|
NO
CONSENSUS ON FISHERIES SUBSIDIES AS DELEGATES BREAK FOR SUMMER
Convergence on fisheries subsidy disciplines continued
to elude delegates to the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules at the
committee's last gathering before the global trade body's annual
August break.
Discussions at the 10 July meeting focused on two
new proposals on special and differential treatment (S&DT) for
developing countries, and artisanal and small-scale fisheries. The
papers, from Indonesia (TN/RL/GEN/150) and Brazil (TN/RL/W/212),
followed appeals by the chair for a clearer definition of these
issues, which Members have struggled to outline over recent months.
Marine conservationists and coastal states also
petitioned the WTO on these issues ahead of last week's meeting.
Members remain divided into two broad camps on how
to structure rules aimed at curbing fisheries spending and consequent
over-fishing. Japan, Korea, Taiwan and the EU want a 'bottom-up
approach' that would ban specific types of subsidy payments, such
as those that directly contribute to increased fishing capacity.
They contend that this would make for clear, workable, and effective
fisheries regulations.
In contrast, several countries, including New Zealand
and the US, have argued for a 'top-down' method that would ban all
fishing subsidies save for some negotiated exceptions. Supporters
of this approach argue that a comprehensive prohibition represents
the best option for halting over-fishing.
Indonesia's proposal echoes the latter sentiment,
calling for a blanket ban with carve-outs for S&DT and artisanal
and small-scale fisheries.
Diving into murky waters
In its proposal, Indonesia defines 'artisanal fishing'
as subsistence-based fishing close to the shore with a proportionate
engine-to-tonnage ratio, primarily carried out by individuals or
families. 'Small-scale fishing' is similarly delineated based on
the volume of operations and their proximity to coastal lines. The
continued allowance of subsidies for both artisanal and small-scale
fishing would be conditional upon governments' proving that support
is not contributing to over-fishing, and that it is following a
fisheries management programme.
Where countries lack the capacity to demonstrate
or monitor resources, Indonesia included a provision that would
require developed countries to offer their poorer counterparts technical
assistance to strengthen fisheries management capacity and to help
them fully engage in national and regional fisheries management
organizations (RFMO). This, Indonesia said, would allow developing
countries to access relevant scientific information and engage in
marine research and conservation activities, both vital components
to maintaining healthy global fish stocks.
Indonesia also appealed to Members to create a subgroup
to the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Committee, comprised
of fisheries experts from Member governments and international institutions.
This subcommittee would be called upon to provide scientific information
and guidance when Member states contest the potential elimination
of subsidy programmes.
Common divisions, common lines
Members from both sides of the fisheries debate
lauded the Indonesian proposal for being one of the first to comprehensively
outline technical assistance, special and differential treatment,
and artisanal and small-scale fisheries.
Nevertheless, the traditional divisions prevailed.
New Zealand, Chile, Thailand, Brazil and the Philippines welcomed
Indonesia's call for sweeping prohibitions on fisheries subsidies.
They praised its text for bringing together the rules group's previous
work on the issue. The US also expressed support for the proposal,
but asked whether the exemption for small-scale fisheries represented
too large a carve-out from the proposed disciplines.
Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, on the other hand, expressed
their objection to Indonesia's paper, report sources. Taiwan went
a step further, noting that the proposal would risk transforming
the WTO into a fisheries management organisation.
The EU also expressed opposition to the Indonesian
proposal, because of the provision that would make it mandatory
for developed countries to provide technical and financial assistance
to developing nations. As the delegated stated, the EU already endows
developing countries with significant funding, but this is not seen
as an obligation, whereas Indonesia's text would.
Members brainstorm, Brazil outlines recommendations
Following the formal meeting on fisheries subsidies,
the Negotiating Group on Rules held an informal brainstorming session
focusing primarily on Brazil's recent proposal on artisanal and
small-scale fisheries. Drawing from its previous submissions, Brazil's
newest text once again calls for a broad prohibition of subsidies,
but with an additional delineation of specific exemptions for S&DT.
Brazil defines artisanal and small-scale fisheries
In its text, Brazil argues that since artisanal
and small-scale fisheries create only negligible effects on fish
stocks, subsidies and resources should continue to be permitted.
Following along similar lines as Indonesia's proposal, this exemption
would be conditional upon Members' observing best practices and
implementing fisheries management programmes.
Brazil defines artisanal and small-scale fisheries
as those relying on non-mechanised means. Other issues taken into
account include how the fishing activities are performed, such as
whether the fisherman works mainly with himself and his family for
a small profit trade.
Brazil also calls for additional S&DT provisions
to allow poorer countries the policy space to develop their industry,
such as through modernising fleets. Here again, this flexibility
would be permitted only within certain, well-defined parameters,
to guard against over-fishing.
Fighting for fish
In anticipation of last week's meeting, marine conservationists
and some coastal states once again called for a broad elimination
of fisheries subsidies.
Marine advocacy group Oceana on 9 July released
a report on the state of the world's fisheries. It also outlined
ways for the WTO to incorporate policies that would halt over-fishing
and support marine conservation.
Oceana called on WTO Members to agree to disciplines
on fisheries subsidies that support marine conservation and work
towards replenishing global fish stocks before they are irrevocably
depleted. The group also recommended that subsidies should be allocated
for strengthening effective fisheries management systems, rather
than operating costs such as modernising vessels.
Similarly, Kenya, along with a loose coalition of
other coastal states including Mauritius and Madagascar, petitioned
the WTO on 9 July to eliminate subsidies to the fishing sector.
"Over-fishing is the single most largest threat to the survival
of the industry and unless the WTO eliminates the massive subsidies
it provides to the sector across the globe, we are going to see
this practice go on un abetted and we risk clearing entire fish
population," said Simon Helphill, a board member of the Kenyan
government's Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KEMFRI).
While this move is consistent with Kenya's stance
on fisheries subsidies, it is not shared by all coastal developing
countries. In early June, for example, a group of eleven small and
vulnerable economies (SVEs), including Pacific island nations such
as Fiji and the Solomon Islands, put forth a text (TN/RL/W/210)
arguing that blanket bans would be "unduly punitive" for
them, especially in light of their minimal effect on over-fishing
(see BRIDGES Weekly, 13
June 2007).
Out for summer
Despite progress within the fisheries discussions
in recent months, significant divisions persist. Moreover, several
Members have expressed concern about moving forward until the state
of other negotiating areas - especially the deadlocked talks on
agriculture and industrial goods trade - is more clearly defined.
Delegates say that the overall impasse in the Doha Round talks might
be more of an obstacle to the fisheries subsidies negotiations than
differences on the issue itself.
The next meeting of the Negotiating Group on Rules
is scheduled for the end of September.
ICTSD reporting.
|