Study Notes on IUU Fishing and Small-Scale Fisheries
Abstract
Focus: This review critically examines the often disproportionate and negative impact of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing regulations on small-scale fisheries, which are crucial for global food security and local livelihoods.
Main Points:
Overlooked Diversity and Legitimacy: Current IUU regulations frequently fail to differentiate between large-scale industrial infractions and the diverse, often legitimate, customary practices of small-scale fisheries, treating minor non-compliance as serious offenses.
Trade-Related Inequities: The implementation of trade-related measures designed to combat IUU fishing inadvertently creates significant inequities, disproportionately burdening small-scale fisheries with high compliance costs and complex bureaucratic requirements.
Criminalization and Violence: The increasing trend of framing IUU fishing as organized crime has severe consequences, leading to the criminalization and potential for violence against small-scale fishers, rather than targeting actual criminal syndicates.
Proposed Strategies: The paper proposes three concrete strategies to better integrate the specific characteristics and contributions of small-scale fisheries into IUU regulations, striving for more effective and equitable outcomes that support their sustainability and resilience.
Introduction
Importance of the Issue:
Global Overfishing: IUU fishing is a significant global threat, substantially contributing to unsustainable fishing practices and the depletion of marine resources worldwide.
Scale of the Problem: It is estimated that annual IUU landings account for approximately 26 million tons globally, meaning roughly 1 in 5 wild-caught fish are from IUU sources. This represents a substantial portion of the global catch.
Economic and Environmental Costs: The annual economic cost of IUU fishing is estimated to be between billion and billion (Agnew et al., 2009; Pew Trusts, 2018; Sumaila et al., 2006). Beyond economic losses, IUU fishing leads to habitat destruction, bycatch, and marine ecosystem degradation.
Regulatory Framework:
UN Recognition: The United Nations first identified IUU fishing as a major global issue in the late 1990s, recognizing its severe implications for marine ecosystems and sustainable livelihoods.
FAO International Plan of Action (2001): This pivotal agreement, developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), established a comprehensive framework for states to combat IUU fishing through national actions and international cooperation.
2009 Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA): Effective in 2016, the PSMA is the first binding international agreement to specifically target IUU fishing. It empowers port states to implement stringent controls on foreign fishing vessels seeking to dock and unload, thereby preventing IUU-caught fish from entering the market.
Regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) have increasingly started addressing IUU fishing within their jurisdictional areas, though their effectiveness varies depending on enforcement capacity and political will.
UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14: The global fight against IUU fishing aligns directly with SDG 14 ('Life Below Water'), particularly target 14.4, which aims to effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, IUU fishing, and destructive fishing practices.
Trade Measures:
Unilateral and Multilateral Approaches: Various countries and international bodies employ diverse strategies to combat IUU fishing, including document verification systems, vessel monitoring systems, and comprehensive labelling schemes.
Notable Examples: The European Union's IUU regulation (EC No. 1005/2008) is a leading example of a multilateral approach, imposing strict certification requirements on seafood imports. The US Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) represents a significant unilateral effort, tracing seafood imports from harvest to entry into U.S. commerce to prevent IUU products.
The Complexity of IUU Fishing
Definition of Key Concepts:
Illegal Fishing: This involves fishing activities conducted in violation of applicable national or international laws and regulations. Examples include fishing without a license, in closed areas, using prohibited gear, or exceeding quotas.
Unreported Fishing: This refers to fishing activities that have not been reported, or have been misreported, to the relevant national authorities or regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs). This includes failing to report catch volumes, misstating species caught, or not registering vessels.
Unregulated Fishing: This occurs in areas or for fish stocks where no applicable conservation or management measures exist, or where fishing is conducted by vessels without nationality or by those flying the flag of a state not party to the relevant international agreements.
Impacts on Small-Scale Fisheries:
Diverse Rule Systems: Many small-scale fisheries operate under long-standing customary rules and traditional governance systems, which are deeply integrated into local cultures and often ensure sustainable resource use. These systems are typically informal and community-based.
Illegality by State Policies: Often, these self-governance structures and traditional practices are not legally recognized by state regulations, which can arbitrarily render local, legitimate fishing activities 'illegal'. This imposition of state law can severely undermine local livelihoods and disempower communities.
Failure to Collect Data: Small-scale fisheries frequently remain unreported due to their large number of often small, unregistered vessels, reliance on informal markets, and the logistical challenges and lack of resources for comprehensive data collection by authorities. This data gap can lead to their misclassification as 'unreported' rather than an acknowledgment of systemic monitoring failures.
Unfounded Classification: A simplistic classification of small-scale fisheries as IUU fishing often overlooks their critical contributions to food security, poverty alleviation, and cultural heritage. This leads to undue stigmatization and a misunderstanding of their socio-economic importance, unfairly grouping them with industrial-scale illegal operations.
Shared Responsibility and Legal Pluralism:
Coexistence of Frameworks: Legal pluralism acknowledges that multiple governing frameworks (state, customary, international) can coexist. However, in the context of IUU fishing, the imposition of rigid state-centric or international regulations often fails to recognize or value local practices, effectively negating their legitimacy and impact on sustainable management.
Bridging the Gap: Addressing IUU effectively requires navigating this legal pluralism, finding ways to legitimize and integrate traditional governance systems into broader regulatory frameworks rather than overriding them.
Trade Restrictions for Combatting IUU Fishing
Overview of EU-IUU Regulation:
Accountability Focus: The EU's IUU regulation (EC No. 1005/2008) aims to hold exporting countries accountable for ensuring that fish products originating from their waters, or caught by their flagged vessels, are not derived from IUU fishing activities.
Catch Certification Schemes: It establishes stringent catch certification schemes that require detailed documentation for all seafood imports into the EU market. This includes proof of legality from the flag state or exporting country, requiring complex administrative processes for compliance.
Due Diligence Requirements: The regulation places the burden of due diligence on importers to verify the legality of their seafood products, leading to increased administrative costs for businesses, particularly for smaller enterprises or those dealing with diverse supply chains involving small-scale fisheries.
'Yellow Card' and 'Red Card' System: The EU employs a warning system for non-cooperating countries. A 'yellow card' serves as a formal warning, initiating a dialogue for improvement, while a 'red card' can lead to a ban on seafood imports into the EU, significantly impacting national economies.
Criminalization and Violence in IUU Fishing
Framing as Organized Crime: There's a growing international trend to categorize IUU fishing, particularly large-scale operations, as a form of transnational organized crime. This framing aims to leverage greater law enforcement and security resources to combat the issue.
Risk of Overreach: While effective against large criminal syndicates, applying this framework indiscriminately can lead to the criminalization of small-scale fishers engaged in minor or customary non-compliance, who often lack the means or knowledge to meet complex regulatory demands.
Increased Enforcement and Violence: Heightened security measures and militarized responses intended for major criminal operations can result in the use of force, arrests, and even violence against vulnerable small-scale fishing communities, undermining their livelihoods and human rights.
Proposed Strategies for Equitable IUU Regulation
Context-Specific Regulations: Tailor IUU regulations to differentiate between large-scale industrial offenses and the diverse, often legitimate, practices of small-scale fisheries. This includes recognizing and integrating customary law and traditional governance systems into formal regulatory frameworks.
Capacity Building and Support: Provide technical and financial assistance to small-scale fisheries to help them comply with reporting and documentation requirements. This includes simplifying bureaucratic processes, offering training, and developing accessible technologies for data collection.
Promoting Legal Pluralism and Co-Management: Foster collaborative governance models where national authorities work with local communities and traditional leaders to co-manage fisheries resources. This approach acknowledges the value of diverse rule systems and aims to bridge the gap between state law and customary practices for more effective and equitable outcomes.