Market-Based Mechanisms – Improving Fisheries Management? - SEAFOOD Ecolabelling: Principles and Practice - page 190

Technological innovation has been a significant factor in both capture fisheries
and aquaculture. For the capture sector, technology has enabled fish to be produced
far more efficiently than in the past, resulting in lower costs of production but not
necessarily more fish. However, in the aquaculture sector, efficiencies driven by
technological innovation have translated into significant reductions in unit prices
(Delgado et al . 2003).
The declaration of EEZs has been partly credited as creating a shift in trade -
developing nations went from being net importers of fish from developed nations
in the 1980s to the reverse of this pattern by the late 1990s (Delgado et al . 2003).
The impacts have been dramatic - for example, the Japanese catch of seafood has
fallen from about 13 million tonnes in 1987 to 7.5 million tonnes in 1995 (Basir
et al . 1998) and imports have risen in a corresponding fashion.
In recent years the global trade liberalisation agenda has had a marked impact
on seafood trade. Many fishery issues such as market access, tariffs, fisheries sub-
sidies, environmental labelling, technical assistance and capacity building, and the
relationship between the World Trade Organization (WTO) and Multilateral Envi-
ronmental Agreements (MEAs) have had an influence on the pressures to produce
fish. Trade liberalisation has provided the incentive to catch more fish and earn more
from export markets. Opportunities to satisfy the seemingly insatiable demand for
quality seafood have been exploited by industries and governments throughout the
world. New markets and new products have been created as a result of the increasing
and diverse technological capacity to catch, process and transport fish and seafood
products (Kurien 2004). For developing countries there is the potential for job cre-
ation and increased wealth, and Kurien (2004) documents a number of examples
where the increased wealth has been used to benefit local fishing communities, such
as in Namibia.
However, the ability to catch fish and move them around the world has far
outstripped the capacity to properly manage the fisheries. Whilst some authors
(Kurien 2004) highlight the 'uncanny relationship between a fish specie ( sic ) en-
tering international trade and its depletion' others (Schmidt 2003) argue that it
is the absence of good management which is at fault, not the destination for the
fish products. The financial benefits of enhanced trade obviously provides added
incentives for increased catches, and to ignore such incentives when designing
catch controls would certainly pose a threat to stocks. Equally, to curtail trade
as an alternative to good fisheries management would be to unnecessarily deny
opportunities.
There is great potential for trade to be a positive benefit for fishing nations, but it is
hampered by the fact that the regulatory framework at the international level is still
evolving. Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) have sought to
strengthen reporting and catch controls, and while these have not yet been tested
in the WTO they are likely to be in compliance (Tarasofsky 2003). In contrast, the
lack of a robust regulatory framework is a threat to trade because there is a lack of
clarity and certainty that accompanies such a regime, including the increased risks
of illegal fishing.