Tackling Iuu To Achieve Sustainable Fisheries By - S. Yeseswini
Tackling Iuu To Achieve Sustainable Fisheries
Authored By
- S. Yeseswini
ABSTRACT
The term ‘sustainable fisheries’
refers to fishing activities that can be continued on a sustained or indefinite
basis without any threat or fear of any harm to be caused to the ecosystem.
Achievement of sustainable fisheries is a challenge encapsulated in Target 14
of the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. Illegal,
unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing is regarded as one of the major
deterrents to various countries in attaining the goal of sustainable fisheries
management.
Indian Ocean fisheries are some of
the most important, accounting for 14.55% of the global marine capture harvest,
albeit 30% of the Indian Ocean’s assessed stocks are not fished within
biologically sustainable levels. Since the Coastal states of the Indian Ocean lack effective Monitoring,
Control, and Surveillance (MCS) capability, IUU fishing has become a low-risk
and high-gain activity. IUU has
affected the traceability and transparency in fishing and the regulation of the
trade of fish products has been brought to the forefront of the international
fisheries policy agenda. The impact of IUU is three-dimensional - economic,
social, and ecological, depleting the marine ecosystem and causing destruction
to the sustainable livelihoods of fishermen. These imminent threats have
awakened governments around the world for regional and international
collaborations to combat this global issue. Thus, there needs to be an
effective implementation of strategic measures with global co-operation to
achieve sustainability.
This paper will focus on three major
aspects, the first is the colossal impact on the environment, the second is the
threat to the Indian Ocean due to persistent IUU activities, and the third is
the measures to combat these illegal activities and discover the path towards
sustainable fisheries management.
Key Words:
IUU, ecosystem, sustainable fisheries, international regulations, measures
1. INTRODUCTION
In the UN Sustainable Development
Summit 2015, which happened between 25 and 27 September in New York, the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted. The 2030 agenda includes 17
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), one of which (Goal 14) addresses oceans,
seas and marine resources as a priority. Goal 14 – to ‘conserve
and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable
development’ – underlines the importance of sustainably managing and using
maritime resources and related ecosystems. This goal of achieving sustainable
fisheries is co-extensive with the goal of ending IUU activities.
IUU fishing is a serious threat to
the sustainable management of fisheries worldwide – depleting fish stocks,
undermining responsible management, destroying marine ecosystems, and
threatening the livelihoods of coastal fishermen and communities. The FAO
International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal,
Unreported and Unregulated Fishing defined the terms for each element[1]:
Illegal fishing is that which is conducted by vessels
of countries that are parties to a regional fisheries management organisation
(RFMO) but operate in violation of its rules, or operate in a country’s waters
without permission.
Unreported fishing is a catch or a number of catches
not reported or misreported to national relevant authorities or RFMO.
Unregulated fishing is conducted by vessels without
nationality or flying the flag of States not parties of relevant fisheries
organisations and who therefore consider themselves not bound by their rules.
IUU fishing, estimated at 11 to 26
million tonnes a year, leads to losses of roughly $10-23.5 billion in value. Illegal fishing is carried by catching overfished stocks
and endangered species in Marine Protected areas (MPA) by using prohibited
fishing methods and practices. It is not confined to any particular place and is
found in all types and dimensions of fisheries, occurs both on the high seas
and in areas under national jurisdiction, and concerns all aspects and stages
of the exploitation and utilization of fish. It is high time states start to
act on the illegal activities taking place in the high seas to achieve the
goals of sustainability.
2.
UNFOLDING THE PATH OF IUU FISHING AND ITS HARMFUL EFFECTS
2.1.
FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO IUU
The factors contributing to risk of
IUU fishing are generally not species-specific, but rather are related to the
economic situations and lack of efficient enforcement mechanisms. Since, the gains from illegal fishing are
higher and advantageous to the fishers, even the law-abiding fishers consider
it to be a better opportunity.[2]? The main reason for Illegal fishing is often
attributed to the inadequate or ineffective monitoring, control, and
surveillance (MCS) of fishing activities, coupled with low operation costs than
those of legitimate fishermen, resulting in higher profits for both lower value
species and the most valuable species.[3]
Government’s failure to enforce
stringent penalties or sanctions due to legal incapacity and resource
constraints or corruption paves the way for illegal fishing activities. The
most valuable species are higher in cost as it requires due care and protection
in fishing, which increases the operating cost and reduces the profit.[4]
Thus, to make more profit they find it viable to indulge in illegal
fishing. Moreover, even though the
operating cost is lower through legitimate routes for lower value fishes, to
make more incentive illegitimate routes are preferred as there is no cost of
licences, no rules and regulations or fishing
quotas. Its prevention depends on governments doing their jobs as flag
states, coastal states, port states, processing states, and market states.[5] It
also depends on private sector actors obtaining information and tracing
products through complex supply chains.
Global overcapacity, with more
vessels operating to catch fewer and fewer fish, also serves as a potential
driver of IUU fishing. Risk of IUU fishing may also be related to the change in
climatic conditions due to which the fishes change their habitat.[6]
Some tuna stocks, due to climate change, follow migratory routes that take them
through the waters of several countries and out into the high seas.[7]
High seas are zones prone to high rates of illegal fishing, thus this route may
lead to a higher rate of underreporting compared to fisheries located within
the territorial waters of States with strong and well implemented regulations.
2.2 FORCED LABOUR AND ILLEGAL
ACTIVITIES IN FISHERIES
IUU fisheries is also linked with
forced labour and slavery, further destabilizing vulnerable people and
communities as well as the ocean environment, hence criminal activities in
fishing and labour exploitation tie together closely.[8]
The IUU fishing often involves forced labour, a form of human trafficking, and
other crimes and human rights abuses, thus forced labour in fisheries is
co-extensive with the rise in IUU activities.
Analysing the main reasons for the increase
in forced labour; Firstly, most fish
stocks are found in coastal regions above the continental shelf. The gradual
depletion of these fish stocks has meant that fishing operators, both
small?scale and industrial, must go further out to sea to locate abundant
fishing grounds.[9] This can
be done only through long-distance fishing which requires more sophisticated infrastructures
and more crew who are willing to stay at sea for prolonged periods, leaving
them under a different jurisdiction of flag states, rather than coastal states.
In coastal regions with declining fish stocks, fishers who were previously
self?employed in small?scale fisheries are now being recruited as employed
crew.[10]
Secondly,
increased crew costs are cut by hiring low?cost labour, often migrant labourers
from less developed countries.[11]
Long?distance fishing operations are labour intensive and crews’ wages can
account for between 30 and 50 percent of operating costs. The use of low wage
migrant labour has meant that these costs can be cut considerably[12]
which may increase the fishing operators’ profit margins and give them a
competitive advantage.
Thirdly, the
limited transparency and traceability of catch in the seafood supply chain is a
risk factor for continuation of labour exploitation in the vessels. The current
legal and regulatory framework in which fishing takes place lacks coherence to deal
with these crimes, thus affording both space and opportunity for dangerous and
exploitative practices including human trafficking.[13]
While buyers are increasingly applying standards, codes of conduct etc. to
their operations, the enforcement has not been effective across the entire
supply chain, including on board the fishing vessels and into the labour
recruitment processes.
2.3. IMPACT ON THE ECOSYSTEM AND
FOOD-SECURITY
Illegal, unreported, and unregulated
fishing remains one of the greatest threats to marine ecosystems due to its
potent ability to undermine national and regional efforts to conserve and
manage fish stocks and, as a consequence, inhibits progress towards achieving
the goals of long-term sustainability and augment food security. IUU fishing
contributes to a dangerous reduction in ecologically vital fisheries that
support over 4 billion people worldwide.
Fish caught by IUU vessels are not
included within scientific stock assessments, and thereby IUU fishing
undermines efforts to gather the data necessary to sustainably manage affected
fisheries, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA).[14]
Fish stocks generally recover slowly from overfishing, according to a body of
scientific research. Nearly half of Mexico’s
total marine fisheries catches since at least 1950 have been unreported,
according to recent scientific research, undermining the accuracy of stock
assessments in Mexican fisheries.[15]
The conditions that enable IUU fishing activities in Mexico, such as weaknesses
in enforcement and maritime domain awareness—as well as limitations in
reporting, monitoring, and recording processes—are common to most fisheries
worldwide.[16]
Unreported catches of Atlantic
Bluefin tuna from the Mediterranean have significantly contributed to the rapid
decline in the stock, according to a scientific report. The species has been
listed as endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species since 2011, although it remains a popular
food item in several parts of the world.[17] Failure to control unreported catches
prevented recovery in North Sea cod—a dietary staple in North America and
northern Europe—until only recently, according to an academic report.[18]
IUU fishing activities also result in
significant bycatch—the incidental capture of non-targeted species that
undermines the food supply of larger predators and, when discarded in the
ocean, decompose and contribute to oxygen-deprived “dead zones.” Bycatch
threatens a number of critically endangered species—such as New Zealand’s Maui
dolphin and the Gulf of California’s vaquita porpoise—and indirectly reduces
other populations, such as some sea turtle and albatross species, according to
UN and academic reports.[19]
According to the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA);[20]
? Some IUU fisheries engage in high
grading, in which the value of a catch is increased by keeping only the best
specimens and discarding the rest. This environmentally destructive practice
removes far more fish than the fishers’ quotas allow, resulting in
underreported catches with substantial bycatch losses.
? On the high seas, some fishers employ
illegal driftnets, which are large-scale passive fishing nets that
indiscriminately capture any animal or marine organism that cannot fit through
the openings. The nets are left to drift passively with transponders or marker
buoys until the fishing vessel is ready to recover its catch; some nets are not
recovered and continue to capture and kill marine animals indefinitely.
Illegal fishing vessel operators
frequently use destructive fishing methods that harm crucial components of
marine ecosystems while generally killing more fish than are captured,
decreasing fish stocks critical to food security and livelihoods.[21] Some
of the harmful methods are:
? Blast or dynamite fishing that has led to the loss of over 50
percent of the coral reef system in Southeast Asia’s Coral Triangle, from which
130 million people derive their primary food or income from fishing, according
to scientific research.
? Cyanide fishing—an illegal practice that is
widespread in the Asia-Pacific where fishers spray poisonous cyanide directly
onto reefs in an attempt to stun and harvest fish—accounts for an estimated 90
percent of tropical aquarium fish imported into the United States, according to
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Most fish do not survive
the experience and upwards of 90 percent of cyanide-exposed fish die within
weeks of exposure, according to the United Nations Environment Program.[22]
Continued decreases in fish stocks,
due in large part to overfishing, threaten global food security. Of the over 4
billion people that consume fish, crustaceans, and molluscs, about a billion
people depend on these sources as their primary source of animal protein,
according to the World Health Organization (WHO).[23] As fish stocks continue to decrease due to
illegal fishing activities, new methods are on lookout to satisfy the global
demands of fish consumption. Aquaculture, a method of controlled cultivation of
aquatic species, has been very successful in overcoming the destruction caused
to marine ecosystems.
2.4 IMPACT ON ECONOMY
IUU fishing disrupts
both small- and large-scale fishing operations and adversely affects populations
who depend on threatened fisheries. IUU fishers typically operate at lower
costs than legal fishers and reduce expected government revenues by fees and
taxes.[24]
Many poor coastal communities rely heavily on fishing for their survival.
Unreported fishing from illegal or subsistence activities has caused
authorities to underestimate fish stocks and permit unsustainable levels of
large-scale commercial fishing, which results in depletion of marine species.[25]
IUU fishing further threatens coastal
and developing countries’ economies through lost or stolen revenue. Illicit
vessels do not typically pay the
associated fishing fees to the government or RFMO, whose resources
are exploited.[26] These
losses extend beyond the direct payment from fish catch to income from
post-harvest processing activities, which decrease with illegal transhipping.
These losses are felt disproportionately by developing countries that rely more
heavily on fish for GDP and subsistence livelihood. Furthermore, these
countries do not have the necessary funding or the enforcement mechanisms to
efficiently control and monitor illicit fishing activities, thus facilitating
illegal activities.[27]
3.
THE THREAT TO INDIAN OCEAN
3.1.
THE INCREASE IN UNREGULATED FISHING
The
Indian Ocean is the third largest ocean in the world. Consisting of 29 littoral
states and six Island nations, this ocean is home to one-third of the world’s
population.[28]
It hosts some of the essential fisheries globally, accounting for over 14 percent of the global wild-caught fish. While international
attention focuses heavily on illegal and unreported fishing in the Indian
Ocean, the unregulated aspect of IUU fishing is often overlooked. Unregulated
fishing is not reported and not bound by any regional monitoring and
surveillance system, making it difficult for coastal State authorities to
identify vessels operating in or near their waters.[29]
The two main reasons[30]
that contribute to unregulated fishing on the high seas of the Indian Ocean
within the current institutional landscape of fisheries management are:
?
The gaps in spatial areas of competence
(Spatial regulatory coverage for species covered by tuna-specific RFMOs is
comprehensive across the Indian Ocean. However, for non-tuna RFMOs, there are
significant gaps)
?
The gaps between the groups of species
covered by RFMO (In some areas of the high seas, there are no international
arrangements other than those for tuna fisheries covered by the Indian Ocean
Tuna Commission (IOTC). Therefore, other than for tuna and tuna-like species,
other fisheries remain at risk of unregulated fishing if flag States fail to
adopt national conservation and management measures).
For
all RFMOs, the weaknesses and gaps in species coverage leave a large number of
species without any conservation and management measures (CMMs) and outside of
the management scope of regional bodies. These include species with current
commercial value, as well as those which could become commercially important in
the future as ocean temperatures increase and species distribution patterns
shift.[31]
This results in a lack of regulation on destructive activities such as bycatch
and, in some cases, blind spots on impacts to endangered species.
3.2.
LACUNAS IN EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT
High
seas are the areas where IUU takes place and are defined as the ocean areas that
lie beyond national jurisdictions, such as exclusive economic zones (EEZs).
Globally, the high seas cover almost half of the planet’s surface, posing
particular management challenges for the international community to sustainably
exploit and conserve their marine resources. The high seas of the Indian Ocean
are not fully covered by regional regulatory frameworks for any species other
than tuna and tuna-like species.[32]
This undermines the efforts being made towards ecosystem-based fisheries
management, threatens the marine food web and, as a consequence, puts
commercially managed and high-value species at risk.
Over
two billion people live along the coasts of the Indian Ocean and are
experiencing rapid economic and population growth. The Indian Ocean is home to
rich fisheries, accounting for 14.55%[33]
of the global marine capture harvest, providing an important source of food and
livelihood security for millions of people in coastal communities across the
region. If overfishing and IUU fishing are not addressed, the resulting loss of
fish biomass will translate into a shortage of fatty acids and essential
micronutrients for millions of people in the region, with a disproportionate
risk of malnutrition in low- and middle-income countries. As demand for
commercially important species such as tuna and tuna-like species (including
swordfish) has skyrocketed, so has the fishing effort to capture them.[34]
This increasing competition for fish stocks threatens the economic stability of
some coastal communities, due to arising risks of conflict over diminishing
resources.[35]
3.3.
EXISTING REGULATORY MEASURES TO TACKLE IUU
There
are three RFMOs that work on conserving fishery resources occurring on the high
seas of the Indian Ocean. Two of these, the IOTC and the Commission for the
Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT), cover tuna and tuna-like
species, while the Southern Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement (SIOFA) covers
fishery resources other than highly migratory species:
a)
The Indian Ocean Tuna Commission
IOTC
is one of five tuna-RFMOs, globally.[36]
The Agreement establishing the IOTC entered into force in 1996. IOTC is
mandated to manage and conserve tuna and tuna-like resources in the Indian
Ocean and adjacent seas. Species-specific management measures cover the four
major commercial tuna species, rebuilding plan for the currently overfished
yellowfin tuna is in place but has not been implemented due to the lack of
compliance of contracting Parties and to fishing efforts being maintained at
high level.
b)
The Commission for the Conservation
of Southern Bluefin Tuna
CCSBT,
another of the five tuna-RFMOs, also has competence in the Indian Ocean. The
Convention establishing CCSBT entered into force in 1994. The CCSBT is mandated
to manage a single species of tuna throughout its area of distribution: the
southern bluefin tuna (SBT). It has no defined Area of Competence (AoC),
putting the CCSBT in the remarkable position of being endowed with a species of
competence instead.
c)
The Southern Indian Ocean Fisheries
Agreement
The
Agreement establishing SIOFA – one of the most recent RFMOs to come into
existence – only entered into force in 2012, with the first CMMs adopted in
2016. SIOFA’s mandate is to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable
use of fishery resources including fish, molluscs, crustaceans and other
sedentary species within the area, and excludes highly migratory species[37]
(part of which are covered by IOTC and CCSBT) and sedentary species subject to
the fishery jurisdiction of coastal States.[38]
3.4.
CHINA IN THE INDIAN WATERS
IUU
fishing is to be viewed as a national security threat and not only as a food,
economic, and human security issue because it undermines the national security
of a country by adversely impacting its maritime security and governance
structures. States such as China have been operating distant water fishing
fleets that often fish in the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of other States.
This practice has led to States expanding their domestic maritime law
enforcement capabilities to aggressively address IUU fishing. Asian States have
regularly witnessed illegal fishers and trawlers, largely from China, in their
waters.
The
Chinese distant water fleet systematically and continuously violates the EEZs
of several countries around the world, jeopardizing those countries’ national
security.[39]
The Chinese fishing fleet has been accused of plundering sea resources as far
away as Africa[40]
and South America,[41]
These fishing vessels reportedly do not adhere to the requirement mandated by
international regulations to keep their automatic identification systems
transmitters continuously activated. At the same time, crews comprised of maritime
militia disguised as civilian fishers operate Chinese fishing vessels in waters
near the South China Sea.[42]
Though
there are no established cases of China’s maritime militia in the Indian Ocean,
a Chinese fishing fleet was present in the Indian EEZ in 2019.[43]
On June 7, 2019, ten Chinese fishing vessels belonging to the Fu Yuan Yu fleet,
owned by Dongxinglong Ocean Fishing Company based in Fujian province, entered
Indian waters near the state of Maharashtra on the Arabian Sea.[44]These
vessels had received permission to enter Indian waters in accordance with
customary international law concerning vessels in distress[45]
from the Indian Coast Guard to shelter in the port of Ratnagiri during cyclone
Vayu.[46]
A
later investigation determined these vessels had engaged in illegal fishing activities
in the Indian EEZ and may have harvested up to 80,000 tons of marine life a
month. The fleet also carried illegal gear, such as drifting gill nets, bottom
trawl nets, and dolphin attracting devices. Such devices are banned by many
national fisheries commissions and are under investigation by international
maritime agencies. Further, according to an IUU Risk Intelligence report, the
Fu Yuan Yu fleet had already engaged in IUU fishing activities in the southern
Indian Ocean and South African waters.[47]
Thus, China has once again proved its inherent recurring illegal behaviours from
territorial disputes to maritime disputes, causing national threat to India in
all the ways it can.[48]
3.5.
INDIA ADDRESSING IUU WITHIN ITS NATIONAL JURISDICTION
The
coastline of India measures 7,517 kilometres, distributed among nine coastal
states and four union territories; the coastal states are Gujarat, Maharashtra,
Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, and West Bengal.[49]
India’s EEZ, which is governed by the national government, encompasses an area
of 2,305,143 square kilometers.[50]
?
Taking cognizance of increasing incidents
of IUU fishing, the Indian government introduced the Marine Fisheries
(Regulation and Management) Bill, 2019.[51]
To curb illegal deep trawler fishing, the bill provides for the impoundment of
foreign fishing vessels fishing in the EEZ and a fine for the owner or master.[52]
It also issues regulations for foreign fishing vessels transiting the EEZ[53]
and criminal penalties for violating those regulations.[54]
?
In addition to the bill, the government
has recently introduced draft National Fisheries Policy 2020 has placed a focus
on IUU fishing and national security.[55]
National Fisheries Policy 2020 is largely an attempt to invigorate fisheries
and to promote inter-state cooperation in coastal area development and
ecotourism.[56]
It provides provision to make the Indian Coast Guard, Coastal Police, and the
regulatory and enforcement agencies to be adequately trained and equipped to
strengthen and implement the MCS system.
?
The Territorial Waters, Continental
Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime Zones Act, 1976,[57]
defines India’s maritime zones, which comply with the 1982 U.N. Convention on
the Law of the Sea[58]
(UNCLOS) to which India is a party. Thus, India enjoys its sovereign rights,
including fishing rights, in the delimited waters under both domestic and
international maritime laws.
?
The Maritime Zones of India (Regulation
of Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981, provides for the regulation of foreign fishing
vessels in India’s maritime zones and related matters.[59]
It authorizes the Indian Coast Guard, when appropriate, to stop and board a
fishing vessel, seize and detain the vessel, including any fishing gear,
fishing equipment, stores, or cargo found onboard the vessel or belonging to
the vessel, and to seize any fishing gear abandoned by the vessel. In 2019 the
government provided the Coast Guard additional authority under the Coast Guard
Act of 1978.[60]
The Coast Guard now has the authority to visit, board, and seize vessels and
objects suspected of being used to commit a crime.
4.
OTHER MEASURES TO COMBAT IUU
4.1.
BORDER CONTROLS
Increasingly,
many major market countries are considering, or have implemented, measures that
block IUU fish products through effective border control measures and that
require third countries to certify legal products through effective MCS. Since
entering into force on 1 January, 2010, the EU IUU Regulation[61]
is the most robust example of a border measure to prevent, deter, and eliminate
IUU fishing. The US and Japan are considering similar measures and China has
already implemented some border controls.
4.2.
MONITOR, CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE (MCS)
Ineffective
fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) is considered one of the
major causes of IUU fishing. From December 2004, the International Maritime
Organization (IMO) has required all vessels over 299 GRT to carry an AIS
transponder on board.[62]
The AIS transponders on board vessels, should include a GPS (Global Positioning
System) receiver, specifically to transmit the vessel’s position, speed and
course, along with some other static information, such as vessel’s name,
dimensions and voyage details. In India, very few numbers of boats are
installed with MCS equipment on board. The probable reason could be economic
constraints since poor fishermen cannot install such equipment on their boat.
4.3.
PORT SECURITY
Drafted
under the auspices of the FAO, the Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent,
Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing (PSMA)[63]
is the first binding international treaty designed specifically to combat IUU
fishing. It recognizes that “measures to
combat IUU fishing should build on the primary responsibility of flag States
and use all available jurisdiction in accordance with international law,
including port State measures, coastal State measures, market-related measures,
and measures to ensure that nationals do not support or engage in IUU fishing.”[64]
India has neither signed nor ratified the PSMA by way of writing, nor publicly
provided a reason for not joining the treaty.
4.4.
CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Challenges
in fighting IUU fishing in the waters of developing countries consist of lack
of patrol vessels, under funding, under staffing, inexperience and an
inadequate legal and operational framework. This could be some of the reasons
for not ratifying the PSMA by most of the developing countries. In this regard,
it is suggested that FAO should pass a resolution to initiate a global fund
scheme and with the support of member states of developed nations the funding
of underdeveloped regional countries may be undertaken. Such support may be
provided through the RFMOs with an aim to strengthen RFMOs for the achievement
of desired outputs.
4.5.
REGISTRATION OF FISHING BOATS AND BAN ON COUNTRIES
Registration
of all fishing boats by the fisheries management organization of regional
countries is very important. With regards to Pakistan perspectives most of the
boats are not registered and some of the boats are double registered. Unless
all the boats are not registered the exact data of the amount of catch and so
as of IUU catch cannot be ascertained. At regional level, Coastal nations could
contribute to transparency by advertising the complete list of registered
boats. This will help market States to identify and reject fish from vessels
that are fishing illegally.[65]
Further,
various bans (import/export) are imposed on many countries' products due to quality
control reasons. For example, a prolonged ban of several years was imposed on
Pakistan fishery products by the European Union due to poor handling of fishery
resources due to which it incurred huge loss to the economy of the country. In
a similar manner, there should be a market ban imposed on IUU suspect nations,
as a stringent measure to deter such activities.
5.
CONCLUSION
Sustainable
fisheries can be achieved only by having a regulated fisheries management.
Transition from unregulated to regulated fisheries cannot only occur on paper –
to achieve this, flag States must have the means to enforce Conservation and
Management Measures. Although India has a robust maritime legal and
institutional infrastructure to address IUU fishing, this infrastructure needs
to be strengthened further by involving international organisations in the
existing regimes. By doing so, it will
avoid duplicating the efforts taken by other countries against common threats,
and can enhance its role in areas uncovered by the international regime to
create a robust compliance mechanism.
India
should become a party to the Agreement on Port
State Measures (PSMA). Becoming a State party to the PSMA would provide
several benefits, including implementing measures to ensure better detection
and investigation of IUU fishing activities and capacity building of developing
States to enhance cooperation in addressing this common threat. Membership
would support and complement efforts to address IUU fishing, both globally and
in the Indian Ocean region, including within the Indian EEZ.
The
Indian government should highlight incidents of IUU fishing more often in open sources,
such as government websites and media reports, to increase public awareness and
also disseminate information on foreign vessels present in the EEZ to provide a
list of suspected IUU vessels denied port access or privileges. Thus, imposing
such measures and effective compliance standards by the Indian government in
the Indian Ocean will prevent further depletion of marine life and curb the
growing threats caused due to illegal and harmful fishing.
[1] FAO, International Plan of
Action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated
fishing, Rome, (2001).
[2] Baird, R.J., Aspects of
illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the Southern Ocean, 23(1) The
International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 95-124 (2006).
[3] Flothmann, S., von Kistowski, K.,
and Album, G., Closing loopholes: getting illegal fishing under control, Marine
Science Journal, 1235-1236 (2018).
[4] Jennings, S. and Kaiser, M.J, The
effects of fishing on marine ecosystems, 34 Academic Press, 201-352 (1998).
[5] Young, MA, International trade
law compatibility of market-related measures to combat illegal, unreported and
unregulated (IUU) fishing, 69 Marine Policy, 209–219 (2016).
[6] Tsamenyi, M., Palma, and Mfodwo,
K., The European Council regulation on illegal, unreported and unregulated
fishing: an international fisheries law perspective, 25(1) The
International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 5-31 (2010).
[7] THE EFFECTS OF ILLEGAL FISHING ON
OUR ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY, The Brillopedia https://www.entitymag.com/effects-illegal-fishing-environment-economy
(last visited Nov 30 2022).
[8] Environmental Justice Foundation Report, Seafood Slaves:
Human Trafficking, Slavery and Murder in Fishing Industry, https://ejfoundation.org/resources/downloads/EJF-Thailand-Seafood-Slaves-low-res.pdf
(2015).
[9] Id.
[10] REVEALED: TRAFFICKED
MIGRANT WORKERS ABUSED IN IRISH FISHING INDUSTRY, The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/nov/02/revealed-trafficked-migrant-workers-abused-in-irish-fishing-industry
(last visited Nov 26, 2022).
[11] Couper, A., Smith, H.D., Ciceri, B,
Fishers and Plunderers: Theft, Slavery and Violence at Sea, Pluto Press.
London, 131 (2015).
[12] Agnew, D.J., Barnes, C.T, Economic
Aspects and Drivers of IUU Fishing: Building a Framework, OECD, Paris,
France, 169–200 (2004).
[13] Surtees, Trapped at Sea. Using
the Legal and Regulatory Framework to Prevent and Combat the Trafficking of
Seafarers and Fishers. 2 Groningen Journal of International Law, 91-153 (2013).
[14] Le Gallic, B, The use of trade
measures against illicit fishing: Economic and legal considerations’64(4) Ecological
Economics, 858–866 (2008).
[15].Kroodsma, D. A. et al, Tracking
the global footprint of fisheries, Marine Life Journal, 904–908 (2018).
[16] Kiruba-Sankar, R. et al, Poaching
in Andaman and Nicobar coasts: insights, Journal of Coastal Conservation, 95–109
(2018).
[17] Juan-Jordá, M. J. et al, Report
card on ecosystem-based fisheries management in tuna regional fisheries
management organizations, 19(2) Fish and Fisheries, 321–339 (2018).
[18] O’Leary, B. C. et al, Addressing
Criticisms of Large-Scale Marine Protected Areas, 20(10) Journal of Bio Science,
1–12 (2018).
[19] Sumaila, U. R. & Vasconcellos.
M, Simulation of ecological and economic impacts of distant water fleets on
Namibian fisheries, 32(3) Ecological Economics, 457–464 (2000).
[20] Warner. R, Oceans beyond
Boundaries: Environmental Assessment Frameworks, 27(2) The International
Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 481–499 (2012).
[21] Stephen Chin, A Hard Tackle
against Illegal Fishing, Asean Post, https://theaseanpost.com/article/hard-tackle-against-illegal-fishing.
[22] Global Implications of Illegal,
Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing, NIC WP 2016-02 (2016).
[23] Okafor-Yarwood, I, Illegal,
unreported and unregulated fishing, and the complexities of the sustainable
development goals (SDGs), 9 Marine Policy, 414–422 (2019).
[24] Agnew, D.J., Pearce, J., and
Pitcher, T.J., Estimating the worldwide extent of illegal fishing, 4(2) PloSone
45-47 (2009).
[25] Aghilinejhad, S.M., Gorgin, S.,
and Jalali, A., What are the drivers of the occurrence of illegal fishing
and conservation barriers of sturgeons in the Caspian Sea? 28(3) Marine and
Freshwater Ecosystems Journal, 690-701 (2018).
[26] Akinbulire, T., Schwartz, H., and
Abielmona, R., A reinforcement learning approach to tackle illegal, unreported
and unregulated fishing. In Computational Intelligence (SSCI), IEEE
Symposium Series 1-8 (2017).
[27] Alzugaray, R., Puga, R., and
Morales, O., Fishery in Cuba: current status, illegal fishing, and
environmental variability, 94(2) Bulletin of Marine Science, 393-408 (2018).
[28] Jayanath Colombage, Sustainable
Fisheries Management in the Indian Ocean: The Way Forward, 3 Polaris
Journal of Maritime Research (P-JMR), ISSN: 2519-1772 (2021).
[29] . WWF (World Wild Fund for Nature)
and Trygg Mat Tracking, Unregulated fishing on the High seas of the Indian
ocean: The Impacts on, risks to, and challenges for sustainable fishing and
ocean health, (2020), https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwftmt_unregulated_fishing_on_the_high_seas_of_the_indian_ocean_2020.pdf.
[30] Ibid, Taconet, M., Kroodsma, D.,
& Fernandes, J.A, Global Atlas of AIS-based fishing activity –
Challenges and opportunities, Rome, FAO, (2019), www.fao.org/3/ca7012en/ca7012en.pdf.
[31] Vianna, G.M.S., Zeller, D. &
Pauly, D, Fisheries and Policy Implications for Human Nutrition, Curr
Environment Health Report, (2020).
[32] Monnier, L., Gascuel, D, Small-scale
fisheries in a warming ocean: exploring adaptation to climate change.
Scientific report, WWF Germany, (2020).
[33] FAO, State of World Fisheries
and Aquacultures, Rome, (2020).
[34] WWF, Seafood sustainability,
stability and security, (2020).
[35]Isigi Kadagi, Zachary Lien & Cullen Hendrix, Fisheries Management: A
Possible Venue for Navigating Fisheries Conflicts in the Indian Ocean, New security
beat Environmental Change Blog, (Dec 19, 2022), https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2020/02/fisheries-management-venue-navigating-fisheries-conflicts-indian-ocean.
[36] Ásmundsson,S, Regional Fisheries
Management Organisations (RFMOs), https://www.
cbd.int/doc/meetings/mar/soiom-2016-01/other/soiom-2016-01-fao-19-en.pdf.
[39] David Tickler et al., Far from
Home: Distance Patterns of Global Fishing Fleets, Science Advances, Aug. 1,
2018, https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/8/eaar 3279.
[40] MOZAMBIQUE FISHERMEN POINT TO
CHINA AS FISH STOCKS DWINDLE, Fisheries Committee for the west central Gulf of
Guinea, https://fcwc-fish.org/othernews/mozambiques-fishermen-point-to-china-as-fish-stocks-dwindle
(last visited Dec. 20, 2022).
[41] 260 CHINESE BOATS FISH NEAR
GALAPAGOS, ECUADOR ON ALERT, Times of India, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/260-chinese-boats-fish-near-galapagos-ecuador-on-alert/articleshow/77276746.cms;
Marco Aquino, Chinese Fishing Fleet off Peru Stirs Up Diplomatic Waters,
Sydney Morning Herald, https://www. smh.com.au/world/south-america/chinese-fishing-fleet-off-peru-stirs-up-diplomatic-waters-20200926-p55zi5.html.
[42] Gregory Poling, China’s Hidden
Navy, Foreign Policy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/06/25/chinas-secret-navy-spratlys-southchinasea-chinesenavy-maritimemilitia/.
[43] CHINESE TRAWLERS SIGHTED IN THE
INDIAN OCEAN: OFFICIAL, Hindustan Times, https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/chinese-trawlers-sighted-in-indian-oceanofficial/story.
[44] Badri Chatterjee, In Troubled
Waters: 10 Chinese Vessels Found Fishing Illegally in Maharashtra, Hindustan
Times,mumbai-news/in-troubled-waters-10-chinese-vessels-found-fishing-illegally-in-maharashtra/story;
Manoj Viswanathan, Fishermen Cry Foul as Chinese Trawlers “Milk” Indian Seas,
New Indian Express, https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2019/jun/27/fishermen-cry-foul-as-chinese-trawlers-milk.
[45] R. R. CHURCHILL & A. V. LOWE,
THE LAW OF THE SEA 63 (3d ed. 1999).
[46] Jagyaseni Biswas, Chinese
Vessels Caught Fishing in Indian EEZ Points at Larger Issue of Illegal Resource
Exploitation, Money Control, https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/india/chinese-vessels-caught-fishing-in-indian-eez-points-at-larger-issueof-illegal-resource-exploitation-4129181.html.
[47] Pramond Ganapathiraju, 3
Chinese Squid Jiggers in South African Waters – Illegal Fishing or Innocent Passage,
IUU Risk Intelligence, https://iuuriskintelligence.com/chinese-squid-jiggers-south-african-waters-illegal-fishing-innocent-passage/.
[48] INDIAN STATES WITH LONGEST
COASTLINE OF SEA, Walk Through India, http://www.walkthroughindia.com/ offbeat/
9-indian-states-with-longest-coastline-of-sea/ (last visited Nov. 18, 2022).
[49] INDIA ACCOUNTS FOR 6.3% OF GLOBAL
FISH PRODUCTION: FISHERIES DEPT, Business Standard,https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/india-accounts-for6-3-of-global-fish-production-fisheries-dept-119061800013_1.html.
[50] Geoffrey Migiro, Countries with
the Largest Exclusive Economic Zone, World Atlas,
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-largest-exclusive-economic-zones.html.
[51] Marine Fisheries Regulation and Management
(MFRM) Bill 2019.
[52] Id. ch. VIII, § 16(2).
[53] Id. ch. IX, § 22(2)(g).
[55] Government of India, National Fisheries
Policy, 2020, http://nfdb.gov.in/ PDF/National_Fisheries_Policy_2020.pdf (last
visited Dec. 8, 2022).
[56] Id
[57] The Territorial Waters,
Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976,
No. 80, Acts of Parliament, 1976.
[58] . U.N. Convention on the Law of
the Sea, opened for signature Dec. 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 397.
[59] The Maritime Zones of India
(Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981, No. 42, Acts of
Parliament, 1981.
[61] Council Regulation [EC] No
1005/2008 and Commission Regulation [EC] No 1010/2009.
[63] Agreement on Port State Measures
to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing,
opened for signature Nov. 22, 2009, 55 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL MATERIALS 1159
(2016) (entered into force June 5, 2016).
[65] INDIAN OCEAN RIM ASSOCIATION
ACTION PLAN 2017–2021, https://
www.iora.int/media/1031/iora-action-plan-7-march-2017.pdf (last visited Dec. 8,
2022).