Maritime Affairs Program (MAP) Handbill Spotlight

Several older international agreements—such as the 1979 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) and its Memorandum on Sharks, the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the 1995 United Nations Fish Stock Agreement (UNFSA), and the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries—emphasize concerns over and suggest actions to counter illegal fishing the related destruction of marine habitats, but do not mention IUU fishing by name, largely because the term had not yet been popularized. Many of these agreements are now recognized as being directly applicable to IUU fishing even if they have not yet included the term ‘IUU fishing’ in amended versions.

Recent Events

While IUU fishing—the illegal aspect in particular—has remained in the minds of governments and international organizations for decades, the Summer of 2024 has seen an uptick in the attention given to, reporting on, and counteractions against IUU fishing.

For example, one scientific investigation analyzing 230 global fisheries concludes that the assessment of some fish stocks have likely been “excessively positive” estimates. U.S. NOAA Fisheries announced on September 10 that, effective in 30 days, certain fishing vessels from 17 nations would be blocked from U.S. ports over IUU fishing concerns. Also in the U.S., a group of bipartisan House members wrote letters to eight federal agencies requesting information on their efforts to combat IUU fishing. Costa Rica just finished another year of its training program dedicated to IUU fishing, this year involving virtual reality technology.

Continued, renewed, and inaugural multinational cooperation has also taken place. In mid-September, diplomats said ‘The Quad’ members—Australia, Japan, the U.S., and India—plan to initiate joint patrols to monitor vessels specifically to counter illegal fishing in the Indo-Pacific. In August, a French navy jet assisted Senegal in surveillance for illegal fishing. Earlier in July, Ecuador’s navy held another round of counter-IUU exercises around the Galapagos Islands while ASEAN and the European Union held their fourth workshop focused on combating IUU fishing, which focused on implementing their new set of guidelines on information-sharing. The EU also just renewed their fisheries agreement with Guinea-Bissau, adding a new protocol on sustainability, and is evaluating the potential renewals of similar agreements with other African countries.

Most notably, Vietnam has been readying itself for a review by the European Commission so that it can have its ‘yellow card’ warning on its seafood, applied to Vietnam since 2017, removed. On August 28, following seven years of various domestic efforts to combat IUU fishing, Vietnam’s Prime Minister led a review meeting in which he gave clear orders to continue to strictly adhere to legal fishing protocols, to keep authorities accountable, and further strengthen vessel oversight procedures. After Vietnam submits an official anti-IUU report to the EU this month and the EC conducts its inspection in October, the EC will decide about the status of the ‘yellow card.’

Keep In Mind

IUU fishing is one of the rare issues that, while obviously contentious in how it should be dealt with, impacts every nation and is capable of being a solid point of commonality to cooperate upon. While it does impact impoverished coastal nations the most, it also impacts any nation involved in the global fishing supply chain.

A lack of reliable information is one barrier to finding solutions, but with technology expanding and tracking methods evolving, the true picture of IUU fishing—its pervasiveness, its ecological impact, its long-term repercussions—should be becoming clearer and, therefore, easier to discuss and counter. This information is also becoming more publicly available through sites such as the IUU Fishing Risk Index or the efforts of non-profit organizations like that of The Outlaw Ocean Project, which are being seen and responded to by government officials.

Since the IPOA-IUU and PSMA were adopted under the FAO, ‘addressing IUU fishing’ has become a reliable area of cooperation for nations at bilateral, multilateral and regional levels. But it cannot be denied that decades of global discussion of IUU fishing has not prevented it from remaining a—if not becoming a more—severe issue today. It can make observers question how much of a priority it really is to governments when compared to economic growth, and to what extent agreements at any level—especially non-binding agreements—are simply political tools.

IUU fishing is not an issue that is capable of simply disappearing overnight, either; it is too complex and embedded into the fishing supply chain. As one article puts it, “[u]ntil there is a traceable chain of custody from the time a fish leaves the water to the time it hits the shelf, customers cannot have 100% confidence in the origin country of their fish.” But real progress is possible, though it will require accountability measures and enforcers. China, as the largest fish producer since 1989, will need to be part of the conversation. Having leaders exhibit open acceptance of the numerous mutual benefits of battling IUU fishing would not go to waste, either. The United Nations’ declaration of June 5 as the International Day for the Fight Against IUU Fishing is a positive example of bringing the public into the conversation.

In spite of seemingly sluggish progress, attention on the issue has not waned and is unlikely to decline in the future. In fact, the world may be approaching a turning point. The sustained—if not increased—attention on IUU fishing, coupled with its natural positive tilt towards mutually beneficial cooperation and the world’s recent obsession with healing the world, are all factors that lean towards the world truly being at the cusp of achieving positive, lasting, impactful action in countering IUU fishing. Tangible progress, not elimination of the issue, is the rational goal to strive for at this stage. A few more loud pushes by powerful, influential, impassioned players—something more concrete than a speech or short social campaign—may soon be all that is needed for global solutions to come to fruition for the betterment of the world.