Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
UNIT 1
FISHERIES POLICY PROCESSES, INSTITUTIONS AND SYSTEMS
RELEVANCE OF INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL
INSTRUMENTS TO NATIONAL COASTAL FISHERIES POLICY
International and regional instruments and their relevance to national coastal
fisheries policy
This lecture surveys existing international and regional instruments and their
relevance and use in national coastal fisheries policy. Non-binding instruments that
will be covered include Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration, the FAO Code of
Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and the Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy and
its Strategic Action Framework. Binding instruments include the 1995 UN Fish
Stocks Agreement and the 2000 Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention.
Expected duration:
1.5 hours
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Introduction
International and regional instruments continue to play an influential role in fisheries
policy at the national level throughout the world. Since the 1992 Earth Summit, there has
been increased attention on the need to strengthen fisheries management as management
practices employed earlier were not effective. Sustainable development concepts have
since been promoted and have been included in various international instruments.
As a region, Pacific Islands States and territories have established numerous regional and
sub-regional instruments to improve management of fish stocks. Most of these regional
and sub-regional instruments have been internalized in national policy and legislation.
However, these instruments place an emphasis on oceanic fisheries management rather
than coastal fisheries management. The lecture will however discuss policy implication
of all relevant instruments and how they may be applied in coastal fisheries policy.
International Instruments1
At the international level, the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(LOSC) is widely acknowledged as the ‘constitution’ for the sea. The LOSC codified
many principles and rules relating to the sea. The LOSC also specifies maritime zones
which States could claim as well as the powers that coastal States enjoy and the rights of
other States in each maritime zone. During the negotiations of the LOSC, a number of
Pacific Island States were involved and supported initiatives such as the archipelagic
State regime and the creation of the Exclusive Economic Zone. These zones expand the
maritime territory of Pacific Island States and also impose the burden of protecting and
preserving the marine environment as well as ensuring sustainability.
The Earth Summit was a landmark meeting that focused attention on people and their
environment. The Summit served to re-orientate international thinking about how the
environment and natural resources, including fisheries, should be used. Chapter 17 of
Agenda 21 provides for oceans, coasts and fisheries.2 After the Earth Summit, the
following agreements were concluded:

1993 FAO Compliance Agreement;

1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (and the associated
International Plans of Action and Technical Guidelines); and

1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.
1
Parts of this section have been adapted from materials used in the Train Sea Coast Responsible Fisheries
Course delivered by the USP School of Marine Studies and IOI-Pacific Islands.
2
The Chapter deals with the protection of the oceans, all kinds of seas, including enclosed and semienclosed seas, and coastal areas and the protection, rational use and development of their living resources.
See: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter17.htm
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
The 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement gave rise to the Convention on the Conservation
and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific
Ocean.
Other fisheries initiatives that were designed to promote long-term conservation and
sustainable use and support the goals and intent of Agenda 21 include the

1992 Cancún Declaration on Responsible Fishing;

1995 Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action on the Sustainable Contribution of
Fisheries to Food Security;

1999 Rome Declaration on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries;

2001 Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem

The fisheries goals in the Plan of Implementation for the 2002 Johannesburg World
Summit on Sustainable Development
1993 FAO Compliance Agreement
The 1993 FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and
Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (Compliance Agreement) is
an integral part of the Code of Conduct, even though its legal status is different from the
voluntary Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. It was adopted in 1993, but did not
come into force until 2003. Thirty two countries have accepted the Agreement, mainly
flag states committing themselves to be responsible flag states – only Cook Islands has
accepted the Agreement in the region.
The Compliance Agreement is complemented by the subsequent 1995 UN Fish Stocks
Agreement and the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. They all
provide a consistent legal foundation for achieving the goal of long-term conservation
and sustainable use of the fisheries resource. The objective of the Compliance Agreement
is to deter re-flagging of fishing vessels to avoid compliance with internationally agreed
conservation and management measures, which undermines the work of RFMOs.
Further detail is provided in Appendix 1 and at http:/www.fao.org/legal.
1995 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries
The 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, which has its roots in the
LOSC, was concluded in the aftermath of the International Conference on Responsible
Fishing (Cancún, Mexico, 6–8 May 1992) and the Earth Summit. These conferences,
respectively, adopted the Cancún Declaration and Agenda 21.
The concept of responsible fisheries and the possibility of creating guidelines or a code of
practice for responsible fisheries that would take into account all the technical, socioeconomic and environmental factors was first discussed by the 1991 Session of the
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Committee on Fisheries (COFI). The concept of responsible fisheries emerged during
discussions about large-scale pelagic driftnet fishing.
COFI acknowledged that FAO had an important role to play in promoting international
understanding about the responsible conduct of fishing operations, and it was in this way
that the concept of and the need for a Code of Conduct was conceived. Following an
extensive consultative and negotiation process among FAO members, the FAO
Conference unanimously adopted the Code in October 1995.
Four IPOAs have been concluded within the framework of the 1995 Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries. These IPOAs address




reducing the incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries;
the conservation and management of sharks;
the management of fishing capacity; and
the prevention, deterrence and elimination of IUU fishing.
These IPOAs focus on particular fisheries issues that are deemed to warrant special
urgent attention because of their negative effects on fisheries and the environment.
Countries are urged to develop national plans of action to give effect to the IPOAs. This
requires fisheries managers to assess carefully their respective national positions with
respect to each of the IPOAs and, in turn, take steps to address them. Each of the IPOAs
provide guidance to fisheries managers about how the national plans should be elaborated
and the timeframes within which the national plans should be concluded.
The Code of Conduct is a global instrument, and it is recognised that it is not equally
applicable to all countries. Moreover, the Code focuses more intensively on industrial
fishery issues than on problems of particular importance to small-scale fisheries. As a
result, without deviating from the overriding purpose and intent of the Code, fisheries
managers should, based on their national situations and needs, strive to implement the
Code, taking account of national circumstances and priorities, with attention to the
special requirements of developing countries, including SIDS (Article 5).
In the Pacific Islands region, much of the focus of implementation of the international
instruments was initially at regional level, responding to global concerns over control of
fishing in the high seas. However, in the last few years, implementation in the region at
national level has increased as indicated by:





systematic revision of national laws incorporating the principles of responsible and
sustainable fisheries
broader application of community-based approaches to fisheries management
increasing participation by non-governmental stakeholders including environmental
and industry NGOs
application of the ecosystem approach in tuna fisheries
institutional reforms that have emphasised strengthening of monitoring, assessment
and management and conservation aspects of fisheries
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007



capacity building gains in skills in these areas
increased attention to mitigating impacts on non-target species
several initiatives to prepare IPOAs
For information about the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, go to the webpage
found at http://www.fao.org/fi
1995 United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement
The 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement was developed in response to a call from UNCED
for cooperation to ensure that high seas fisheries are managed in accordance with the
provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, particularly highly
migratory and straddling stocks. The Agreement serves to strengthen and supplement the
provisions of the 1982 Convention dealing with straddling stocks and highly migratory
stocks. It sets out detailed rules and minimum standards to be followed and steps to be
taken by States and RFMOs to settle disputes if and when they arise. The Agreement
entered into force on 11 December 2001.
The purpose of the Agreement is “to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable
use of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks through effective
implementation” of the relevant provisions of the LOSC.
While the Agreement only address the conservation and management of straddling and
highly migratory fish stocks, the general principles found in Article 5, the obligation to
apply the precautionary approach (Article 6) in accord with the guidelines in Annex II,
and the need to ensure compatibility of measures in zone and beyond in Article 7 is
relevant to coastal fisheries. These articles are provided in Attachment B.
For information on the Agreement and its status, go to the webpage found at
http://www.un.org/depts/los
2000 Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory
Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean
The Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks
in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPFC Convention) was concluded in 2000
within the framework of the LOSC and its implementing agreement, the 1995 UN Fish
Stocks Agreement. The structure and content of the WCPF Convention parallels the 1995
UN Fish Stocks Agreement. The Convention was the first agreement of its type to be
concluded for highly migratory fish stocks under the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.3
3The
first Convention established under the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement was for straddling fish stocks:
The South-East Atlantic Fisheries Organization. However, the first Convention for highly migratory fish
stocks was the WCPF Convention.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
It is a landmark agreement for Pacific Island Countries and the management of highly
migratory fish stocks.
The purpose of the Convention is to provide for the comprehensive conservation and
management of highly migratory fish stocks in the Convention Area: “to ensure, through
effective management, the long-term conservation and sustainable use of highly
migratory fish stocks in the western and central Pacific Ocean in accordance with the
1982 Convention and the Agreement” (i.e., the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement).
The Convention came into force in June 2004, and was brought into force by its
ratification by 10 Pacific Island countries with Australia, Korea and New Zealand.
Subsequently, all Pacific Island States and all major fishing states in the region have
become Commission Members. The Commission has introduced measures relating to
fishing activity on the high seas and in national waters.
For information about the Convention and the Commission, go to the webpage found at
http://www.wcpfc.int
South Pacific Ocean Regional Fisheries Management Agreement
The latest international fisheries instrument relevant to the Pacific Islands region to be
developed is the South Pacific Ocean Regional Fisheries Management Agreement.
Negotiation of this agreement is in its final stages. The agreement applies to the high
seas in a large area of the South Pacific from Chile across to Australia. The northern
border of the area for the Western Pacific is not yet established, so it is not yet clear how
much, if any, of the Pacific Islands region will be covered by this Agreement.
The agreement will establish a new organisation, called the South Pacific Regional
Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO). The SPRFMO will have functions that
roughly parallel those of the WCPF Commission, applying to the straddling and discrete
high seas stocks that are not covered by the WCPF Convention. The major existing
fisheries that will be covered include the large mackerel fishery in the high seas of the
eastern South Pacific and the deep bottomfish species complex on the under sea ridges
and plateaus, of which orange roughy is the most sought after species.
For information about this initiative, go to the webpage found at
http://www.southpacificrfmo.org/
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Other International Instruments:
Millenium Development Goals
The MDGs emanated from the United Nations Millenium Declaration adopted by the
UNGA in September 2000.4 The MDGs have influenced the Strategic Plan for Coastal
Fisheries endorsed in 2003 and influence the work of international and regional
organisations in the region. Goals 1, 7 and 8 are relevant to coastal fisheries. Goal 1 aims
to eradicate poverty and hunger, goal 7 promotes environment sustainability, and goal 8
supports global partnerships for development.
Goal 1:


Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day
Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
Goal 7:

Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and
programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources

Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe
drinking water

Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by
2020
Goal 8 aims include:
4

Develop further an open trading and financial system that is rule-based,
predictable and non-discriminatory, includes a commitment to good governance,
development and poverty reduction— nationally and internationally

Address the least developed countries' special needs. This includes tariff- and
quota-free access for their exports; enhanced debt relief for heavily indebted poor
countries; cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous official
development assistance for countries committed to poverty reduction

Address the special needs of landlocked and small island developing States

In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new
technologies— especially information and communications technologies
UNGA Resolution 55/2. A copy of the resolution may be obtained from:
http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.pdf.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Regional Instruments5
Regional cooperation in the Pacific Islands region is well developed and recognised
internationally. This cooperation is promoted through the work of three technical regional
agencies: the Forum Fisheries Agency, the Marine Resources Division of the Secretariat
of the Pacific Community and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment
Programme. One of the outstanding features of regional cooperation in fisheries is the
extent to which countries have been able to coordinate and harmonise their policies and
activities in areas of common concern.
Initially, regional fisheries cooperation was focused on arrangements with distant-water
fishing nations and entities (DWFNs) that target tuna stocks in exclusive economic zones
(EEZs). But recently, Pacific Island Countries have broadened their focus to include
fostering and controlling domestic fleets as those fleets grow in importance. Along with
the right to expand development of domestic fishing industries, is the right of
responsibility in maintaining effective sustainable fisheries management and that stocks
are kept above sustainable levels.
The international community recognises that Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have
special needs and that they face a range of uncertainties not confronted by most other
continental developing States. Almost without exception, SIDS have fragile economies,
and this situation is made worse by environmental concerns that pose substantial threats
to the survival of many SIDS, especially those consisting of low-lying islands and atolls.
Fisheries are the lifeline of SIDS in the Pacific Islands region. While the degree of
economic and social dependence varies among countries, some of them, such as Kiribati,
depend on tuna to a very large extent for food security and as a means to promote
national development.
In fostering regional fisheries cooperation in the Pacific Islands region, countries must
strike a balance between their national interests and those of their neighbours in the
region. It has been demonstrated that national and regional interests do not always
coincide on fisheries issues. Nonetheless, through consensus building and the recognition
that not all countries will benefit equally, agreement is usually reached and a common
approach adopted. This process, which sometimes involves national sacrifice in the
interest of the common regional good, has been viewed with enthusiasm by other regions
of the world where fisheries cooperation has not achieved the same level of development
or dynamism as in the Pacific Islands region.
Regional fisheries cooperation in the Pacific Islands region has been formalised in a
number of instances through regionally adopted instruments. The purpose of these
instruments is to strengthen the conservation and management of shared fisheries in the
5
Parts of this section have been adapted from materials used in the Train Sea Coast Responsible Fisheries
Course delivered by the USP School of Marine Studies and IOI-Pacific Islands.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
region and to put in place arrangements that will facilitate long-term sustainable and
responsible practices.
Like their international counterparts, regional instruments need to be implemented. States
are, therefore, required to develop policy that supports the instruments and, in turn, and as
appropriate, take action to revise legislation to give effect to them. Fisheries managers
should be well briefed on the purpose, role and status of regionally concluded
instruments, even if their governments are not party to them.
Regional and sub-regional instruments adopted include:
1979 South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency Convention
The FFA Convention resulted from the decision by the South Pacific Forum to decline a
proposal to establish a regional fisheries commission like the WCPF Commission and to
establish instead a regional fisheries agency open only to members of the South Pacific
Forum. The decision was a response to the refusal of some fishing states to accept
coastal state sovereign rights over tuna and a belief by Forum Members that they needed
to cooperate among themselves to put in place their EEZs and associated legal and
technical frameworks before entering into an organisation with fishing states. However
the FFA Convention also includes recognition of the need for “additional international
machinery to provide for co-operation between all coastal states in the region and all
states involved in the harvesting of such resources” which subsequently led to the
negotiation and adoption of the WCPF Convention.
1982 Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Management of
Fisheries of Common Interest
The 1982 Nauru Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Management of Fisheries of
Common Interest (Nauru Agreement), which established the Nauru Group, was signed in
February 1982. The signatories to the Agreement are a subset of the FFA membership
and include the Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau,
Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.
When the Nauru Group was established, there was a view among the northern members
of the FFA that they should cooperate more closely on matters related to arrangements
with DWFNs because their collective EEZs contained a large proportion of the tuna
stocks in the region. In this way, policies and approaches adopted by the Nauru Group
with respect to relations with DWFNs have in time been diffused to the rest of the FFA
region: For example, the regional minimum terms and conditions of access to EEZs by
DWFN fleets were first developed by the Nauru Group and later extended to the entire
FFA membership.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
When the Nauru Group was being established, there was a fear that it would split the
FFA into the haves and the have-nots with respect to tuna abundance. However, this did
not occur, and indeed, in the 1980s and 1990s, the existence of the Nauru Group served
to strengthen regional cooperation and to facilitate a greater and fairer financial return
from their access agreements with DWFNs.
Four implementing arrangements have been concluded under the Nauru Agreement.
They are:



the First and Second Implementing Arrangements Setting Forth Minimum Terms And
Conditions Of Access To The Fisheries Zones of the Parties;
the Palau Arrangement; and
the FSM Arrangement
1989 Convention for the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Driftnets in the
South Pacific
The 1989 Convention for the Prohibition of Fishing with Long Driftnets in the South
Pacific (Wellington Convention) was signed in November 1989, in Wellington, New
Zealand. The Convention entered into force in May 1991. The purpose of the Convention
is to prohibit nationals and vessels of parties to the Convention from engaging in driftnet
fishing activities in the Convention Area (i.e., the South Pacific region).
Fishing with large-scale pelagic driftnets became an issue in the Pacific Islands region in
the mid-1980s when fleets from the Republic of Korea, Japan and Taiwan started fishing
with nets that in some cases were up to 60 kilometres in length. The principal objection to
this type of fishing was that it was completely non-selective, and its impact on the
ecosystem was unknown. Signatories to the Wellington Convention maintained that
under these circumstances precaution should be exercised. The implementation of the ban
is now considered to be one of the first uses of the precautionary approach in fisheries.
In 1991, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted resolution 46/215.
Among other things, this resolution called on members of the international community to
ensure that a global moratorium on all large-scale pelagic driftnet fishing was
implemented on the high seas, including enclosed seas and semi-enclosed seas, by 31
December 1992. The UNGA has continued to monitor closely the use of large-scale
pelagic driftnet fishing. FAO has reported annually to the General Assembly on the
incidence of this type of fishing.
The international moratorium on the use of large-scale pelagic driftnet vessels has been
successful, and except for very isolated cases, this type of fishing has been eliminated
from the world’s oceans. Since the early 1990s, there have been no reports of driftnet
fishing in the Pacific Islands regions.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
1992 Niue Treaty on Cooperation in Fisheries Surveillance and Law
Enforcement in the South Pacific Region
The 1992 Niue Treaty on Cooperation in Fisheries Surveillance and Law Enforcement in
the South Pacific Region (Niue Treaty) opened for signature in July 1992. It entered into
force in May 1993. The Treaty has been ratified by 15 FFA Members.
The purpose of the Niue Treaty is to coordinate matters related to Monitoring, Control
and Surveillance (MCS). To this end, parties have agreed to cooperate in the enforcement
of their fisheries laws and regulations and to develop regionally agreed procedures for the
conduct of fisheries surveillance and law enforcement.
The principal provisions of the Niue Treaty are found in Article VI. Among other things,
this Article provides that any two or more parties may enter into a Subsidiary Agreement
under which they would cooperate in the provision of personnel and the use of vessels
and aircraft.
The Treaty paved the way for effective MCS cooperation among FFA members. It deals
with a problem that island countries face with respect to vessels committing an
infringement in the EEZ of one country and then continuing to fish with impunity in the
EEZ of another FFA member. The Treaty closed loopholes in the Pacific Island region
with respect to IUU fishing and served to deter unauthorised fishing by both regional and
DWFN vessels.
While the Treaty offers great potential to enhance MCS in the region, the pace of
implementation has been slow.
Other Regional Instruments
In addition to binding fisheries instruments summarised above, there are a number of
non-binding instruments agreed at the regional level. Although non-binding in nature,
these instruments provide insight into the direction of regional policy and possibly
national policy.
Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy and Integrated Strategic Action Framework6
The Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy was endorsed by Pacific Island leaders in 2002
and is the first regional ocean policy in the world. The Policy was created because of the need
to achieve responsible ocean governance in the region.
The vision is a "healthy ocean that sustains the livelihoods and aspirations of Pacific Island
communities" and the Policy's goal is to ensure the future sustainable use of the ocean and its
6
Most of this section is borrowed and adapted from the PIROP website:
http://www.spc.int/PIOCEAN/forum/New/welcome.htm.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
resources by both Pacific Island communities and their external partners. The Policy views
the ocean broadly, defining it "to include the waters of the ocean, the living and non-living
elements within, the seabed beneath and the ocean-atmosphere and ocean-island interfaces."
The Policy adheres to international law rules relating to the sea as provided in the LOSC.
While the LOSC confer rights on Pacific Island communities relating to the use of the ocean
and its resources, accompanying responsibilities relate to the sustainable development,
management and conservation of the ocean's living resources and to the protection of the
ocean environment and its biodiversity.
The Policy introduces five guiding principles to achieve the sustainable use of ocean
resources:





Improving the understanding of the ocean
Sustainably developing and managing the use of ocean resources
Maintaining the health of the ocean
Promoting the peaceful use of the ocean
Creating partnerships and promote cooperation
In 2004, regional leaders endorsed the strategic action framework of the Regional Ocean
Policy. The Framework is designed to serve as a guide for implementation and is
intended to be inclusive, allowing for participation by governments, non-governmental
organisations, non-state actors, the private sector, and civil society (See Attachment C). It
provides:




A regional consensus on priorities for actions to ensure improved
ocean governance and sustainable use of the ocean and its
resources;
A framework for regional coordination of action;
A framework for regional and international institutions to use in
integrating their work; and
Guidance to development partners on regional priority areas
requiring their support
Both the Policy and its Framework are focused at the regional level but implementation
will necessarily involve actions at all levels (local, national, regional and international).
The Framework is intended to influence the development of workplans of regional
organisations and help direct the work they conduct on behalf of their members. It will
also provide guidance to national governments in implementing sustainable development
and management of ocean, coastal and island resources, in partnership with local
communities.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
For further information on the Regional Ocean Policy and Strategic Action Framework,
go to the webpage found at http://www.spc.int/PIOCEAN/forum/New/welcome.htm.
Strategic Plan for Fisheries Management and Sustainable Coastal Fisheries in
Pacific Islands7
The Strategic Plan was endorsed at the SPC regional Head of Fisheries meeting in 2003.
The Plan was initiated at an SPC regional policy meeting on coastal fisheries
management held in Nadi in March, 2003. This was followed by in-country visits and
consultation which showed concerns relating to over-exploitation of coastal marine
resources due particularly to increased commercial activity.
The Plan takes into account international developments in sustainable development and
fisheries management and is formulated to assist in developing the capacity of national
governments and the region in achieving sustainable development targets. According to
the Plan:8
“Life-style changes and the requirements of a growing cash economy in Pacific
islands will continue to result in further shifts from subsistence to commercial
fishing. Fisheries managers in Pacific islands have to address the implications of
this, not only in terms of development and income generation, but in terms of
sustainability and food security. This strategic plan will assist in developing the
capacity of island governments, and the region as a whole, to achieve the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on poverty reduction and outcomes of
the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD
2002). The relevant requirements of these include actions to;
-
Implement strategies for sustainable development by 2005
Reverse the loss of environmental resources by 2015
Maintain or restore fisheries stocks on an urgent basis and where
possible by 2015.
The impact of globalisation on socio-economic development and the sustainable
use of fisheries resources in the region emphasises the use of international
instruments under both the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS, 1982) and the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED, 1992). In particular, Chapter 17, Agenda 21 of UNCED
provides a basis for national policies and strategies on the sustainable
development and management of coastal fisheries.”
Based on the above, it is clear that the Plan builds directly on international instruments
promoting sustainable development rather than an existing regional policy.
King, M., Fa’asili, U., Fakahau, S. & Vunisea, A. 2003. Strategic Plan for Fisheries Management and
Sustainable Coastal Fisheries in Pacific Islands. SPC/Commonwealth Secretariat. 45p.
8
See p. 3 of the Strategic Plan.
7
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Vava’u Declaration on Fisheries
The most recent regional instrument was agreed to by Pacific Island Forum leaders at the
2007 Forum meeting in Tonga. The Declaration reaffirms regional cooperation in
fisheries and calls for a stronger commitment from members. Among other matters,
leaders specifically:
-
Recognised that regional fisheries resources remain a key driver for
sustainable economic growth in the region, especially for small island
states, and that they must as a consequence be supported by responsible
and effective stewardship;
-
Recalled the commitment by Leaders under the Pacific Plan to maximise
sustainable returns from fisheries by developing an ecosystem based
fisheries management planning framework; encouraging effective fisheries
development, including value-adding activities; and collaboration to
ensure legislation and access frameworks are harmonised;
-
Recognised the aspirations of Pacific Islands countries to strengthen their
engagement in sustainable fisheries and to maximise the flow on benefits
from both domestic fisheries and foreign fishing operations in the region;
-
Remained conscious of the imperative need to take immediate and
decisive collective action to ensure that, within the next three to five years,
to secure peoples’ future livelihoods, regional food security, and
environmental sustainability of the seas and their ecosystems;
Further leaders committed nations to, among other tasks:
-
Promote domestic fisheries, in particular the development of national
tuna industries, in the context of a phased introduction of rights-based
management arrangements supported by an appropriate management and
regulatory framework;
-
Develop and manage inshore/coastal fisheries and aquaculture to support
food security, sustainable livelihoods and economic growth for current and
future generations of Pacific people;
The Vava’u Declaration is provided in Attachment D.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Relevance of Instruments to Coastal Fisheries Policy9
Identified instruments developed at the international and regional levels have and will
play an influential role in the formulation of coastal fisheries policy. The overarching
concepts that are relevant to coastal fisheries policy (and other national policies) are:
1. Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD);
2. Sustainable Fisheries; and
3. Responsible Fisheries.
Ecologically Sustainable Development has been discussed at the international level over
the last two decades. ESD was reinforced at the Earth Summit and has been incorporated
in international, regional and national instruments. A notable addition at the international
level are the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) where sustainable development is
promoted to achieve, among other things, a reduction in poverty.
The other two concepts are related and are used interchangeably to convey the same idea.
They are mutually reinforcing and are aimed at the same goal.
Underlying the achievement of sustainable development, long-term sustainability and
responsible fisheries is the assumption that governments are prepared to politically
support action to achieve these objectives. In some cases, this requires governments to
implement unpopular decisions, including closing fisheries or reducing the fishing effort
(i.e., reducing the numbers of fishers and vessels operating in a fishery). In extreme
cases, it might mean imposing moratoria on fishing for particular stocks that are
threatened. This action has been taken, for example, in the North Atlantic Ocean for some
cod and plaice stocks.
Sustainable Development
The concept of sustainability was first developed in the Stockholm Declaration of 1972,
was part of the Rio Declaration of 1992, the Barbados Programme of Action of 1994, the
Johannesburg Declaration of 2002, and the Mauritius Declaration of 2005. In 1987, the
Brundlandt Commission defined “sustainable development” broadly as development that
meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the needs of the future.
The concept is included in numerous international instruments and relied upon by
international institutions. Noteworthy is the recognition by the International Court of
Justice that sustainable development is a principle that had to be considered by parties in
the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros project.10
9
Parts of this section have been taken and adapted from materials used in the Train Sea Coast Responsible
Fisheries Course delivered by the USP School of Marine Studies and IOI-Pacific Islands.
10
Judgment in the Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project(1998) 37 ILM 162.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
At the regional level, the concept of sustainability can be found in all regional
conventions.11 The first regional environmental convention adopted in Apia in June
197612 provides references to the principles in the Stockholm Declaration and provides a
regional framework for “taking action for the conservation, utilisation and development
of … resources through careful planning and management for the benefit of present and
future generations”. The Apia Convention does not explicitly define sustainable
development but provides for its components. To illustrate further, in 1993 the region
adopted the agreement that provided legal autonomy to the Pacific Regional Environment
Programme (SPREP).13 The SPREP Agreement incorporates sustainable development
objectives and outlines the broad objectives of the organisation in promoting cooperation
in the Pacific region and providing assistance in order to protect and improve its
environment and ensuring sustainable development for present and future generations.14
ESD is implemented to varying degrees by all Pacific Small Island Developing States
(SIDS). The concept is not only found in policy but it is also a matter of law in all Pacific
SIDS. The context for decision-making on sustainability in Pacific SIDS appears to rest
primarily on: the needs and aspirations of local communities, and the aspirations of
national governments.15 In practice at the national level, the latter receives more attention
than the former. Needs and issues emanating from the regional or international levels
may have an influence, but based on the actions of States, is not believed to be as
important as national needs. Admittedly, this is a simplistic view of a process involving
complex political and economic issues.
Sustainable fisheries
In the 1980s, concern about the environment and its degradation focused attention on
world fisheries, among other things. This concern led to a number of initiatives, including
the 1991 FAO/Netherlands den Bosch Conference on Agriculture and the Environment,
which refined and adopted the term sustainable development. It defined sustainable
development as
11
Convention on Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific. Adopted 12 June 1976. In force 28 June
1980.
Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific Region,
adopted 24 November 1986. 26 ILM (1987). In force 18 August 1990. The two protocols of this convention
are: Protocol for the Prevention of Pollution of the South Pacific Region by Dumping, and the Protocol
concerning Cooperation in Combating Pollution Emergencies in the South Pacific. Convention to Ban the
Importation into Forum Island countries of Hazardous and Radioactive wastes and to control the
Transboundary movement and management of Hazardous Wastes within the South Pacific region (Waigani
Convention), adopted 16 September 1995. In force 21 October 2001.
12
Convention on Conservation of Nature in the South Pacific. Adopted 12 June 1976. In force 28 June
1980.
13
Agreement establishing the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme. Adopted 16 June 1993.
14
Article 2, SPREP Agreement.
15
Fisher, D. E. 2003. Australian Environmental Law. Lawbook Co.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
the management and conservation of the natural resource base and the
orientation of technological and institutional change in such a manner as to
ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for the present
and future generations. Such development (in the agriculture, forestry and
fisheries sectors) conserves land, water, plant and animal genetic resources; is
environmentally non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable
and socially acceptable.16
The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also
known as the Earth Summit, set the stage for action in the 1990s and beyond by adopting
Agenda 21: A Programme of Action for Sustainable Development. An important
outcome of UNCED was the agreement that the concept of long-term sustainability
should be the underpinning premise for the use of renewable resources. In 2005 the
World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) called for sustainable marine
resource assessment and management by 2010, and restoration of fish stocks to MSY
levels by 2015. Similarly, several elements and provisions of sustainable and optimum
utilization of marine resources are also flagged in the WCPFC Convention.
The sustainability concept has been incorporated in just about every community-based
marine resource plan, national management and development plan and relevant Act
relating to marine resources and biological diversity in Pacific Island State and territories.
In consequence, the use of the ‘long-term sustainability’ concept in various international,
regional and national instruments has created powerful momentum for implementation of
these concepts. In this region, this will remain a real test for implementing the concept by
all stakeholders in to the future; and recognizing to integrate this with development
initiatives and sustained livelihood of local populations particularly those in rural areas.
The implementation of policies that facilitate long-term sustainability in fisheries should
take into consideration social, cultural, economic, physical and development
considerations. In doing so, those policies should focus on two critical elements:
1. inter-generational equity in terms of access to resources and
2. measures designed to regulate the use of resources in order to prevent degradation.
Measures that could improve fisheries management and be used in key action areas are
spelled out in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21. This chapter is entitled “Protection of the oceans,
all kinds of seas, including enclosed and semi-enclosed seas, and coastal areas and the
protection, rational use and development of their living resources.” Chapter 17 is divided
into the following program areas:

integrated management and sustainable development of coastal and marine areas,
including exclusive economic zones;

marine environmental protection;
16FAO.
(1991). The den Bosch declaration and agenda for action on sustainable agriculture and rural
development. FAO. Rome. 63 pages.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007

sustainable use and conservation of marine living resources of the high seas;

sustainable use and conservation of marine living resources under national
jurisdiction;

addressing critical uncertainties for the management of the marine environment and
climate change;

strengthening international (including regional) cooperation and coordination; and

sustainable development of small islands.
Each of the program areas addresses

objectives;

activities (including the management of related activities, data and information, and
international and regional cooperation and coordination); and

means of implementation (financing and cost evaluation, scientific and technological
means, human resource development and capacity building).
Responsible fisheries
The 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries introduced the notion of
responsible fisheries. Responsible fisheries implies that all those engaged in the fisheries
sector, regardless of their different roles, should act in a way that does not prejudice
access to resources by current or future generations. In this way, governments, fishers,
processors, consumers and other stakeholders are morally challenged and encouraged to
take responsibility for their actions or lack of action if this leads to resources being
depleted. Significantly, the notion of responsibility also conveys the idea that
stakeholders should be socially accountable and answerable and act in a trustworthy way.
In the past, little consideration was given to the apportionment of blame when a fishery
collapsed. This is no longer the case. If a fishery collapses today, it is likely that
stakeholders will be called on to answer why this situation has occurred. Indeed, the first
principle of the Code of Conduct (Article 6) states that
the right to fish carries with it the obligation to do so in a responsible manner so
as to ensure effective conservation and management of the living aquatic
resource.
Relevant Coastal Fisheries Principles from international and regional
instruments:
In recent years, and especially after the adoption of Agenda 21, fisheries management has
become increasingly more sophisticated as new concepts and principles have been
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
developed and the international community has pressed for their implementation. Many
of the concepts and principles that have emerged or re-emerged, while being clear in
theory, pose operational difficulties in implementation. Moreover, some of these
principles are still in their formative stages, while in other cases there is not complete
agreement about their essential elements and interpretation. The following are
noteworthy:

Ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM): This approach has two
separate but interrelated elements: managing target and bycatch species and
conserving biodiversity by minimising impacts on other species in the ecosystem.
Such management is inherently more difficult to implement and very much more
complex than single or multispecies management; nonetheless, “a focus on the entire
ecosystem and not only on individual stocks is urgently needed to protect and utilize
marine resources.”17

Rights-based fisheries management: the core of the concept of rights-based
management is that the management system creates some form of instrument that
represents the right to participate in the fishery while others are excluded – and that
instrument has a value to it. The instrument and the value attached to it belong to
someone, creating a form of property, and thus the term property right is applied. The
system then works by providing incentives to participants in the fishery to take
certain actions to maximise the returns they get from their right, including the value
of their right – with the intention that these actions should have a “good” outcome
such as promoting sustainable fishing or reducing overcapacity.

Community-based fisheries management: this is a form of rights-based
management in which rights are held by communities. In the Pacific Islands, many
communities had long-established systems of customary tenure over fishery resources
or areas. Government regulations and administrations tended over decades to
supplant and undermine these systems with centralized legal structures. More
recently, there has been an increased awareness that many coastal fisheries can be
most effectively managed by those who are most dependent on them. This has led to
systems of devolving legal control over access to resources and levels of harvesting to
coastal communities. This approach has been most effective where it has been able to
build on systems of traditional marine tenure, but can also be applied more generally
in areas where such systems have not been in place or have been abandoned. Fiji,
Solomon Islands and Samoa are globally recognised as examples of best practices in
the application of community- based management – but at the other end in terms of
scale, domestic fisheries management in Japan is largely community-based fisheries
management.

Performance indicators to assess progress in achieving sustainable fisheries
management. This process involves establishing objectives and measuring
17
Statement by Serge M. Garcia, FAO Fisheries Resources Division Director at the Reykjavik Conference
on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem, Iceland, 1–4 October 2001.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
performance against those objectives. Performance indicators enhance
communication, transparency, effectiveness and accountability in management. No
standard method exists on how results should be measured in fisheries, and additional
work is required to facilitate a broader implementation. In some countries, there is a
move towards establishing links between management objectives, management plans,
implementation and enforcement, results, and the government budgetary process.

Precautionary approach: This approach requires, among other things, that caution
should be exercised when information about a fishery is poor or lacking. Application
is complicated because there is no agreed, single framework within which to pursue
implementation. The Code of Conduct, especially in Article 7.5, the 1995 UN Fish
Stocks Agreement and the 1995 Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action call for the
implementation of the precautionary approach. In Article 7.5.1, the Code of Conduct
calls for the precautionary approach to be applied widely in fisheries management.
This Article also states that the absence of adequate scientific information should not
be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and management
measures. The 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement in Article 6 makes a similar
statement with respect to the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks
and highly migratory fish stocks. The WCPF Convention also addresses the
precautionary approach. Significantly, an early application of the precautionary
approach in fisheries in the late 1980s was the conclusion of the 1991 Wellington
Convention, which is discussed later in this unit;

Exchange of real-time information for decision making and reporting (e.g.,
especially when fishery quotas, as a means of management, are being used). Such
real-time transfers are also required for assessing the impact of new technology on
management measures and for the support of fishery networks (e.g., for food safety
and monitoring, control and surveillance [MCS]). The Code of Conduct addresses
this issue, among other things, in Article 7.4.4 and in Technical guidelines numbers 1,
1.1 and 4;

Reduction of waste in fisheries, principally through the minimisation of bycatch and
discards, is of particular concern for biodiversity and food security reasons. Articles
6.6, 7.6.9 and 8.5.1 in the Code of Conduct; Technical guideline number 7, which
deals with the responsible use of fisheries; and the 1995 Kyoto Declaration and Plan
of Action seek to reduce waste in fisheries. While this is not a new issue, additional
work on gear-related issues is necessary to enhance further selectivity in vulnerable
fisheries;

The situation of indigenous fishers and their fishing communities should receive
special consideration when elaborating fishery management arrangements. The social,
cultural and economic importance of fisheries to indigenous groups should be
factored into management allocations. This issue is addressed in Article 7.6.6 of the
Code of Conduct. As an example, Fiji has adopted specific measures to promote
participation by indigenous Fijians in commercial fisheries; and

The need to enhance MCS, generally, through concerted action by flag States,
coastal States and port States. This issue is addressed widely in most of the recently
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
concluded international instruments, including the Code of Conduct, especially in
Articles 8.1, 8.2 and 8.3, and Technical guidelines numbers 1, 1.1, and 4, the 1995
UN Fish Stocks Agreement, and the IPOA-IUU. In the Pacific Islands region the
threat of IUU fishing and the need to enhance MCS is increasing as access to
resources becomes more limited and more valuable.
Pio E Manoa
School of Marine Studies
Faculty of Islands and Oceans
University of the South Pacific
E: manoa_p@usp.ac.fj
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
ATTACHMENT A: CODE OF CONDUCT GENERAL PRINCIPLES
ARTICLE 6 - GENERAL PRINCIPLES
6.1
States and users of living aquatic resources should conserve aquatic ecosystems.
The right to fish carries with it the obligation to do so in a responsible
manner so as to ensure effective conservation and management of the living
aquatic resources.
6.2
Fisheries management should promote the maintenance of the quality,
diversity and availability of fishery resources in sufficient quantities for present
and future generations in the context of food security, poverty alleviation and
sustainable development. Management measures should not only ensure the
conservation of target species but also of species belonging to the same ecosystem
or associated with or dependent upon the target species.
6.3
States should prevent over fishing and excess fishing capacity and should
implement management measures to ensure that fishing effort is commensurate
with the productive capacity of the fishery resources and their sustainable
utilization. States should take measures to rehabilitate populations as far as
possible and when appropriate.
6.4
Conservation and management decisions for fisheries should be based on
the best scientific evidence available, also taking into account traditional
knowledge of the resources and their habitat, as well as relevant environmental,
economic and social factors. States should assign priority to undertake research
and data collection in order to improve scientific and technical knowledge of
fisheries including their interaction with the ecosystem. In recognizing the
transboundary nature of many aquatic ecosystems, States should encourage
bilateral and multilateral cooperation in research, as appropriate.
6.5
States and subregional and regional fisheries management organizations
should apply a precautionary approach widely to conservation, management and
exploitation of living aquatic resources in order to protect them and preserve the
aquatic environment, taking account of the best scientific evidence available. The
absence of adequate scientific information should not be used as a reason for
postponing or failing to take measures to conserve target species, associated or
dependent species and non-target species and their environment.
6.6
Selective and environmentally safe fishing gear and practices should be
further developed and applied, to the extent practicable, in order to maintain
biodiversity and to conserve the population structure and aquatic ecosystems and
protect fish quality. Where proper selective and environmentally safe fishing gear
and practices exist, they should be recognized and accorded a priority in
establishing conservation arid management measures for fisheries. States and
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
users of aquatic ecosystems should minimize waste, catch of non-target species,
both fish and nonfish species, and impacts on associated or dependent species.
6.7
The harvesting, handling, processing and distribution of fish and fishery
products should be carried out in a manner which will maintain the nutritional
value, quality and safety of the products, reduce waste and minimize negative
impacts on the environment.
6.8
All critical fisheries habitats in marine and fresh water ecosystems, such as
wetlands, mangroves, reefs, lagoons, nursery and spawning areas, should be
protected and rehabilitated as far as possible and where necessary. Particular
effort should be made to protect such habitats from destruction, degradation,
pollution and other significant impacts resulting from human activities that
threaten the health and viability of the fishery resources.
6.9
States should ensure that their fisheries interests, including the need for
conservation of the resources, are taken into account in the multiple uses of the
coastal zone and are integrated into coastal area management, planning and
development.
6.10
Within their respective competences and in accordance with international
law, including within the framework of subregional or regional fisheries
conservation and management organizations or arrangements, States should
ensure compliance with and enforcement of conservation and management
measures and establish effective mechanisms, as appropriate, to monitor and
control the activities of fishing vessels and fishing support vessels.
6.11
States authorizing fishing and fishing support vessels to fly their flags
should exercise effective control over those vessels so as to ensure the proper
application of this Code. They should ensure that the activities of such vessels do
not undermine the effectiveness of conservation and management measures taken
in accordance with international law and adopted at the national, subregional,
regional or global levels. States should also ensure that vessels flying their flags
fulfill their obligations concerning the collection and provision of data relating to
their fishing activities.
6.12
States should, within their respective competences and in accordance with
international law, cooperate at subregional, regional and global levels through
fisheries management organizations, other international agreements or other
arrangements to promote conservation and management, ensure responsible
fishing and ensure effective conservation and protection of living aquatic
resources throughout their range of distribution, taking into account the need for
compatible measures in areas within and beyond national jurisdiction.
6.13
States should, to the extent permitted by national laws and regulations,
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
ensure that decision making processes are transparent and achieve timely
solutions to urgent matters. States, in accordance with appropriate procedures,
should facilitate consultation and the effective participation of industry,
fishworkers, environmental and other interested organizations in decision–making
with respect to the development of laws and policies related to fisheries
management, development, international lending and aid.
6.14
International trade in fish and fishery products should be conducted in
accordance with the principles, rights and obligations established in the World
Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement and other relevant international
agreements. States should ensure that their policies, programmes and practices
related to trade in fish and fishery products do not result in obstacles to this trade,
environmental degradation or negative social, including nutritional, impacts.
6.15
States should cooperate in order to prevent disputes. All disputes relating to
fishing activities and practices should be resolved in a timely, peaceful and
cooperative manner, in accordance with applicable international agreements or as
may otherwise be agreed between the parties. Pending settlement of a dispute, the
States concerned should make every effort to enter into provisional arrangements
of a practical nature which should be without prejudice to the final outcome of
any dispute settlement procedure.
6.16
States, recognising the paramount importance to fishers and fishfarmers of
understanding the conservation and management of the fishery resources on
which they depend, should promote awareness of responsible fisheries through
education and training. They should ensure that fishers and fishfarmers are
involved in the policy formulation and implementation process, also with a view
to facilitating the implementation of the Code.
6.17
States should ensure that fishing facilities and equipment as well as all
fisheries activities allow for safe, healthy and fair working and living conditions
and meet internationally agreed standards adopted by relevant international
organizations.
6.18
Recognizing the important contributions of artisanal and small-scale
fisheries to employment, income and food security, States should appropriately
protect the rights of fishers and fishworkers, particularly those engaged in
subsistence, small-scale and artisanal fisheries, to a secure and just livelihood, as
well as preferential access, where appropriate, to traditional fishing grounds and
resources in the waters under their national jurisdiction.
6.19
States should consider aquaculture, including culture-based fisheries, as a
means to promote diversification of income and diet. In so doing, States should
ensure that resources are used responsibly and adverse impacts on the
environment and on local communities are minimized.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
ATTACHMENT B: PART II OF 1995 UN FISH STOCKS AGREEMENT
PART II
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF STRADDLING FISH STOCKS
AND HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS
Article 5
General principles
In order to conserve and manage straddling fish stocks and highly migratory
fish stocks, coastal States and States fishing on the high seas shall, in giving
effect to their duty to cooperate in accordance with the Convention:
(a) adopt measures to ensure long-term sustainability of straddling fish
stocks and highly migratory fish stocks and promote the objective of their
optimum utilization;
(b) ensure that such measures are based on the best scientific evidence
available and are designed to maintain or restore stocks at levels capable of
producing maximum sustainable yield, as qualified by relevant environmental and
economic factors, including the special requirements of developing States, and
taking into account fishing patterns, the interdependence of stocks and any
generally recommended international minimum standards, whether subregional,
regional or global;
(c) apply the precautionary approach in accordance with article 6;
(d) assess the impacts of fishing, other human activities and
environmental factors on target stocks and species belonging to the same
ecosystem or associated with or dependent upon the target stocks;
(e) adopt, where necessary, conservation and management measures for
species belonging to the same ecosystem or associated with or dependent upon the
target stocks, with a view to maintaining or restoring populations of such
species above levels at which their reproduction may become seriously
threatened;
(f) minimize pollution, waste, discards, catch by lost or abandoned gear,
catch of non-target species, both fish and non-fish species, (hereinafter
referred to as non-target species) and impacts on associated or dependent
species, in particular endangered species, through measures including, to the
extent practicable, the development and use of selective, environmentally safe
and cost-effective fishing gear and techniques;
(g) protect biodiversity in the marine environment;
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
(h) take measures to prevent or eliminate overfishing and excess fishing
capacity and to ensure that levels of fishing effort do not exceed those
commensurate with the sustainable use of fishery resources;
(i) take into account the interests of artisanal and subsistence fishers;
(j) collect and share, in a timely manner, complete and accurate data
concerning fishing activities on, inter alia, vessel position, catch of target
and non-target species and fishing effort, as set out in Annex I, as well as
information from national and international research programmes;
(k) promote and conduct scientific research and develop appropriate
technologies in support of fishery conservation and management; and
(l) implement and enforce conservation and management measures through
effective monitoring, control and surveillance.
Article 6
Application of the precautionary approach
1.
States shall apply the precautionary approach widely to conservation,
management and exploitation of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish
stocks in order to protect the living marine resources and preserve the marine
environment.
2.
States shall be more cautious when information is uncertain, unreliable or
inadequate. The absence of adequate scientific information shall not be used as
a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and management measures.
3.
In implementing the precautionary approach, States shall:
(a) improve decision-making for fishery resource conservation and
management by obtaining and sharing the best scientific information available
and implementing improved techniques for dealing with risk and uncertainty;
(b) apply the guidelines set out in Annex II and determine, on the basis
of the best scientific information available, stock-specific reference points
and the action to be taken if they are exceeded;
(c) take into account, inter alia, uncertainties relating to the size and
productivity of the stocks, reference points, stock condition in relation to
such reference points, levels and distribution of fishing mortality and the
impact of fishing activities on non-target and associated or dependent species,
as well as existing and predicted oceanic, environmental and socio-economic
conditions; and
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
(d) develop data collection and research programmes to assess the impact
of fishing on non-target and associated or dependent species and their
environment, and adopt plans which are necessary to ensure the conservation of
such species and to protect habitats of special concern.
4.
States shall take measures to ensure that, when reference points are
approached, they will not be exceeded. In the event that they are exceeded,
States shall, without delay, take the action determined under paragraph 3 (b) to
restore the stocks.
5.
Where the status of target stocks or non-target or associated or dependent
species is of concern, States shall subject such stocks and species to enhanced
monitoring in order to review their status and the efficacy of conservation and
management measures. They shall revise those measures regularly in the light of
new information.
6.
For new or exploratory fisheries, States shall adopt as soon as possible
cautious conservation and management measures, including, inter alia, catch
limits and effort limits. Such measures shall remain in force until there are
sufficient data to allow assessment of the impact of the fisheries on the
long-term sustainability of the stocks, whereupon conservation and management
measures based on that assessment shall be implemented. The latter measures
shall, if appropriate, allow for the gradual development of the fisheries.
7.
If a natural phenomenon has a significant adverse impact on the status of
straddling fish stocks or highly migratory fish stocks, States shall adopt
conservation and management measures on an emergency basis to ensure that
fishing activity does not exacerbate such adverse impact. States shall also
adopt such measures on an emergency basis where fishing activity presents a
serious threat to the sustainability of such stocks. Measures taken on an
emergency basis shall be temporary and shall be based on the best scientific
evidence available.
Article 7
Compatibility of conservation and management measures
1.
Without prejudice to the sovereign rights of coastal States for the purpose
of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the living marine resources
within areas under national jurisdiction as provided for in the Convention, and
the right of all States for their nationals to engage in fishing on the high
seas in accordance with the Convention:
(a) with respect to straddling fish stocks, the relevant coastal States
and the States whose nationals fish for such stocks in the adjacent high seas
area shall seek, either directly or through the appropriate mechanisms for
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
cooperation provided for in Part III, to agree upon the measures necessary for
the conservation of these stocks in the adjacent high seas area;
(b) with respect to highly migratory fish stocks, the relevant coastal
States and other States whose nationals fish for such stocks in the region shall
cooperate, either directly or through the appropriate mechanisms for cooperation
provided for in Part III, with a view to ensuring conservation and promoting the
objective of optimum utilization of such stocks throughout the region, both
within and beyond the areas under national jurisdiction.
2.
Conservation and management measures established for the high seas and
those adopted for areas under national jurisdiction shall be compatible in order
to ensure conservation and management of the straddling fish stocks and highly
migratory fish stocks in their entirety. To this end, coastal States and States
fishing on the high seas have a duty to cooperate for the purpose of achieving
compatible measures in respect of such stocks. In determining compatible
conservation and management measures, States shall:
(a) take into account the conservation and management measures adopted and
applied in accordance with article 61 of the Convention in respect of the same
stocks by coastal States within areas under national jurisdiction and ensure
that measures established in respect of such stocks for the high seas do not
undermine the effectiveness of such measures;
(b) take into account previously agreed measures established and applied
for the high seas in accordance with the Convention in respect of the same
stocks by relevant coastal States and States fishing on the high seas;
(c) take into account previously agreed measures established and applied
in accordance with the Convention in respect of the same stocks by a subregional
or regional fisheries management organization or arrangement;
(d) take into account the biological unity and other biological
characteristics of the stocks and the relationships between the distribution of
the stocks, the fisheries and the geographical particularities of the region
concerned, including the extent to which the stocks occur and are fished in
areas under national jurisdiction;
(e) take into account the respective dependence of the coastal States and
the States fishing on the high seas on the stocks concerned; and
(f) ensure that such measures do not result in harmful impact on the
living marine resources as a whole.
3.
In giving effect to their duty to cooperate, States shall make every effort
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
to agree on compatible conservation and management measures within a
reasonable period of time.
4.
If no agreement can be reached within a reasonable period of time, any of
the States concerned may invoke the procedures for the settlement of disputes
provided for in Part VIII.
5.
Pending agreement on compatible conservation and management measures, the
States concerned, in a spirit of understanding and cooperation, shall make every
effort to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature. In the
event that they are unable to agree on such arrangements, any of the States
concerned may, for the purpose of obtaining provisional measures, submit the
dispute to a court or tribunal in accordance with the procedures for the
settlement of disputes provided for in Part VIII.
6.
Provisional arrangements or measures entered into or prescribed pursuant to
paragraph 5 shall take into account the provisions of this Part, shall have due
regard to the rights and obligations of all States concerned, shall not
jeopardize or hamper the reaching of final agreement on compatible conservation
and management measures and shall be without prejudice to the final outcome of
any dispute settlement procedure.
7.
Coastal States shall regularly inform States fishing on the high seas in
the subregion or region, either directly or through appropriate subregional or
regional fisheries management organizations or arrangements, or through other
appropriate means, of the measures they have adopted for straddling fish stocks
and highly migratory fish stocks within areas under their national jurisdiction.
8.
States fishing on the high seas shall regularly inform other interested
States, either directly or through appropriate subregional or regional fisheries
management organizations or arrangements, or through other appropriate means,
of the measures they have adopted for regulating the activities of vessels flying
their flag which fish for such stocks on the high seas.
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
ATTACHMENT C: PIROF-ISA STRUCTURE
(Source: http://www.spc.int/PIOCEAN/forum/New/pirof-isa2.htm)
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
ATTACHMENT D : VAVA’U DECLARATION
THE VAVA’U DECLARATION ON PACIFIC FISHERIES RESOURCES
“OUR FISH, OUR FUTURE”
We, the Leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum, meeting at Vava’u in the Kingdom of
Tonga:
RECOGNISING that our regional fisheries resources remain a key driver for
sustainable economic growth in the region, especially for small island states, and that
they must as a consequence be supported by responsible and effective stewardship;
RECALLING the commitment by Leaders under the Pacific Plan to maximise
sustainable returns from fisheries by developing an ecosystem based fisheries
management planning framework; encouraging effective fisheries development,
including value-adding activities; and collaboration to ensure legislation and access
frameworks are harmonised;
ALSO RECOGNISING the aspirations of Pacific Islands countries to strengthen their
engagement in sustainable fisheries and to maximise the flow on benefits from both
domestic fisheries and foreign fishing operations in the region;
RECALLING in this context our 2004 call for closer Ministerial oversight of Pacific
fisheries issues;
NOTING with appreciation and deep concern the report on the current state of Pacific
fisheries provided to us by the current Chair of the Forum Fisheries Committee, at the
request of the Committee’s 64th Meeting, held at Ministerial level;
COGNISANT of the significant economic opportunities which the regional fisheries
resource offers to all our members, and of the comparatively low returns on the resource
being achieved by countries in the region;
SEIZED by the scientific advice that over-fishing of two key regional tuna species –
bigeye and yellowfin tuna – now places stock levels in jeopardy;
CONSCIOUS therefore of the imperative need for us to take immediate and decisive
collective action to ensure that, within the next three to five years, we secure our
peoples’ future livelihoods, regional food security, and environmental sustainability of
our seas and their ecosystems;
HEREBY reaffirm the importance of fisheries to the economies of all Pacific Forum
countries, and commit ourselves to:
• PROMOTING DOMESTIC FISHERIES, in particular the development of national
tuna industries, in the context of a phased introduction of rights-based management
arrangements supported by an appropriate management and regulatory framework;
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
• DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL/INSHORE FISHERIES
and aquaculture to support food security, sustainable livelihoods and economic
growth for current and future generations of Pacific people;
• MAINTAINING REGIONAL SOLIDARITY among Forum member countries in
managing the region’s tuna stocks;
• STRENGTHENING OUR SUPPORT for the Forum Fisheries Agency, the
Secretariat of the Pacific Community and other regional fisheries bodies as they
intensify their efforts in applying a long-term strategic approach to Pacific fisheries,
and in tuna species in particular, to ensure that these resources are effectively
managed so as to provide enduring economic, social and cultural benefits;
• UPHOLDING AND STRENGTHENING the existing regional and national
arrangements, agreements and conservation measures that protect this essential
resource; and
CONSISTENT with our earlier calls for the sustainable utilisation of fisheries resources,
and with our concerns regarding food security for future generations, we further
solemnly COMMIT ourselves and our governments to the conservation and sustainable
management of highly migratory tuna resources by:
• FULLY IMPLEMENTING without delay the conservation and management
measures developed and endorsed by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries
Commission (WCPFC);
• SEEKING THE URGENT ADOPTION OF ADDITIONAL MEASURES by the
WCPFC to address over-fishing of bigeye and yellowfin, including a reduction in
longline catches and addressing purse seine fishing, and specific steps to reduce the
catch of juvenile bigeye and yellowfin;
• RECOGNISING THE ASPIRATIONS OF SMALL ISLANDS DEVELOPING
STATES to develop their domestic fisheries and CALLING ON DEVELOPED
MEMBER COUNTRIES of the Commission to implement measures to support
such endeavours;
• DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING, with the assistance of the Forum
Fisheries Agency, a comprehensive regional Monitoring, Control and Surveillance
(MCS) strategy;
• INVESTIGATING AND TAKING APPROPRIATE STEPS as a matter of priority
to strengthen, simplify and give full transparency to our national fisheries
governance and licensing arrangements;
• CONTINUING SUPPORT as appropriate for the current tuna tagging initiative of
the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, including the aspiration that it expand to
cover the rest of the Pacific; and,
Unit 1 – Fisheries Policy Processes, Institutions and Systems – Lecture Notes – Pio Manoa – Nov 2007
• SUPPORTING AND ENDORSING efforts by the Forum Fisheries Agency,
supported by the Forum Secretariat, to take forward as a matter of urgency work to
examine the potential for new multilateral Pacific regional arrangements patterned
on the Niue Treaty Subsidiary Agreement model for exchange of fisheries law
enforcement data, cross-vesting of enforcement powers, and use of fisheries data for
other law enforcement activities; and
CONSISTENT with our previous deliberations, REAFFIRM the Declaration on Deep
Sea Bottom Trawling adopted at the 2006 Nadi Forum and WELCOME the subsequent
UNGA Resolution 61/105 which called for strong measures to regulate and manage
deep sea bottom trawling;
COMMIT to the protection of high seas biodiversity and the conservation and
management of non-highly migratory fish stocks in the Pacific Ocean;
ENCOURAGE effective participation in the negotiations to deliver a best-practice
South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation in view of the longer-term
strategic significance to Members and the possible interaction of the high seas pelagic
stocks with tuna resources governed by the WCPFC;
AGREE TO RAISE THESE DEEP CONCERNS as a matter of urgency with Distant
Water Fishing Nations (DWFNs) and regional coastal states participating in the PostForum Dialogue, and urge their close cooperation with our efforts; and,
REQUEST the Forum Fisheries Agency, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, the
Forum Secretariat and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission to jointly
monitor progress in implementing these commitments, and reporting on this –
especially progress in regional tuna management – under the Pacific Plan to Forum
Fisheries Ministers and our next Leaders’ Meeting for further consideration.
THIRTY-EIGHTH PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM
NUKU’ALOFA, TONGA
16 -17 OCTOBER 2007
FORUM COMMUNIQUÉ