SUVA (FIJI TIMES) — While Pacific member countries of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) recently showed committed solidarity against global fishing subsidies paid by Distant Water Fishing Nations (DWFNs) to support their fisheries industries, the issue of fisheries subsidies itself is a “double-edged sword” for the broader Pacific as many countries depend on fishing revenues from DWFNs, said veteran regional fisheries management expert Dr Transform Aqorau.
Speaking to The Fiji Times after the historic Pacific WTO Trade Ministers’ anti-subsidy lobbying at the 13th WTO Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi in February, Dr Aqorau said the situation created a “complex balancing act”.
“On one hand, to attract investment in the fishing industry, these (Pacific) governments often need to provide tax concessions and other incentives. These measures, aimed at bolstering local economies and creating jobs, can also be argued to be subsidies.
“On the other hand, Pacific Island Countries rely significantly on access fees from DWFNs to generate revenue. This dynamic creates a complex balancing act: while seeking to promote local industry and sustainable fishing practices, Pacific Islands must navigate the economic pressures and incentives that come with foreign investments and fleets in their waters.”
The former chief executive officer of the Parties to Nauru Agreement (PNA) – a Pacific fishing bloc of eight Pacific Island Countries that controls the world’s largest sustainable tuna purse seine fishery – said in places like Fiji, the situation is further complicated by becoming a hub for foreign fishing operations, notably Chinese longline fishing activities.
“These foreign entities often receive substantial subsidies from their home countries, allowing them to operate at lower costs and compete more aggressively in the market.
“As a result, local companies like Fiji Fish struggle to compete and are forced to divest or rethink their investments.
“This reality underscores the broader implications of fisheries subsidies, where international trade dynamics and subsidies intersect with local economies and sustainability efforts, presenting a challenging scenario for local businesses and policy makers alike in maintaining a viable and sustainable fishing industry.”
Notable absence
In taking their case to the WTO MC13, the primary concern for Pacific WTO Trade Ministers was for the capping and reduction of the fisheries subsidies paid by DWFNs to bankroll their fishing industries, which has been linked to overfishing and overcapacity of global fish stocks.
Notably absent however were most of the PNA member countries who are not WTO members but who carry a lot of clout in the Pacific’s tuna business with their massive-sized Exclusive Economic Zones and their national revenues hugely dependent on the lucrative PNA Vesssel Day Scheme (VDS), where they sell fishing days to DWFNs.
Out of the PNA members – Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu and the New Zealand-depenent territory Tokelau – only Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea are WTO members and who were part of the Pacific delegation to WTO MC13.
While as members of PNA the two countries directly benefit from VDS revenues, they along with Fiji are among Pacific countries that operate their own canneries and have not made it a secret that they would also like to operate their own fleet to supply their canneries, keep jobs local and get more from their own tuna resources than what they’re currently getting.
“As a group of Pacific Island Countries, we should really start considering having a major fleet of tuna vessels.” said Fiji’s deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade Manoa Kamikamica, lead negotiator for the Pacific delegation at the WTO MC13.
“As a group of countries that control 50 percent of the stock, we should really use our strategic strength and try and leverage and make sure we get opportunities for ourselves, rather than just saying to fishing companies, come, fish in our waters, they pay us a token amount and our countries don’t get any benefits from the resources, in terms of the manufacturing, value addition, all that part.”
In doing so however, they are up against the financial might of the bigger fishing nations and their subsidies worth over US$22billion.
“Developed countries, as the top subsidisers, have vested interests in maintaining their fishing operations and market share, which can conflict with the need for sustainable fishing practices,” Dr Aqorau said.
“Their position in the negotiations can push back against the efforts of smaller nations or blocs, like the Pacific delegation, who advocate for stricter subsidy controls to protect their marine resources and ensure sustainable use of fisheries.” For Pacific countries, he said, the implications of the fisheries subsidies debate are profound.
“The region relies heavily on its marine resources for economic development, sustenance, and cultural heritage.
“Effective and fair regulation of fisheries subsidies is crucial to preventing overfishing and ensuring the long-term sustainability of these resources.
“The challenge for Pacific nations in the WTO negotiations is to assert their collective interests and secure commitments from larger fishing nations to reduce harmful subsidies and promote sustainable fishing practices,” Dr Aqorau said…. PACNEWS