International Ocean Governance: more can be done to promote socially and environmentally sustainable fisheries

Ahead of the EU IOG conference from 14 to 16 December, it is essential to recall the role of sustainable fisheries in providing livelihoods in coastal areas and its contribution to food security

The EU has stated several times that it wants to lead the way on International Ocean Governance, setting the global agenda, in its own words, “championing determined action for our oceans”. Ahead of the high-level conference ‘EU International Ocean Governance Forum 2020 - Setting the Course for a Sustainable Blue,’ to be held from 14 to 16 December, it is essential to underscore that the EU can do more to promote and protect socially and environmentally sustainable fisheries, given its role in providing livelihoods in coastal areas, and its contribution to food security.

In October, the European Commission opened a targeted stakeholder consultation to re-examine the EU’s role in international ocean governance and the three priorities of the current Agenda, and identify new policy areas. Both CFFA and the EU Long Distance Advisory Council, as the body representing the different interests in the distant water fisheries, from the fishing industry, the unions, and environmental and development NGOs, identified the need for more attention to the interactions between Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG14 - clean oceans) and SDG2 (zero hunger), but also for an increased attention to sustainability standards for seafood products that will be sold on EU markets.

1. Value and participation of coastal communities

Fisheries, particularly small-scale fisheries in developing countries, are essential for the livelihoods of coastal communities and the populations food security. Yet, they are often excluded from the negotiating table of decisions that concern the oceans. For example, the IOG consultation did not include them in the list of groups to be targeted for capacity building on issues of conservation and sustainable use of ocean, seas and marine resources, though they are the primary users of the oceans. CFFA has underscored several times the marginalisation of fishing dependant coastal communities in the EU’s strategies, such as blue growth and the F2F strategy, and has demanded that the value of fisheries, especially in job creation and food security, be fully taken into account.

For World Fisheries Day, in November, the Collectif Pêche et Développement raised the alarm bell with regards to the case of Marine Protected Areas, where fishermen are often excluded from discussions. As the LDAC stated in its response to the consultation, these need to be science-based, have clear objectives and conservation goals that cover all extractive activities. However, CFFA added that above all, the establishment and design of MPAs should be submitted to free, prior, and informed consent of affected coastal communities, and fair and equitable benefit-sharing with them. Co-management should be encouraged.

The participation of coastal and fishing communities in decision-making about oceans is especially important because they will be the ones most affected by climate change. In our contribution to the public consultation, we insisted on the need to strengthen climate change resilience of communities and that this issue needs to be taken into consideration in fisheries management and ocean policies. For example, by supporting the restoration and maintenance of marine habitats that sequester carbon dioxide, such as mangroves, or by supporting coastal area adaptation to the consequences of sea-level rise.  

2. Human rights, social and environmental standards for seafood products

However, to lead effectively towards delivering on global sustainability, the EU should use not only maritime and fisheries policies, but also look at development, cooperation and trade policies. Artisanal fishing communities in developing countries provide quality products to feed local and regional populations, but are however faced with other “ocean” competing sectors, including industrial foreign vessels.

In West Africa, some of these foreign vessels fishing for small pelagics catch fish to turn it into fishmeal for export to China and Europe. Other industrial coastal trawlers enter illegally the zones reserved for artisanal fishers, like in Ivory Coast or Guinea, catching fish for export on the international markets. This, as well as the lack of public investments in public services in coastal communities, leads to food insecurity. In Guinea, for example, more than 60 companies export fish while the local distribution chain fails to bring fresh fish to Guineans due to lack of refrigeration and other constraints. On top of the right to food violation, there are wider social and environmental sustainability issues, such as the precarious working conditions and pollution faced by communities in developing countries.

This week, a multi-Advisory Council advice on the future after Covid-19 looking at the maritime sector, also highlighted in its conclusions several cases of human rights violations, “including the violations of labour rights by some industrial fishing fleets that supply fish for the EU market, or the imports of fishmeal and fish oil from West Africa that threaten the right to food of African populations.” This advice recalls that the “EU market is the most important and lucrative market for fish products globally” and calls for a legislation that ensures that “products placed on the EU market are free from human rights violations”.

This legislation should also ensure that the highest environmental and social sustainability standards apply to all products deriving from ocean exploitation. However, it is important that in this process, the EU supports developing countries to commit and achieve the necessary changes for meeting these standards, and avoid shortcuts to the EU market for those countries that do not respect those standards.

Several actions in this regard are pressing. For example, as we say in our contribution to the IOG consultation, “it is imperative to ban aquaculture depending on fishmeal”, as it often deprives local people of fish food in developing countries. The EU should also ban the imports of aquaculture products that require the privatisation of vast coastal areas, displacing communities or destroying vital ecosystems, such as mangroves.

Nevertheless, as we have recently underlined in a position paper about aquaculture, there is no way that European citizens can continue consuming sustainably the same amounts of seafood. The EU should promote a general diminution of fish consumption, prioritizing sustainably wild caught-fish and low-impact aquaculture.

3. External fisheries management

The LDAC underscores in its contribution to the Commission’s consultation that “there is no need for an overarching body to regulate fisheries, as we have UNCLOS”. However, some improvements can be made to reduce pressure on the oceans. For example, there is a need to close the gaps in Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMO) coverage, for sustainably managing currently unregulated fisheries, the key example being small pelagics overexploited stocks in West Africa, that are shared among the Atlantic coastal states and that are key for the food security in the region. There is also urgency to “harmonize approaches on issues such as fishing capacity, access allocation rules and increase transparency” at Regional Fisheries Management Organisations level.

Generally speaking, in its external policies that have an impact on fisheries, the EU should develop comprehensive coherent strategies per sea basin (Atlantic, Indian Ocean, Pacific), so that the cumulative impacts of all EU policies deliver sustainable fisheries. In this regard, “Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements should act as building blocks” to these coherent regional strategies, as a group of African and European professional organisations and NGOs already recommended last May.

The upcoming evaluation of SFPAs the European Commission is planning should look into this regional aspect but also other aspects of transparency, participation and sustainability. Since public money should support public good, “SFPA funds should be used to develop a conducive environment, in third countries, for transparent sustainable fisheries”, with research, improved Monitoring Control and Surveillance and by ensuring the participation of coastal communities in the decision-making processes.

If the EU wants to lead by example on international oceans governance, including global fisheries, whilst meeting their commitments regarding poverty alleviation and sustainable fisheries development, it needs to ensure coherence between its external policies that affect developing countries coastal communities’ livelihoods.

---