• id Indonesia
  • en English
Indonesia for Global Justice
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Media
  • Priority Agenda
  • Publications
  • About us
  • Home
  • Media
  • Priority Agenda
  • Publications
  • About us
No Result
View All Result
Indonesia for Global Justice
No Result
View All Result

Civil Society Open Letter to Ministers on WTO Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations

February 23, 2024
in WTO
Home WTO
960
SHARES
2.4k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

In February 2024 when World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministers meet there will be intense
pressure and expectation for an outcome on the current negotiations on fisheries subsidies. The
ministerial (MC13) comes after the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS) was reached at the
previous Ministerial, and while the WTO is eager for further agreement, the current text of
negotiations fails to provide support to either fish stocks, marine conservation or development.
Research estimates that of the USD$35.4 billion of global fisheries subsidies provided in 2018, 19%
went to the small-scale fishing sub-sector (SSF), including artisanal, and subsistence fisheries.
While more than 80% went to the large-scale (industrial) fishing sub-sector (LSF), of which
subsidies that were capacity-enhancing totalled USD 18.3 billion with fuel subsidies being the
highest overall subsidy type (USD 7.2 billion)1
.
Negotiations on fisheries subsidies in the WTO were renewed from the Sustainable Development
Goal 14.6 mandate which aims to “prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute to
overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to IUU fishing, and refrain
from introducing new such subsidies, recognizing that appropriate and effective special and
differential treatment (SDT) for developing and least developed countries should be an integral part
of the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiation”.
The current Chair’s text for MC13 is failing to meet the SDG mandate because:

  • Those most responsible aren’t being held accountable – Under the current Chair’s text there
    is no recognition of historical responsibility for the state of global fish stocks and
    overfishing. The text does not target large-scale or industrial-scale fishing. The decades of
    subsidisation from industrial fishing nations and fleets are not accounted for in the design of
    prohibitions resulting in a text that fails to target those responsible for sustained overfishing
    and who have built their fleet capacities, nor the wealth that has been accrued at the expense
    of fish stocks and developing country resource holders.
  • Small Scale Fishers caught up in the agreement – If a developing country catches more
    than 0.8% of global marine capture, the exemption allowed is for small-scale fishers who
    meet the criteria of being “low income, resource poor and/or livelihood fishing” within 12 or
    24 (the and/or and 12/14nm is depending the negotiations) nautical miles of the coastline.
    This limited exemption is not allowed if they have just one fleet engaged in distant-water
    fishing. Both the definition and the geographical limit severely constrains the policy space
    available to these governments to support their small fishers. This is also extremely unfair
    given that small fishers are not the ones responsible for unsustainable fishing
  • Inadequate flexibilities – Many developing country resource holders aspire to expand their
    domestic fleets to fish their own waters without having to rely on outside fleets. To do this,
    there may be a requirement for subsidisation, yet this agreement makes that harder. The
    division of developing countries around the percentage of global marine capture (below or
    above 0.8% under current Chair’s text) undermines the principles of special and differential
    treatment and doesn’t reflect the domestic capacity that members have to meet the
    obligations of the agreement. Crucially, the ability of developing countries to be able to
    access the provided flexibilities relies on them meeting the notification requirements set out,
    these go beyond the existing subsidy agreement requirements.
    1https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.539214/full#F5
  • WTO to decide on fisheries management measures – The proposed text allows for
    prohibited subsidies to continue provided that it is demonstrated the stocks being fished are
    being managed sustainably. This is a lop-sided clause as it will benefit those with advanced
    monitoring mechanisms, namely the developed countries, to continue to subsidise their
    fleets. It also opens up a Members conservation measures to be challenged in the WTO, an
    enforceable body with no expertise in fisheries management, which again favours those
    members with the capacity to challenge another member.
  • Undermining the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea – The current Chair’s
    text impinges on the sovereign rights of countries to manage and exploit their fisheries
    resources by requiring them to report management measures to the WTO for possible
    contestation as well as restrict their ability to support the domestic fishing fleets. The WTO
    will undermine existing international ocean treaties and therefore weaken the capacities of
    developing countries to manage fish stocks and prevent distant-water fishing fleets from
    accessing fish stocks.
  • An Imbalanced Agreement that Rewards Capacity – The text as it currently stands will be
    of most use to those, mostly developed, countries that already have the existing capacity to
    subsidise their fleets and manage their fish stocks. The management and measurement of
    fisheries stocks is prohibitively expensive for many developing countries, making it harder
    for them to manage all their fish stocks as well as report to the WTO in order to access
    flexibilities in the text. Punishing those with the least capacity to manage, subsidise or notify
    does not address the dire state of global fish stocks but instead punishes those least
    responsible.
  • An undemocratic and divisive process – The outcome of MC12 was driven by the
    secretariat and only secured through all-night negotiations, something beyond the scope for
    many developing country delegations. We have not seen any attempt to involve small-fisher
    groups in these talks. In addition, it needs to give developing country and LDC members
    enough opportunity to participate and voice their opinions till the end, and the green room
    type of consultations conflict with the desired approach.
    We are calling on Ministers to make sure that any outcome on overfishing and overcapacity
    subsidies negotiations targets those who have the greatest historical responsibility for overfishing
    and stock depletion, excludes all small-scale fishers from any subsidy prohibitions, prevents the
    WTO from ruling on the validity of conservation and management measures of members, and
    upholds the sovereign rights of countries under UNCLOS.
    Endorsed by:
    International:
  1. People’s Health Movement (PHM)
  2. Society for International Development (SID)
  3. The Campaign of Campaigns
  4. Third World Network
  5. Women’s Working Group on Financing for Development
  6. Worldwide Forum of Fish Harvesters and Fish Workers (WFF)
    Regional:
  7. Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development
  8. Asia Pacific Network of Environmental Defenders
  9. Asia Pacific Research Network (APRN)
  10. Pacific Islands Association of Regional Non-Government Organisations (PIANGO)
  11. Pacific Network on Globalisation
  12. WIDE+ (Women In Development Europe+) Gender and Trade Working Group
    National:
  13. All India Kisan Sabha
  14. Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture, India
  15. Asosiasi Nelayan Tradisional Sulawesi Utara (ANTRA), Indonesia
  16. Aware Girls, New York, USA
  17. Bangladesh Krishok Federation
  18. Beyond Beijing Committee, Nepal
  19. Biswas Nepal
  20. COAST Foundation, Bangladesh
  21. Centre for Human Rights and Development (CHRD), Mongolia
  22. Consumers’ Association of Penang, Malaysia
  23. Culture Centre of the Deaf (CCD), Mongolia
  24. Diverse Voices and Action (DIVA) for Equality, Fiji
  25. Ecotour Enterprise, Cameroon
  26. Empower India
  27. Equidad de Género: Ciudadanía, Trabajo y Familia, Mexico
  28. Equitives Foundation, India
  29. Equity and Justice Working Group (EquityBD), Bangladesh
  30. Federasi Serikat Nelayan Nusantara (FSNN)
  31. Feminist Dalit Organisation (FEDO), India
  32. Feminist Dalit Organization (FEDO), Nepal
  33. Food Security Network- KHANI, Bangladesh
  34. Forum Masyarakat Adat Pesisir (FMAP), Indonesia
  35. Forum Peduli Pulau Pari, Indonesia
  36. Handelskampanjen, Norway
  37. ICENECDEV, Cameroon
  38. Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers’ Movement (ICCFM)
  39. Indonesia for Global Justice (IGJ)
  40. Inisiasi Masyarakat Adat (IMA), Indonesia
  41. Initiative for Right View (IRV), Bangladesh
  42. Kesatuan Nelayan Tradisional Indonesia – KNTI
  43. Koalisi Rakyat untuk Hak Atas Air (KruHA), Indonesia
  44. Koalisi Rakyat untuk Keadilan Perikanan (KIARA), Indonesia
  45. Koalisi untuk Advokasi Laut Aceh (KuALA), Indonesia
  46. Komunitas Nelayan Tradisional (KNT) Muara Angke, Indonesia
  47. Komunitas Nelayan Tradisional (KNT) Dadap, Indonesia
  48. Krityanand UNESCO Club, India
  49. Layar Nusantara, Indonesia
  50. Maleya Foundation, Bangladesh
  51. Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum
  52. Persatuan Pendidikan dan Kebajikan Jaringan Nelayan Pantai Malaysia (Malaysian Coastal
    Fishermen’s Welfare and Education Network)
  53. Persaudaraan Perempuan Nelayan Indonesia (PPNI)
  54. Psychological Responsiveness NGO, Mongolia.
  55. Public Advocacy Initiatives for Rights and Values in India
  56. Roots for Equity, Pakistan
  57. Rural Development Organization (RDO), Pakistan
  58. Sahabat Alam Malaysia (Friends of the Earth)
  59. Samyukta Kisan Morcha (NP), India
  60. SEATINI Uganda
  61. Serikat Nelayan Indonesia (SNI)
  62. South Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers’ Movement (SICCFM)
  63. Sunray Harvesters, India
  64. Sustainable Development Foundation, Pakistan
  65. The Institute for ECOSOC Rights, Indonesia
  66. TWN Trust India
  67. UBINIG, Bangladesh
  68. Women with disabilities Development foundation (WDDF), Bangladesh
Download PDF
Previous Post

Indonesian Fisherfolks Group on Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations at the Ministerial Conference 13th of WTO

Next Post

Ahead of the 13th WTO Ministerial Conference: Prohibition of Fisheries Subsidies at the WTO Threatens the Sustainability of Small and Traditional Fisherfolks

Indonesia for Global Justice

Rengas Besar No.35 C, RT.14/RW.2, Jati Padang, Ps. Minggu,
Jakarta Selatan - Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 12540
Telepon: (021) 7941655

© 2023  - Indonesia for Global Justice


Berlangganan Sekarang!

Ikuti berita terbaru dari Indonesia for global justice, berlangganan sekarang!

Terimakasih telah berlangganan di Indonesia for global justice


  • id Indonesia
  • en English
No Result
View All Result

Indonesia for Global Justice
Jl.Rengas Besar No.35 C, RT.14/RW.2, Jati Padang, Ps. Minggu Jakarta Selatan - 12540
Telepon: (021) 7941655

  • English