the problems of hunger and food insecurity have global...

Unit 5: Applicability of fisheries policy options to local, regional and national context - VRB 11/07

Topic 5: Applicability of Fisheries Policy Options to Local, Regional, National and International Context

Topic Aim: To identify and assess the appropriateness of fisheries policy options in meeting the goals and objectives of the broader national policy framework

Overall Objectives: Briefly outline the broader context of coastal fisheries policy framework in

the Pacific Islands Analyse the identified fisheries policy options in addressing the goals and

objectives of the broader national policy framework Re-evaluate fisheries policies which have been implemented

Learning outcomes: Understand the context of broader coastal fisheries policy framework and

the policy goals and objectives Identify and assess the appropriateness of a fisheries policy option in

meeting the above goals and objectives


Session I

The Broader context of coastal fisheries policy framework in the Pacific Islands

Aims and objectives Briefly outline the instruments of policy at the different levels that have

implications for management and development of coastal fisheries the Pacific Islands

Identify the link between international and regional instruments and national coastal fisheries policies

Outline the key drivers for policy and their goals and objectives

IntroductionEffective fisheries management to achieve its intended goals (such as optimizing social benefits) and to contribute to the implementation of international commitments relating to the protection of the marine environment, and sustainable use of its resources, require an understanding of the international, regional and national policy framework. These policies then guide the development of fishing and aquaculture activities and the management of fisheries resources.

This module briefly reviews some of the key international and regional instruments for the management and sustainable use of fisheries resources which were discussed in Unit 1. It then tries to link this to the policy options discussed in Unit 3 to see how the different policies address the international and regional obligations in meeting the intended goals and objectives of fisheries activities. Finally, the Unit will provide a basis for a critical re-evaluation of current coastal fisheries policies in the Pacific Islands.

It is important to note that the establishment of an effective and efficient fisheries policy can help a country to fulfill its obligations under a number of different international and regional instruments at the same time. It is therefore important to re-evaluate current fisheries policies which are being implemented to see their compatibility and conformity.

By the end of this unit, participants will be able to identify and evaluate various fisheries and related policies in addressing national goals while simultaneously meeting the regional and international obligations.

Translating international commitments on sustainable use and management of fisheries resources at the national level can be seen as follows, some of which have already been discussed in Unit 1:(Remember that these have evolved through a political and consultative process at various levels.


International instruments UNCLOS, Agenda 21, Rio Declaration of Principles, CBD, FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, Rome Declaration on World Food Security, Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action on Food Security, WSSD- Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, Millennium Development Goals, Barbados Action Plan, Mauritius Declaration.

Regional instruments SPC – Strategic Coastal Fisheries Plan; Regional Ocean Policy; Regional Coral Reef Initiative; SPREP - International Waters Programme; Micronesian Challenge; Pacific Plan, Vava’u Declaration on Fisheries.

National instruments National legislation – Fisheries & Marine Resources Act, Environment Management Act; National Economic Development Strategy Plans, National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (NBSAP); National Strategic Action Framework

Let us review some of these instruments and how they contribute to coastal fisheries policy development and planning in the Pacific Island countries.

Overall Legal instruments influencing Coastal Fisheries

The three levels of decision making and their interrelationships are discussed.

International LevelThe 1982 UNCLOS provides the global legal framework for all activities in the oceans and seas and lays down the fundamental obligation of all States to protect and sustainably use the marine environment. It requires States to conserve and manage marine living resources within areas under national jurisdiction and beyond.

In recent years, an increasing number of international instruments including political declarations, plan of action and conventions have recognized the need for sustainable and efficient use of the marine environment and fisheries resources.

It is important to realize that becoming a party to a convention or treaty entails a State the obligation to comply with the provisions set out in the instrument.

UNCED: Agenda 21The framework for sustainable coastal fisheries and rural development in relation to food security was elaborated among other things in the Programme of Action for Sustainable Development (Agenda 21) of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. While Agenda 21 must be seen as a whole with its direct and indirect relevance to coastal fisheries, there were also some very specific provisions related to coastal fisheries. Chapter 17 sets forth the rights and obligations of States and provides


international basis upon which to pursue the protection and sustainable development of the marine and coastal environment and its resources. In particular, Chapter 17, programme areas A & D provides a basis for national policies and strategies on the sustainable development and management of coastal fisheries. Some relevant provisions are stated below:

17.74. States commit themselves to the conservation and sustainable use of marine living resources under national jurisdiction. To this end, it is necessary to:

(a) Develop and increase the potential of marine living resources to meet human nutritional needs, as well as social, economic and development goals;

(b) Take into account traditional knowledge and interests of local communities, small-scale artisanal fisheries and indigenous people in development and management programmes;

(c) Maintain or restore populations of marine species at levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield as qualified by relevant environmental and economic factors, taking into consideration relationships among species;

(d) Promote the development and use of selective fishing gear and practices that minimize waste in the catch of target species and minimize by-catch of non-target species;

(e) Protect and restore endangered marine species;

(f) Preserve rare or fragile ecosystems, as well as habitats and other ecologically sensitive areas.

17.81. Coastal States should support the sustainability of small-scale artisanal fisheries. To this end, they should, as appropriate:

(a) Integrate small-scale artisanal fisheries development in marine and coastal planning, taking into account the interests and, where appropriate, encouraging representation of fishermen, small-scale fisherworkers, women, local communities and indigenous people;

(b) Recognize the rights of small-scale fishworkers and the special situation of indigenous people and local communities, including their rights to utilization and protection of their habitats on a sustainable basis;

(c) Develop systems for the acquisition and recording of traditional knowledge concerning marine living resources and environment and promote the incorporation of such knowledge into management systems.

17.82. Coastal States should ensure that, in the negotiation and implementation of international agreements on the development or conservation of marine living


resources, the interests of local communities and indigenous people are taken into account, in particular their right to subsistence.

17.83. Coastal States, with the support, as appropriate, of international organizations should conduct analyses of the potential for aquaculture in marine and coastal areas under national jurisdiction and apply appropriate safeguards as to the introduction of new species.

17.84. States should prohibit dynamiting, poisoning and other comparable destructive fishing practices.

17.85. States should identify marine ecosystems exhibiting high levels of biodiversity and productivity and other critical habitat areas and should provide necessary limitations on use in these areas, through, inter alia, designation of protected areas. Priority should be accorded, as appropriate, to:

(a) Coral reef ecosystems;

(b) Estuaries;

(c) Temperate and tropical wetlands, including mangroves;

(d) Seagrass beds;

(e) Other spawning and nursery areas.

The above specified ecosystems are largely found with the boundaries where coastal fisheries operate.

Barbados Programme of Action for Small Island Developing States (SIDs) Chapter IVThe BPoA sets forth specific actions and measures at the national, regional and international level in support of the sustainable development of SIDs. Chapter IV of the SIDs Programme of Action focuses on Coastal and Marine Resources as a priority area. The national action, policies and measure to this effect are as follows:

(i) Establish and/or strengthen, where appropriate, institutional, administrative and legislative arrangements for developing and implementing integrated coastal zone management plans and strategies for coastal watersheds and exclusive economic zones, including integrating them within national development plans. (ii) Design comprehensive monitoring programmes for coastal and marine resources, including wetlands, in order to determine shoreline and ecosystem stability, and also document and apply, as a basis for integrated coastal zone planning and decision-making, traditional knowledge and management practices that are ecologically sound and include the participation of local communities.


(iii) Develop and/or strengthen national capabilities for the sustainable harvesting and processing of fishery resources and provide training and awareness programmes for the managers (Government and local communities) of coastal and marine resources. (iv) Ratify and/or adhere to regional and international conventions concerning the protection of coastal and marine resources and combat unsustainable fishing and related practices (BPoA for SIDs Chapter IV, 1994).

The focus of this action plan has been on developing skills and capabilities of small islands to bring about a more integrated approach to development such as harmonizing policies and strategies for coordination of sustainable management and utilization of coastal and marine resources.

Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action on the Sustainable Contribution of Fisheries to Food Security, 1995

The UNCED provision were elaborated under the Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action. Food security depends, inter alia, on sustainable management of fish, forests, and wildlife. In many indigenous communities, these resources are the principal sources of protein in the diet. The traditional knowledge within indigenous communities also plays an important role in the achievement of food security for these communities and others. The Kyoto Plan of Action calls for integrated assessments of fisheries in order to evaluate opportunities and strengthen the scientific basis for multispecies and ecosystem management (para3). It also points out the need to minimize waste and discards through measures including, to the extent practicable, the development and use of selective, environmentally safe and cost- effective fishing gear and techniques; and exchange information on methods and technologies to minimize waste and discards (para 7).

One of the major strategies to enhance food security is therefore effective management of fisheries resources and minimizing wastage and discards.

The Rome Declaration on World Food Security and the World Food Summit Plan of Action These instruments lay the foundations for diverse paths to a common objective - food security, at the individual, household, national, regional and global levels.

Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. In this regard, concerted action at all levels is required. Each nation must adopt a strategy consistent with its resources and capacities to achieve its individual goals and, at the same time, cooperate regionally and internationally in order to organize collective solutions to global issues of food security.


A growing world population and the urgency of eradicating hunger and malnutrition call for determined policies and effective actions. A peaceful, stable and enabling political, social and economic environment is the essential foundation which will enable States to give adequate priority to food security, poverty eradication and sustainable agriculture, fisheries, forestry and rural development.1

World Summit on Sustainable Development and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI)

The plan of implementation builds on from UNCED as an attempt to commit to take concrete actions and measures to achieve sustainable development. Chapter IV focuses on protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development. Paragraph 31 section a, b and h of the JPOI have direct relevance to coastal fisheries. These are stated below:

a. Maintain or restore stocks to levels that can produce the MSY with the aim of achieving these goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis and where possible no later than 2015.

c. Implement the 1995 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and relevant international plan of action and technical guidelines of the FAOh. Support the sustainable development of aquaculture, including small-scale aquaculture, given its growing importance for food security and economic development.

Furthermore, the Millennium Development Goals resulting from the United Nations Millennium Declaration adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2000 on eradication of extreme poverty and hunger and in achieving environmental sustainability remain the overall broad goals of direct relevance to coastal fisheries. The 2001 Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem calls for fisheries to use gear and techniques that reduce bycatch and discards and take into consideration the ecosystem interactions and relationships.

Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (1995)The development of long term sustainable fisheries management is an ideal goal for all fisheries managers. The Code provides the benchmark guidelines to this effect by taking into account the technical, socio-economic and environmental factors. The Code provides principles and standards applicable to the conservation, management and development of all fisheries. It covers capture, processing and trade of fish and fisheries products, fishing operations, aquaculture, fisheries research and the integration of fisheries into coastal area management (Article 1.2). Objectives of the Code are stated in Article 2 which 1 World Food Summit, 13-17 November 1999 and Rome Declaration on World Food Security.


includes among other things, principles and criteria for implementing national policies for responsible conservation of fisheries resources and fisheries management and development.

In terms of fisheries management objectives, the Code states that appropriate measures must be taken based on best scientific evidence available, designed to maintain or restore stocks at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, as qualified by the relevant environmental and economic factors, including special requirements of developing countries (Article 7.2). Among other things, the management measures should address the following issues:

a. avoid excess fishing capacity and exploitation of stocks remains economically viable

b. the economic conditions under which fishing industries operate promote responsible fisheries

c. the interest of fishers, including those engaged in sustainable, small-scale and artisanal fisheries, are taken into account

d. biodiversity of aquatic habitats and ecosystems is conserved and endangered species protected

e. depleted species are allowed to recoverf. adverse environmental impacts on resources are assessed and

correctedg. pollution, waste, discards, catch by lost or abandoned gear, catch of

non-target species, and impacts on associated or dependent species are minimised, through measures such as development of selective, environmentally safe and cost-effective fishing gear and techniques.

How do these international instruments relate to your work?Are they relevant and help to meet the fisheries policy objectives of your country?Can you use them to legitimize some of the work that you are doing or hope to do?

To keep abreast with these you will need to have a legal person familiar with fisheries issues or you should have a ready access to such personnel.

Regional Policy ContextOne of the core messages from Agenda 21 has been the need for policy coordination at national, regional and international levels to achieve integrated oceans and coastal management. The Regional Ocean Policy provides 5 guiding principles for individual and collaborative action to promote responsible stewardship of the ocean for regional and global benefit. The 5 guiding principles to achieve sustainable use of ocean resources are:

Improving the understanding of the ocean


Sustainably developing and managing the use of ocean resources

Maintaining the health of the ocean

Promoting the peaceful use of the ocean Creating partnerships and promote cooperation

Based on the foundations of the above 5 principles, the implementation guidelines are elaborated in the Integrated Strategic Action Framework.

Integrated Strategic Action FrameworkThe Pacific Forum leaders endorsed the strategic action framework of the Regional Ocean Policy in 2004. The Framework is designed to guide implementation, and allows for participation by governments, non-governmental organisations, non-state actors, the private sector, and civil society. It provides:

A regional consensus on priorities for actions to ensure improved ocean governance and sustainable use of the ocean and its resources;

A framework for regional coordination of action;

A framework for regional and international institutions to use in integrating their work; and

Guidance to development partners on regional priority areas requiring their support

Both the Policy and its Framework are focused at the regional level but implementation requires actions at all levels (local, national, regional and international). The Framework is seen as the main driver to influence the development of work plans of regional organizations and guide national governments in implementing sustainable development and management of ocean, coastal and island resources, in partnership with local communities.

SPC - Strategic Plan for Fisheries Management and Sustainable Coastal Fisheries in Pacific Islands (2005-2007)Following the development of the Integrated Strategic Action Framework and a SPC regional policy meeting on coastal fisheries management held in Nadi in March, 2003 and a field study completed in selected Pacific island countries during May and June 2003, SPC has developed a strategic plan for fisheries management and sustainable coastal fisheries in Pacific islands.

The reduction in catches of inshore marine species was of seen as the most important concern. Traditionally, seafood has been the most important source of protein in Pacific islands. However, catches of the most accessible seafood - the


fish, seaweed and shellfish of the lagoons and reefs - have been declining in some island countries over many years. In the few islands where data are being collected continuously, the recorded decline has sometimes been dramatic; in Guam, for example, catch rates have decreased by 70% over the past 15 years (SPC Strategic Plan).

The reasons for the decline in inshore catches include overexploitation, a shift from subsistence to commercial fishing, the use of overly efficient and destructive fishing methods and environmental degradation. Growth in human populations (approaching 4% per year in some islands) is placing increasing pressures on coastal ecosystems and their resources. Whereas in the past emphasis has been on making exploitation more efficient (eg by encouraging the use of modern boats and fishing gear), at present the emphasis is on reducing fishing mortality (eg by controlling fishing effort and by restricting the use of certain fishing gear).

There is concern about the use of overly efficient gears – the use of gill nets in lagoons, underwater torches to spear fish sheltering on reefs at night, and SCUBA gear to spear fish and lobsters are examples. In addition, several countries have to combat the use of destructive fishing methods including the use of explosives and poisons.

Typically, local fisheries agencies have insufficient resources and expertise to assess and manage coastal fisheries in spite of the important role these play in food security and poverty reduction.

National governments in Pacific islands have imposed a variety of regulations that either restrict fishing (input controls), restrict the catch (output controls) or protect the marine environment. However, there is a general belief among fisheries managers in the Pacific Islands that fisheries regulations are either in need of review or inadequately enforced (or both).

The degradation of fish habitats including coral reefs, lagoons and wetlands has contributed to the decline of inshore fish stocks. This suggests that a broader ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) is needed to replace the narrower target-species approach to fisheries management. The problems of achieving EAF are exacerbated by there being two separate government authorities responsible for fisheries and the marine environment. Marine protected areas (MPAs) are important in that they provide refuges in which invertebrate and fish stocks can grow and reproduce. Although the number of MPAs, both nationally and community-owned, is growing throughout the region, some countries are encountering problems in establishing workable MPAs.

Life-style changes and the requirements of a growing cash economy in Pacific islands will continue to result in further shifts from subsistence to commercial fishing. Fisheries managers in Pacific islands have to address the implications of


this, not only in terms of development and income generation, but in terms of sustainability and food security.

The strategic plan aims to assist in developing the capacity of island governments, and the region as a whole, to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on poverty reduction and outcomes of the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD 2002)[Above information extracted from SPC Coastal Fisheries Strategic Plan 2005-2007].

The relevant requirements of these include actions to;

Implement strategies for sustainable development by 2005 Reverse the loss of environmental resources by 2015 Maintain or restore fisheries stocks on an urgent basis and where possible by

2015.

*** You can notice the link between regional policy and the international instruments

Table 5.1: Summary of problems* in coastal fisheries management (percentages are based on the number of countries identifying particular problems as most important).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Overexploitation of marine species 78%Inadequate or outdated fisheries regulations 50%Inadequate enforcement of fisheries regulations 50%Lack of capacity in the country – eg in stock assessment, data collection 50%Destructive fishing methods – eg explosives, breaking coral 39%Overly efficient fishing methods – eg night diving, small mesh nets, SCUBA 22%Overlap between national/provincial/island responsibilities 17%Shift from subsistence to commercial fishing 11%Ciguatera fish poisoning 11%Illegal fishing by foreign vessels 6%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Source: SPC


National LevelOne can see that the international instruments and guidelines are translated within a regional context as a harmonised policy direction. It then becomes incorporated into national plans for implementation at a local or national level. These may appear within the national legislation, national economic development strategy, fisheries sector plans, environment management plans and so on. Some of the important changes one has seen in the recent years within the realm of coastal fisheries management in the Pacific Islands have been: revision of national laws to incorporate the principles of responsible and

sustainable fisheries focus on decentralised management using community-based approaches to

fisheries management increased participation by non-governmental organisations including

environmental NGOs and industry and private sector interests institutional reforms to strengthen monitoring, assessment, management and

conservation aspects of fisheries capacity building to enhance capabilities of personnel increased attention to mitigating impacts on non-target species

As seen is many of the Pacific Island countries and discussed in Unit 1, there are many factors that underpin the development of national coastal fisheries policies. In addition to the external factors discussed above that influence policy, there are other internal or endogenous factors within the countries that also affect the policy formulation process.

These include the type of government structure, the political history, national laws and regulations, the influence by traditional authorities and institutions such as customary and traditional rights. Furthermore, the availability of fisheries resources, its market demand, management capability, the number of fishers and the level of dependence on the fisheries all influence policy development.

The case study reviews of the Pacific Islands indicate that there are various sources of influence that determine the overall policy framework for coastal fisheries at the national level. The national economic development plans provide an important policy direction and outline the goals, objectives and strategies of the fisheries sector at the national level.

Let us look at some examples of how national plans articulate the coastal fisheries policy:

Marshall IslandsThe following documents provide an indication of the evolving fisheries sector policies in the Marshall Islands.


Fisheries Policy Statement (1997) National Fisheries Development Plan (1997) Meto 2000 Economic Report and Statement of Development Strategies

(April 2001) Strategic Development Plan Framework 2003-2018 of the Vision 2018

(June 2001) Marshall Islands Fisheries Sector Master Plan (November 2002) produced

as part of Vision 2018 sector strategy Policies and Priority Action for Sustainable Mariculture Development

(August 2004)

The fisheries policy is guided by the following interrelated needs to:

Improve economic benefits within sustainable limits Promote responsible, private sector led developments; and Strengthen institutional capacities within the country for responsible

fisheries development and management

Improving benefits is a policy goal while the latter two are approaches to take. One needs to keep in mind the factors that led to the formulation of the above policy document – political, social, legal and economic factors!

Case of Fiji Islands

In the Fiji Islands, the Ministry of Fisheries and Forests Strategic Development Plan (2005-2007) outlines the policy objectives that reflect on the priority areas. Some of the priority areas relevant to coastal fisheries are as follows:

Strategic Priorities Areas for both the Fisheries:

To ensure sustainable development.

To create and maximize values.

To create growth through development of the value chain of the two sectors.

To increase resource owners participation in the economic development of the two sectors.

To build capacity & provide institutional strengthening and infrastructure to support economic development in the two sectors.

Alleviation of poverty.

Integration of economies.


Implementation of Government strategic interventions for disadvantaged groups.

Policy Objectives:

To promote marine and forest bio-diversity through better conservation of resources.

To develop and use appropriate legislation, monitoring, surveillance, enforcement and practices consistent with International and Regional standards that is conducive to developing credibility and sustainability of the two sectors.

To promote and provide for strengthening of its institutions and capacity building geared towards achieving the vision, mission and goals of the Ministry in providing support and manpower for the development of the sectors.

To explore market access and market opportunities for all products developed from our resources targeting the retail end of the market chain.

To grow the sectors through increased production of value added products, and niche marketing.

To develop Fiji as a service center for all the high value fishing activities in the Pacific region.

To create employment in the rural areas through resource development.

To uplift the living standards through active participation of resource owners through the development of the sectors.

To use intervention policies of Government aligned to UN policies favoring economically disadvantaged groups and indigenous communities.

To improve food security, supply & source through reseeding, restocking and culture of fisheries.

To strategically conserve flora and fauna to restore basic necessities of life like water, oxygen, energy and carbon dioxide and to preserve land from erosion and siltation which upsets aquatic ecosystems and disrupts the food chain through killing of coral and reef systems.

To support the sectors to increase export earnings and grow at a minimum rate of $70 million annually or at a minimum 7% annually.


Promote the use of appropriate and efficient technology, better resource utilization and target high value products in the development of the sectors.

Provide adequate infrastructure to support the commercial and industrial development of the sectors.

To promote and provide the strengthening of relevant, appropriate, and effective institutions for the sustainable management and development of the sector.

Develop appropriate legislation and enforcement capabilities consistent with International and Regional protocols and convention compatible to the growth of the sector.

Provide better finance and asset management to better support service deliveries of the Ministry to the sectors.

Key PointsIn synthesizing the broader context of the coastal fisheries policy framework in the Pacific Islands, one can say that there are many internal and external factors that influence how fishing activities are conducted and how fisheries are managed. The international and regional requirements such as those highlighted in the Code of Conduct, Regional Ocean Policy, SPC Strategic Plan for Coastal Fisheries, and the national fisheries laws and regulations and economic and strategic development plans are seen to provide the basis for the identifying goals and objectives in the broader national policy framework. Such goals and objectives form the backbone of any fisheries management plan. These may reflect the overall national development goals or may be specific to the sector as a means of achieving the national goals. Let us see this in the context of coastal fisheries in the Pacific Islands.

The dominant trends we see now in the policy formulation is the incorporation of social factors in decision making. The need to include the primary stakeholders or the communities or fishers and the industry. There are also other interest groups or other users of the coastal environment who may have either direct or indirect impact on fisheries or whose activities may affect fisheries production. Therefore an integrated approach to fisheries management has become essential. There is also a common theme across that enforcement and monitoring of fisheries regulations has been generally ineffective because of lack of resources and capability (it is too costly). There is also an increase in emphasis on use of traditional knowledge and resource use systems to complement the more contemporary management measures. There is also concern over the biological status of the resources and need to converse and protect resources that are in danger of collapse.


In short, the main single message is that there is increase pressure on the coastal resources due to increase in population and consequent demand for resources to support livelihoods and economy while at the same time resources are declining. However, with decline in resources, there is also a need to reduce fishing pressure. The basic economic problem continues to persist – to meet the unlimited wants amongst the limited scarce resources.

As resources become scarce, we have to use it in the most efficient and effective manner in order to optimize the benefits from it. We also need some criteria for evaluating and making choices amongst the various alternatives available within the fisheries sector and within the greater coastal environment where fisheries exists with other economic activities. Here again, the question of allocation will arise which will require making choices on allocation.

Typical goals and objectives of the Coastal Fisheries sector may include the following:

To promote and facilitate sustainable development to contribute to national GDP

Optimise long-term social and economic benefits to the nation Promote long-term sustainable use and the replenishment of living marine

resources Achieve the optimum utilization of living resources To ensure that fishing and fish processing are conducted in ways that

miminise negative impacts on the environment, reduce waste, and preserve the quality of fish caught

Particular attention should be given to the needs of local people who depend upon fisheries for their livelihoods

Use best scientific information available while taking into account traditional fishing practices and knowledge where it is appropriate

Important fish habitats such as reefs and lagoons, wetlands and mangroves should be protected from destruction and pollution

Create employment opportunities for local people and communities Improve income levels of fishers Improve welfare of fishing communities Increase value added processing to maximize returns from the fishery

The above goals and objectives reflect on the concern for environmental and resource sustainability, distribution of benefits amongst the stakeholders and optimizing of long term societal benefits from the fisheries.


Session II

Analysis of the identified fisheries policy options in addressing the goals and objectives of the broader national policy framework

Aims & Objectives

To briefly examine the apparent outcomes of the different fisheries management options identified in Unit 3 and how they may address the broader policy goals and objectives identified in the above lecture

Identify some of the strengths and weaknesses and the interdependence and conflicts that may arise from the different management options

Highlight the need for a complementary set of policies in order to meet the goals and objectives of fisheries management

IntroductionIn unit 3 we looked at the key policy options for solving the problems of fisheries. These were seen in the context of designing an efficient and effective fisheries management regime comprising of the three main components:

Fisheries management system – methods or tools of managing fishing activities Monitoring, control and surveillance – observe fishing activities, enforcement rules and guidelines for controlling fishing activitiesFisheries Judicial system – assist in implementation and enforcement of fisheries management rules.

In this lecture session, we will review some of the policy options in meeting the broader goals and objectives of the fisheries sector. What are the outcomes of these policy options?

Review the Fisheries Management RegimeTo achieve full benefits from the fisheries management, all 3 components of the fisheries management regime (FMR) must be appropriately designed, fully functional and well coordinated (Arnason, 2007). The purpose of the FMR is to contribute to the net economic benefits from the fishery. In other words, maximise the resource rent or benefits. These rents when properly measured define the society’s ability to improve the economic welfare of its people (Arnason, 2007). The overall net benefits (welfare) increases when benefits of fisheries management outweigh the costs involved (ie. costs associated with MCS and FJS).


Recall, what makes a good or effective MCS?

There is timely flow of data and information that is cost effective and reliable; and management costs are borne by the beneficiaries of the management system, ie fishers and society.

What makes a good and effective FJS?A system where the violators are effectively punished and one that is cost effective. The benefits of violation should be less than the cost of crime. Penalties should be set at the right level where the probability of an offence is low; if an offence occurs, the rate of detection should high; and if detected, chances of prosecution and punishment should be high.

What makes a good FMS?An option or a set of options that that can optimise the net present value of the fishery.

In Unit 3 we also learnt that the desirable properties of a fisheries management system as:

(a) Effectiveness in generating net fisheries rents(b) Robustness in the face of variable conditions.(c) Low cost of operation.(d) Minimal data needs.(e) Perceived fair distribution of benefits.(f) General social acceptability (Arnason, 2007).

The management tools discussed in Unit 3 are summarized again below:

Some fisheries management tools identified in Unit 3

1 Fishing gear restrictions

2 Fishing area restrictions

3 Fishing time restrictions (Certain dates excluded from fishing)

4 Fish size restrictions

5 Total harvest restrictions (Total allowable catch, TAC)

6 Individual harvest restrictions (Individual catch quotas)

7 Taxes and subsidies (The fishing activity subject to taxes or subsidies)

8 Fishery access restrictions (Fishing licences)

9 Fishing vessel restrictions (Restrictions on vessels' size, power, equipment etc.)

10 Fishing effort restrictions (Limited total fishing time)

11 Sole ownership (exclusive ownership over a fish stock or a part of it)


12 Territorial use rights in fisheries (TURFs)

(Arnason, 2007)

The various management tools are categorized under the four major types of the fisheries management system discussed in unit 3. Fisheries management systems: Classification

Direct biological fisheries

management

Direct economic fisheries

managementTaxes Property rights

Gear restrictions Total allowable catch, TAC

Taxes/subsidies Access licences

Area restrictions Vessel restrictions Individual harvest quotas

Time restrictions Effort restrictions Sole ownership

Minimum size restrictions

Territorial use rights

(Arnason, 2007)

In light of meeting the goals of the overall fisheries management regime, one must also consider the other components, namely MCS and FJS. The MCS costs must also be taken into consideration when formulating the fisheries policy. There should be net economic benefits accruing after the payment of all the costs including the MCS costs. On the other hand, the FJS determines components of the probability that a violator of fisheries rules will have to suffer a penalty, and sets the penalty itself. Adherence to fisheries management rules requires sufficiently high expected cost of penalties that will act as effective deterrent. Altering either the enforcement activity or the penalty for the violations, one can determine the level of violations (Arnason, 2007).

Analysis of some policy options [Refer to the notes in Topic 3]Let us now look at these different management tools and assess whether these are able to satisfy the goals and objectives of the national policy framework discussed in the above lecture.

Biological ManagementThe main aim of this is to improve the yield of the resources through increase in biomass growth. Common measures include such things as gear and size restrictions, area closures and time (seasonal) closures. These measures improve the biological side of the fishery, prevent over-exploitation and or helps to rebuild stocks.

Size restrictions – minimum legal size of catch to protect juveniles and under-sized.


Will the particular regulation actually reduce the present catch? Will increased future value of catch justify the current reduction?

Size limits will be effective if only fish are returned to water safely and whether the size can be determined before actual capture. Under-sized fish may require additional sorting, gear modifications, etc which may increase the direct cost of fishing as well as cost of MCS. It may be difficult to employ in a multi-species fishery. The use of size limits on its own will most likely have a high MCS cost.

Closed Seasons – A closed season is a period of time during which fishing may not take place such as when they are spawning since catch is most vulnerable at that time. This can improve the biological health of the stock but not economic condition if used on its own. For example, effort can increase during open season to compensate for the lost fishing time. The inputs of the fishery (capital and labour) may remain idle, therefore increase cost of operations unless re-deployed.

Area closures - an area where fishing is not allowed. This may be to protect young or spawning stock. Again this also if used on its own is likely to increase the cost of fishing operations while it may improve the biological side of the fishery and in rebuilding stocks. A common form of area closure is the MPAs or taboo areas.

The outcome of biological management measures is that yield can increase and that consumers can also benefit with increased supply of fish with the improved yields through increase in consumer surplus. However, fisheries rents are unlikely to increase in the long run given the high research and management (MCS) costs associated with biological fisheries management. Fisheries management based exclusively on biological fisheries management will most likely produce a negative economic return as shown in unit 3. This management can be useful in the case of achieving conservation and rebuilding of fish stocks.

Direct Economic RestrictionsManagement measures under this include restrictions on fishing time such as days at sea; fishing capital control such as vessel size, engine power, vessel technology; and effort restrictions such as fishing gear and type of gear. Direct controls can also be on the total allowable catch. The direct economic control often increases the cost of fishing effort, thereby reduces the effort and consequently increases the equilibrium biomass. However, with lower effort and new equilibrium biomass, there may still be no profits. Therefore, direct economic restrictions still do not remove the problem of common property. There may be no long term economic gain and cost of operating is likely to increase due to increased MCS costs.


Let us look at the case of gear restrictions. For example, if we impose mesh size restrictions, then there may be greater sustainable yield in the long run thus creating an economic rent and therefore attracting other fishers whereby rent can erode away. Likewise, in the case of using a TAC. While this may solve the biological concerns, it is unlikely to increase the resource rent due to the costs associated with the fishing operations and likely excessive investments. Restrictions are already seen as imposing limitations on the efficiency of operations which will therefore have economic consequences. The need for biological and research information is also high therefore indicative of cost implications. As shown in Unit 3, direct economic restrictions as a management tool will be useful where the alternative is the collapse of the fishery (Arnason, 2007).

In achieving the various goals and objectives of fisheries management, if direct economic restrictions are used, it is likely that the health of the fish stock may improve but the long term economic benefits would be reduced due to high MCS costs. In the case of coastal fisheries, while direct controls are imposed through the fisheries and Marine Resources Act and Regulations, enforcement has always been a problem. Even where there are combination of methods used such as vessel size and technology, often monitoring costs of these different components can outweigh the benefits.

Taxes and subsidiesA tax measure can change the level of effort in a fishery by directly changing the profitability of fishing.If the level of tax is correctly determined and administered, it can bring the fishery to its optimal point. The amount of tax returns can provide a measure of the efficiency of management. Thus, if the tax returns are low, then the tax rate is either too low or too high (Arnason, 2007). The fisheries management tax is economically beneficial and is able to generate income for the government. However, the practical implementation of the tax poses several problems as identified in detail in Unit 3. These include:

Difficulty to determine the correct amount of the tax- to be able to calculate the optimal tax, the authorities must be have access to all data about all fishing operations, have a sound knowledge of fish stocks and prices of fishing inputs and output.

In many societies, it is legally, administratively and politically difficult to vary taxes over time. However, as we have seen, the optimal tax must be continuously altered. Therefore, in practice, the tax must be sub-optimal for this reason.

Fisheries taxation generates income for a centralized authority which can sometime be used in misguided projects.

A taxation regime is in general socially unpopular.


Fisheries management by means of taxation requires a great deal of rather costly enforcement.

While theoretically taxation can be an interesting possibility for effective fisheries management, in practical terms, it is difficult to impose due to limitations in data and for social reasons. There are also many other reasons why this may be less of a possibility in the context of Pacific Islands coastal fisheries. Fishery is largely informal or subsistence and so less organized. Fishers hardly keep records and operate based on their immediate food, nutritional and income needs and therefore not profit motivated to generate optimal rents.

In the case of subsidies, it is directly the opposite where the cost of fishing would be reduced for the fishers, thereby encouraging more fishers to join the fishery or to switch to environmentally friendly use of technologies that can become more affordable to fishers, or to discourage fishers to leave the fishery, etc. The use of subsidies however is more complex and depends on the type of subsidies and purpose and could be either effort enhancing or reducing.

Subsidies therefore remain a contentious issue in the context of coastal fisheries for the developing small islands in the Pacific.

Property RightsProperty rights in fisheries have evolved to deal with problems of open access nature of the fishery that can lead to the tragedy of the commons. The major types of property rights in fisheries discussed in Unit 3 were: access licenses (fishing license), individual quota, individual transferable quota, sole ownership, TURFs, and community rights. We have already seen that a well defined property right will have strong features of all the characteristics (Appropriability, enforceability, duration, divisibility, transferability). Private goods lend themselves to the development of well-defined property rights over them because they are rival and thus divisible and excludable. Well-defined property rights are necessary for effective market transaction to occur and for resource use to be efficient. The efficient and sustainable use of private goods can thus be encouraged by ensuring the rights are durable, enforceable and enforced, and transferable.

Private property rights can belong to an individual or a community, and may be ownership or use rights. As long as the rights over the resource is clearly defined and recognised, people will have incentives to use the resource sustainably and markets can develop to allow the efficient allocation of that resource. It avoids the rush to cash in as the owner or right-holder can decide when to utilize the resources.

Let us briefly go over some of the features of the different types of property rights we commonly find.


Common property – a holder of a right where it could be a group or groups of people where the various characteristics of a property may be weak or non- existent such as exclusivity and transferrability.

Licenses – these are seen as somewhat weak property rights in relation to fish stock protection since fish stock are still regarded as a common property because of their transboundary nature. In order to improve their share in fishing, fishers have to expand fishing effort. Therefore just by imposing a requirement for licenses to operate, effort can continue to increase by improving the capability to fish, thus impacting on the resource. On the other hand, licenses can help to somewhat deal with open access nature.

In the context of coastal fisheries, commercial fishing has been regulated through imposing of licenses. However, monitoring enough components of such licensing scheme has always been a problem. While licensing may be easy to implement, deciding on the number of licenses that would accrue the optimal level of resource rent will require additional information on the resources, market prices and costs.

Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) – This is where certain areas are allocated to groups or individuals where the holder of the right may have exclusive rights to the resources in the area. TURFs can be seen as a property right but have limitations where fish are transboundary.

In many Pacific Island countries, TURFs have been used as a form of coastal fisheries management where adjacent coastal communities have exclusive access to the certain coastal areas or fishing grounds. TURFs are useful when fishing is conducted over sedentary resources such as clam or seaweed farming.

Sole Ownership – This is seen as an ideal type of property right where externality is removed and so there is no damaging competition for catch shares. A sole owner will have both incentive and means to manage his/her property in the most efficient manner.

While there may be rare cases of sole ownership of a coastal fishing ground, sole ownership can exist in relation to use rights where there is one company or an individual who has the sole rights to fish in a particular area.

Community Management – In the community fisheries management, there is a defined group of people such as a community or a cooperative. If the group has an exclusive right and a genuine interest to manage their fishery, there can be potential to generate rents. Whether the group is successful depends to a large extent on the knowledge and internal dynamics of the group, in particular their decision making mechanism (Arnason, 2007). The advantage of community rights is that it has the potential to reduce enforcement problems, create incentives for the community and provide a more efficient source of information


(Arnason, 2007). The downside is that this management system is dependent on the dynamics of group decision making. It may still require government to oversee that management is carried out effectively.

Community management of coastal fisheries is widely practiced in many of the Pacific Island countries. The effectiveness of the management system depends on the local community institutions which are based on traditional and customary rules and practices. This will be discussed in detail in unit 7.

Individual Quota/ITQ – A catch quota gives the holder the right to a certain share of the TAC while an individual transferable quota is economically more efficient system of quota whereby a market for quota is created. Since individual entities enjoy the ownership of harvesting rights, they are in a position to maximize economic benefit. Transferability allows only efficient operators to harvest, thus optimizing economic rent. Unit 3 has given us a detailed assessment of how a quota allows the security of harvest by allowing the holder the opportunity to harvest at least cost. However, IQ and ITQ have certain disadvantages such as the problem of enforcement, hygrading and discarding.

In the case of coastal fisheries where multi-species fisheries exist and where biological information on stocks may be limited, determining the optimal TAC would be difficult. Allocation criteria also need to be carefully determined to avoid conflicts.

Let us now see some of the identified policy options in addressing the objectives of the broader national policy framework. Table 5.2 tries to weigh the applicability of various options in light of the nature and characteristics of the coastal fisheries in the Pacific Islands. These are arbitrary weights for the purpose of our analysis. These require more detailed assessments by looking at the nature of fisheries and the practicality of implementing the various objectives.

Table 5.2 Assessing Policy Goals & Objectives in Fisheries Plans in the Context of Pacific Islands

Management Tool

Sustainable Fisheries

Optimising Economic Benefits

Achieving Food & Nutritional Security

Increasing Employment

Conservation & Stock -Rebuilding

Achieving Integrated Management

Overall Score

Open access

0 SR (1) 0 0 0 0 1 ?

Biological:Gear restriction

2 1 1 0 3 0 7

Area closure

2 1 1 0 3 1 8

Time restriction

2 1 1 0 3 0 7

Minimum size limits

3 1 1 0 3 0 8

Direct Economic Restriction:


Total Allowable Catch

3 1 (SR) SR (1) 1 3 1 10

Vessel restriction

1 1 (SR) 1 (SR) 1 1 0 5

Effort restriction

2 2 2 1 2 1 10

Indirect Economic Restriction:Taxes & subsidies

3 3 3 1 2 1

Property Rights:Access/license

1 1 1 1 1 1 6

IQ/ITQs 3 3 3 1 2 1 13Sole ownership

3 3 2 1 3 3 15

TURFs 2 2 3 3 2 2 14Community rights

3 3 3 3 3 3 18

Weight: 1 low contribution, 2 average contribution, 3 high contribution SR: Short Run

From the given crude analysis, the most practical potential policy tool would be community rights in addressing the national policy goals that are partly derived from the various international and regional instruments to meet the local needs and aspirations. In deciding on the appropriate policy choice, one also has to further consider other factors such as minimising MCS costs, a system that requires minimal data and one that is socially acceptable. Thus the institutions that implement and make decisions become critical to how policies ultimately meet the societal needs and aspirations.


Session II (B)

Re-evaluation of fisheries policies which have been implemented

Aims & Objectives: Critically review some of the current policies in light of meeting the stated

goals and objectives Reconsider the various components of the fisheries management regime

to achieve the optimal policy mix Identify some possible solutions, opportunities and constraints

IntroductionThis session will critically evaluate some of the current management practices in the Pacific Islands. We have so far seen that the national policy framework increasingly places emphasis on sustainability of the fish stocks. There are a number of conventions, agreements and guidelines which point to the need to impose limit on the use of the coastal area such as the reefs and lagoons.

There is also an expectation that coastal fisheries will also assist in alleviating poverty and where potential exists, it is seen to provide an important source of income, foreign exchange and employment to coastal communities. There is also a general recognition that involvement of fishers and coastal communities is also critical in implementing any policy decisions. Implementation of policies also raises questions on responsibilities of governments, fishers and other stakeholders of the coastal space.

To what extent government should be involved in management and what sort of support should be provided by government and management agencies to fishers? There are also socially and politically contentious issues on whether government would support small-scale fishers living near the coastal areas only or also those with capital and technology but outside of the community? What could be the underlying factors that will determine the criteria for allocation of fishing opportunities? To address these issues, one will have to consider the applicability of the fisheries management tools and how these tools fit into the desired fisheries management regime that will help achieve the various policy objectives?

Analysis of management practices

Closed Areas (Marine Protected Area) – Many of the Pacific Islands have someform of MPAs where areas in the sea adjacent to the villages are closed off either temporarily or permanently. The purpose is to rebuild stocks, protect juveniles, spawning grounds, etc. In some countries, having closed areas are a common


method of fisheries management where the assumption is that stocks will be protected and that there would be spill over benefits of stocks from such spawning grounds.

How effective is this management tool in addressing the policy objectives? Can the benefits from the fishery be optimized under such a management system? Is there an effective MCS system that is enforceable and that it is enforced? Finally we have to analyse the costs and benefits of developing and managing a MPA. Are there long term net benefits flowing? For the community and or government, the question would be whether fisheries management by MPA provides the highest welfare, say when compared to other alternative options like tourism, sand extraction,etc.

Size limits – Common species with size limits include beche-de-mer, trochus, mangrove crabs, pearl oysters and some finfish. This management measure helps to protect juveniles and ensures that there is adequate recruitment. In commercial fishery size limits can easily be implemented where market for under-sized fish does not exist or that it is illegal. The MCS associated with size limits in a subsistence or artisanal fishery is likely to be very expensive given the logistical difficulties of distances in the region. However, if there is community control, size limits may be easier to implement since enforcement can be within the community, provided community has institutional structures in place to monitor, and enforce and effectively prosecute offenders.

Customary Marine Tenure (CMT) – A number of the Melanesian and Micronesian countries have legal recognition of customary rights that are regulated by custom and culture. These could be seen as examples of TURFs where a particular coastal community will have exclusive use rights. How effective are the CMT systems in meeting the policy goals and objectives? In the case of Fiji, the CMT (qoliqoli system) is seen as a common property of the community where outsiders from the community are excluded by law. However, there is little control over the fish in the sea which then can create potential competition amongst the community members. Whether the CMT is able to optimize resource rent and whether resource rents could be derived is dependent on the community choice of an optimal fishing effort, its enforcement and implementation. In addition, the community will also need a mechanism to distribute the benefits in order to fulfill the societal goals. Therefore just by having exclusive access to fishing ground does not guarantee that income and harvests will increase in the long term. The short term initial gains will be dissipated. The community will need an institutional framework that will enable the effective implementation of its own FMR at the local level.

Licensing – While this method is used for managing artisanal commercial fisheries, its effectiveness largely depends on the monitoring and enforcement. Often commercial fishers are located in distant areas and the number of these operators are generally small. Distinguishing them with other vessel operators


who are subsistence fishers who do not require a license will require time and resources such as the need for enforcement officers. Licensing of vessels does not mean that resource sustainability can be achieved if there are other components of the vessel capacity that are not regulated as well. One also has to compare the management related MCS costs with the benefits derived from the fishery by imposing licenses. Another factor that is important is the private benefits of fishers as against the penalty for violation. If the fines are small amounts such as $300 or $500 or even $1000, then fishers are most likely going to offend since they are likely to make more profits and therefore still have a net gain from the fishery. While licensing does provide an easy way of managing fishing effort, it will need to be used with other management measures.

Total Allowable Catch – Total allowable catch has been used in some occasions to limit the amount of harvest such as trochus fishery in the Cook Islands. The condition under which the TAC has been operating is that fishing days are limited to a short season and all harvests take place during this period. The fishers are organized as a community and there is only one market source for these fishers. However, a global TAC is unlikely to provide optimal returns because off the practical difficulty in monitoring and enforcement and the high cost of operation of such as management measure. Determining a TAC based on sound scientific information may also be limited because of the lack of such information. If the level of effort is chosen at the optimal level or MEY level of harvest, then there is some indication that stock is unlikely to collapse.

Locally Managed Marine Areas – this is a form of a community based management where community has agreed to set up a formal structure (as representative of the community) to oversee management of the fishery. What are the strengths and weaknesses of this management system when seen in light of the characteristics of an efficient and effective fisheries management regime? What level of MCS does this system require and is it cost effective? What are the main goals of the LMMA and does this address the broader goals of the coastal fisheries policy goals and objectives? This will be further explored in Unit 7.

Concluding CommentsThis unit tried to review the elements of the national policy framework and identify the goals and objectives of fisheries sector plans. It then tried to look at the various fisheries policy options available and whether those options met the identified goals and objectives. Some current practices were also analysed to see how they fared in meeting the policy goals and objectives.

In analyzing the effectiveness of a policy, the goals and objectives must be clearly stated so that the outcomes could be measured or evaluated by using some criteria such as economic and environmental principles that use such tolls as cost and benefit analysis. The long term social benefits from a fishery must outweigh the long term social costs of management. Often when there are


several policy objectives that are not well coordinated, there will be room for conflicts and sub-optimal results. Policy coordination in order to get the right policy mix that is complementary is very critical for the success of any policy tool.

Appendix I:

A Summary of Goals, Strategies and Outputs from the SPC Strategic Plan for Coastal Fisheries.

Outputs from draft SPC plan Suggested goals and strategies from this document

Output 3.1: Assistance to individual PICTs in developing or rehabilitating and promoting socially inclusive and appropriate coastal fisheries development and governance policies and plans.

Goal 1: To enhance the capacity of fisheries agency staff to manage sustainable fisheries.

1a) Organizational structure and HRD plans.1b) Attachments to SPC and national programs.1c) Preparation of fisheries management plans. 1d) Practical fisheries management issues.1e) Preparation of proposals, designing projects etc

Output 3.2: Establishment and maintenance of databases of information on Pacific island coastal fisheries and fisheries management practices, and publication of case studies and compendia.

Goal 2: To assist fisheries agency staff in their efforts to collect, store, retrieve and analyse basic fisheries data and/or indicators to monitor the status of fish stocks.2a) Collection and storing of subsistence fisheries data.2b) Using fisheries data in stock assessments.

Output 3.3: Establishment and maintenance of networks for sharing experiences and expertise in coastal fisheries management.

Goal 3: To assist countries to review, update and/or develop practical and enforceable fisheries regulations. 3a) Review of legislation on coastal fisheries. 3b) Recommendations on size limits.3c) Application of fisheries regulations.

Goal 4: To assist countries involve fishers and other stakeholders in fisheries management and to assist with the development of property-use rights.4a) Community-based fisheries management. 4b) Developing community by-laws. 4c) Fisheries management advisory committees.4d) Gender-orientated approach to fisheries management.

Goal 5: To assist countries in raising public awareness of the need for fisheries management, fisheries regulations and conservation. 5a) Training in public awareness raising.5b) Provision of non-technical publicity material.5c) Socio-economic assessments of subsistence fisheries.

Goal 6: To assist countries to site, survey and monitor marine protected areas and to assist with an ecosystems approach to fisheries management6a) Siting and monitoring MPAs – UVC training.


6b) Socio-economic surveys on benefits of MPAs.6c) Establishing an ecosystems approach to fisheries.

Appendix II

Fiji Fisheries Sector Strategic Development Plan

Policies and Strategies: 2005 - 2007

Marine sector

Policies Indicators

To ensure Sustainable Development of Marine Capture Fisheries and Aquaculture Resources.

Annual Community awareness and advisory programme on resource assessment & management Five community-based initiated Management Regime [e.g. Marine Protected Areas] from 2005 Mangrove Management Plan formulated by 2006 in collaboration with Forestry, lands, Agriculture, NGO’s & Civil Society. Annual assessment of suitability of current TAC of 15,000 MT, and vessel limit of 110. 12 Qoliqoli resource profiles completed in 2005, including reports. Resource Management Plan for at least 10 Qoliqoli areas developed annually. Quarantine Facilities fully established and operational at Naduruloulou Research Station by 2006. Aquaculture Stock Quality Gene pool Improvement Programme in place starting 2006 Review of Fisheries Act in 2005, and to compliment the new Customary Fisheries Bill. Aquaculture Legislation & Policy guideline in place by 2006. Fisheries Management Bill (Offshore) enacted by 2007. Fisheries and Environmental Impact Assessment Zoning in collaboration with Lands & Forestry targeting an improved investment process. Guideline for Aquarium and Live Reef Food Fish Trade in place from 2005. Management Information System and Database on Inshore Fisheries established by 2006.

To promote production and export of value added fisheries products.

Increase of fisheries export by 10% per annum. Production of 300 tons of Dried Seaweed by 2007. Established 6 pearl farms by 2007, and production of 300 tons prawn by 2007. Production of 3000 tons of Tilapia, and 360 tons freshwater shrimps by 2007 Developed 4 commercial value added fish product profile per year Gained improved access to processed fish products in the EU markets by 2005. Increased cargo capacity to facilitate exports by 2007

To increase local participation in all areas of the industry.

10 indigenous companies for tuna long line fishing established by 2005 and assistance to set up own processing facility. Increase in number of 5 offshore fishing licenses and businesses reserved for indigenous Fijian issued to genuine Fijian boat owners and

businessmen annually until 50/50 is achieved. To establish National Fisheries Corporation as a vehicle to facilitate increased involvement of resource owners in the industry by 2006. 90% Local ownership for Pearling Industry by 2007, and thereafter. Satellite Freshwater Farming System in place starting in 2005.

To provide appropriate institutional and physical infrastructure to support and manage development in the sector.

Establish at least 2 Rural Fish Service Centers annually from 2004. Production Support Services through the Subsidy Assistance Program by 2006 and onwards. Commodity Council to be in operation by 2006 Lami Fisheries Jetty improvement to be completed by 2006 Fisheries Training Centre to be established by 2007. NRS to be established and in full operation as a National and Regional Freshwater Aquaculture Research centre by 2007. 3 tilapia hatcheries established and operation by 2007. One Freshwater shrimp hatchery established and operation by 2007. 6 tilapia market outlets established and operation by 2007.


Aquaculture Farm Management Services fully established by 2006. Annual inventory of all major Assets and timely maintenance and services.

To provide human resource institutional strengthening and appropriate capacity building.

Implementation of a HRD Plan by 2006. Phase I appraisal of the Fisheries Training Centre by 2005. Strengthen Technical Cooperation Programs on Bilateral and Multi-lateral framework. Formulate specialized training packages for each project commodity by 2005. Strengthen, monitor, control and enforce surveillance on Fisheries compliance regimes. To provide efficient library service for fisheries information dissemination.

To promote applied, developmental and market research.

Develop an appropriate plan for a National Mariculture Research Centre by 2006. Monitor artisanal and inshore fisheries status annually. Annual Reef Reseeding and enhancement programs for 10 Qoliqoli and Marine Protected Area. Annual compilation of 15 Qoliqoli resource profiles. Conduct Aquaculture and Mariculture development Research. Established Product Development and Utilization Research capacity by 2006. Market research on Shrimp, Seaweed, Pearl, Beche-de-mer, giant clam and value add products.

Collaborative field research with NGOs’ and International donor and academic institutions.

the problems of hunger and food insecurity have global...

Documents