News and Analysis • Volume 8 • Number 14 • 25th July 2008

New Fisheries Submissions on the Eve of the Ministerial Meet

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

Key players in the fisheries negotiations submitted papers emphasising their positions just in time for the mini-ministerial taking place in Geneva during the week of 21 July - this despite the fact that ministers will not be discussing fisheries subsidies.

The most recent development in a spate of communications on fisheries subsidies, a 21 July proposal by China, India and Indonesia focused on developing country exceptions. A coalition of six Latin American countries and a group comprising Australia, New Zealand and the US circulated statements last week outlining their positions regarding fisheries subsidies: both papers leant support to the level of ambition contained in the draft text issued last November by the Chair of the WTO’s rules committee, Ambassador Guillermo Valles Galmés of Uruguay (TN/RL/213, available at http://docsonline.wto.org). The two statements and proposal followed an earlier communiqué from Galmés framing a path for the group’s future negotiations.

While the proposal by China, India and Indonesia stressed the need for effective special and differential treatment for developing countries, the focus of both papers was on the need for meaningful disciplines to combat the trade-distorting effects of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overexploitation of marine resources. That notwithstanding, the two statements also acknowledge the necessity of this special and differential treatment. They argue that such flexibility is not a blank cheque. For the Latin American group in particular, fisheries management schemes are a requirement for sustainable marine resources.

Proposal by China, India and Indonesia

The latest proposal on fisheries subsidies was tabled on 21 July by China, India and Indonesia during the ongoing ministerial meeting in Geneva (TN/C/W/51). Trade ministers are currently convened in an attempt to reach a compromise in WTO negotiations on agriculture and non-agricultural market goods (see related story, this issue). While fisheries subsidies are not on the ministerial agenda, they are considered to be an important facet of the Doha development round.

The proposal emphasises the importance of special and differential treatment for developing countries given the particular importance of fisheries for livelihoods, poverty reduction and food security. More specifically, China, India and Indonesia call for exemptions from subsidies disciplines for developing country small and artisanal fishermen, as well as fisheries infrastructure and capital and operating costs.

The sponsors of this recent submission tabled the last proposal discussed in the fisheries negotiations. Much of the substance of the new proposal was covered in discussion on their previous proposal. For this reason, sources have commented that it is unclear when the opportunity to talk about the recent paper will arise or what value it will add to negotiations. While Courtney Sakai, campaigner for environmental group Oceana, called the tabling at the ministerial “misplaced,” others assume that the intent of the sponsors was to raise the profile of the capacity constraints and particular vulnerabilities of developing countries in the fisheries subsidies negotiations.

Latin American paper: no blank cheque for developing countries

Circulated last week, the paper co-sponsored by Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico and Peru took the form of a sixteen point statement (TN/RL/W/234). Although the Chair’s draft has proved somewhat contentious, the regional grouping endorsed the need for “substantial and ambitious disciplines,” as originally envisaged by the Chair’s text.

“The main focus is and must continue to be a prohibition of subsidies that is sufficiently broad to achieve the substantial results … but, at the same time, accompanied by limited general exceptions and adequate flexibilities for developing countries,” stressed the six countries.

The Latin American grouping went on to say that the general exceptions and flexibilities must “necessarily be subject to appropriate management requirements.” The paper cites the common experiences of the sponsors - all developing countries - where proper management was found to be essential to ensuring the sustainability of marine resources. Moreover, the group argued that the challenges faced by developing countries should not be used as an excuse not to implement fisheries management measures. Accordingly, the group drew attention to the fact that developing countries require technical assistance, in all its forms, to achieve satisfactory fisheries management regimes.

Alex Munoz Wilson of the South American office of Oceana commented that “the statement shows that strong measures to limit fisheries subsidies can be compatible with the social and economic objectives of developing countries.”

Australia, New Zealand and US: strong subsidies disciplines required

Australia, New Zealand and the US distributed a second statement last week on fisheries subsidies (TN/RL/W/235). They stressed, in particular, the urgency of realising a strong fisheries subsidies agreement in light of recent developments - such as rising fuel costs, the closure of commercially important fisheries and food security concerns - which encourage subsidisation. However, this would ultimately undermine the long term goal of sustainable marine resources.

The sponsors outlined general principles and practical steps for propelling fisheries subsidies negotiations forward. The core principles identified for inclusion in a final agreement include a strong prohibition of subsidies, appropriate special and differential treatment and technical assistance for developing countries, sustainability measures, and a greater level of transparency concerning fisheries subsidies.

In order to facilitate future negotiations, Australia, New Zealand and the US proposed intensifying technical work on areas of general consensus and finding convergence on core issues that continue to divide delegations. Echoing the position of the Latin American delegations, Australia, New Zealand and the US believe that the Chair’s draft - a “landmark” in encouraging worldwide sustainable fisheries - is a sound basis for negotiation.

Their call for strong subsidies disciplines and for maintaining the level of ambition contained in the Chair’s draft, reiterated in both communications of last week, contrasts with the reality of the last few rounds of fisheries negotiations, where the focus has been on finding exceptions to prohibited subsidies and mitigation of the level of ambition of the text. For instance, the most recent proposal tabled by China, Indonesia and India, unlike the Chair’s draft, would not require developing countries to construct fish management regimes (see Bridges Weekly, 21 May 2008). As such, sources have said, it contains significant carve-outs for developing countries on fisheries subsidies.

Moreover, the papers reflect the fact that the divisions in fisheries subsidies negotiations are not between developing and developed countries. The position of Australia, New Zealand and the US, for example, contrasts with that of the EU, Japan, Norway and Canada, which have sought to narrow the scope of proposed prohibitions. While the Latin American group and China, India and Indonesia converge on the necessity of special and differential treatment for developing countries, they diverge on how to most appropriately accomplish it.

Rules Chair outlines strategy for future negotiations

Earlier this month, the Chair of the WTO’s Negotiating Group on Rules issued a communiqué outlining how the rules talks could proceed in the event that modalities on agricultural and industrial goods trade are established at this week’s mini-ministerial conference. The rules negotiations cover anti-dumping, horizontal subsidies and fisheries subsidies.

In the message, which was sent to all WTO Members via fax on 14 July, Chair Galmés stated his intent to issue draft texts on anti-dumping and horizontal subsidies after modalities are agreed.

However, Galmés acknowledged that the state of affairs in the fisheries subsidies negotiations is vastly different from anti-dumping or horizontal subsidies. With no pre-existing agreement to work from, delegates are “faced with fundamental challenges” in developing new rules.

Galmés holds that the fisheries negotiations have not yet reached a stage advanced enough to issue a draft text containing both effective fisheries subsidies disciplines and adequate special and differential treatment for developing countries. Thus, to facilitate further dialogue on fisheries, Galmés intends to issue a ‘road map’ highlighting the key questions to address and areas that require compromise at the same time he tables draft texts on anti-dumping and horizontal subsidies.

Also in the facsimile, Galmés outlined his plan for intensive rules negotiations throughout September. Recognising that all areas of the rules group mandate must progress together, Galmés allotted the first two weeks to fisheries subsidies; the group will address anti-dumping and horizontal subsidies later in the month. From there, Galmés noted that “regular and in fact nearly continuous” meetings would be required in order to negotiate a rules text acceptable to all Members.

At the end of July, Galmés said he would submit a report to the Trade Negotiations Committee providing a more detailed schedule for the negotiations.

Additional resources

The facsimile text can be accessed here.

ICTSD reporting.