Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are in ongoing discussions regarding subsidies that lead to overfishing and overcapacity, striving to find a balance between sustainability and development to benefit communities and developing nations. After failing to reach a consensus at the 13th Ministerial Conference in February in Abu Dhabi, negotiations have shifted to Geneva, where General Council meetings are intended to finalize discussions.
However, the urgency to achieve a settlement has resulted in a draft that predominantly favors the largest subsidizers, absolving them of robust obligations to address overfishing. Concerns regarding this approach were articulated during a recent WTO Public Forum, where representatives from the Norwegian Trade Campaign and the World Forum of Fish Workers and Fish Harvesters emphasized the necessity for meaningful outcomes that both prohibit harmful subsidies and foster development.
Many developing countries, particularly those with extensive coastlines and significant populations of artisanal fishers, voiced their worries about the unequal distribution of responsibilities in the proposed agreement. Anisa Farida, First Secretary of the Indonesian Mission, underscored that any resulting obligations should not compromise Indonesia’s food security or its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The negotiation process must aim to enhance voluntary commitments to reduce subsidies for distant-water fishing and adequately reflect the circumstances faced by countries like Indonesia, rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach based on aggregated subsidy levels. This broader perspective should account for factors like Exclusive Economic Zone size and coastline length.
Additionally, the principle of “Common But Differentiated Responsibility,” which suggests that those most responsible for a problem should bear the greatest burden for its resolution, is inadequately reflected in the current drafts, limited to varied notification obligations that do not truly hold the major contributors accountable.
The challenges faced by local fishermen in maintaining their livelihoods could worsen if the proposed agreements fail to restrict the large fleets that engage in overfishing. Alieu Sowe, National Coordinator for the Gambian Fisher Folks Association, emphasized the limitations of the current draft, which he believes perpetuates existing power dynamics at sea.
Small-scale fishers are urging for more stringent measures against industrial fishing subsidies and stronger support for sustainable practices, which are absent from the current proposals. Although they confront multifaceted challenges, the political tussles surrounding the negotiations have diverted attention from critical objectives.
Helene Bank, a special adviser to the Norwegian Trade Campaign, called on the WTO to adhere to its commitments under the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14.6, focusing on the fleets and fishing practices responsible for overfishing and overcapacity. Despite widespread calls, particularly from nations in the Pacific and Africa, for an emphasis on controlling major fishing fleets, India has been criticized for obstructing agreements during the recent Ministerial Conference.
For the WTO discussions to yield significant results, the outcomes must align with established international principles. While Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 provides a foundational mandate for the negotiations, other SDGs key to food security and development must not be compromised, especially if obligations disproportionately impact small-scale fishers and developing countries.
Moreover, the principle of “Common But Differentiated Responsibility” must be honored, as neglecting to hold significant contributors to overfishing accountable could lead the WTO to endorse an agreement that undermines established international sustainability standards. Current proposals regarding special and differential treatment, aimed at recognizing the challenges faced by developing countries, risk distorting these foundational principles.
Some Least-Developed Countries (LDCs) may encounter considerable difficulties in fulfilling obligations, especially as they transition out of LDC status, which is forthcoming for nations such as Bangladesh and Myanmar. The existing text could also inadvertently restrict small-scale fishers from receiving necessary government support, despite their minimal role in overfishing.
While the ongoing WTO discussions evoke disappointment over the inability to reach conclusions in prior conferences, this period may also present an opportunity for improvement. Although numerous countries seem willing to accept existing proposals, there is a collective desire for stricter prohibitions, particularly targeting large fishing fleets.
This situation allows negotiators the chance to amend course, creating an agreement that satisfies all parties rather than one merely tolerated. The current climate provides room to reevaluate ineffective negotiation strategies and realign objectives with broader principles, ultimately seeking a balanced resolution that promotes sustainability and supports the developmental aspirations of vulnerable communities.