Combating IUU fishing and vessel monitoring system developments

Statement by the Norwegian Minister of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs Svein Ludvigsen on FAO Ministerial Meeting of Fisheries, Rome 12 March 2005

The issues associated with IUU-fishing relate to almost all facets of fisheries management.

There are gaps and shortcomings in the current ocean legal framework and in the institutional governance structures. This has contributed both to IUU-fishing and overfishing in general. We need to address these problems.

The underlying causes for overfishing and IUU-fishing are lack of political commitment to enforcement and implementation of existing regulations, together with political failure to manage domestic and regional overcapacity.

Mending and improving the legal framework and governance structure will not automatically tackle these fundamental problems.

Nevertheless there are several actions we should take. An efficient network of Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) is one of the most important institutional elements to achieve sustainable harvesting of high seas resources. Such a network is not fully in place yet, neither with respect to geographical scope, mandate or efficiency.

We should therefore make it our priority to strengthen these organizations. In many cases, mandates of RFMOs need to be revised, to fully reflect all the provisions of UN-Fish stock agreement. In particular it is important to ensure that the mandates allow for incorporation of biodiversity and ecosystem considerations into management decisions.

As called for in the recent UN General Assembly Fisheries Resolution, it is now important to ensure that regional fisheries management organizations take action to protect vulnerable areas from bottom trawling and other destructive fishing practices. In areas where no relevant RFMO or arrangement currently exists, the competence of existing regional fisheries management organizations could either be expanded to cover relevant fisheries activities, or new regional fisheries management organizations should be established. I am very pleased with the decision of the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) to close some vulnerable bottom habitats within their regulatory area for trawling. This is an excellent practical example on how RFMOs should tackle these issues.

I also look forward to the outcome of NEAFCs future-group that currently considers possible revisions to the convention. Norway will propose to establish a similar process for the Northwest Fisheries Organization (NAFO) at the next annual meeting.

Let me end this part of my intervention with a word of caution: If the RFMOs in the coming years should fail to provide a forum where states can agree on necessary management and conservation measures, they will gradually become marginalized. And that would indeed be a great loss to us all.

Let me now briefly touch on the issue of High Seas Marine Protected Areas. There are currently several ongoing processes that explore options for establishing a legal framework for High Seas Marine Protected Areas. This process can potentially turn out to affect fisheries management quite significantly. On a general basis, I would warn against establishing competing and overlapping legal regimes.

I would like to end my intervention here today by making a small observation. As regards marine resources, the attention of media and the international community has during the last decade focused on protection and conservation.

Time may have come to increase our focus on utilization – thus balancing the utilization-conservation equation. With the risk of stating the obvious; the utilization of the living marine resources and the marine ecosystem serves a purpose; to provide food and welfare. Let us not forget that.