Abstract

The WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies adopted in June 2022 is potentially a step forward for ocean sustainability. Yet, its success in removing fisheries subsidies contributing to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, and overfishing more generally, will depend on its scope, its effective interpretation, and broad implementation. Here we focus on Article 5.1, which, in its narrowest interpretation prohibits fishing subsidies in areas not covered by Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and Regional Fishery Management Organizations (RFMOs) but in its broadest interpretation prohibits subsidies for any unregulated fisheries in the high seas. This study finds that only ∼1.35% of the high seas are not spatially covered by at least one RFMO, and most of that area are frozen parts of the high seas with little to no fishing. This means that if Article 5.1 is interpreted to mean the area of the high seas not managed under RFMOs, then the effect of Article 5.1 will be minimal or non-existent even if the article is fully implemented. Many RFMOs, however, are only mandated to regulate a few species, such as tunas. Much of the potential impact of Article 5.1 thus could rest on the definition of the ‘competence of a relevant RFMO,’ which we argue should be defined based on both area and species of competence. To make the Article meaningful in terms of removing harmful subsidies that impact the sustainability of high seas fish stocks, additional clarifying provisions to Article 5.1 to reaffirm that it applies to both unregulated areas and species outside of the competence of relevant RFMOs are needed.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call