Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 3 • Number 6 • 3rd April 2003
FISHERIES SUBSIDIES: DEEP DIVISIONS PERSIST IN WTO
FISHERIES SUBSIDIES: DEEP DIVISIONS PERSIST IN WTO
Meeting from 19-20 March, the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules considered a new US paper on fisheries subsidies. Similar to the "Friends of Fish" submission tabled by Argentina, Chile, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and Peru at the last Rules Negotiating Group meeting (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 21 February 2003), the US submission was intended as a move from simply reviewing the problem of fisheries subsidies to considering possible solutions. Following the usual pattern, Korea and Japan took a different view with Korea presenting its own submission on this issue.
The US paper (TN/RL/W/77) raises several ideas for initial discussion, including expanding the category of prohibited "red light" subsidies under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures to include fisheries subsidies that "directly promote overcapacity and over-fishing, or have other direct trade-distorting effects". It further suggests creating a "dark amber" category of fisheries subsidies that would be presumed to be harmful, unless the subsidising government could demonstrate that the subsidy did not lead to overcapacity or over-fishing, nor other adverse trade effects. The paper also proposes improved notifications of fisheries subsidy programmes under WTO rules.
Ambassador Linnet Deily, presenting the US paper at the meeting, said Members had "an historic opportunity" to harness trade liberalisation in order to advance sustainable development. The US estimates global fishing subsidies at US$10-$15 billion a year. Deily called for closer cooperation with the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and NGOs in the ongoing WTO negotiations on fisheries subsidies.
While the paper received support from Norway, Peru, Iceland, Chile, Australia, Argentina, EC, New Zealand, the Philippines and Mauritius, Korea continued to take another approach. In its submission (TN/RL/W/69), Korea questioned the need for a categorisation of fisheries subsidies as suggested by the "Friends of Fish" group, calling on Members to "present clear views on the necessity and the objective of the categorisation to the satisfaction of all Members of the rules negotiation". Korea furthermore noted that categorisation should be carried out by FAO and the OECD, given their longer and deeper institutional experiences in the study of fishery subsidy issues in comparison with the Rules Negotiating Group.
Japan supported Korea, while China supported the US proposal, stressing, however, that fish farming should not be included under new rules. The EU is taking a low profile in the negotiations for the time being, as its internal fisheries reform is ongoing, but is expected to submit its own paper on fisheries subsidies to the WTO in May. A representative of an environmental NGO indicated support for the US paper, noting that the debate in the Rules Negotiating Group was moving beyond the issue of the Group’s mandate to concrete proposals on how to address fisheries subsidies.
WTO documents are searchable at http://docsonline.wto.org.
ICTSD reporting; "U.S. wants tougher trade rules for fish subsidies," REUTERS, 20 March 2003; "U.S. Proposes Tougher WTO Disciplines on Fishing Subsidies," REUTERS, 21 March 2003.