Both the 1982 UN Convention and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement make it clear that the purpose of collecting fisheries data is to underpin decisions with respect to conservation and management of the resources, in the case of the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement, with respect to straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. That said, it is unlikely that these statistics, having been collected, will be used only for that purpose. Thus, the data might be used, for example, directly or indirectly, to assist in identifying the origin of a catch for the purposes of trade rules concerning the origin of a particular item in trade (subject to any applicable confidentiality restrictions). However, it is important to keep in mind the basic purpose of the data collected, and that same information might only partly serve another purpose in another context. For example, in the area of fish processing, sales, and trade in the product, the data will have to be adapted to meet that purpose.
Fisheries data will also play an important role in determining the financial contributions to certain management organizations, as for example is the case with the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Thus, Article XIII of the Agreement for the Establishment of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, which deals with finances, states, that a scheme for contributions shall be adopted by the Commission, which shall involve an equal basic fee and a variable fee, which shall be based “inter alia on the total catch and landing of species covered by the Agreement in the area,” and the per capita income of each Member. However, it will be apparent that simply answering this question by reference to the flag of the vessel making the catch will not be sufficient information.
Fisheries data will also of course be useful in negotiations concerning access to exclusive economic zones where one of the issues is catch history. Indeed, Article 62(3) of the 1982 UN Convention requires the coastal state to take into account a number of factors, including the need to “minimise economic dislocation in States whose nationals have habitually fished in the [EEZ]”.6
6 Note also, for example, other provisions where catch data will become important: Articles 66 (Anadromous stocks), 67 (Catadromous species), 69 (rights of landlocked States) and 70 (rights of geographically disadvantaged States).Another area where the data might also play a role is in determining the parties to a negotiation on the management of a particular straddling fish stock or highly migratory fish stock. Here, the information would need to be looked at more closely in order to determine if, in fact, the stock in question was actually found in the EEZ of a particular coastal State, it would not be enough merely to work from data made by the flag State (unless of course, it was provided in enough detail to permit such a more detailed analysis). Related to this question is the “catch history” of a particular country in a particular area, which will often be a major issue in negotiations.
Another instance where the catch data can be used is to cross check the accuracy of the statistics provided in respect of landings.
There are no doubt numerous other instances where such data can (or does) serve another purpose.
