Principles applicable to information and compliance control
Assessment of access conditions and procedures
80. The paper considered under this Agenda item was:
AC/5: General Guidelines for Monitoring, Control and Surveillance -Extract from the Report on an Expert Consultation on Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Systems for Fisheries Management (Rome, 27-30 April 1981)
81. This paper was summarized by Dr. C. Newton who also gave a description of the various FAO Regional Workshops on Surveillance and Enforcement. At these Workshops, the need was emphasized for coastal States to identify the extent and nature of their surveillance and enforcement requirements before purchasing expensive and sometimes unnecessary hardware. An assessment of such requirements could frequently be obtained by limited aerial surveillance.
82. Dr. Newton also advised that at the Expert Consultation on Regulation of Fishing Effort in January 1985 it was recognized that difficulties existed with most regulatory techniques presently used by coastal States (e.g., catch/effort/position reporting, limited or minimum mesh sizes), and that less costly techniques with greater emphasis on self-regulatory measures by the foreign fleets, must be introduced.
83. The papers considered under this Agenda item were:
AC/8: Access Conditions and Compliance Control, by Dean Robb, Attorney, Agana, GuamAC/17: Japanese Experience in Access Conditions of 200-mile Regime, by Norio Fujinami, Special Adviser to the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries on International Affairs (Fisheries), Japan
84. For the purpose of his paper, Mr. Robb defined compliance as the degree to which a foreign vessel conforms its operations to the system of access conditions of the coastal State. Access conditions should also be construed in the widest sense as a system to include all aspects of access (e.g., process of allocation), and not be limited just to those matters provided for by legislation.
85. Consideration was given to six principles of access conditions which might aid compliance:
(a) Reasonable conditions: Reasonable conditions, which were pertinent to the particular type of fishery and fishing vessel and could be easily discharged by the fishermen were most likely to be voluntarily met and to encourage self-regulation. The best method to assure reasonableness and self-regulation appears to be through agreements between DWFS and coastal States rather than through unilateral prescriptions by coastal States.(b) Reasonable information requirements; Coastal States should only seek information from foreign fishing vessels which is of real value to them and capable of being digested. The most cost-effective ways for obtaining this information, such as those that minimize disruption to fishing operations, should also be examined.
(c) Credibility; Where a coastal State lacks comprehensive enforcement capability it should seek to have full compliance with a modest compliance scheme, rather than minimum or sporadic compliance with a sophisticated scheme. The latter will lead to a lack of credibility and will ultimately break down.
(d) Cost effectiveness; It is to the advantage of all parties to minimize the cost of compliance because any cost of compliance will ultimately be shared.
(e) Regional harmonization; For many coastal States harmonization of regimes can increase the cost-effectiveness of compliance and enhance their respective enforcement capabilities. Regionally harmonized conditions of access can also assist foreign fishing fleets in meeting coastal State requirements.
(f) Appropriate sanctions; The setting and imposition of appropriate sanctions can be of considerable aid to compliance control. For example, indirect sanctions such as removal of future access rights, particularly on a regional basis, may provide more potent and cost-effective compliance control than the usual sanctions of seizure and fine. Also fleet-wide sanctions can be effective and may help to encourage the exercise of flag-State responsibility.
86. Mr. Fujinami outlined the Japanese experience in access conditions and discussed the conditions which could appropriately be applied to any fishery and those conditions which were specific to certain types of fisheries.
87. For the fisheries for highly migratory species, for example, the following conditions of access could pose difficulties for the foreign fishing fleet: 24 hour prior notice of entry or departure from the EEZ, provision of a prospective fishing plan in advance of entry, and port calls on arrival and prior to departure from EEZ. Merit was seen in having a table drawn up of the efficacy of all existing types of access conditions with respect to particular types of fisheries.
Discussion
88. Considerable discussion took place in regard to observer schemes, which worked well in some instances, but not in others.
89. Five underlying elements on conditions of access were identified and discussed:
a. Objectives of access conditions90. Apart from access fees, the principle objective for many developing coastal States is to obtain resource and catch/effort data, as well as information on fishing vessel movements and activities in its EEZ. The phenomenon of the vicious circle was recognized, where in response to non-compliance by foreign fishing vessels, the coastal States often increased the severity of their conditions of access. This frequently resulted in increased non-compliance. One possible solution to this undesirable situation might be bilateral discussions held independently of the negotiating process, at which information could be made available. Such meetings could foster more understanding between the coastal States and the fishing States. Regional agencies or commissions might also facilitate this process. And, in addition, it could be useful for DWFS to have agents or representatives present in the coastal States.b. Reasonableness of access conditions
91. There was a general feeling that compliance control conditions imposed by the coastal State should be reasonable. This means that in meeting the needs of the coastal State conditions should be selected that also take into account the legitimate interests of the distant-water fishing fleet and in particular the costs of implementation. Reasonableness of conditions would also be an incentive to self-regulation. It was recommended that a further technical meeting be held to assess the reasonableness of possible access conditions on the basis of specific fisheries and types of situation.92. One participant insisted that the management of the fish resources in the EEZs should lead to benefits for the developing coastal States which, he reminded, have sovereign rights over the resources. Moreover, this is the declared aim of the forthcoming World Fisheries Conference.
c. Self-regulation by foreign fishing vessels
93. It was recognized that this is the most cost-effective compliance control and that access agreements of longer duration might encourage greater self-regulation. Such agreements could result in fishermen perceiving a long-term management interest in maintaining a healthy fishery, in the promotion of vessel replacement and, with such investment, greater incentives for compliance.d. Flag State Responsibility
94. Flag State regulation of the activities of its vessels in a coastal State's EEZ was also considered a very cost-effective means for achieving compliance. Procedures already exist in several DWFS (e.g., USSR, Spain, Poland and Japan) for sanctions to be imposed upon any of their fishing vessels which contravene certain coastal State requirements. The implementation of the concept of flag State responsibility would call for wider adoption of Government to Government umbrella agreements which, however, may raise problems in connection with flags of convenience.e. Harmonization of access conditions
95. It was recognized that certain harmonization of access conditions could usefully be achieved on both global and regional levels. At the global level there may be considerable benefit to be obtained from harmonization of such issues as standard specifications and identification (e.g., international radio call signs), codes of observer practices and standard boarding procedures. At the regional level benefits to both coastal States and foreign fishing fleets could be obtained by harmonization of access conditions relating inter alia to applications, reporting and log books.
