On December 2, the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) published an independent review of the Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing regulation, which was adopted in the European Union (EU) in September 2008, and came into force more than one year later. Although it continues to be heavily debated —inside and outside the EU— an official review of the legislation has not yet been produced by the European Commission.
Funded by the Oak Foundation, the IEEP independent analysis on the implementation of the IUU regulation specifically addresses:
• The review of the implementation process in the first year
• The identification of implementation challenges faced by Member States and third-countries; and
• Recommendations for changes that may improve the system
The goal of the IUU Regulation (EC) 1005/2008 is to combat illegal fishing by ensuring that none of its illegally caught fish and fish products end up on the Community market. It is worth noting that the regulation is indeed very significant since the European Union is the largest market for fishery products in the world— at 40% of the global market— according to IEEP report. According to the European Commission in 2009, it is estimated that IUU fishing accounts for almost 20 percent of all marine catches in the world, with a value of approximately 10 billion Euros every year. This makes IUU fishing the second largest source of fishery products in the world. EU imports of IUU catches, according to ‘conservative’ estimates in the IEEP report, have been valued at 1.1 billion Euros in 2005 alone.
The regulation also focuses on control of all landings and transshipment of third-country fishing vessels in Community ports, and all trade of marine fishery products to and from the European Union.
The importance of the IUU regulation cannot be underestimated due to the large EU market share, “if the Regulation is successful, it could have a considerable influence on global IUU fishing”, IEEP reports.
The IEEP analysis of the IUU regulation identified the following gaps:
1) Deficiencies in the catch certification scheme— the paper certificates are vulnerable to fraud (massive amounts of products requiring certification and validation) and this cannot sufficiently prevent illegal imports into the EU market. The report mentions that the DNA sampling methodology for traceability, control and enforcement, could be explored for implementation in the EU, as it has proven effective elsewhere; in addition it is very important to identify which species ‘are vulnerable to fraudulent trading’ in order to understand the ‘lucrative illegal trade flows… and closing up the loopholes’.
2) Over-dependence on the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs), which are known to be ‘slow, cumbersome, and political’, when adding vessels to the Community Black List. IEEP recommends that the Commission manages the vessel lists itself, updating the list not annually as is currently the case, but on a more frequent basis.
3) Lack of action on publication of the Community Alert System and the Non-Cooperating Third Country List. It is recommended that a timeframe is provided for establishing the Non-Cooperating Third Country List, or progress on establishing such list should be communicated by the Commission. This would be helpful in identifying the effectiveness of trade restrictions or sanctions on non-cooperating third countries.
4) Lack of transparency on Commission’s actions and implementation of the regulation. The report suggests that the Commission should improve ‘its communication on the implementation process on all aspects’, including the publication of non-cooperating states, which at the moment is confidential.
The report findings were compiled using a comprehensive methodological process which included the completion of three parts. The first part included a desktop review of the available documents on IUU fishing and existing legislation. The second part included the identification of challenges experienced by Member States in the first year of implementation of the IUU regulation. This part was completed using two sets of questionnaires: first questionnaire designed for DG Mare; and, another one was distributed to 20 of the 27 Member States and included follow-up interviews. The third and last phase of the process included the analysis of EU fisheries imports to determine the effectiveness of the catch certification scheme, which if effective, it was hypothesized, should have changed EU import trends.
Despite the identification of the gaps listed above, a more comprehensive assessment on the implementation and effectiveness of the regulation is still required. So far, no official review date of the IUU Regulation has been set by the European Commission; however, according to Article 55 of the Regulation, the EC must undertake this task by 29 October 2013.
For detailed information contained in the report please check the links below: