As discussions among World Trade Organization (WTO) members continue over subsidies that lead to overfishing and overcapacity, the challenge of balancing sustainability with development remains crucial to achieving an outcome that benefits communities and developing nations.
After the inability to reach a satisfactory agreement during the 13th Ministerial Conference in February in Abu Dhabi, negotiations have resumed in Geneva, where the General Council meetings are anticipated to serve as the platform for concluding the discussions.
However, the rush to finalize an agreement has resulted in a draft that appeases the largest subsidizers and those historically responsible for overfishing, while absolving them of significant commitments.
Concerns regarding the current approach were voiced at the recent WTO Public Forum during a session organized by the Norwegian Trade Campaign and the World Forum of Fish Workers and Fish Harvesters. Panelists emphasized the importance of achieving a substantive outcome that prevents subsidies for overfishing while simultaneously promoting development, livelihoods, and sustainability.
Developing countries, particularly those with extensive coastlines and substantial artisanal fishing populations, have raised alarms about an imbalance in the burden imposed by the agreement. Anisa Farida, First Secretary of the Indonesian Mission, insisted that any resulting obligations should not compromise Indonesia’s food security or hinder its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
To achieve this, the commitments should enhance the existing ‘best-endeavor’ strategy against subsidies for distant-water fishing and should reflect the particular conditions faced by countries like Indonesia, rather than relying solely on aggregate subsidy levels. This aggregate approach overlooks essential factors such as the size of Exclusive Economic Zones, total population, and coastline length.
The agreement’s reference to the ‘Common But Differentiaed Responsibility’ principle was noted, but critics claim it only manifests through varied levels of notification requirements, failing to adequately target the true contributors to overfishing.
Additionally, the difficulties faced by small fishers will escalate due to the inability to control industrial fleets, as highlighted by Alieu Sowe, National Coordinator for the Gambian Fisher Folks Association, who remarked on the limited flexibility within the draft that perpetuates existing inequalities in ocean governance.
Small-scale fishers are advocating for more robust measures to limit industrial fishing subsidies and better support for sustainable fishing practices, which are currently absent from the negotiations. The complex challenges they face, compounded by political maneuvering, risk overshadowing the primary objectives of the discussions.
Helene Bank, a special adviser to the Norwegian Trade Campaign, urged the WTO to uphold its commitment under United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 and address issues related to fleets and fishing methods driving overfishing and overcapacity. Despite widespread calls for action against large high-seas fishing fleets, India has been singled out for “blocking” an agreement during the last Ministerial Conference.
Papua New Guinea’s Trade Minister Richard Maru criticized influential fishing nations for failing to eliminate harmful subsidies, obstructing progress in negotiations.
To maximize the negotiations’ impact, it is vital to adhere to established international principles. While Sustainable Development Goal 14.6 mandates these negotiations, other goals related to food security and development could be jeopardized if small-scale fishers and developing countries bear the brunt of commitments.
Moreover, the principle of “Common But Differentiated Responsibility,” which has underpinned many treaties addressing sustainability, must be honored to prevent the WTO from endorsing an agreement that contravenes accepted sustainability practices.
Current proposals regarding special and differential treatment, which acknowledge developing nations’ constraints and provide for lower commitments, risk undermining these fundamental principles. Some Least Developed Countries (LDCs) may encounter significant challenges in meeting their obligations, particularly as they transition from LDC status in the near future.
The draft agreement also poses a risk of inadvertently including small-scale fishers in subsidy prohibitions, thereby limiting their access to government support and assistance, despite their minimal role in overfishing.
While the ongoing negotiations at the WTO have resulted in disappointment over the failure to achieve a resolution during the 13th Ministerial Conference and the subsequent General Council meeting, this situation may present an opportunity for positive change. Many nations appear open to refining prohibitions, particularly regarding large fleets, allowing negotiators a chance to craft a more satisfactory agreement.
There is potential to re-examine what is not functioning within the negotiations and realign them with critical principles to produce a balanced outcome that targets those undermining sustainability while enhancing the development prospects of communities and developing nations.