WTO welcomes NGOs’ imperfect but ‘historic’ anti-fishing agreement

First stephistoricalThe agreement, broken by the WTO on Friday, is certainly a compromise, but it sets the stage for a concrete fight against the billions in subsidies that contribute to illegal fishing and the overexploitation of endangered oceans. The WTO is the only organization that can develop and implement global agreements to limit anti-competitive subsidies. It has so far failed to reach an agreement on fisheries, an economic sector that is heavily supported by world governments. At the end of the marathon talks that ended in Geneva on Friday morning, 164 WTO members concluded:an agreement based on environmental sustainability“, Said its CEO Ngozi Okonjo-Ivela.

A breakthrough he described as “first but a possible step forward“Reduce funding to increase overfishing capacity”ending deep-sea fishing subsidies«. «Fighting one of the key factors in turning global fishing“, For Pew Charitable Trusts NGO,”a decisive step forwardFor the IISD (National Institute for Sustainable Development) think tankcatalystFor the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) «a huge leap for transparencyAccording to Bloom. NGOs fighting to save the oceans are enjoying this moment after more than 20 years of struggle. «The new agreement is the result of a compromise between 164 countries, so it is not perfectsaid WWF International CEO Marco Lambertini. «But the ocean needs help now, and marine ecosystems and coastal communities cannot wait for a perfect solution. The WTO has reached an agreement that should serve as a catalyst for subsidies and further fisheries reform.“, He assessed.

“Bloom NGO sees in it”a historic first step for the ocean«Եւ»a huge leap for transparency«. Oceana NGO regrets that the agreement simply did not end the subsidies for overfishing.our oceans are at a great loss todaysaid its executive director, Andrew Sharples.

«From torpedo to pragmatism»

According to a study regularly cited by experts, հետազոտ Bloom’s co-authored study, global fishery subsidies in 2018 amounted to $ 35.4 billion, of which more than 80% went to industrial fishing և was considered responsible. Increasing fishing skills. fleets. The WHO has not stopped “all harmful remedies that encourage overfishingbut its director’s goal was to get the organization outthe shock in which the institution fell“Bloom’s goal has been achieved, founder Claire Nuvian welcomes.”pragmatism” and “will«. He clarifies that the agreement reached in Geneva includes three main points.

First, a two-year ban on illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing subsidies granted to the least developed countries in their exclusive economic zone (Article 3), ie up to 200 nautical miles. Second, the ban on fish farming subsidies for over-exploited fish stocks for two years for the least developed and developing countries (Article 4). The article was particularly controversial with India, which on Tuesday threatened to block the finalization of the agreement if “25 years of transitionhe was not given. The text stipulates that “The state maintains or provides subsidies if those subsidies or other measures are taken to restore the resources to a biologically stable level.“According to Bloom, which alerts about this exception”because it could open a chasm of complicity between industrial lobbies ‘states’ to take + fake + measures to restore fish populations«. Finally, the agreement establishes an international standard of transparency (Article 8), making notifications of subsidies by states mandatory. «We did not have a mechanism to go back, now we have a framework. That’s really importantIsabel Jarrett, head of the Pew NGO, told AFP.