Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
-
Book (stand-alone)Legislating for an ecosystem approach to fisheries – Revisited
An update of the 2011 legal study on the ecosystem approach to fisheries
2021Also available in:
No results found.The ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) is a risk-based management process for the planning, management, development, regulation and monitoring of fishing and fishing-related activities. EAF addresses ecological consequences of fishing as well as social, economic and institutional aspects of fisheries sustainability. Adequate legislation and regulatory frameworks are key to successful implementation of the EAF. The continuous review and update of information on legislation and regulatory instruments require the analysis of existing legal frameworks at all levels of governance, to assess whether they remain in force, valid and aligned with international fisheries law standards, including the EAF. The present work was prepared with a view to provide current information on how the EAF is being implemented through national legal frameworks of selected countries in Africa. It revisits a previous legal study prepared by Anniken Skonhoft and published by FAO in 2011. A decade later, based on the scope of that study, the present work provides updated data and contributes to the knowledge on the current global and regional legal frameworks for an EAF, which are vital for EAF implementation purposes. This update also re-analysed certain countries’ national legislation and their evolution with respect to capturing the EAF requirements. Ultimately, the present work supports the legal implementation of an EAF for a holistic, integrated and innovative way of managing fisheries that promotes the participation of all relevant stakeholders and the use of best available knowledge for decision making, whilst balancing the human dimensions with the care for the environment, habitats, ecosystems and biodiversity related with fishery resources on which they depend. -
DocumentReport of the IOTC Performance Review Panel 2009
Also available in:
No results found.In response to calls from the intertiol community for a review of the performance of Regiol Fisheries Magement Organisations (RFMOs), the Indian Ocean Tu Commission (IOTC) agreed in 2007 to implement a process of Performance Review. The IOTC formed a Review Panel, consisting of an independent legal expert, an independent scientific expert, six IOTC Members and a non-governmental organisations observer, which concluded its report to the Commission in January 2009. The Panel’s review was based on the criteria developed as a result of a joint meeting of tu RFMOs, Kobe, Japan, 2007 and concentrated on the following issues: Adequacy of the Agreement for the Establishment of the Indian Ocean Tu Commission (IOTC Agreement) relative to current principles of fisheries magement, Consistency between scientific advice and conservation and magement measures adopted, ?? Effectiveness of control measures established by the IOTC; and Efficiency and transparency of fincial and administrative magement. KEY FINDINGS OF THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW PANEL I. The legal framework of the IOTC Agreement: The alysis of the legal text of the IOTC Agreement identified a series of gaps and weaknesses which can be summarized as follows: The IOTC Agreement is outdated as it does not take account of modern principles for fisheries magement. The absence of concepts such as the precautiory approach and an ecosystem based approach to fisheries magement are considered to be major weaknesses. The lack of clear delinea tion of the functions of the Commission or flag State and port State obligations provide examples of significant impediments to the effective and efficient functioning of the Commission. The limitation on participation to this RFMO, deriving from IOTC’s legal status as an Article XIV Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) body, conflicts with provisions of United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA) and prevents major fishing players in the Indian Ocean from discharging their obligations to cooperate in the work of the Commission. The IOTC relationship to FAO, most notably in the budgetary context, negatively affects the efficiency of the work of the Commission, with neither Members nor the Secretariat in full control of the budget. This also raises questions relating to the level of transparency in the Commission’s fincial arrangements. ????? The Panel recommends that the IOTC Agreement either be amended or replaced by a new instrument. The decision on whether to amend the Agreement or replace it should be made taking into account the full suite of deficiencies identified in the Review. II. The criteria-based alysis of the performance of the Commission: The alysis based on the Performance Review criteria highlighted numerous weaknesses in the workings of the Commission, of which the most important have been identified as: High levels of uncertainty The quantitative data provided for many of the stocks under the IOTC Agreement is very limited. This is due to lack of compliance, a large proportion of catches being taken by artisal fisheries, for which there is very limited information, and lack of cooperation of non-Members of the IOTC. The data submitted to the Commission is frequently of poor quality. This contributes to high levels of uncertainty concerning the status of many stocks under the IOTC mandate. Poor record of compliance and limited tools for addressing non-compliance Low levels of compliance with IOTC measures and obligations a re commonplace. The Commission to date has taken very limited actions to remedy this situation – there are currently no sanctions/pelties for non-compliance in place. Moreover, the list of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) vessels applies to non-Members only. Special requirements of developing States Many developing States are experiencing serious capacity/infrastructure constraints which impede their ability to comply with their obligations, especially in terms of data collection, repor ting and processing. A number of developing States also lack appropriate scientific expertise and, even where such expertise is available, budgetary constraints limit their participation in Commission meetings, particularly those of the Scientific Committee and working parties. III. In light of these findings, and in addition to the specific recommendations made against each of the criteria, the Review Panel draws the Commission’s attention to the following overarching issues Uncertainty Address ing uncertainty in data and in the stock assessments is one of the most fundamental and urgent actions required to improve the performance of the Commission. This will require a variety of actions of which the most important are: application of scientific assessment methods appropriate to the data/information available, establishing a regiol scientific observer programme to enhance data collection for target and non-target species, and improving data collection and reporting capacity of developi ng States. Also engaging non-Members actively fishing in the area is of critical importance to addressing uncertainty. Equally important are developing a framework to take action in the face of uncertainty in scientific advice and enhancement of functioning and participation in the Scientific Committee and subsidiary bodies. Compliance It is imperative to strengthen the ability of the Compliance Committee to monitor non-compliance and advise the Commission on actions which might be taken in resp onse to non-compliance. Sanction mechanisms for non-compliance and provisions for follow-up on infringements should be developed. The Resolution on the establishment of the IUU list should be amended to allow for the inclusion of vessels flagged to Members. Special requirements of developing States Increased fincial support for capacity building should be provided to developing States. The Commission should enhance already existing funding mechanisms to build developing States’ capacity for data collection, processing and reporting, as well as technical and scientific capabilities. In this context, the possibility of establishing a special fund to facilitate participation in the Commission’s work, including subsidiary groups should be considered. Strengthening the Secretariat’s role/ability to undertake targeted capacity building should be explored. -
Book (stand-alone)Review of the legal frameworks in the ESA-IO Region 2011
Also available in:
No results found.This review consists of a detailed study of the legal frameworks in the Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles, Somalia and the United Republic of Tanzania as far as they pertain to fisheries laws, and are related to MCS and actions agreed upon in RFMO Agreements, and as far as they enable effective prosecution. The aim of the study is to provide recommendations for the improvement of these legal frameworks. The general legal review of the above countries is based on a desktop study, which was followed up by in-country specific investigations for Tanzania, Madagascar and Seychelles. Since there are already numerous other reports that consider this same topic, an attempt was made to avoid duplication thereof, and to focus on additional issues where possible. A distinct emphasis was placed on the use of criminal sanctions as a tool to ensure compliance with fisheries legislation. The majority of the report comprises of an assessment of the specific areas that require updating and harmonisation and identification of legal challenges and barriers to enforcement for each country. This assessment is divided into three parts for each country, namely an assessment of the legal framework, an evaluation thereof, and finally, recommendations on how the legislation may be improved. Within the evaluation, legal challenges and barriers to the implementation or adoption of regional agreements and standards and barriers to regional cooperation and information sharing were specific ally considered. The principle fisheries legislation in the Comoros is a 2007 decret, which, while quite extensive, lacks the necessary implementing text. In Kenya the principle fisheries legislation that regulates marine and inland fisheries, as well as aquaculture is comparatively outdated and lacking in many areas, however it was found that the 2011 Bill is extensive, and is in many respects a clear improvement. In Madagascar it was found that the current legislation is currently inadequate a nd contains numerous outdated provisions, such as outdated and inadequate penalties, and inadequate powers of fisheries inspectors. However, as is the case of Kenya, the new 2007 Bill addresses most of these issues. It has however not as yet been finalised, nor is it clear when it will be promulgated. Suggested interventions include a review of all supporting legislation, such as decrees and orders in order to adapt to the Bill. In Mauritius the principal legislation governing fisheries was foun d to have numerous key shortcomings. The recommendation is for a review of the legislation, in order that a comprehensive approach can be taken to ensure that the recent international fisheries instruments to which Mauritius is party are fully implemented. In the Seychelles, there are a number of main pieces of fisheries legislation governing fisheries, and a new Fisheries Bill has been prepared. The new Fisheries Bill, which is expected to become law before the end of 2011 is in the final stage s of development, and is a fine effort to modernize fisheries management. While the Fisheries Act of 1987 does not provide an adequate legal framework for MCS, the 2011 draft Bill is a huge improvement in this regard. In Somalia, it was found that the fisheries legislation is currently outdated and insufficient with regard to the creation of offences and the powers of inspectors, and is no longer an effective tool for fisheries management. There is also an inadequate legal framework for effectiv e MCS, both for the enforcement of domestic legislation as well as the enforcement of regional requirements. The legislative framework requires urgent attention if effective MCS on local and regional level is to be achieved. In Tanzania, there are currently five main pieces of Fisheries’ legislation, because the fishery sector is not a union matter and as a result, Mainland Tanzania and Tanzania Zanzibar each have their own specific pieces of legislation that regulate this sector. The Deep Sea F ishing Authority Act of 1998, as amended in 2007, and the Deep Sea Fishing Authority Regulations of 2009 are comprehensive, and recommendations have been made for their improvement and strengthening.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.