Search

In response to recommendations made by a recent performance review, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) is attempting to develop a quota allocation system (QAS) for management of the tuna and tuna-like species of the Indian Ocean. As “first-movers” in the process, Indonesia, the Seychelles, the European Union, Iran, and the Republic of Korea made contrasting proposals to the IOTC in March 2011 on possible QAS form and structure. Structure (the factors to be taken into account in determining allocation) is critical as it will determine on a long term basis the share accruing to each IOTC member state of the estimated USD 2–3 billion worth of tuna caught in the Indian Ocean each year. This article records and discusses the content of these first steps towards QAS formulation by placing them in the context of rights-based management as applied to the offshore areas falling under tuna RFMO management. The options proposed in March (which the IOTC is still considering) all have a similar architecture but result in sharply divergent allocation outcomes. Despite the sophistication of some of the proposals, the recent IOTC review suggests that the regulatory and management capacity of the IOTC does not match the science and enforcement requirements appropriate to these recent proposals. Perhaps efforts to improve IOTC performance need to be made in parallel with discussions on QAS definition and implementation. To further advance the debate and also concretely demonstrate likely economic outcomes, the article provides indicative monetary valuations of quota allocations proposed. It uses a range of potential historical reference periods (5, 10, 15, and 20 years).

This article provides a law and policy prospective on Australia's fisheries interests and enforcement responsibilities projected towards the year 2020. First, the paper sets out two key economic and technological trends, namely, the trend towards fishing in deep waters and further down the water column and the rise of Asian markets as the principal demand centre in the global fisheries economy. Second, it discusses likely trends in the evolution of the illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing sector towards 2020 by exploring the increasing criminalisation and militarisation of IUU activity in response to heightened control measures developed by states. Third, it addresses developments in the global regulatory framework, focusing on the high seas, including the role of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) as regulators of high seas fishing, the likely implementation of the inspecting state concept, regulation of fishing for discrete high seas stocks and on fragile seamounts. Fourth, it discusses the changing balance in policy and enforcement relations between states and increasingly assertive environmental and commercial sector non-governmental organisations (NGOs). The final part concludes with the range of technologically sophisticated options that may be in more widespread use by 2020.

On 29 September 2008, the Council of the European Union (EU) adopted Council Regulation (EC) No. 1005/2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Essentially, the EU IUU Regulation establishes a framework in which access to EU markets for fisheries products is partly conditioned by the extent to which a country, area or region of origin is demonstrably or increasingly free of IUU fishing. Aside from the amendments to US legislation in 2007, the EU IUU Regulation is the only other domestic legislative measure adopted solely to combat IUU fishing, with four main components: port State measures against third-country vessels, a catch documentation scheme, IUU vessel listing, and listing of non-cooperating States. This article analyses the EU IUU Regulation in the context of international fisheries law, and particularly international efforts to combat IUU fishing. It is concluded that the measures outlined in the EU IUU Regulation, despite several ambiguities, are generally consistent with those called for under international fisheries instruments and measures being implemented by regional fisheries management organisations.

Considers the likely effects on African, Caribbean and Pacific countries of the European Union's Directive on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing.