Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements: A Revisit

Fisheries Partnership Agreements and Trade

Following on from my 1 September 2019 post about fisheries agreements as tools to generate income and support the economies of many coastal states, the EU has announced its signing of another multi-species Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement (SFPA) setting out conditions whereby EU fishing vessels may fish in the Seychelles’ fishing zone. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) states in its leading document that monitors the state of the world’s fisheries and aquaculture that for the Seychelles, trade in fish and fish products represent over 40% of its total value merchandise trade.[1]  

The structures, processes and implementation of Agreements and Protocols such as these are an insight into the nature of the relationship itself and invites scrutiny as to the extent of sustainable cooperation in balancing parties’ interests. 

A New Agreement and Protocol between the EU and the Seychelles

The EU and the Seychelles “concluded negotiations for a new Fisheries Partnership Agreement and a new Protocol for the next six years”[2] and unlike the EU-Senegal arrangement examined in my aforementioned post, the parties have agreed a new Agreement and implementing Protocol. Last week’s proposal for a Council decision aims to authorise the conclusion of this Agreement and its implementing Protocol.[3]

The total value of this deal in the duration of the new Protocol and taking into account the required contribution by EU ship owners is approximately €58,200,000.[4]

This Agreement and Protocol in superseding the old Agreement and Protocol takes into account the principles of the EU’s reformed fisheries policy, the Seychelles’ legislation and measures recommended by the Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) regarding conservation and responsible management of fisheries.[5] The Seychelles is a contracting party to the IOTC, the fisheries organisation that manages highly migratory species such as tuna in the Indian Ocean. 

Fishing Opportunities and the Fleet 

The new Protocol will retain the previous one’s annual reference tonnage of 50,000 tonnes allowing an EU fleet of 40 purse seiners and 8 long-liners. Focusing on allocation and apportionment of fleet there would be a 33% increase in EU long-liners operating in the Seychelles’ fishing zone. The EU states that the reference tonnage and fleet is based on analysis of past catches, available assessments and scientific advice.[6] 

Sustainable fisheries agreements should be transparent as to the constituents of authority and interests present and instrumental to their formulation and operation.

Beyond Best Intentions

As the EU continues to engage with African states through SFPAs, it is important to highlight that: 

• There is paucity of data on the negotiating positions and decisions employed in reaching these agreements. Information about Council regulations, the Agreements and Protocols are available on the EU website. However, where it comes to information that would assist in reconciling the interests of the parties with the actual agreement, the lack of data must give us pause. 

•  It is unclear how this new agreement takes into account measures recommended by the IOTC. For instance, the report of the 22nd session of the IOTC Scientific Committee dated 2-6 December 2019 in examining the status of tuna and tuna-like resources in the Indian Ocean and associated species emphasises problems of overfishing (Bigeye Tuna); stock decline (Albacore); and absent stock assessments and data (Bullet Tuna).[7] Meanwhile the new Protocol increases the fleet of long-liners that normally target tuna stocks. 

•  It is unclear whether the EU in assisting or reinforcing monitoring, control and surveillance activities in the Seychelles would incorporate compulsory “before and after fishing” port calls in the new Protocol.[8]  This is not the case with the previous Protocol.  

Next Steps: Change through Transference 

Exchange of financial rewards and technical assistance for access to resources could lead to avenues for the dissemination and adoption of international standards. It is recommended that the EU consider the impact of their actions towards reordering priorities and demonstrating a true commitment to sustainable fisheries partnerships with African states. This approach would constitute a necessary step towards engendering informed debates about fisheries policies with the aim of encouraging responsible fisheries governance.[9]

[1] FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department.2018) 52. 

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/press/eu-and-seychelles-conclude-negotiations-new-sustainable-fisheries-partnership-agreement_en

[3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CONSIL:ST_5051_2020_INIT&from=EN

[4] https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/press/eu-and-seychelles-conclude-negotiations-new-sustainable-fisheries-partnership-agreement_en

[5] Id. 

[6] Id.

[7] https://iotc.org/documents/SC/22/RE

[8] According to the Seychelles 2019 National Report to the Scientific Committee of the IOTC, distant water fleets (such as the EU fleet) do not land or tranship in the Seychelles’ Port Victoria therefore there are no port sampling programmes in place for these vessels. Landing and port reporting at the Seychelles would go a long way towards transparent and improved logbook coverage, landings and size data accuracy in the region. See further here: https://iotc.org/documents/SC/22/NR22

[9] For more on the need for fisheries transparency and participation, see: http://fisheriestransparency.org/about-the-initiative

The African Union’s 2050 Africa Integrated Maritime Strategy: A Brief Appraisal of the Growth Stage

Introduction

Agenda 2063,[1] a transformational blueprint adopted in May 2013 in celebration of the golden jubilee of the African Union (AU)[2] looked seaward for inclusive and sustainable resource-led economic growth.[3] Focusing on Africa’s Maritime Domain (AMD), the AU’s 2050 Africa Integrated Maritime Strategy (AIM Strategy) which was adopted in 2014 presents a framework for sustainable exploitation of the resources in AMD for wealth creation.[4] According to the strategy document, with the objective being “to achieve increased development and integration of the continent,”[5] the AU is currently in the “growth stage.” 

Developing Africa’s blue economy entails readjusting the intensity of resource exploitation in the region and reassigning the benefits of its ocean resources to the advantage of its peoples. 

Accordingly, through the AIM Strategy, a sustainable thriving blue economy can be achieved by harmonising regional mechanisms with already existing economic communities against the backdrop of core principles namely, information sharing, communication, collaboration, co-operation, capacity-building and co-ordination.  

Multi-Dimensional Objectives

The uses of the coasts, seas and oceans and the resources of AMD are on the ascendant and the challenges confronting these areas are multi-dimensional and of global significance. Growth in seaborne trade to and fro Africa,[6] growth in fisheries exports from Africa,[7] threats from climate variability[8] amongst others are factors that necessitate a multi-dimensional and multi-jurisdictional approach to ocean management in the AMD.

The AIM Strategy should work towards harmonising states’ structures, agencies and institutions thereby preventing fragmented legislative and enforcement mechanisms. 

Looking Seaward

The AIM Strategy is ambitious because it is guided by objectives that impact a diverse range of policy areas, some of which are transnational and issue-driven. Examples include amongst others, fisheries; telecommunications; transport; protection of the marine environment; climate change; and maritime security. However, it is a social and political strategy that could work with national institutions if incorporated in states’ regulatory structures. Existing regulatory structures, in addition to declarations, regional plans and programmes mainly[9] include a number of regional Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs):

• Indian Ocean MOU[10]

• Mediterranean MOU[11]

• West and Central Africa MOU on Port state Control[12]

• Maritime Organisation of West and Central Africa MOU[13] 

Robust legal frameworks and public policies are key to the realisation of objectives that are transnational and issue-driven. 

Toward Binding Regulatory Structures

A MOU is not a legally binding agreement. States conclude MOUs on the understanding that they do not create legal rights and obligations under international law.[14] Although the above MOUs could embody the state parties’ shared ideals and interests, protocols from which legally binding mechanisms could be developed to ensure uniform application of states’ ideals would benefit the AU moving ahead.[15]

A compliance strategy in addition to already existing regulatory framework which balances the socio-economic outcomes with environment impacts is a necessary first step towards the realisation of the AIM Strategy’s objectives. Enforcement mechanisms could follow as reinforcers.

This is in line with global focus on sustainable development and in this way, the AU could become a leading voice in making substantial contributions to changing policy and approaches in ocean use regionally and internationally.

[1] See https://au.int/Agenda2063/popular_version

[2] Formerly known as the Organisation for African Unity. 

[3] See https://au.int/agenda2063/goals for the list of goals and priority areas. 

[4] See African Union, 2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy (AIM Strategy). Addis Ababa. https://au.int/en/documents-38

[5] Ibid. 12. 

[6] According to the AIM strategy document, over 90% of Africa’s imports and exports occur by its seas.  

[7] FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department.2018) 56.

[8]  FAO and UNECA, Regional Overview of Food Security and Nutrition. Addressing the Threat from Climate Variability and Extremes for Food Security and Nutrition. (FAO and ECA. Accra 2018).

[9] See also the 2008 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea (the "Rotterdam Rules") which is not yet in force. African state parties: Cameroon, Republic of Congo and Togo.  

[10] The Indian Ocean Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control signed in Pretoria (South Africa) on 5 June 1998. African state parties: Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mauritius, Madagascar, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa and Tanzania. 

[11] The Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control in the Mediterranean Region signed in Valletta (Malta) on 11 July 1997. African state parties: Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.

[12] The Memorandum of Understanding for the West and Central African Region signed in Abuja (Nigeria) on 22 October 1999. African state parties: Angola, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Cote d’ Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea Bissau, The Gambia, and Togo.

[13] The Maritime Organisation of West and Central Africa was established in 1975. African state parties: Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo. 

[14] R. Jennings and A. Watts (eds), Oppenheim’s International Law: Vol. 1 (Longman, Harlow 1992). 1203.

[15] A good example is the 1982 Paris MOU as amended which was bolstered by the 1995 EC Directive as amended to ensure enforcement capability and uniformity in application by the member states.  See H Bang and D. Jang, “Recent Developments in Regional Memoranda of Understanding on Port State Control,” Ocean Development & International Law 43 (2012):170 for an explanation of the Paris MOU.