Market accessAPECExport controlsNZ and the WTODohaImproving access to marketsStrengthening trade rulesTrade IssuesOECDTrade AgreementsTrade RelationshipsTrade and economic analysisTrade lawTrade scholarships
Find MFAT's information paper on a country or territory. (We don't have information papers on all countries.)
Although we have tried to use plain English content on the site, you may come across specialist terms and acronyms. Find out what they mean in our glossary of terms.
If you come across a term that isn't included in the Glossary please send us an email.
Global fisheries are a classic case of the “tragedy of the commons”. According to the Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) , 75% of the world’s commercial fisheries are over-exploited, fully exploited or significantly depleted; only 1% are recovering. Without effective international rules, the crisis will continue to deepen.
Improved international management of common marine resources, such as Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, is essential if global fisheries are to be restored. In addition to poor management, there is an undeniable link between the parlous state of global fisheries and subsidies.
By reducing the marginal costs faced in the fishing industry and increasing earnings, subsidies provide a perverse incentive for fishermen to spend more time at sea, catching more fish, even though many of their target fisheries are on the point of collapse. What is more, fisheries subsidies play a significant role in the fishing industries of some nations: 20% of the global fishing industry’s revenue is derived from public aid, with this support heavily concentrated in a small group of WTO Members.
In 2001, WTO Ministers mandated negotiations to “clarify and improve WTO disciplines on fisheries subsidies” in the Doha Round [external link].
A wide range of countries have participated actively in these negotiations. Together with New Zealand, Argentina, Australia, Chile, Iceland, Peru, The Philippines, the United States of America and other countries have argued for a broad prohibition on all fisheries subsidies, with only justified exceptions. Brazil has largely shared this approach. Chinese Taipei, the European Union, Japan and South Korea all agree that there needs to be additional disciplines on fisheries subsidies, but are far less ambitious.
At the December 2005 WTO Ministerial in Hong Kong [external link], Ministers were able to agree that there should be strengthened “disciplines on subsidies in the fisheries sector, including through the prohibitionof certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and over-fishing”.
Global fishing capacity is 250% what it should be were we to exploit the fisheries resource in a sustainable manner, so it is no surprise that most WTO Members agree that there needs to be a prohibition on further subsidies to the construction and modernisation of fishing vessels.
For many years, New Zealand has been a leading proponent of stricter disciplines on harmful fishery subsidies, particularly for those that promote overcapacity in the industry and lead to an increase in fishing effort. More contentious is New Zealand’s argument that most other subsidies that benefit the fishing industry – and therefore encourage over-fishing – should also be banned. Some other Members dispute the need to ban any subsidies to the fishing industry’s variable and operational costs.
After having debated these core issues since 2001, the Membership is now ready to enter the final stage of negotiations. This final stage will be on the basis of draft negotiating text prepared by the Chair of the Rules Negotiating Group.
