US Calls for Ban on Fish Subsidies
WTO Members have given a mixed welcome to a new US proposal to prohibit most government subsidies to commercial fishing.
The proposal (TN/RL/GEN/145) was discussed at a late April meeting of the Negotiating Group on WTO Rules, which has a mandate to “clarify and improve WTO disciplines on fisheries subsidies, taking into account the importance of this sector to developing countries.”
The proposal calls for a broad prohibition on commercial fishing subsidies, targeting any initiatives that encourage wild-capture fishing for commercial purposes, such as payments for ships and fuel, as well as loan guarantees.
Specific negotiated exceptions to the ban would be available to policies that do not encourage increased fishing capacity, such as the removal of boats through buyback schemes, re-education for fishermen and research initiatives focused on marine conservation. However, the proposal underlines that these exemptions would need to be strongly disciplined to ensure that they do not become a loophole for promoting overcapacity.
Access fees, typically paid by developed country governments in return for the right to fish in developing countries’ territorial waters, would be not be counted as prohibited subsidies if: the fleet using the distant water fishing right pays adequate compensation to the government that bought the access; the terms and conditions of access, as well as the compensation paid, are published, and; the arrangement includes science-based assessment and monitoring of the status of the fisheries resources in question. Access fees – an important source of revenue for many small island states – would not be treated as subsidies to the recipient states.
The paper also calls for a periodic review of the new rules’ impact and points to methods for increasing transparency, avoiding circumvention of the regulations, and helping countries make the transition into conformity with the policy.
The US proposal does not outline any provisions on special and differentiated treatment for developing countries. Instead, it states that the US remains “interested in the further development of Argentina’s proposal (TN/RL/GEN/138/Rev.1), noting the need for further clarification of the limits of any proposed special and differential treatment.”
At the April meeting, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Ecuador, Mexico and New Zealand supported the US proposal. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan objected to its ‘blanket ban’ approach and reiterated their preference for a bottom-up process, with WTO Members identifying specific subsidies that would be prohibited rather than exceptions to a general ban. The three countries are working on a new submission based on this approach. The EU and Norway also expressed reservations over the broad scope of the US proposal.
Subsidies and Overfishing
In his introductory remarks, US Ambassador Peter Allgeie told the rules group that high subsidy levels were “part of the reason the global fishing capacity is significantly greater than needed to catch what the oceans can produce sustainably.”
Conservation organisations WWF and Oceana expressed strong support for the US proposal. Oceana’s campaign director Courtney Sakai called it a ‘bold move’ that would help address the ‘havoc in our oceans’ created by large subsidised fishing fleet. An international group of leading ecologists and economists warned in November 2006 that fisheries could collapse worldwide by 2048 if no action were taken to halt current levels of overfishing. A 2006 report by the University of British Columbia estimated global annual fisheries subsidies to amount to US$34-30 billion. Conservation advocates say at least US$20 billion of these are harmful and account for three-quarters of the world’s overfishing.