Convention Biological Diversity

Transcription

1 AFRICAN UNION INTERAFRICAN BUREAU FOR ANIMAL RESOURCES IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES INSTRUMENTS IN AFRICA - A CASE STUDY FOR CENTRAL AFRICA Convention Biological Diversity

2 Prepared by: Benedict P. Satia Edited by: Mr. Obinna Anozie, Dr. Mohamed Seisay and Dr. Simplice Nouala Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the African Union Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources. Citation: AU-IBAR IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES INSTRUMENTS IN AFRICA - A CASE STUDY FOR CENTRAL AFRICA. AU-IBAR Reports All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Published by AU-IBAR, Nairobi, Kenya Copyright: 2016 African Union Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AUIBAR) ISBN Requests for such permission should be addressed to: The Director African Union Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR) Kenindia Business Park Museum Hill, Westlands Road P.O. Box , Nairobi, KENYA Or by to: ibar.office@au-ibar.org

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ABSTRACT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v vi viii ix 1. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the paper Organization of the Paper Context and rationale Domestic Landscape, Structure and Actors Methodology 3 2. GENERALITIES ON KEY INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT Evolution of International Instruments Classification of key instruments for fisheries and aquaculture development Main Concepts in Instruments Relevant to Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy in Central African Region 7 3. ASSESSMENT OF DOMESTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS The Process Transforming international commitments into enabling national fisheries legal frameworks Relationship between regulators and stakeholders and the response of the primary target groups to regulations Consequence of target groups response for the physical problems at hand CHALLENGES, CONSTRAINTS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Institutional arrangements Legal Considerations Financial Needs Technical Requirements Human resource development The Role of COREP FRAMEWORK OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANS OF ACTION TO ADOPT KEY INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS Goal and Objectives Elements of the Framework Responsibilities and Timing Expected Outcomes 30 iii

4 6. CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES 32 ANNEXES 34 iv

5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Director of AU-IBAR wishes to acknowledge the assistance and contributions from various individuals and organizations particularly from Central Africa, including respective Regional Fisheries Organizations and Regional Economic Communities, other stakeholders and all those who facilitated the work of this consultancy. We also extend our thanks to all those who participated in related forums and interviews. Special thanks go to the consultant who prepared the document and the team at IBAR for the editorial work. This work was done under the project Strengthening Institutional Capacity to enhance governance of the fisheries sector in Africa Project number, DCI-FOOD 2013/ , funded by the EU to whom we are grateful for the financial support. v

6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of Countries ATLAFCO Ministerial Conference on Fisheries Cooperation Among African States Bordering the Atlantic Ocean AU African Union AUC African Union Commission AU-IBAR African Union-InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources AU-MS African Union Member States CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CIFAA Committee for Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture of Africa CEBEVIRHA Economic Commission on Cattle, Meat and Fish Resources of CEMAC CECAF Fishery Committee of the East Central Atlantic CEMAC Monetary and Economic Community of Central Africa CICOS International Commission for the Congo-Oubangui-Sangha Basin COREP Regional Commission for Fisheries of the Gulf of Guinea CITES Convention for the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora COFI FAO Committee on Fisheries CSO Civil Society Organization EAA Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture EAF Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries EC European Commission EU European Union EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ECCAS Economic Community of Central African States EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations ICCAT International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas ICSF International Collectivity in Support of Fishworkers IMO International Maritime Organization IPOA International Plans of Action IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated LCBC Lake Chad Basin Commission MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MDG Millennium Development Goals MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield MPA Marine Protected Area NACA Network of Aquaculture Centres of Asia-Pacific NEPAD New Partnership for Africa s Development NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPOA National Plan of Action PSMA Port State Measures Agreement PFRS Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa REC Regional Economic Community RFB Regional Fishery Body RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organization vi

7 RPOA Regional Plan of Action UNCED United Nations Conference on the Environment and development UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea UN-DESA United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs UNDOALOS United Nations Department of Oceans and Law of the Sea UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFSA United Nations Agreement for the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks VMS Vessel Monitoring System WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development WTO World Trade Organization WWF World Wildlife Fund vii

8 ABSTRACT One of the stated purposes of the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (PFRS) is to facilitate ratification and /or adoption of appropriate provisions in international fisheries management instruments. The intention is to assist AU Member States, RECs and RFBs to develop realistic fisheries and aquaculture policies by suggesting standards and best practices to the sector s benefits to AU member states, in terms of food security, employment and income. International fisheries-specific and non-fisheries-specific instruments are vital to fisheries management and aquaculture development because they reflect state commitment to recognized conservation and management doctrines, standards, rights and best practices and certificated procedures. However, international instruments can affect national policies only if states are willing and capable of incorporating international obligations into their national legislations (enactment), ensuring their application (or execution) and enforcement in areas which fall completely under national jurisdiction. This paper assesses the domestic implementation of international instruments that impact fisheries management and aquaculture development by nine AU-MS in Central African Region; analysis of the challenges and constraints the countries face in adopting and domesticating these instruments and provides suggestions to improve the situation. The rate of ratification of non-fisheries- specific instruments is very high while the rate for fisheriesspecific instruments is very low. This low rate of implementation is due to a series of factors ranging from the extent of public support for fisheries, the political strength of the fisheries administrations, and the policy characteristics of the instruments, to the absence of a champion or leader to pilot the process and insufficient participation either by the quality of staff or inconsistency in participation during the negotiation process of the instruments and sometimes the lack of awareness of the existence of the some instruments. The degree to which countries have executed international instruments was gauged using the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and the IPOA-IUU fishing and IPOA-CAPACITY. The Code of Conduct is reflected in the day-to-day activities of the countries and in the majority of countries this instrument has been incorporated in the national fisheries legal framework. A host of actions fully in line with the Code s spirit and principles are being implemented across the region. Some important tools and mechanisms have been developed mostly at regional level with external assistance and under the auspices of COREP to combat IUU fishing and manage fishing capacity. These tools and mechanisms are yet to be put into effective use. Constraints and challenges the countries face in executing or adopting international instruments hinge on the quality of fisheries governance as this is undermined by institutional arrangements, legal considerations, financial need, and technical requirements as well as human resources development. The paper suggests remedies to correct these constraints and the issues related to both enactment and execution. In response to the directive of the PFRS, that any reforms must also assist Member States to meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments a framework of five interrelated components to create a clear national approach that will facilitate the adoption of international instruments relevant to fisheries and aquaculture by AU-MS in the Central African Region is suggested. Background information on some key international instruments that could serve to refresh the memories of staff as they move forward with the process is also provided in an annex to the paper. viii

9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following the adoption in 1982 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, many multifaceted international instruments that rely heavily on science and technology and relate specifically to fisheries or to aspects of the conservation and management of aquatic living resources and the environment, veterinary health and trade have been adopted by the international community. The rationale for adopting these instruments are to arrest the growing depletion of the world s fisheries stocks, the degradation of their habitats and orient national policies towards the promotion of more sustainable behaviours by national actors resulting in the long-term sustainable development of fisheries and the development of environmentally friendly aquaculture. Despite the existence of these instruments major challenges that the instruments by conventional wisdom were intended to address continue to impede the sustainable use of living aquatic resources globally as well as in the Central African Region. One of the expected outcomes of the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (PFRS) endorsed by the Summit of African Heads of State and Government in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea, June 2014 is that Member States are assisted to meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments. However, international instruments can affect national policies only if states are willing and capable of incorporating international obligations into their national fisheries laws (enactment), ensuring their application (or execution) and enforcement in areas, such as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which fall completely under national jurisdiction. The reasons why such incorporation does not take place are only partially understood. Using a five tier modified version of the Interactive Model of Policy Implementation, this paper the output of a desk study, assesses the domestic implementation of international instruments that impact fisheries management and aquaculture development by nine AU-MS (Angola, Cameroon, Central Africa Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe); analyzes the challenges and constraints the Countries face in domesticating these instruments and provides suggestions to improve the situation. The rate of ratification of international instruments in general by states in the region is relatively high. Almost all the States have ratified the key framework conventions such as UNCLOS and UNFCCC and also major environmental and trade related conventions for example CBD, RAMSAR, CITES, SPS Agreement, MARPOL, etc. for which the leadership role is outside the ministry or department of fisheries. However, ratification of the fisheries- specific instruments is very low. Only Angola has ratified the Compliance Agreement and is Signatory to the Agreement on Port State Measures; while Gabon is Signatory to the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and has ratified the Agreement on Port State Measures. The reasons for the low rate of ratification of fisheries- specific instruments varies between countries but is related to several factors: the extent of public support for fisheries; the preferences and priorities of politicians; the political strength of the department of fisheries and related agencies and their access to the national policy making process. Domestic implementation is also hindered by the policy characteristics of instruments, that is, the problem addressed could be of difficult solution; the type of policy could generate high cost; and/or its design (objectives, implementation framework) may be vague and inadequate. Other constraints are the absence of a champion or leader to pilot the process and insufficient participation either by the quality of staff or inconsistency in participation during the negotiation process for the instruments. ix

10 Several countries have taken steps through legislation, regulations, administrative decisions or policy documents to accommodate the key concepts of sustainable and responsible fisheries and ecosystem approach to fisheries/aquaculture, as well as in general the provisions of the voluntary instrument - the Code of Conduct for Responsible fisheries -, in the day- to- day modus operandi. However, the requirements of the binding instruments are yet to be incorporated in their legislations. The legislations and regulations of the countries are not consistent and there are also weaknesses in several key areas. To improve on the situation it is suggested that: States should endevour to be actively involved in the negotiation process for the formulation of international instruments and be represented at such negotiations by competent staffs who are themselves subject matter specialists, if possible. All coastal States should be encouraged to ratify and implement the provisions of the Compliance Agreement and the PSMA which are important tools to combat IUU fishing. States that are Contracting Parties to ICCAT should endevour to domesticate the UNFSA, Compliance Agreement and PSMA as this will enable them fulfill their technical obligations to the RFMO Countries should take steps to ratify and eventually reflect the provisions of fisheries-specific international instruments in their national legislation and regulations to give them legitimacy; Countries should also strive to harmonize their legislations in order to facilitate the application of these international instruments in such areas as the combat of IUU fishing and to promote the longterm sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture in the region. Countries should designate dedicated National Focal Points at the Fisheries Department to pursue and coordinate activities related to specific instruments of significant importance. Reviewing, updating and bringing the National Fisheries Laws and Acts in line with international fisheries instruments and other international commitments by AU-MS and also encompassing all aspects of fisheries management, including licensing and enforcement; management principles underpinning fisheries management at national levels; Capacity development of relevant staff and incorporation of this aspect in the curriculums of the Fisheries Department of Universities, Polytechnics and Schools of Fisheries. Provision of incentives and benefits The environmental and health/veterinary laws which all the countries have incorporated in their legal framework provide additional tools allowing countries to address a broad range of issues and challenges from biodiversity and conservation, to habitat protection, product quality and trade, including the conduct of environmental impact assessment (EIA) depending on the scale of the aquaculture installation. The degree to which countries have executed the provisions of international instruments was gauged using the Code of Conduct and the IPOA-IUU fishing and IPOA-CAPACITY. The Code of Conduct is reflected in the day-to-day activities of the countries and in the majority of countries this instrument has been incorporated in the national fisheries legal framework. A host of actions fully in line with the Code s spirit and principles have been implemented across the region. Progress made over the past decade in many cases with external assistance and under the auspices of COREP at the regional level is significant. Such progress for the most part has been limited to the elaboration of appropriate fisheries governance tools and mechanisms; which are yet to be effectively used. With regards to IUU fishing, Cameroon has formulated a national plan of action that is yet to be formally adopted and implemented. An RPOA-IUU has been developed under the auspices of COREP. Countries are taking a variety of actions such as the revision of the fisheries legal framework to reflect IUU fishing, x

11 creating awareness of the phenomenon among relevant stakeholders, placing observers on board fishing vessels, updating of vessel registration and databases, development of MCS and VMS in some countries; strengthened cooperation between the Ministries of Fisheries and Ministry of Defense, the development of a Regional Strategic Plan of Action on Monitoring, Control and surveillance Systems for waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of COREP to combat IUU fishing. No country has formulated an NPOA-CAPACITY. However under the auspices of COREP an RPOA- CAPACITY has been developed and is yet to be adopted by the Conference of Ministers of COREP. In the absence of a bona fide plan of action for the management of fishing capacity, countries are managing fishing capacity through the limitation of licenses in almost all the countries, the deliverance of fishing permits for artisanal fisheries in a couple of countries and by requiring those wishing to construct, import or charter fishing vessels to be used in Congo to obtain prior authorization from the competent authority before doing so. Angola and Congo are reported to have put in place quota systems. There is generally good working relationship between the regulators and the other stakeholders. However, the primary target groups complain of high degree of bureaucracy to obtain relevant permits, licenses, authorizations, and other services from the administration and this limits their productivity; while the administrations allude to the noncompliance of regulations by the target groups. Overlapping mandates or bureaucratic fragmentation sometimes leads to conflicts between line ministries, duplication of efforts, and dissipation of already limited resources in several countries. These conflicts tend to perpetuate themselves and in turn impede updating of policy contents and the chances of goals being achieved. Civil society organizations exist in all the countries in the general area of rural development and they tend to have good working relations with the fisheries administrations. However their contribution to fisheries and aquaculture sector is yet very limited. The key constraints and challenges reported by countries were generally consistent. The common thread in these constraints is the quality of fisheries governance. The challenges and constraints are briefly presented in the report under: institutional arrangements, legal considerations, financial need, technical requirements and human resource development; and for each theme remedies are suggested. In response to the directive of the PFRS, that any reforms must also assist Member States to meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments a framework of five interrelated components to create a clear national approach that will facilitate the domestication of international instruments relevant to fisheries and aquaculture by AU-MS in the Central African Region to optimize the benefits offered by the region s living aquatic resources and to contribute to the sustainable development and management of these resources for food, livelihoods and wealth is suggested. The components consist of a series of actions that are designed to maximize identified opportunities and to minimize constraints. The components span from encouraging appropriate public and political support; developing awareness, capacity building, and effective implementation to participatory monitoring and auditing systems, for domestication of instruments. Background information on some key international instruments that could serve to refresh the memories of staff as they move forward with the process is also provided in an annex to the paper. The Regional Commission of Fisheries of the Gulf of Guinea (COREP) has played and is playing a cardinal role sourcing finances and developing partnerships with appropriate agencies such as FAO, AU-IBAR, ACP II Fish, NEPAD Agency, etc. to promote the implementation of the provisions of international instruments xi

12 in its Member States. From all indications, COREP is best placed to continue to accompany the countries in their quest to promote the long-term sustainable development of their fisheries and the achievement of environmental friendly aquaculture development. However as a purely advisory body there are limitations to what COREP can do especially at national levels. xii

13 1. 1INTRODUCTION 1.1. Purpose of the paper This paper assesses the domestic implementation of international instruments that impact fisheries management and aquaculture development by African Union Member States (AU-MS) in the Central African Region; analyzes the challenges and constraints the Countries face in adopting these instruments and provides suggestions to improve the situation Organization of the Paper The Paper comprises six Sections. Section 1 outlines the Objective of the study, the Context and rationale, Domestic landscape, and Methodology. Section 2 treats the Generalities of the key international instruments: their evolution, classification and main concepts in the instruments relevant to fisheries management and aquaculture development in the Central African Region. Section 3 assesses the domestication of the instruments using a modified Interactive Model of Policy Implementation by Grindle and Thomas (1992). Section 4 summarizes the main challenges and constraints the countries face in domesticating international instruments and provides suggestions to improve the situation. Section 5 proposes a-five interrelated components Framework those Countries could use to develop National/Regional Plans of Action to facilitate the adoption of international instruments. Section 6 provides some thoughts as conclusions. An annex to the Paper provides background information on eighteen of the instruments. In addition to a glossary, for each instrument, there is a short description and presentation of the objectives, relevance and key provisions. An extract of the terms of reference is provided as Annex Context and rationale One of the stated purpose purposes of the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa is facilitate ratification and /or adoption of appropriate provisions in international fisheries management instruments. The intention is to assist AU Member States, RECs and RFBs to develop realistic fisheries and aquaculture policies by suggesting standards and best practices to the sector s benefits to AU member states, in terms of food security, employment and income. Following the adoption in 1982 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, many major international instruments and initiatives relating specifically to fisheries or to aspects of the conservation and management of aquatic living resources and the environment have been adopted by the international community. The rationale for adopting these instruments are to arrest the growing depletion of the world s fisheries stocks, the degradation of their habitats and orient national policies towards the promotion of more sustainable behaviours by national actors resulting in the long-term sustainable development of fisheries and the development of environmentally friendly aquaculture. Despite the existence of these instruments major challenges that the instruments by conventional wisdom were intended to address continue to impede the sustainable use of living aquatic resources and aquaculture development globally as well as in the Central African Region. It is not surprising therefore, that at its twenty-sixth session in March 2005; the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) 1 recommended that efforts should now focus on implementing these instruments rather than on concluding new instruments. 2 The Summit of African Heads of State and Government in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea, June 2014, endorsed 1 COFI is presently the only global inter-governmental forum where major international fisheries and aquaculture problems and issues are examined and recommendations addressed to governments, regional fishery bodies, non-governmental organizations, fishworkers, FAO and international community, periodically on a world-wide basis. COFI is also used as a forum in which global agreements and non-binding instruments are negotiated. 2 FAO 2005: Report of the Twenty-sixth Session of COFI, FAO Fisheries Report No

14 the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (PFRS) as a blue print to facilitate transformation of Africa s fisheries and aquaculture for food, livelihoods and wealth. Most fisheriesspecific and non-fisheries-specific international instruments (on the environment, health/ veterinary and trade) provide frameworks that can facilitate the attainment of the objectives of the PFRS. One of the expected outcomes of the PFRS is that Member States are helped to meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments. 3 However, international instruments can affect national policies only if states are willing and capable of incorporating international obligations into their national legislations (enactment), ensuring their application (or execution) and enforcement in areas, such as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which fall completely under national jurisdiction. The reasons why such incorporation does not take place are only partially understood (Freestone et al. 2006), with little research or assessments focusing on how developing countries particularly in Africa comply with international instruments for fisheries management and aquaculture development Domestic Landscape, Structure and Actors The Countries covered in this assessment are Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe. The total population of these countries was estimated at 152 million in 2015 (UN-DESA 2015). The contribution of fisheries to gross domestic product (GDP) is less than 2.75 percent except in Sao Tome and Principe where it has been between 5 and 6 percent since the year 2000 (Catazano, 2012). The economies of most of these countries have significant similarities. They have large forest resources, mining, agriculture or fisheries, but also a privileged exploitation of oil for several of them. These economies are also characterized by their low diversification, heavy dependence on the outside and usually a high debt ratio. In the fisheries sector, the marine environment is not as rich in fishery biomass as the adjacent West and Southern regions of the African Atlantic coast and the resources available are unevenly distributed between countries (Satia, 2015). Available information indicates that over 70 percent of the stocks that are monitored, particularly the demersal finfish are fully or overexploited (FAO 2014). The shrimp fishery particularly in Cameroon and Gabon which is also shared with Nigeria is recovering after a decade of decline 4. There are appreciable areas of lakes, reservoirs, wetlands/floodplains and significant river systems that are important for inland capture fisheries in all the countries. The region also has great potentials for aquaculture development which represent immense opportunities for socio-economic development in terms of livelihoods, income and employment. The resources are yet to be exploited; hence across the region, aquaculture for the most part is still a marginal activity, and sometimes in an embryonic state (Mba-Asseko et al., 2012). The inland water fisheries have been negatively affected by climate change and agriculture development policies. For example the area of Lake Chad, the fourth largest fresh water body in the continent, has been reduced by over 50 percent since 1963 and fish production also dropped from tonnes in to between and tonnes presently (De Graff et al. 2014, Mamane NA-ANDI pers. Com.). Fish consumption is variable in the region with a low per capita annual consumption of about 6 kg in the Democratic Republic of Congo to a high of 37 kg in Gabon. The region is a net importer of fish and fishery products as several countries import fish commodities to meet their deficits in fish supply (Mba-Asseko et al., 2012). 3 AUC-NEPAD (2014). The Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa, Section Anon 2012 Plan d Aménagement Pêcherie Crevettière Industrielle du Cameroun, Plan d Aménagement Pêcherie Crevettière Industrielle au Gabon; developed under the FAO-NANSEN Programme 2

15 Fisheries management is vested in the central ministry responsible for fisheries and/or aquaculture in the respective countries. There is the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), and also a monetary arrangement, the Monetary and Economic Community of Central Africa (CEMAC). The principal regional fishery body is the Regional Fisheries Commission for the Gulf of Guinea (COREP) to which 7 of the nine countries are either Members (5) or Observers (2). In addition, there are eight other regional fishery bodies and arrangements operating in the region to which variable numbers of countries are members (See Table 3). Besides the fisheries and Aquaculture Department, key or relevant stakeholders in the different countries are a number of line ministries in particular Planning and Economy, Finance, Defense, Veterinary, Transport (Merchant Marine); fishers (both industrial and small-scale), fish farmers, processors, fish traders, the private sector and civil society organizations. All the countries have elaborated Strategy Documents to modernize their economies, stimulate development and become emerging economies in the next twenty to twenty-five years. These Strategy papers highlight the importance of fisheries and aquaculture and the commitment of governments to enhance the role of fish in nutrition and food security, poverty alleviation and wealth generation. In 2007 the Heads of State of ECCAS took the important decision of recognizing COREP as a specialized technical institution of this Regional Economic Community (REC) with clearly defined financial resources to ensure the proper functioning of COREP. This innovative approach has the potential to revamp fisheries and aquaculture development in the region Methodology This was a desk study. The assessment and analysis is based on extensive literature search, particularly reports of COREP, FAO, International Legal Instruments relevant to Fisheries and Fishing Communities: A Handbook (ICSF 2015) and other sources; self-assessment by the competent fisheries and aquaculture officials of the respective countries using questionnaires and verification of provided information through triangulation by the Consultant. This was done using multiple sources (policy documents, meeting reports, and other available literature), the holding of focus group discussions and interviewing officers and stakeholders from the countries on the sidelines of the Think Tank Meeting on Governance of Small- Scale Fisheries and its Contributions to the Accelerated Agricultural Transformation Goals of Africa held in Dakar, Senegal, January Treaties, conventions and agreements were identified through searches of internet sites specializing in fisheries/ocean policy and law, environmental law and organizations which activities impact on fisheries and aquaculture sector. In particular the following websites were searched: (FAOLEX, FISHLEX) of the FAO Legal and Ethics Department, FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture FARISIS, the United Nations Department on Oceans and Law of the Sea (UNDOALOS), United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), World Trade Organization (WTO), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Maritime Organization (IMO) as well as those of the concerned countries. The analysis of the domestic implementation of international instruments for fisheries management and aquaculture development in the countries was done using a modified version of the Interactive Model of policy implementation by Grindle and Thomas (1992). 3

16 2. GENERALITIES ON KEY INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT 2.1. Evolution of International Instruments The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) adopted in 1982 and which came into force in 1994 is widely acknowledged as the mother law or magna carta for the sea. The Convention among other things codified many principles and rules relating to the sea; and also specifies maritime zones which States could claim as well as the powers that coastal States enjoy and the rights of other States in each maritime zone. In the same vein, the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known as the Earth Summit which focused attention on people and their environment is acknowledged as a landmark meeting because the event and resulting outcomes for example the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and agreement on Agenda 21, etc. served to re-orientate international thinking about how the environment and natural resources, including fisheries, should be used. For fisheries and aquaculture development one of the major outcomes of UNCED was the adoption of Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 which provides for oceans, coasts and fisheries. Since the adoption of UNCLOS and the conclusion of UNCED, on the basis of increased scientific knowledge on marine ecosystems, the rate of development (negotiation and adoption) of global instruments impacting on fisheries and aquaculture has escalated considerably and continues to do so. The key international and regional instruments relevant to fisheries management and aquaculture development in the Central African Region are presented in Table 1. Annex 2 contains background reference document which describes and highlights the objectives, relevance and major provisions of 18 of the key instruments. The Specific Case of Aquaculture: Aquaculture development is a mostly national affair, and as such a sovereign matter; no binding global international agreements or conventions ruling aquaculture exist. Non-theless, several provisions in environmental instruments such as the Convention on Wetlands of Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (RAMSAR Convention), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Abidjan Convention and on the Framework Convention on Climate change are relevant to the sector. More specifically, the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries 5 and other similar voluntary Codes dealing with aquaculture in particular represent the mainstream international avenues to help regulate the sector on the larger scale, and to encourage responsible practices. Relevant policy instruments that have been developed since the year 2000 include, the Nairobi Declaration on the conservation of aquatic biodiversity and use of genetically improved and alien species for aquaculture in Africa (Anon, 2002), the Bangkok Declaration and Strategy (NACA/FAO, 2000) and the International Principles for Responsible Shrimp Farming (FAO/NACA/UNEP/WB/WWF, 2006). These instruments represent efforts to go beyond the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and develop more detailed principles, guidelines and best practices for a wide-ranging set of issues relevant to aquaculture policy and law making, and sustainable industry development. 5 In view of the greater importance of capture fisheries at the time of its elaboration greater emphasis was given to capture fisheries. However, an equal importance is being placed on aquaculture as evident by the number of instruments for example guidelines, strategies, etc. prepared by FAO on all aspects of fisheries and aquaculture in the framework of the Code. 4

17 Table 1: List of key International and Regional Instruments Relevant to Fisheries Management and Aquaculture Development in the Central African Region United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 2. Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (1993 FAO Compliance Agreement) 3. Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (The1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement UNFSA-) 4. Agreement on Port State Measures to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (2009 Port States Measures Agreement) European Union Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated regulations (EU-IUU Regulations) 6. Convention on Biological Diversity (1992 CBD) 7. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES, 1973 Washington Convention) 8. Convention on Wetlands of Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (1971 RAMSAR Convention) 9. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 10. The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) 11. Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade 12. Convention for Cooperation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region (the Abidjan Convention) 13. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto Non-binding/Voluntary or Soft Instruments 1. FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries 2. The 2005 Abuja Declaration on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (Abuja Declaration) Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (PFRSFAA) 4. International Plan of Action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing (IPOA-IUU) 5. International Plan of Action on the Management of Fishing Capacity 6. Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication 7. The FAO International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-sea fisheries in the High Seas 8. Code of Safety for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels, 1968 Regional Instruments 1. Regional Plan of Action of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea for the management of fishing capacity 2. Regional Plan of Action of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing 3. Regional Strategic plan of action on Monitoring, Control and Surveillance systems for waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea 4. Regional Economic Observatory on fisheries for Member States of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea 5. Convention relative to the determination of minimum terms and conditions of access, the exploitation and commerce of fisheries resources in waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea [Expected to be a binding instrument] 5

18 Regional fishery bodies and Arrangements 1. Acts of the Regional Commission of Fisheries of Gulf of Guinea (COREP) 2. Economic Commission on Cattle, Meat and Fishery Resources (CEBEVIRHA) 3. International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) 4. Convention on Ministerial Conference on Fisheries Cooperation among African States Bordering the Atlantic Ocean (ATLAFCO) 5. Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) 6. Committee for Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture for Africa (CIFAA) 7. Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC) 8. International Commission for Congo-Oubangui-Sangha (CICOS) 9. Inter-Governmental Organization for Marketing, Information and Cooperation Services for Fishery Products in Africa (INFOPECHE) 2.2. Classification of key instruments for fisheries and aquaculture development The instruments listed in table 1 are of two major types: Binding and non-binding or voluntary. A binding instrument is one that everyone (state or entity) who has signed must follow or be punished. Non-binding agreements show that governments or entities are trying to do something but they accept that they may not always be able to do so because of economic or other reason. Quite often non-binding instruments are drafted in the conditional tense using the term should. In this way States and other entities are encouraged to undertake certain actions and activities rather than being obligated to do so. A second observation is that the instruments on the list cover a very broad range of fishery issues some of which are relatively novel, at least in their application. The most important of these issues include governance, biological concerns, conservation, improved transparency and stakeholder participation or consultation in fisheries management, the application of the precautionary approach, the adoption of ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) and/or to aquaculture (EAA) and fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS). The third observation is that some of the instruments are non-fisheries-specific instruments; they deal with the environment, veterinary health, trade, etc. Such instruments provide additional tools, which address a broad range of issues and challenges relating to the conservation and management of fisheries resources and the marine environment, as well as the handling and processing of fish and fishery products in general, aspects of product quality, hygiene, safety, inspections, certification etc. for local consumption and export, etc. Individually the instruments listed in table 1 do not meet the major challenges facing fisheries management and aquaculture development today. However, collectively they provide a very comprehensive and elaborate framework for addressing the major challenges facing the sustainable use of marine 6 living resources and the development of environmentally friendly aquaculture. The instruments fall into 5 classes as shown in table 2. 6 Marine is used in this paper in a generic sense to include marine, brackish and fresh water ecosystems. 6

19 Table 2: Classification of key International Instruments for fisheries management and aquaculture development relevant to the Central African Region Type of Instrument Purpose Examples UNCLOS Resolved a number of critical issues of ocean governance including providing a jurisdictional framework for the governance of oceans space and resources within, and environmental space Globally binding fisheries specific instruments International fisheries specific Voluntary instruments Global and regional non-fisheriesspecific instruments (Environmental, Health/Veterinary, Trade) Regional institutional frameworks Regional fisheries management organizations, regional fishery bodies and arrangements To fill the gaps in the UNCLOS and address the conservation and management of fish stocks and better define responsibilities of key players Reiterate principles and standards for responsible fisheries and encourage their application Provide useful tools and principles towards sustainable fisheries management and the of environmentally friendly aquaculture development Adoption, adaptation and domestication of international instruments to regional and national conditions ICCAT Strengthened by the adoption of UN Fish Stocks Agreement and include in the consideration of conservation and management measures principles of sustainability FAO Compliance Agreement UN Fish Stocks Agreement Port States Measures Agreement EU Regulations on IUU fishing 1. FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries 2. (IPOA-IUU) 3. (IPOA-CAPACITY 4. Voluntary Guidelines for Small- Scale Fisheries 5. Code of Conduct for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels 1. RAMSAR Convention 2. CITES 3. Convention on Biological Diversity 4. SPS Agreement 5. Framework Convention on Climate Change 6. Abidjan Convention 7. MARPOL (See Table 1) See Table 1. Only ICCAT is a regional fisheries management organization. The rest are regional fishery bodies or arrangements The others fulfill advisory and consultative roles, promote cooperation, capacity building among its members Main Concepts in Instruments Relevant to Fisheries and Aquaculture Policy in Central African Region The instruments listed in Table 1 have played and can continue to play influential roles in the formulation of fisheries and aquaculture development policy, fisheries management and aquaculture development globally and to an extent in the region. In addition to laying emphasis on the promotion of good governance principles in the management of natural resources, the overarching concepts that are highlighted in the instruments and relevant to the region s fisheries and aquaculture policy are: 7

20 1. Sustainable Development/Sustainable Fisheries 2. Responsible Fisheries 3. Ecosystem approach to fisheries/aquaculture These three concepts are related, are mutually reinforcing, convey the same idea and are aimed at the same goal, namely sustainability. Underlying the achievement of sustainable development, long-term sustainability and responsible fisheries is the assumption that governments are prepared to politically support actions to achieve these objectives. In some cases, this requires governments to implement unpopular decisions, including closing fisheries or reducing the fishing effort (i.e., reducing the numbers of fishers and vessels operating in a fishery or duration of fishing). In extreme cases, it might mean imposing moratoria on fishing for particular stocks that are threatened. Sustainable Development Sustainable fisheries conventionally mean fishing is conducted over the long-term at an acceptable level of biological and economic productivity without leading to ecological changes or foreclose options for future generations. This is derived from the concept of sustainability. The concept of sustainability was first developed in the Stockholm Declaration of and has since figured in several declarations. In 1987, the Brundlandt Commission defined sustainable development broadly as development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the needs of the future. The FAO Conference for the purpose of natural resource development and management in 1989 defined sustainable development as: The management and conservation of the natural resource base and the orientation of technological and institutional change in such a manner as to ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for the present and future generations. Such development (in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors) conserves land, water, plant and animal genetic resources; is environmentally non-degrading, technically appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable 8 An important outcome of UNCED was the agreement that the concept of long-term sustainability should be the underpinning premise for the use of renewable resources. Hence in 1992 UNCED set the stage for action in the 1990s and beyond by adopting Agenda 21: A Programme of Action for Sustainable Development. In 2005 the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) called for sustainable marine resource assessment and management by 2010, and restoration of fish stocks to MSY levels by A notable addition at the international level in terms of sustainability are the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) where sustainable development is promoted to achieve, among other things, a reduction in poverty; an issue that is of paramount importance to improve the livelihoods of fisheries communities in the region. Responsible fisheries The 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries 9 formally introduced the notion of responsible fisheries. Responsible fisheries implies that all those engaged in the fisheries sector, regardless of their different roles, should act in a way that does not prejudice access to resources by current or future generations. In this way, governments, fishers, processors, consumers and other stakeholders are morally 7 Stockholm represented a first taking stock of the global human impact on the environment, an attempt at forging a basic common outlook on how to address the challenges of preserving and enhancing human environment. As a result, the Stockholm Declaration espouses mostly broad environmental policy goals and objectives rather than detailed normative positions. However, following Stockholm, global awareness of environmental issues increased dramatically, as did international environmental law-making proper. At the same time the focus of international environmental activism progressively expanded beyond transboundary and global common issues to media-specific and cross-section regulation and the synthesizing of economic and development considerations in environmental decision-making. 8 FAO Sustainable Development and natural resources management: Conference, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. C 89/2 Suppl. 2. August 1989, 54p. 9 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome, FAO p. 8

21 challenged and encouraged to take responsibility for their actions or lack of action if this leads to resources being depleted. Significantly, the notion of responsibility also conveys the idea that stakeholders should be socially accountable and answerable and act in a trustworthy way. In the past, little consideration was given to the apportionment of blame when a fishery collapsed. This is no longer the case. If a fishery collapses today, it is likely that regulators will be called on to answer why this situation has occurred. Indeed, the first principle of the Code of Conduct (Article 6) states that the right to fish carries with it the obligation to do so in a responsible manner so as to ensure effective conservation and management of the living aquatic resource. Ecosystem approach to Fisheries/Aquaculture Ecosystem-Approach to fisheries (EAF) is a risk based management planning process that covers the principles of sustainable development including the human and social elements of sustainability, not just the ecological and environmental components. In this respect, it considers the effects of all human activities and environmental factors on aquatic ecosystems when making decisions. It recognizes that fisheries management decisions must take into consideration not just a single fish species, but also the other organisms that have relationships with the species and its physical habitat. Decisions about the management of a species and its ecosystem are based on the best scientific information available (Precautionary principle). According to the FAO 10, EAF seeks to improve all fishery management processes by adopting risk management principles that recognize complete knowledge is never available and is not essential to start the process. EAF works by the identification and assessment of all relevant issues and the establishment of participatory processes to help address high priorities effectively and efficiently. It assists with making the best decisions with the information available by using a precautionary approach (to reflect the risk) and an adaptive approach (to improve knowledge and adjust decisions). Implementing EAF helps to develop comprehensive fishery management systems that seek the sustainable and equitable use of the whole system (ecological and human) to best meet the community s needs and values. FAO has also developed Guidelines on the Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture 11. The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries and Aquaculture (EAF and EAA) has been adopted by the FAO Committee on Fisheries (COFI) as the appropriate and practical way to fully implement the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. 10 FAO EAF Toolbox: The Ecosystem approach to fisheries, Rome. 172p. 11 FAO Aquaculture Development. 4. Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture. FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No. 5, Suppl. 4. Rome, FAO pp 9

22 3. ASSESSMENT OF DOMESTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS 3.1. The Process The core terms that are generally used in connection with the application of international instruments at regional or national levels are implementation, compliance, and effectiveness. Implementation is generally understood as the execution of decisions for the achievement of given goals (Hill & Hupe 2002; Lane 1995; Najam 1995). In the context of international instruments it is generally referred to as domestic implementation and refers to the measures that states take to make international agreements/accords, etc. effective in their domestic law; that is, the process which translates international commitments into action at the national level and (can) steer actors towards specific behaviours (Andresen et al. 1995; Underdal & Hand 2000; Victor et al. 1998). Some international instruments, such as the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, are self-executing that is they do not require national legislation or regulations to become effective. But all binding agreements require national legislation or regulations to become effective. Although non-binding instruments do not need legislation to make them effective, it is still advisable to incorporate them in the national fisheries legal framework. Such action would provide legitimacy and strengthen application of the instruments in the field. Compliance refers to whether countries adhere to the provisions of the instruments and to the implementing measures they have instituted, resulting in changes in the state of the fisheries and aquaculture development as well as behavioural change induced by international instruments. Effectiveness is related to, but is not identical with, compliance. Countries may be in compliance with an instrument, but the instrument may nevertheless be ineffective in attaining its objectives. For example an instrument prohibiting international trade in shark fins the result could effectively stop the trade but have little impact on the decimation of shark populations, which may be consumed within the national borders where they are located, rather than abroad, after being exported. Effectiveness thus is made up of two strands: in achieving the stated objectives of the instrument and in addressing the problems that led to the instrument. Both compliance and effectiveness go beyond domestic implementation as generally defined and will not be treated in detail in this paper Model for Analysis of Domestic Implementation of Instruments There are several models of domestic implementation of international instruments (Younis and Davidson 1990). The model used in this assessment is a modified version of the Interactive Model of Policy Implementation by Grindle and Thomas (1991). It consists of five major phases as depicted below: 1. Adherence and more specifically Ratification, that is acceptance of international instruments through parliamentary procedures 2. Transformation of international commitments into enabling national fisheries legal frameworks: a. national legislation b. administrative decisions 3. Execution of national programmes through administrative systems 4. Relationship between regulators (Fisheries Department and other related line ministries, agencies etc.) and target groups (fishers and other fisheries stakeholders) and the target groups response to regulations 10

23 5. Consequence of target groups response for the physical problems at hand (Modified from Grindle and Thomas 1991) The first three phases relate to acceptance of instruments by States (Ratification) and highlight domestic outputs (phase 2 and 3) and outcomes (phase 3). Outputs will refer to both the incorporation of international obligations into national laws (or enactment) (phase 2a), and the strictly administrative implementation of those derived national laws through administrative rules and actions (or execution) (phase 2b and 3). Elements for phases 4 and 5 are self-explanatory Ratification/Acceptance/Accession/Approval of Instruments Ratification defines the act undertaken on the international plane, whereby a State establishes its consent to be bound by an international instrument such as a treaty; convention, etc. Other forms of adhesion to international instruments are Acceptance, Accession and Approval. (See Annex 3 for definition of these terms). The institution of ratification grants states the necessary time-frame to seek the required approval for the instrument on the domestic level and to enact the necessary legislation to give domestic effect to that instrument. Signing of an international instrument is an important public relations and symbolic politics; a token gesture of support. On the other hand, ratification carries legal obligations and effectively becomes a contractual arrangement. Ratification in all States in the Central African Region require at least three steps: (a) subject of the instrument to Parliamentary procedures in deliberative assemblies; (b) the execution of an instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval by the Head of State, expressing the intent of the State to be bound by the relevant international instrument; and thirdly the deposit of the instrument with the depositary 12. The rate or level of ratification, approval or accession by Central African States to some of the key international instruments relevant to fisheries management and aquaculture development is given in Table 3. The Table also indicates the States affiliation to some of the relevant regional fishery bodies and arrangements. Table 3: Ratification of international instruments by AU-MS of Central African Region Unless stated otherwise, date listed is the date of ratification/accession/adherence/entry into force; A= Signatory Only; CP = Contracting Party Countries/ Pays UNCLOS (CNUDM) 1982 UNFSA ((ANUP) FAO Compliance Agreement (Accord de Conformité) Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) Ramsar Convention on Wetlands CITES Agreement on PSM on IUU Fishing (MREP) Abidjan Convention Framework Convention on Climate Change (CC- NUCC) Angola (S ) S Cameroon Cent. Africa Rep Chad Congo Dem. Rep. Congo S Equatorial Guinea S Gabon (S= ) Sao Tome & Principe The usual procedure is for the Depository to collect the ratifications of all States, keeping all Parties informed of the situation (the status of ratification). 11

24 Regional fishery bodies and regional fisheries management organizations member states; A= Signatory Only; CP = Contracting Party COUNTRIES COREP ECCAS CEMAC ICCAT LCBC CICOS CECAF CIFAA CEBEVIRHA INFOPECHE ATLAFCO Angola Observer CP CP CP CP Cameroon CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP (S ) Central African - CP CP CP CP - CP CP Republic Chad - CP CP CP - CP CP Congo CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP (S ) Democratic Republic CP CP CP CP CP Congo Equatorial Guinea Observer CP CP CP CP CP Gabon CP CP CP CP CP CP CP Sao Tome & Principe CP CP CP CP The rate of ratification of international instruments in general by states in the region is high. Almost all the States have ratified the key framework conventions such as UNCLOS and UNFCCC and also major environmental and trade related conventions for example CBD, RAMSAR, CITES, SPS Agreement, MARPOL, etc. However, ratification of the fisheries- specific instruments is very low. Only Angola has ratified the Compliance Agreement and is Signatory to the Agreement on Port State Measures; while Gabon is Signatory to the UN Fish Stocks Agreement and has ratified the Agreement on Port State Measures. With regard to regional fishery bodies, five States (Cameroon, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe) are Members of COREP while Angola and Equatorial Guinea are Observers; four States (Angola, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Sao Tome) are Contracting Parties to ICCAT; all the coastal States are either Contracting Parties to ATLAFCO or are Signatories. As bona fide Members of FAO, all the coastal countries are Members of CECAF and states of the region are Members of CIFAA, which are bodies established in the framework of the FAO Constitution. In addition and as appropriate, some countries are members of the Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC), the Economic Commission on Cattle, Meat and Fish Resources (CEBEVIRHA) of the Monetary and Economic Community of Central Africa (CEMAC); and the International Commission for the Congo-Oubangui-Sangha Basin (CICOS) Reasons for low ratification of fisheries-specific instruments: The low rate of ratification of fisheries- specific instruments is probably related to several factors. Implementation of international instruments like policy implementation is a fundamental political process (Collins and Earnshaw 1992). It tends to be significantly affected by three political factors: the extent of public support for fisheries; the preferences and priorities of politicians; and the political strength of the department of fisheries and related agencies and their access to the national policy making process. A number of studies have shown that implementation can be hindered by the policy characteristics (Grindle and Thomas 1991). By this it is meant: the problem addressed could be of difficult solution (Underdal, 2002); the type of policy could generate high cost (Birkland, 2001); and/or its design (objectives, implementation framework) may be vague and inadequate (Hill and Hupe, 2002, Winter, 2006). International instruments developed since the 1990s are multifaceted and rely heavily on science and technology. Besides the necessity to ensure the provisions are based on the best available science, science functions as an important political resource in the formation and implementation of several instruments, to ensure reason and objectivity to prevail over emotions, ideology and special interests. Scientific and technical knowledge are absolutely needed to better understand and validly interpret the instruments, to obtain buy-in by policy-makers and other stakeholders and eventually carry out necessary tasks contained 12

25 in the instruments. Often such capacity is limited especially if competent staff had not participated in the negotiation process (Brown Weiis and Jacobson 1998). Participation in the negotiation process permits countries to draw leadership on the issue from the scientific community; increases the participants knowledge of the issue and contribute in making them more committed and effective in promoting the domestic implementation of the instruments. Another factor that could hinder domestication of instruments is the absence of a champion or Leader to pilot the process (Jacobson and brown Weiss 1998). In view of this situation, FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department has organized regional workshops to promote the application of several of the instruments adopted by the Organization s Governing Bodies - the FAO Conference and COFI. FAO also has supported the participation of Member Countries which request in the negotiation process and organized workshops to help developing countries understand the rationale and science behind many of the provisions. Technical assistance has also been given to countries which request in drawing up national plans of action to ensure effective implementation of the instruments. In recent years regional workshops have been organized to increase understanding of the international plan of action on illegal, unreported and unregulated fisheries (IPOA-IUU) and the Agreement on Port State Measures; with a view to accelerate the ratification of the PSMA and the effective application of these instruments (FAO/COPACE, 2009; Doulman and Swan, 2010) Analysis of the reports on the negotiations processes of three fisheries-specific and binding instruments (Compliance Agreement, UN Fish Stocks Agreement and Port State Measures Agreement) indicate that Countries of the region were not actively involved in the negotiation processes of the first two. Brown Weiss and Jacobson (1998) reported that states that did not participate in the negotiation of international environmental accords tend to have difficulties adhering to the accord or tend to do so only several years after the instrument was adopted. Countries accept instruments when their governments have concluded that the instruments are in their interest. For some of the countries in the region non- adherence to the UN Fish Stocks Agreement appears appropriate but for States that are Contracting Parties of ICCAT ratification and implementation of the UNFSA would seem essential to enable them fulfill their obligations to the regional fisheries management organization (RFMO). It is surprising that many coastal countries have not ratified the Compliance Agreement and are yet to ratify Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA). These instruments are vital to combat IUU fishing, a phenomenon that is rampant in the region. IUU fishing depletes fish stocks, destroys marine habitats, distorts competition, puts honest fishers at an unfair disadvantage, and weakens coastal and riparian communities, with negative social and economic consequences for countries in general and small-scale fish workers in particular. The ratification of these instruments can facilitate enhanced regional cooperation and harmonization of fisheries legislations and regulations. Suggestions: States should endevour to be actively involved in the negotiation process for the formulation of international instruments and be represented at such negotiations by competent staffs who are themselves subject matter specialists, if possible. All coastal States should be encouraged to ratify and implement the provisions of the Compliance Agreement and the PSMA All Contracting Parties to ICCAT should ratify the three fisheries-specific binding instruments to enable them meet their obligations to ICCAT. 13

26 3.2. Transforming international commitments into enabling national fisheries legal frameworks International law and international fisheries instruments are vital to fisheries management because they reflect state commitment to recognized conservation and management doctrines, standards, rights and best practices. National institutions in charge of fisheries are expected to ensure that their personnel are acquainted with international binding and voluntary instruments to ensure their effective translation and application at the domestic level. It is important that these instruments are reflected in the national fisheries legal frameworks. Instruments ratified by states may be binding to states, but might not be applied or enforced domestically against natural or juridical persons unless they are reflected in enabling legislation. Indeed many binding instruments contain issues or generic obligations that Parties are required to reflect in their national legislations or regulations. The Compliance Agreement, for example, requires Parties to implement the following issues in their national legislations or regulations: designation of the national authority responsible for carrying out the duties of the flag state under the agreement; provisions that make it unlawful for flag vessels to undermine the effectiveness of international conservation and management measures, and that provide a mechanism for authorities to ensure that the law is respected; mandatory fishing authorizations for flag vessels fishing on the high seas; mandatory conditions for flag vessels receiving a fishing authorization; proper marking of fishing vessels; information on fishing operations; enforcement measures and sanctions; establishment and maintenance of records of flag vessels fishing on the high seas; duties of the flag state to provide FAO with information The Situation with non-binding instruments: The Code of Conduct being a soft law instrument, its implementation can be soft in many ways. However, some of the principles inherent to the Code of Conduct stem from binding arrangements and will hence be transcribed into national legal frameworks over time. Many of its other principles are non-binding in nature, represent suggested best practice in many cases, and would often translate into policy first, and later into applied management practice, and then possibly into law if the country so desires. In the long run however, domestic enabling legislation is advantageous for non-binding instruments such as the Code of Conduct and the International Plans of Action (IPOAs) as national legislation can translate the call for voluntary action into local requirements by enforcing rights and responsibilities and sanctioning non-compliance 13. Transforming international commitments into enabling national fisheries legal frameworks (national legislation and/or administrative decisions) embrace the realms of policy (policy decisions), law (legal revisions), and operational matters. Decisions taken in these three interrelated areas could affect the institutional arrangements necessary to support effective execution of national programmes related to or derived from the instrument(s). The question is to what extent have countries in the region attempted to effect such transformation? 13 It is to be noted that the broad framework of the Code of Conduct accommodates both binding agreements such as the Compliance Agreement and nonbinding instruments such as the International plans of action dealing with reducing incidental catch of Seabirds in longline fishing, for the conservation and management of Sharks, for the management of fishing capacity and to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; as well as others. 14

27 Reflection of international instruments in National legislation Principal Fisheries Laws All the countries have fisheries legislation. Angola and Gabon have comprehensive legislations that reflect the concepts of sustainable and responsible fisheries as well as ecosystem approach to fisheries and/or aquaculture and elements of the Compliance Agreement. The Fisheries Laws of the other countries with the exception of Cameroon and Democratic Republic of Congo also address these issues howbeit in a less comprehensive manner. Hence in general the fisheries legislations are not consistent with the relatively recent developments in the sector and do not meet the requirements of the international legal regime aimed among others to better manage fisheries in the high seas, the management of shared stocks, and combating IUU fishing 14. There are also weaknesses in the restrictions on fishing effort, the regulation on bycatch, licensing mechanisms, sanctions, monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS). There is a great need to work towards the harmonization of the legislations and regulations of countries in the region in order to promote the long-term sustainable development of fisheries (Kinfoussia 2012). The national Legislations of the countries are: Angola: Law on Aquatic Biological Resources: Law no. 6-A/04 of 8 October 2004 promulgated on 3 September 2004 Cameroon: Law No. 94/01 of 20 January 1994 relative to the regime of forestry, wildlife and fisheries Central African Republic: Law/14/PR/2008 relative to the regime of forestry, wildlife and fisheries resources Chad: Law No. 61/268 of 22 December 1961 modified by Ordinance No. 71/090 of 6 August 1971 Congo: Law No of 1 February 2000 on the organization of Marine fishing in the Republic of Congo and Law No June 14, 2010 on the organization of fisheries and inland aquaculture Democratic Republic of Congo: Law No.3 of 1937 on Hunting and Fishing Equatorial Guinea: Law No. 10/2003 of 17 November 2003 on the organization of fishing activities in the republic of Equatorial Guinea Gabon: Law 015/2005 on the Code of fisheries and aquaculture in the Republic of Gabon Sao Tome and Principe: The Act No.9 / 2001 Fisheries Act and Fishery Resources It is strongly suggested that: Countries should take steps to reflect the provisions of fisheries-specific international instruments in their national legislation and regulations to give them legitimacy. Countries should also strive to harmonize their legislations in order to facilitate the application of these international instruments in such areas as the combat against IUU fishing, information sharing, licensing mechanisms, sanctions, monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS), fishing practices especially for shared resources, conditions of access, etc. Non-Fisheries-Specific Laws What many of the countries lack in their fisheries legalization is compensated for to a degree in the Environmental framework laws as well as in their Veterinary legislation. In the early 1990s international banks and bilateral aid donors put pressure on the countries, as was also the case in many other African countries, to enact environmental framework laws (Nugent 2009). Many were authored with external assistance and modelled to some extent on European and North American precedents. As a result many countries went rapidly from a situation of weak environmental legislation or none at all to one of strong or even draconian legislation. In most cases this occurred in the absence of domestic pressure and without much effective stakeholder involvement, such that even civil servants, private sector and civil society were not fully aware of the extent of the change (UNEP/UNDP 1996, 1999; 14 Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo are in the process of revising their fisheries legislations. 15

28 Nugent, 2009). However, since the enactment of these comprehensive environmental framework laws, it is reported that several of the countries have considerable policy experience in many of the areas of environmental planning and law, and in practical, field-level implementation (Blaikie and Simo 1998). All the countries also have comprehensive Veterinary legislations. These environmental and health/veterinary laws 15 provide additional tools, which address a broad range of issues and challenges relating to the conservation and management of fisheries resources and the marine environment, as well as the handling and processing of fish and fishery products in general, aspects of product quality, hygiene, safety, inspections, certification etc. for local consumption and export. Although in some cases these laws do not explicitly address fisheries and aquaculture issues, they provide a broad framework within which fisheries and aquaculture issues can be addressed effectively. For example the environmental framework laws contain among others appropriate mechanisms for environmental impact assessment (EIA), measures to protect environmental receptors, internal waters and floodplains, protection of coastal and marine waters, and the protection of soil and subsoil. b) Administrative decisions Fisheries and Aquaculture: The countries have enacted regulations, decrees, arêtes, bylaws, or administrative orders to facilitate the application of the legislation. The weaknesses that are apparent in the legislation are evident in the regulations in that in some cases, they are developed in general terms, they do not stress sustainable use, and their provisions take more the form of ideals than legal requirements which leave disproportionate interpretative discretion to sub-national officials. Environmental laws: The countries have elaborated framework policies, administrative rules or directives, guidelines, as well as standard operating procedures on a series of environmental issues which are aimed at assisting investors and more specifically in our case aquaculture investors to interpret the environmental laws and facilitate their effective implementation. On a generic basis, the administrative rules or standard operating procedures for environmental impact assessment (EIA) are as summarized in table 4: Table 4: Administrative rules and standard operating procedures for EIA Scope General Environmental Assessment (EA) General environmental impact assessment (EIA) Aquaculture EIA Environmental Audit Environmental conformity Evaluation of EIA reports Synthesis of subject matter General Guidelines for the conduct of an environmental impact study Text on the interpretation of institutional and regulatory framework for EIA Guide for the conduct of an environmental impact study for aquaculture project General guide for environmental audit, to quantify environmental performance and position with a view to define what needs to be done to sustain or improve on indicators of such performance and position General guide for environmental conformity Guide for evaluation of EIA reports In summary, in order to promote sustainable development and responsible fishing practices national fisheries legal framework should reflect the Principal fisheries laws, international fisheries legal framework and non-fisheries specific laws. This representation is depicted in the figure below. 15 Including as well those of the prevention and mitigation of pollution 16

29 Principal Fisheries Laws Fisheries Acts/ Codes/ Laws (Including aquaculture laws) Subsidiary legislation (Regulations, decrees, arête, by-laws and executives or administrative orders) National jurisprudence NATIONAL FISHERIES LEGAL FRAMEWORK International Fisheries Legal Framework (reflected in national laws) customary international law multilateral treaties including regional agreements, jurisprudence Non-fisheries-specific Laws (Other laws impacting on fisheries) Environmental laws Health/ Veterinary laws Customs laws Figure 1: Representation of a typical national fisheries framework showing the relationship between international, non-fisheries-specific and fisheries-specific law. Source: A Fishery Manager s Guidebook. Edited by Kevern L. Cochran and Serge M. Garcia, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations and Wiley-Blackwell, Level of Execution of some key Instruments A preliminary assessment showed that countries are not yet executing in a formal manner the provisions in the fishery specific binding instruments. It was therefore agreed to review actions taken by the countries with respect to implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and two of the instruments related to the Code: the International plan of action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IPOA-IUU) and the International plan of action for the management of Fishing Capacity (IPOA-CAPACITY) 16. The Code of Conduct was chosen because it is a comprehensive blueprint for management of fisheries and aquaculture development adopted by the international Community under the auspices of the FAO. The instrument sets out principles and standards of behaviour for responsible fisheries practices with a view to ensuring the effective conservation, management and development of living aquatic resources with due respect for the ecosystem and biodiversity. Although the Code of Conduct is voluntary, certain parts of it are based on relevant rules of international law, including those reflected in the 1982 UN Convention (UNCLOS). Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing remains one of the greatest threats to marine, brackish and freshwater ecosystems and continues to have serious and major social, economic and cultural implications for the conservation and management of living aquatic resources in the region. The phenomenon of overcapacity is evident in both the industrial and artisanal sectors. Fishing overcapacity is probably the 16 Since the Code of Conduct was adopted in 1995 nine instruments are formally linked to the Code. These are the Compliance Agreement, the four IPOAs: to prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing, for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries, for the Conservation and Management of Sharks, for the Management of Fishing Capacity; two Strategies: for improving information on Status and Trends of Capture Fisheries (STF) and for improving information on Status and Trends in Aquaculture (STA); and two International Guidelines: Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of food Security and Poverty Eradication and International Guidelines on Deep sea Fishing. 17

30 primary root cause of stock declines, ecosystem changes, poor economic performance of the sector, and it ultimately negatively affects the livelihoods of fishing communities. Potentially, both IUU fishing and overcapacity can affect the sustainability of the fisheries, compromise the implementation of policies and management plans and can in, extreme cases; undermine the rational exploitation of the resource. Most Salient Actions Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries The Code of Conduct has been incorporated in the national fisheries legal framework either through policy, legislation, regulations or administrative decisions in all the Countries. It is reflected in the fisheries legislations of Angola, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Gabon and Sao Tome and is of common usage in the fisheries administrative documents and policies of all the countries. A host of actions fully in line with the Code s spirit and principles have been implemented across the region 17. Key examples include Revision of the legal framework for fisheries and aquaculture to incorporate the principles set out in international instruments on the management of aquatic living resources and the environment (Angola, Cameroon, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Sao Tome and Principe 18 ) Sensitization and capacity building for stakeholders on different aspects of the Code in all the countries. The Code has been translated in local languages (Swahili, Kilongo, and Tchiluba) in the Democratic Republic of Congo and widely distributed. An estimation of the economic value of the marine fisheries of Cameroon, Gabon, Congo, and Sao Tome and Principe) Policy Framework document for fisheries and aquaculture have been developed (Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon and Equatorial Guinea) Management plan for the shared Sardinella stocks of the Southern Gulf of Guinea (Angola, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Congo and Gabon) has been developed Development of Management plans on the principles of Ecosystem approach to fisheries for the shared shrimp fisheries of Gabon, Cameroon and Nigeria Development of a national plan for the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture (Central African Republic, Chad) Development of a Regional Strategic Plan on Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS) for waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of COREP Elaboration of Minimum terms and Conditions of Access, the exploitation and commerce of fisheries resources in waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of COREP Analysis of the contribution of marine fisheries sector to national economies and assessment of the potential wealth associated with fisheries resources of Member States of COREP Development of a Regional Economic Fisheries Observatory for Member Countries of COREP All the countries have designated marine protected areas (MPAs) Aquaculture In addition to the elaboration of aquaculture development plans, and improvement in the skills and capacity of operators in different aspects of the sector from the mass production of fingerlings to the management of intensive production units in several countries (Angola, Cameroon, Congo, Gabon) there is an emerging picture of more environmentally aware operations. Several countries have introduced mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) for new aquaculture developments based on the scale of the project. 17 Over the past decade for Member States and Observers of COREP, greater emphasis has been placed on improving the governance and institutions in the region in conformity with the principles of the Code. This has taken place under the auspices of COREP with financial support from the PAF/NPCA Programme, ACP II FISH Programme and EAF-NANSEN Project. 18 The revised legislations of Cameroon and the Democratic Republic of Congo are yet to be adopted by the respective Parliaments. 18

31 IUU Fishing Cameroon with the assistance of FAO has formulated a national plan of action - NPOA-IUU fishing. It is yet to be formally adopted and implemented. A Regional plan of action on IUU fishing (RPOA-IUU) has been developed under the auspices of COREP but it is yet to be adopted by the Conference of Ministers. However the countries are taking a number of actions to address IUU fishing. They include the revision of the fisheries legal framework to reflect IUU fishing, creating awareness of the phenomenon among all stakeholders, the use of administrative decisions to address the phenomenon, training of inspectors and observers and the presence of observers on board fishing vessels, as well as increased cooperation and collaboration among countries in the sharing of experiences. Other measures are the formulation of an economic observatory; updating of vessel registration and databases, development of port infrastructure, MCS and VMS in some countries (Angola, Cameroon, Gabon, Sao Tome and Principe); increased cooperation between the Ministries of Fisheries and Ministry of Defense to combat IUU fishing, and the development of a Regional Strategic Plan of action on Monitoring, Control and surveillance Systems for waters under the jurisdiction of Member States of COREP. Recently, the countries are working to attach fisheries surveillance and enforcement in the ambit of the multinational Coordination Centre (CMC), an agency charged with maintaining security in the Gulf of Guinea portion under the jurisdiction of countries in the region. A common phenomenon in many countries is identifying IUU fishing largely with foreign entities carrying out illegal operations. This narrow view of the phenomenon poses serious challenges in translating the IPOA-IUU into effective, fully framed and implemented NPOA-IUUs. Management of Fishing Capacity No country has formulated an NPOA-CAPACITY. However under the auspices of COREP an RPOA- CAPACITY has been developed. The RPOA is yet to be adopted by the Conference of Ministers of COREP. In the absence of a bona fide plan of action for the management of fishing capacity, countries are managing fishing capacity through the limitation of licenses in almost all the countries, the deliverance of fishing permits for artisanal fisheries in a couple of countries and by requiring the deliverance of an authorization by the competent authority prior to construction, import or charter of fishing vessels by Congo. Congo and Angola also reported to have quota systems Relationship between regulators and stakeholders and the response of the primary target groups to regulations Commitments made by States to international instruments can only be achieved through effective partnership arrangements between the fisheries departments and other line ministries as regulators and the prime targets such as fishers, fish farmers, private sector, fishmongers and processors, and with the collaboration of NGOS and civil society organizations. Our assessment showed that there is generally good working relationship between the regulators and the other stakeholders. However, there are also some incidences of conflicts. These conflicts fall within two distinct arenas, the target groups on the one side and the bureaucratic system on the other side. The primary target groups complain of high degree of bureaucracy to obtain relevant permits, licenses, authorizations, and other services from the administration and this limits their productivity. On their part the regulators complain that of the noncompliance of regulations by the target groups. 19

32 Concerning the issue of noncompliance of regulations the primary target groups are easily and frequently tempted to violate regulations designed, as they often see it, specifically to restrict their effectiveness. In an environment of limited human and financial resources and effective enforcement mechanisms, the countries have attempted to correct this non-compliance by balancing compliance and enforcement, to encourage an environment where maximum compliance from fishers occurs and to use enforcement in areas where this is not successful. Since people are more inclined to obey rules that they feel or perceive are legitimate, rightful, justifiable, fair and reasonable, the fisheries administrations are establishing good dialogue between them and the primary target groups; they are involving relevant stakeholders in the formulation of laws and regulations and in planning activities. In addition the stakeholders perception is being gradually changed from one of dependence to that of co-owners of the management process through capacity building, the promotion of participatory approaches in the implementation of programmes and activities and the promotion of comanagement approaches particularly in inland water bodies. On the other side, there is a high degree of bureaucratic fragmentation and overlapping of mandates which frequently leads to conflicts between line ministries, duplication of efforts, and dissipation of already limited resources. Conflicts in the bureaucratic arena tend to perpetuate existing administrative conflicts, which in turn impede updating of policy contents and limit the chances of goals being achieved. Civil society organizations exist in all the countries in the general area of rural development and they tend to have good working relations with the fisheries administrations. However their contribution to fisheries and aquaculture sector is yet very limited Consequence of target groups response for the physical problems at hand Many countries in the region have not yet taken steps to domesticate international fisheries-specificinstruments in their national fisheries legal framework. However, all the countries are applying to varying degrees some of the recommended standards, best practices and principles of some international instruments in particular the Code of Conduct in their fisheries management and aquaculture development initiatives. Progress made over the past decade in many cases with external assistance and under the auspices of COREP at the regional level is significant. Such progress for the most part has been limited to the elaboration of appropriate fisheries governance instruments; which are yet to be effectively implemented. It is therefore not surprising that the major challenges facing the sustainable use of living aquatic resources and the development of aquaculture in the region persist and in some cases continue to grow. These include: overfishing, IUU fishing, fishing overcapacity, poor selectivity of fishing gears, and the environmental impact of fishing, especially in prohibited areas. 20

33 4.0. CHALLENGES, CONSTRAINTS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS The key constraints reported by countries were generally consistent. They were lack of or insufficient financial and human resources as well as facilities, lack of political will/support, weak interdepartmental coordination and collaboration, insufficient cooperation between countries, and limited awareness amongst relevant stakeholders of the international instruments; deficiencies in national legal framework for fisheries (laws and regulations), inconsistencies or lack of similar regulations in other countries in the region and lack of uniform guidelines on some key issues for the region as well as limited involvement of stakeholders including non-state actors in the implementation of international instruments. The common thread in these constraints seems to be the quality of fisheries governance. They are briefly presented below under the following sub-groups: institutional arrangements, legal considerations, financial needs, technical requirements and human resource development Institutional arrangements These are a constraint from various points of view. All the respondents stated that the fisheries department had the principal role in ensuring the ratification of the fisheries-specific instruments. They also pointed out that an inter-departmental consultative mechanism exists at which fisheries and aquaculture issues are deliberated. Non-the-less it was reported that there is insufficient interagency relationships and lack of interagency cooperation. Insufficient interagency relationships may be caused by overlapping mandates of agencies, personality conflicts which may individually or collectively result in a poor exchange of information or lack of information sharing and sometimes undue bureaucracies such that the process of ratification of instruments and/or the submission of amended legal frameworks are not presented to parliament on schedule. At times slowness in the implementation of instruments may be related to insufficient capacity in the subject matter or the dynamism of the leader. Possible solutions: Effective implementation of international and regional instruments requires cooperation and communication at the national, regional and international levels. The operational details would vary from one country to another based on national circumstances and conditions. Fisheries Departments should be more proactive and request a review of the terms of reference of interagency/departmental mechanisms to render it more effective; at least to accommodate fisheries and aquaculture concerns. Countries should seek support from bilateral or multilateral donor or technical assistance programmes, bearing in mind some international instruments contain provisions for such assistance Legal Considerations The constraints relating to legal aspects in implementing international instruments are complex. On the one hand it may be due to limited awareness about evolving international law in the specific matter, the absence of a leader to spearhead the process, inadequate administrative, scientific, and legal resources; or inadequate legal frameworks which pre-date the international instruments. On the other hand deficiencies in national laws and regulations, the lack of similar regulations in the region can constraint efforts to effectively implement provisions in some instruments such as may be required to combat IUU fishing. A comparative analysis of the legal framework of member countries of COREP identified the major deficiencies and key areas where harmonization would be required (Kinfoussia 2012). Generally, when instruments are not integrated into the national fisheries legal framework prioritizing activities related to the instrument seem to be difficult and not likely to be funded from national budgets. 21

34 Possible Solutions Countries that have not yet done so should review and update their legal framework and ensure that they are consistent to enable implementation of the key international fisheries and environmental instruments. If necessary, countries should seek legal assistance from donor countries or development partners to undertake this task Countries should proceed to harmonize their fisheries laws and regulations on a regional basis in view of the significant number of shared living aquatic resources and shared inland water bodies in the region Financial Needs Financial needs and economics also play a critical role in the domestic implementation of international instruments. The majority of the countries reported of limited financial resources to undertake their tasks. The cost of implementing international instruments can be very high and is greatly influenced by the importance the government attaches to the sector, the relevance of specific instruments to the overall fabric of the country from an economic, social and cultural perspectives, the capacity of a nation s economy to absorb the cost of implementation etc. Since government resources are limited, only agencies or departments that can better justify their case stand a chance of getting a better piece of the pie. Possible Solutions Fisheries departments need to do a better job in projecting the importance of fisheries and aquaculture sector to government, other line ministries and the general public Technical Requirements Most international instruments are very demanding in science and technology. To effectively combat IUU fishing, for example, requires the integration or coordination of fisheries related port State measures with the broader system of port State controls, including other tools such as VMS and observer programmes, as well as port controls. The equipment are not only expensive but their use and manipulation require the appropriate know-how. Integrated databases and information systems are also needed for quick and effective decision-making. The lack of such information systems including computerized communication can greatly hinder the effective implementation of international instruments. Possible Solutions Development of infrastructure, MCS and VMS apparatus Implement the fishery economic observatory that has been developed in the framework of COREP 4.5. Human resource development Capacity development is an ongoing concern in all the countries for many aspects of fisheries and aquaculture. The fisheries sector presents particularly fast-moving challenges to develop and maintain human capacity, given the rapid proliferation of internationally agreed instruments in the past two decades, advances in technology and profit motives that contribute to promoting and sustaining IUU fishing and other poor fisheries and aquaculture practices leading to dwindling fish stocks and/or damage to the ecosystem. A wide range of constraints are related to human resource development including the government s administrative capacity. These include insufficient administrative, scientific, and legal resources to issue laws and regulations and to monitor their implementation; and in the fisheries department the lack of trained and/or insufficient number of personnel in all the important areas of the sector as well as; insufficient training programmes bearing in mind that capacity-building activities are inherently long-term in character, especially those activities that are not highly task-specific. Many types of capacity development tend to 22

35 be stepwise and incremental in approach so that revision and recapitulation are often necessary. The challenges associated with human resources development are exacerbated in situations where there is a high degree of staff turnover. Possible Solutions In order for the intentions in the instruments to become realities in everyday life, countries need adequately trained human resources to address the three stages of development and implementation: participating in the development (negotiation and adoption) of instruments, including at the sub regional and regional levels; Effective participation in training programmes on international instruments organized by such development partners as FAO; developing strategies, plans and laws at the national level to implement the agreed provisions; and operationalizing the agreed rights, duties and obligations. The constraints and challenges discussed above have probably always existed and are interrelated. By highlighting these challenges and constraints once more and identifying ways on how they can be addressed will contribute to overcoming the obstacles in a comprehensive and mutually reinforcing manner in the region. Creating greater awareness to the issues, political support and good governance are essential prerequisites to overcoming the challenges and constraints The Role of COREP The Commission has played and is playing a cardinal role sourcing finances and developing partnerships with appropriate agencies such as FAO, ACP II Fish a programme of the EU Commission, NEPAD, AU-IBAR, etc. in promoting the implementation of the provisions of international instruments in the area covered by its Convention. Under the auspices of COREP, fisheries management plans, strategy papers, regional plans of action on IUU-Fishing and Fishing Capacity, an economic fishery observatory, several back ground studies and training programmes both in fisheries and aquaculture have been undertaken. COREP is best placed to continue to accompany the countries in their quest to promote the long-term sustainable development of their fisheries and the achievement of environmental friendly aquaculture development. However as a purely advisory body there are limitations to what it can do especially at national levels. 23

36 5. FRAMEWORK OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANS OF ACTION TO ADOPT KEY INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS The Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa stated that Any Reforms must also assist Member States to meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments. The framework proposed here below provides suggestions on the elaboration of national/regional plans of action to adopt key international instruments for fisheries management and aquaculture development by AU-MS in the Central African Region Goal and Objectives The overall goal of the framework is to create a clear national approach that will facilitate the domestication of appropriate international instruments relevant to fisheries and aquaculture by African Union Member States (AU-MS) in the Central African Region to optimize the benefits offered by the region s living aquatic resources and to contribute to the sustainable development and management of these resources for food, livelihoods and wealth. This goal can best be achieved by defined outcomes that meet the following five objectives 1. Encouraging appropriate public and political support for domestication of instruments. 2. Developing awareness and support for instruments at the regional and national policymaking levels by stakeholders 3. Developing of a fisheries and aquaculture sector that Is educated and trained in the implementation of international and regional instruments 4. Encouraging the development and implementation of national and regional instruments (plans of action, Codes, programmes, Guidelines, etc.) 5. Implementation of monitoring and auditing systems 5.2. Elements of the Framework The framework is envisaged as a number of components consisting of a series of actions that are required to achieve the overall goal. These actions are designed to maximize identified opportunities and to minimize constraints. It should be noted that the components are not single entities in themselves, but overlap and are reliant on each other. For example, without political will to move the process forward (Component 1); there will be little chance of advancing with the other components. However, the political will is unlikely to develop without awareness at the regional and national levels (Components 2 and 3). It is therefore important that the actions under each component are examined as a whole and occur where appropriate simultaneously if the desired outcomes are to be achieved. The five components required to propel the process and achieve the main goal together with an indication of the actions required and the expected outcomes are presented below. Component 1: Public and political support for implementation of instruments Ensuring the appropriate policy is in place is fundamental to providing the necessary incentives to encourage the domestication of international instruments. 24

37 Objectives Actions Outcomes To develop a comprehensive and incentive awareness analysis to achieve the domestication of instrument(s) To prepare the political environment for acceptance of instrument to be domesticated To develop appropriate enabling legal frameworks that reflect incorporation of instrument 1. The Fisheries Department in conjunction with other relevant stakeholders elaborates a nonbias policy document outlining the benefits and potential difficulties of domesticating the international instrument(s). 2. In some cases the elaboration of the policy document may require external human and financial assistance 3. Fisheries Department to obtain political support to domesticate instrument at Ministerial/ departmental level 4. Fisheries Department in collaboration with appropriate line ministries analyze possible changes in the fisheries legal framework Minister in-charge of fisheries to canvass for the domestication of the instrument including its presentation through deliberative assemblies Fisheries Department in conjunction with appropriate line ministries ensure incorporation of instrument in the fisheries legal framework Understanding of the success or failure of current fisheries management practices and the advantages/disadvantages of domesticating the instrument Activities identified and prioritized on the national agenda Responsibilities and time lines are identified Human and financial resources estimated Tacit approval by the Minister to proceed Synthesis of any possible legislative and regulatory changes is available Ratification of instrument (if necessary) Approval for regulatory changes, at the minimum, for non-binding instruments Reflection of instrument in the Fisheries Acts/Codes/Laws and subsidiary legislation (Regulations, decrees, arête, by-laws etc.) Component 2: Awareness Raising and Support for Instruments A fundamental component for having the provisions of international and regional instruments implemented is to ensure the policy makers are fully aware of the instrument, what it is designed to do, the relevance to the country and how it can be implemented Objectives Actions Outcomes To improve awareness within the 1. Convene meeting of interdepartmental fisheries department, other relevant line ministries and stakeholders on the existence and broad content of instrument(s) consultative To provide a dedicated person tasked to carry out Instrument awareness, training and implementation activities mechanisms including stakeholder groups; where a national consultative mechanism for fisheries exists this will best serve the purpose 2. Distribute for discussion policy analysis on the instrument 1. Identify a Lead-Person to pilot the domestication process of the instrument 2. Financial resources made in the budget to ensure the process is realized with as less financial difficulties as possible 3. Seek support from bilateral and multilateral donors (if necessary) Greater awareness at all levels of the existence of the instrument Policy document is improved By-in to the process by line ministries and other stakeholders A specialized and dedicated instrument implementation officer capable of actively progressing the implementation of the instrument is designated 25

38 Objectives Actions Outcomes To create an environment where there will be stakeholder acceptance of the Instrument Availability of Conduct a series of workshops with key Fisheries Department, industry, fish workers, fish farmers, and non-state actors representatives. informed core of individuals capable of preparing and commencing the process of implementing the instrument within or through their respective organizations Component 3: Capacity Development for Instrument Implementation Capacity to ensure effective implementation of the instrument may be lacking or deficient. Personnel from all stakeholder groups require an understanding of the science behind the instrument as well as the content and what it means when put into practice. With this knowledge will come the understanding of the reasons for domesticating the instrument, resulting in a desire and pride in achieving implementation. Objectives Actions Outcomes To improve the understanding of fishery and aquaculture sector personnel in implementation of the instrument 1. Conduct a needs analysis survey to determine training and awareness requirements and priorities for support activities. 2. Conduct training on the most important aspects of the instrument with personnel from key stakeholder groups. 3. NGO staff who have attended training on instruments are invited to conduct training at village or community level Support, training and awareness requirements identified and prioritized Trainees with better understanding of the full requirements for achieving objectives of the instrument Participants develop an understanding of what good fisheries or aquaculture practices as should be defined in the instrument An increased number of key personnel who share the vision for implementation of the instruments and have the skills to be part of implementing the vision Stakeholders aware of and beginning to prepare for instrument implementation A pool of trained staff to conduct the implementation programme Allocation of resources based on identified priorities to achieve successful implementation of instrument Component 4: Development of National Instrument and Implementation Strategy While the international instrument is a comprehensive document for worldwide or regional application; most countries will wish (and is strongly advisable) to develop a national instrument, codes, plan of action, programmes, as the case may be which are tailor-made to their particular situations. The technical content in the international instrument will form the basis of the national or regional instrument. 26

39 Objectives Actions Outcomes Create awareness of the instrument and implementation strategy To generate country level acceptance of the need for national programme based on the international or regional instrument To produce National Instrument ( code, guidelines, NPOAs etc. ) on the basis of international or regional instrument To generate a strategy whereby a national instrument can be implemented Progression of the actions detailed in Component 2 1. Development of a national stakeholder body including Department of Fisheries, other relevant governmental agencies, industry organizations, private sector, NGOs etc. to act as a steering committee for the process of Programme development and implementation. The Instrument implementation officer should be a part of this committee to assist in facilitating the process and provide indications as to successful practices used to achieve implementation in other countries. 2. Country should seek technical assistance for this task, if necessary 1. Drafting of the National instrument, programme, Code, guidelines, etc. as appropriate based on the International instrument 2. Trialing of the draft instrument on a small scale basis with an appropriate stakeholder group. 1. Drafting of the National instrument, programme, Code, guidelines, etc. as appropriate based on the International instrument 3. Trialing of the draft instrument on a small scale basis with an appropriate stakeholder group. 4. Changes made to the draft national instrument based on the trialing results and feedback from stakeholder groups. 5. Acceptance of the draft instrument by the stakeholder Steering Committee. 6. Release of the national instrument. 1. Development of a national framework/ plan of action, which includes all stakeholder groups for implementation of the national, or where appropriate regional instrument Key stakeholders aware and ready to participate in Instrument implementation and in the development and execution of national instrument/programme Increased positive and proactive environment within which to achieve change Increased country-level acceptance of the instrument. Better understanding among stakeholders of the requirements of programme to implement the instrument Generation of a draft national instrument which is appropriate and accepted by the stakeholders. Performance testing of the instrument (NPOA, guidelines, code etc.) allowing refinements as required. A national instrument (NPOA, code, guideline, programme) based on the International Instrument is available A framework for implementation of the national instrument. Funding assistance to support the implementation program. 27

40 Objectives Actions Outcomes 2. Seek for donor support to assist in funding the implementation. 3. Development of a training programme structure for implementation of the instrument; using if possible trainees from Component 3 as trainers. A framework for implementation of the national instrument. Funding assistance to support the implementation program. A training program to commence implementation Component 5: Implementation of Participatory Monitoring and Auditing Systems Monitoring of instrument implementation at the ground level is important to determine the success or failure or more precisely the effectiveness of the instrument. Effectiveness is the result of not only how governments implement international instruments (the formal legislation or regulations that countries adopt to comply with the instrument) but also of compliance (the observance of those regulations and commitments contained in the instrument). It is essential that an initial audit be carried out to provide a baseline for comparison in the future. Annual follow-up monitoring will assess the level of compliance being achieved. This level can then be progressively raised over time as the instrument is fully implemented. Objectives Actions Outcomes To increase the understanding of how to carry out planning for and implementation of operational monitoring and auditing programmes To improve the quality of fisheries and aquaculture practices/ operations through effective monitoring and auditing practices. Incorporate monitoring and auditing as an important component of all national and regional workshops, including, where possible, practical field activities using these systems. Countries should adopt the process used for the PFRS 1. A national baseline audit to be carried out to determine current operating standards. 2. New national minimum compliance levels to be determined and a date set for achievement of new levels. Development or reinforcement of an effective hierarchical structure within fisheries departments to allow monitoring and auditing to occur in an efficient and effective manner. 3. Monitoring program to commence with on ground support from key Fisheries Department staff. 4. Ongoing monitoring and auditing with the annual generation of SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time bound) objectives to guide future activity A trained group of people with the knowledge to teach others and to establish and run a monitoring and auditing programme for the instrument Definition of standards currently being achieved nationally by industry operations. Benchmarks and monitoring indicators Trained and effective supervisors who feel well supported and are competent at their tasks. Determination of the level of compliance achieved and the effectiveness of the Instrument implementation programme to date. A new and realistic set of national benchmarks for the next compliance audit. Ongoing monitoring and auditing program. 28

41 5.3. Responsibilities and Timing The implementation of the national/regional plan of action will involve appropriate actions by all stakeholders. These include: The Government Private sector Industry, Small scale fishers and aquaculturists Relevant NGOs International Organizations Bilateral and multilateral donors The government has a major role to play in such actions, particularly through the Ministry in- charge of fisheries and aquaculture and other relevant line ministries. However, the private sector and industry will have the primary role for implementation on the ground. A summary of the priority responsibilities for the some of the key players are suggested below. Ministry in-charge of Fisheries/Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture Inform public about the instrument through the media and new information technology to build support for implementation Evaluate and refine national policy and/or legislation to formally adopt the instrument Ensure budgetary provisions are made and canvass for funding from external sources Promote coordination among relevant ministries and departments, and collaboration with external services of the department Promote both vertical and horizontal partnerships for implementing national instruments Build a culture of effective implementation by engaging both the public and the private sector in determining needs and setting priorities and in updating the plan of action Investing in capacity development to the maximum extent possible using internal funds Make available technical assistance and capacity building programmes at national and local levels Ensure an effective departmental structure exists to allow monitoring and auditing to occur. Define benchmarks and monitoring schedules and indicators Reporting on national progress against PF&RS to AU-IBAR/NPCA Industry Engage effectively in implementing the national plan of action Participate in capacity building activities Contribute to monitoring and auditing of programmes Private Sector, Adopt and implement the national instrument Co-finance specific activities Support the policy direction and training program instituted by the Department of Fisheries and aquaculture through the provision of finance, resources and personnel. NGOs CSOs and CBOs Organize capacity building activities Co-finance specific activities Facilitate multi-stakeholder activities and events such as round table discussions engaging the public and private sector 29

42 Develop and implement public awareness campaigns and demonstrations actions on specific issues Conduct/participate in monitoring and evaluation processes Develop an NGO-level plan of action/strategy for implementation of the national instrument. This should focus primarily on small-scale operations. Develop training programs based on the policy direction that can be applied to village based operations. COREP Ensure equitable sharing of the information generated by the different countries at the appropriate time Coordinate development of individual country-based instruments and where applicable pilot the formulation of regional plans of action. Assist in mobilizing and securing of resources to support Member States Strengthen cooperation and human capacity building in Member States Create opportunities for bonding donors on the need to support programmes for management of aquatic living resources in the region Ensure that any implemented training, awareness or research programs operate within the frameworks already created by other regional and bilateral programs. AU-IBAR Assist in seeking funding from development partners and agencies to implement adoption processes of international instruments in AU-MS Promote the exchange of experiences and know how among AU-MS Contribute to capacity development of Member States for implementation of national instruments 5.4. Expected Outcomes The outcomes of successfully implementing the actions in the national instrument (NPOA, Code Programmes, etc.) are intrinsically linked to those of the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa (FPRS) and can be summarized as follow: Member States meet their obligations under national and international fisheries, aquaculture and natural resource management instruments The fishery stocks are sustainable and in non-degraded ecosystems Fishery is economically valuable and able to meet the needs of the present and future generations Increased aquaculture production from environmental friendly enterprises 30

43 6. CONCLUSIONS The countries have worked individually and collectively to domesticate some relevant international instruments. Their efforts have been limited by a number of factors, constraints and challenges which need to be corrected so that the countries can optimize the benefits from the living aquatic resources at their disposal and also promote environmentally friendly aquaculture development. The proposed five interrelated components framework provides a clear national approach to facilitate the domestication of appropriate international instruments relevant to fisheries and aquaculture; while the background information on some key international instruments given in the annex could serve to refresh the memories of staff as they move forward with the process. 31

44 7. REFERENCES 1. Andresen, S., Skjoeseth, J. B. and Wettestad, J. (1995) Regime, the State and Society: Analyzing the implementation of International Environmental Commitments, Working Paper, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg. 2. Anon (2002) Nairobi Declaration: Conservation of Aquatic Biodiversity and Use of Genetically Improved and Alien Species for Aquaculture in Africa ICLARM/CTA/FAO/IUCN/UNEP/CBD. Nairobi, Kenya 3. AU-NEPAD (2014) The Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa. 4. Birkland, T. A. (2001) An Introduction to the Policy Process Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making, M.E. Sharpe, Amonk-London 5. Blaikie, P. and Mope Simo, J. (1998) Cameroon s Environmental Accords: Signed, Sealed but Undelivered in Brown Weiss, E. and Jacobson, H. K. (rds.) Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords. The MIT Press Cambridge and London. 6. Brown Weiss, E. and Jacobson, H. K. (2000) Engaging Countries Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords, the MIT Press, Cambridge and London. 7. Catazano, J. (2012) Rapport de Synthèse 2 Composante 2: Gouvernance régionale des pêches au sein de la zone de la COREP. Programme PAF/NEPAD d appui a la COREP. Commission Régionale des Pêches du Golfe de Guinée (COREP) 8. Collins, K. and Earnshaw, D. (1992) The Implementation of European Environmental Legislation. Environmental Politics1 (Winter): De Graff, Gertjan et al. (2014). Rapport de référence régional pour les pêcheries du lac Tchad/ Regional Baseline report fisheries Lake Chad. LCBC-PRODEBALT-NEPAD FAO Fish Programme 70 pp 10. Doulman, D. J. and Swan J. (2012) A Guide to the Background and Implementation of the 2009 FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular 1074 FIPI/C FAO (2005) Report of the twenty-fifth session of the Committee on Fisheries, FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No FAO (1989) Sustainable Development and Natural Resources Management: Conference, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, C 89/2. Suppl. 2. August 1989, 54p. 13. FAO (1995) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, Rome, FAO p. 14. FAO (2007) EAF Toolbox: The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries, Rome p. 15. FAO (1999) International Plan of Action for the management of Fishing Capacity, FAO, Rome 16. FAO (2001) International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, FAO, Rome. 17. FAO (2011) Aquaculture Development: Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture. FAO Technical Guidelines 18. FAO (2014) The State of world fisheries and Aquaculture, Rome 19. FAO/COPACE. (2009) Rapport de l Atelier FAO/COPACE sur les mesures du ressort de l Etat du port pour lutter contre la pêche illicite, non déclarée et non règlementée pour la sous-région de l Afrique de l Ouest. Accra. Ghana juin FAO/NACA/UNEP/WB/WWF (2006) International principles for responsible shrimp farming, Bangkok, Thailand, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific. 21. Freestone, D., Barnes, R. and Ong, D.M. (2006) (eds.) The Law of the Sea, Oxford University Press, Oxford 22. Grindle, M.S. and Thomas, J.T. (1991) Public Choice and Policy Change The Political Economy of Reform in Developing Countries, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London. 23. Hall, C. (1998) Institutional Solutions for Governing the Commons: Designing Factors and Effectiveness, 32

45 in Journal of Environment and Development. Vol.7. No. 2. Pp Hill, M. and Hupe, P. (2002) Implementing Public Policy, SAGE Publications Ltd. London 25. ICSF (2015) International Legal Instruments Relevant to Fisheries and Fishing Communities: A Handbook. International Collectivity in Support of Fishworkers, 27 College Road, Chennai, India 26. Jacobson, H. and Brown Weiss, E. (1998). A framework for analysis, In Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords Edith Brown Weiss and Harold K Jacobson (Eds.) 27. Kinfoussia, C. (2012) Etude Comparative des législations des pêches des Etats Membres de la COREP. Programme PAF/NEPAD d appui à la COREP. 28. Lane, J-L. (1995) The Public Sector Concepts, Models and Approaches, SAGE Publications Ltd. London 29. Lane, J-E. (1999) Policy Implementation in Poor Countries, in Lazin, FA (ed.) Policy Studies and Developing Nations The Policy Implementation Process in Developing Countries, Vol. 6.. Jai Press Inc. Stamford. 30. Mba-Asseko, G. et al. (2012) Formulation d un cadre politique africain des pêches et de stratégie des reformes des pêches en Afrique : rapport sur l évaluation des enjeux stratégiques du développement de la pêche en Afrique Centrale 31. NACA/FAO (2000) Aquaculture Development Beyond 2000: the Bangkok Declaration and Strategy. Conference on Aquaculture in the Third Millennium, February 2000, Bangkok, Thailand, NACA and FAO, Rome, 27pp. 32. Najam, A. (1995) Learning from the Literature on Policy Implementation: A Synthesis Perspective, Working Paper, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg 33. Nugent, C. (2009) Review of Environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture in Africa in FAO Environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 527, Rome 34. Satia, B. P. (2015) An Overview of the large marine ecosystem programs at work in Africa today; Environmental Development (2015), Underdal, A. and Hanf, K. (2000) (eds.) International Environmental Agreements and Domestic Politics The case f acid rain, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Hants and Burlington. 36. Underdal, A. (2002) one Question, Two Answers, in Miles, E. L., Underdal, A., Andresen, S., Wettestad, J., Skjaerseth, J.B., and Carlin, E. M. (eds.) Environmental Regime Effectiveness Confronting Theory with Evidence, The MIT Press, Cambridge and London 37. UN (1982) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, 10 December 1982, UN Publication, New York 38. UN (1992) Agenda 21, Rio de Janeiro 39. UN (2002) World Summit on Sustainable Development Political Declaration and lan of Implementation, New York. 40. UN-DESA (2015) World Population Prospects. The 2015 Revision, World Population 2015 Wallchart ST/ESA/SERA/ UNEP/UNDP (1996) Compendium of Environmental Laws of African Countries. Vol. 1 UNEP/UNDP Joint project on environmental law and institutions in Africa 42. Victor, D.G., Raustiala, K., and Skolnikoff, E. B. (1998) (eds.) International Environmental Commitments Theory and Practice. The MIT Press, Cambridge and London 43. Winter, S. C. (2006) Implementation, in Peters, B. G. and Pierre, J. (eds.) Handbook of Public Policy, Sage Publications, London 44. Younis, T. and Davidson, I (1990) The Study of Implementation, in Younis, T. (ed.) Implementation in Public Policy, Dartmouth, Aldershot 33

46 ANNEX 1: EXTRAITE OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE CONSULTANCY FOR ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRAINTS TO THE IMPLEMENTATION/ ADOPTION OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS FOR FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION OF INTERVENTION AREAS TO SUPPORT AFRICAN UNION MEMBER STATES IN CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this exercise is to increase the level of awareness of AU MS and establish the underlying factor for the low rate of implementation or adoption of relevant International and Regional Instruments for sustainable fisheries management with a view of identifying intervention areas for support to the AU member states. The specific objectives are to; i. Assess of the level of awareness and status of implementation of relevant international instruments for sustainable fisheries management in AU MS. ii. Identify the challenges in the ratification and implementation of these instruments iii. Identify relevant provisions in these instruments that would strengthen regional approach to sustainable management and development of fisheries and aquaculture in Africa. iv. Identify key interventions areas/measures that will facilitate the adoption and domestication of the international instruments by AU MS in line with the African fisheries reform strategy. EXPECTED RESULT: i. A comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge and status of AU MS on awareness and application of International/Regional Fisheries Instruments is established. ii. The challenges facing AU MS in the implementation and ratification of these instruments. iii. An action plan to fast track the adoption and domestication of international fisheries instruments is developed established. SPECIFIC ACTVITIES: This activity will be implemented simultaneously through the engagement of one consultant for each of the five Regions in Africa; East, Central, North, Southern and West. The consultants will undertake the following tasks: Briefing by the AU-IBAR; Consultation meetings with the relevant Authorities of the assigned AU MS; Produce a comprehensive report on the challenges faced by AU MS in implementation of international fisheries instruments; Produce a report with recommendations on strategic intervention areas that would facilitate the adoption and/or implementation of these instruments by AU MS; Provide a background reference document, briefly describing each instrument and justification of relevant provisions that may be having bearing on African fisheries and aquaculture development; Develop a framework for establishing a national and regional plans of action for AU MS to adopt key international fisheries instruments (e.g. IUU, sustainable aquaculture development, fishing access arrangements etc.); Finalize the draft documents taking into account of the conclusions and recommendations made by the AU-IBAR; Compilation of the required reports as outlined in Section 7.1 of this Terms of Reference 34

47 LOCATION: The consultancy would be home based with field visits predominantly by desk, online research and correspondences. But where necessary, after consultation and approval by AU-IBAR, field trips would be undertaken to respective AU MS. The period of implementation of the contract will be 30 days. 35

48 ANNEX 2: BACK GROUND REFERENCE DOCUMENT ON SOME INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS THAT IMPACT FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT IN CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION Glossary Acceptance: When a State becomes a party to a treaty; it may mean either by signature subject to acceptance (analogous to ratification) or by acceptance without prior signature (analogous to accession). The text of the treaty usually establishes which meaning of acceptance is meant. Also see ratification. Accession: the act whereby a State that has not signed a treaty expresses its consent to become a party to that treaty by depositing an instrument of accession. Accession has the same legal effect as ratification, acceptance or approval. The conditions under which accession may occur and the procedure involved depend on the provisions of the relevant treaty. Accession is generally employed by States wishing to express their consent to be bound by a treaty where the deadline for signature has passed. However, many modern multilateral treaties provide for accession even during the period that the treaty is open for signature. Action plan: a sequence of steps to achieve an endpoint or an instrument developed in partnership between the fisheries and aquaculture department and representatives of all relevant stake-holders groups, describing what needs to be done, where, when, how and by whom to achieve a desired goal, for example, adoption of international instruments at national level. In addition to clearly stated objectives, action plans should contain, if possible, tasks assignments, schedules, and resource allocation and evaluation criteria. Adoption: the formal act by which negotiating parties establish the form and content of a treaty. The treaty is adopted through a specific act expressing the will of the States and the international organizations participating in the negotiation of that treaty, e.g., by voting on the text, initialing, signing, etc. Adoption may also be the mechanism used to establish the form and content of amendments to a treaty, or regulations under a treaty. Agreement: a decision to do something made by two or more people, organizations, companies or governments. Agreements can be binding or non-binding. A binding agreement is one that everyone who has signed must follow or be punished. Non-binding agreements show that governments are trying to do something but they accept that they may not always be able to do so because of economic reasons. Convention: a formal multilateral treaty with a broad number of parties. In the last century, however, the term was regularly employed for bilateral agreements. Conventions are normally open for participation by the international community as a whole, or by a large number of States. Usually, instruments negotiated under the auspices of an international organization are entitled conventions. The same holds true for instruments adopted by an organ of an international organization. Declaration: formal statement by a State or international organization while ratifying a convention Entry into force: (definitive entry into force): Entry into force of a treaty is the moment in time when a treaty becomes legally binding on the parties to the treaty. The provisions of the treaty determine the moment of its entry into force. This may be a date specified in the treaty or a date on which a specified number of ratifications, approvals, acceptances or accessions have been deposited with the depositary. 36

49 Guidelines: a set of instructions to be followed Legally binding: the requirement that contracting parties follow the provisions in the instrument and create legal rights and duties Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): a less formal international instrument than a typical treaty or international agreement. It often sets out operational arrangements under a framework international agreement. It is also used for the regulation of technical or detailed matters. An MOU typically consists of a single instrument and is entered into among States and/or international organizations. Party: a State or other entity with treaty-making capacity that has expressed its consent to be bound by that treaty by an act of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, etc., where that treaty has entered into force for that particular State. This means that the State is bound by the treaty under international law. Protocol: an agreement of a less formal nature than that entitled a treaty or convention. Generally, a protocol amends, supplements or clarifies a multilateral treaty. Ratification, acceptance, approval: the act undertaken on the international plane, whereby a State establishes its consent to be bound by a treaty. Ratification, acceptance and approval all require two steps: the execution of an instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval by the Head of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs, expressing the intent of the State to be bound by the relevant treaty; and, for multilateral treaties, the deposit of the instrument with the depositary; and for bilateral treaties, the exchange of the instruments between parties. Treaty: a generic term embracing all instruments binding under international law, regardless of their formal designation, concluded between two or more international juridical persons. Thus, treaties may be concluded between States; international organizations with treaty-making capacity and States; or international organizations with treaty-making capacity. 37

50 1982 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON LAW OF THE SEA Short Title: Law of the Sea Convention Acronym: UNLOSC Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Treaty Date and place of Adoption: 10 December 1982, Montego Bay, Jamaica. Date of Entry into Force: 16 November Description The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is a comprehensive legal text that establishes jurisdiction and governance parameters of many key natural resources, including high seas fisheries. UNCLOS is one of the most significant legal instruments ever developed because it encompasses such a broad span of rights and obligations relating not only to fisheries, but also to transit and seabed resources. The Convention deals with a comprehensive range of subjects contained in 320 articles and nine annexes. Specifically with regard to marine capture fisheries, the Convention deals with the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), the rights and jurisdiction of the coastal state, conservation and management of the living resources of the high seas, maximum sustainable yield (MSY), optimum utilization, and the establishment of regional fishery bodies (RFBs) for transboundary and highly migratory stocks. Relevance The 1982 Convention remains the parent Convention of all international fishery instruments. It provides the legal basis for coastal States to have complete jurisdiction over the 200 nautical miles adjacent to coastlines, as well as jurisdiction over sedentary fish stocks and all non-living resources to the edge of the continental shelf. It specifies freedom of fishing and freedom of navigation on the high seas, but also states that these freedoms are subject to restrictions. It stipulates that coastal States and fishing flag States have a duty to co-operate on conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and other fisheries on the high seas. It specifies that flag States have a right to exercise jurisdiction over their vessels anywhere, including the high seas, but also stipulates that with this right comes a duty to control the activities of vessels flagged by them. It provides for cooperation in fisheries management through competent sub-regional, regional or global organizations. Major Provisions In exercising EEZ rights and duties, state parties shall have due regard to the rights and duties of other states. (Article 56) Coastal state is responsible for determining allowable catch of living resources within its EEZ in accordance with proper conservation and management measures. (Article 62) Coastal state shall promote the objective of optimum utilization of living resources within the EEZ. (Article 62) Coastal state and states fishing for trans-boundary stocks are required to seek to agree upon measures necessary for conservation of stocks in the EEZ adjacent area. (Article 63) Coastal state shall cooperate to ensure conservation and optimum utilization of highly migratory stocks throughout the region, both within and beyond the exclusive economic zone. (Article 64) States to cooperate with a view to the conservation of marine mammals within the EEZ and in the high 38

51 seas, and in the case of cetaceans, to work through appropriate international organizations for their conservation, management and study (Article 65 and 120) All states have the duty to take, or to cooperate with other States in taking, such measures for their respective nationals as may be necessary for the conservation of the living resources of the high seas. (Articles 117 and 118) Available scientific information, catch and effort statistics, and other data relevant to the conservation of fish stocks, shall be contributed and exchanged on a regular basis through competent fishery organizations. (Article 119) AGREEMENT TO PROMOTE COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES BY FISHING VESSELS ON THE HIGH SEAS Short Title: Compliance Agreement Legal Status: Binding Acronym: Compliance Agreement Type of Instrument: Agreement Date and place of Adoption: 24 November, 1993 (FAO Rome, Italy) Date of Entry into Force: 24 April 2003 Description An international agreement arising out of Declaration of Cancun (1992) and Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED 1992) and negotiated under the FAO Constitution for states to take effective action, consistent with international law, to deter the practice of reflagging of vessels as a means of avoiding compliance with applicable conservation and management rules for fishing activities on the high seas. Objectives The Compliance Agreement has two primary objectives: to impose upon all states whose fishing vessels operate on the high seas an array of obligations designed to make the activities of those vessels consistent with conservation and management needs; to increase the transparency of all high-seas fishing operations through the collection and dissemination of data about high-seas fishing vessels and their activities Relevance The international legal regime for marine fisheries cannot operate effectively if fishing vessels are permitted to reflag to a flag state of convenience, now appropriately redefined flag of non-compliance to escape the applicable conservation and management measures of high seas fishing. In this regard, the Compliance Agreement reinforces the effectiveness of international fisheries conservation and management measures by redefining and reinforcing the concept of flag state responsibility for the activities of fishing vessels flying the flag of a state party. It also seeks to provide means to ensure the free flow of information on all high seas fishing operations. Major Provisions The main thrusts of the Agreement can be summarized under three principle rules: Rule 1: Each flag state must ensure that its vessels do not engage in any activity that undermines the effectiveness of international fishery conservation and management measures, whether or not the flag state is a member of the regional fishery organization that adopted such measures 39

52 Rule 2: No vessel is to be used for fishing on the high seas without specific flag state authorization Rule 3: No flag state shall grant such authority to a vessel unless the flag state is able to control the fishing activities of that vessel. These three rules represent a new vision for high-seas fisheries. To abide by these rules, flag states must actively oversee the high-seas fishing operations of their vessels. They must decide case by case whether to authorize any vessel to fish on the high seas. Most importantly, they may not permit any vessel to fish on the high seas at all unless they are able to prevent the vessel from undermining agreed high-seas conservation rules The agreement requires the following issues to be implemented in the national legislation of its parties: designation of the national authority responsible for carrying out the duties of the flag state under the agreement; provisions that make it unlawful for flag vessels to undermine the effectiveness of international conservation and management measures, and that provide a mechanism for authorities to ensure that the law is respected; mandatory fishing authorizations for flag vessels fishing on the high seas; mandatory conditions for flag vessels receiving a fishing authorization; proper marking of fishing vessels; information on fishing operations; enforcement measures and sanctions; establishment and maintenance of records of flag vessels fishing on the high seas; duties of the flag state to provide FAO with information AGREEMENT FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA OF 10 DECEMBER 1982 RELATING TO THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF STRADDLING FISH STOCKS AND HIGHLY MIGRATORY FISH STOCKS. Short Tittle: United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement Acronym: UNFSA Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Treaty Date and place of Adoption: 4 December 1995 (New York, USA) Date of Entry into Force: 11 December 2001 Description This land-mark intergovernmental legal agreement constructed under UN auspices and subsidiary to its parent treaty the UNCLOS - prescribes the mechanisms for international cooperation between coastal States and States fishing on the high seas in order to achieve long-term sustainability of highly migratory fishery resources and stocks that straddle the high seas and EEZs. It also establishes minimum standards which are applicable not only to fishing for straddling and highly migratory stocks on the high seas but also to fishing for all fish stocks under the jurisdiction of the coastal State. In addition, the Agreement reinforces the roles played by regional fisheries organizations in managing these stocks. In order for states or entities to have access to these fisheries resources, they must either join the organizations or, at a minimum, apply the fishing rules established by these organizations to their own vessels. Disputes arising under the agreement are subject to compulsory and binding dispute settlement. 40

53 Objectives Promote cooperation between coastal States and States fishing on the high seas in order to achieve longterm sustainability of highly migratory fishery resources and stocks that straddle the high seas and EEZs. Relevance Underlines the special interest of coastal States in the conservation of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks Elaborates on the UNCLOS provisions of the duty to co-operate and the duties of the flag State, including the obligation to apply the precautionary approach by setting limit reference points for maximum sustainable yield Underscores the need for ecosystems and biodiversity concerns to be factored into the management process Advocates for the creation and use of regional fisheries management organizations and also to be promoted as a means of fulfilling the duty of States to co-operate Provides a framework for the conservation and management of highly migratory and straddling fish stocks in international waters regulated by regional fisheries management organizations such as the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), a regional fisheries management organization (RFMO) which area of competence also includes the marine waters of coastal States in the Central African Region. Major Provisions UNFSA provides the first treaty definition of the terms conservation and management as meaning measures to conserve and manage one or more species of living marine resources that are adopted and applied consistent with the relevant rules of international law as reflected in the Convention and this Agreement. The main elements that need legislative implementation are: Coastal states and distant water fishing states are required to ensure that the conservation and management measures which are created within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and on the high seas are compatible. Parties to the agreement are to apply general principles for the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks, including the precautionary approach, on the high seas as well as within their EEZ. Flag states must meet certain obligations with respect to their vessels fishing on the high seas for straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. State parties are obliged to join regional fisheries management organizations or arrangements, or to agree to comply with the conservation and management measures those bodies create. Otherwise they will not be allowed to fish in the areas where such measures apply. Non-flag states are subject to innovative enforcement provisions, and a new concept of port-state jurisdiction in respect of fishing vessels applies. States will have to apply detailed provisions on peaceful dispute settlement. Endorses the Precautionary Approach and provides examples on how it can be applied; and this represents a significant departure from the UNCLOS recognition of maximum sustainable yield. 41

54 CODE OF CONDUCT FOR RESPONSIBLE FISHERIES Short Title: The Code of Conduct Acronym: CCRF (Code) Legal Status: Non-binding Type of Instrument: Voluntary Code Date and Place of Adoption: 31 October 1995, (FAO, Rome, Italy) Description: The Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries is the first international global and voluntary instrument of its type to have been concluded for the fisheries sector directed towards all States and fishing entities, sub regional, regional and international organizations, whether governmental or non-governmental, and all persons concerned with the conservation, management and development of fisheries resources. This comprehensive blueprint for the management of fisheries sets out principles and international standards of behaviour for responsible practices for all dimensions of fisheries with a view to ensuring the effective conservation, management and development of living aquatic resources with due respect for the ecosystem and biodiversity. The Code covers the capture, processing and trade of fish and fishery products, fishing operations, aquaculture, fisheries research and the integration of fisheries into coastal area management. It also recognizes the nutritional, economic, social, environmental and cultural importance of fisheries and the interests of all those concerned with the fishery sector. The broad framework of the Code of Conduct accommodates both binding agreements and non-binding instruments that include: the 1993 FAO Compliance Agreement; four non-binding international plans of action (IPOAs) dealing with the management of seabirds, sharks and fleet capacity, and combating IUU fishing; two voluntary strategies for improving information on status and trends of capture Fisheries, and aquaculture; voluntary guidelines such as those relating to Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries in the context of Food Security and poverty eradication, on the management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas, the ecolabelling of fish and fishery products from marine capture fisheries, and inland fisheries; the non-binding 2005 Model Scheme on Port State Measures; and the binding 2009 FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (2009 FAO Port State Measures Agreement). In view of the greater importance of capture fisheries at the time of its elaboration greater emphasis was given to this sector. However, an equal importance is being placed on aquaculture as evident by the number of instruments prepared on all aspects of fisheries and aquaculture in the framework of the Code Objectives: The leading objective of the Code of Conduct is to establish principles for responsible fishing and fisheries activities, taking into account all their relevant biological, technological, economic, social, environmental and commercial aspects. In doing so, the goals of long-term sustainability, as envisaged by several international instruments are implemented. 42

55 More specifically, the objectives of the Code are: to establish principles and criteria for the elaboration and implementation of national policies for responsible conservation of fisheries resources and fisheries management and development; to serve as an instrument of reference to help states establish or improve the legal and institutional framework required for the exercise of responsible fisheries and to formulate and implement appropriate measures; to provide guidance that may be used where appropriate in the formulation and implementation of international agreements and other legal instruments, both binding and voluntary; to facilitate and promote technical, financial and other cooperation in conservation of fisheries resources and fisheries management and development; to promote the contribution of fisheries to food security and food quality, giving priority to the nutritional needs of local communities; to promote protection of living aquatic resources and their environments and coastal areas; to promote the trade of fish and fishery products in conformity with relevant international rules and to avoid the use of measures that constitute hidden barriers to such trade; to promote research on fisheries as well as on associated ecosystems and relevant environmental factors; to provide standards of conduct for all persons involved in the fisheries sector Relevance: The rationale underlying the Code is that effective fisheries management is essential if long-term goals of sustainability are to be achieved, in view of the large proportion of fisheries that are not effectively managed. The Code takes a holistic view of fisheries, and prescribes principles and standards for the conservation and management of all fisheries and dimensions of fisheries. It demonstrates the interdependencies in the fisheries sector, and the need to address all areas if consistent, sustained and sector-wide improvements are to be achieved. Major Provisions In total the Code has 12 articles and two annexes. Articles 1 to 6 describe the nature and scope of the Code, its objectives and relationship with other international instruments, directions for its implementation, monitoring and updating, the special requirements of developing countries, and general principles. Articles 7 to 12 deal with substantive technical aspects related to fisheries management, fisheries operations, aquaculture development, fisheries and coastal area management, post-harvest practices and trade, and fisheries research. The 1995 FAO Code of Conduct is supported by a series of technical guidelines. Advisory in nature and intended to provide how to information, the guidelines are prepared from time to time to assist in the implementation of the concepts and measures of the Code (e.g. the precautionary approach to fisheries). The guidelines have no formal status and may be revised to fit changing circumstances. They are elaborated in different ways by individual and informal drafting groups to formal expert meetings and consultations. 43

56 INTERNATIONAL PLAN OF ACTION TO PREVENT, DETER AND ELIMINATE ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING Short Title: IPOA-IUU Legal Status: Non-binding Type of Instrument: Plan of Action Date and Place of Adoption: 2 March 2001, FAO, Rome, Italy Description The IPOA-IUU was elaborated as a result of the 1999 Rome Declaration on the Implementation of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries at which the ministers undertook to develop a global plan of action to deal effectively with all forms of IUU fishing including fishing vessels flying a flag of convenience» now referred to as flag of non-compliance. The IPOA IUU provides States with a set of comprehensive, effective and transparent measures, often referred to as a toolbox of measures, to be used directly by them, or indirectly through RFMOs, to combat IUU fishing. The IPOA IUU is broad in scope, seeking to address IUU fishing in a holistic and flexible manner, depending on particular country and regional needs. As a non-binding instrument, the IPOA IUU is drafted in the conditional tense using the term should. In this way, States are encouraged to undertake certain actions and activities rather than being obligated to do so. Objectives To prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing by providing all States with comprehensive, effective and transparent measures by which to act, including through appropriate regional fisheries management organizations established in accordance with international law. Relevance Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) depletes fish stocks, destroys marine habitats, distorts competition, puts honest fishers at an unfair disadvantage, and weakens coastal communities, particularly in developing countries. IUU fishing, within and outside the EEZ, is known to have negative social and economic consequences particularly for small-scale fish workers. Apart from the reduction in catches as a result of activities of IUU fishing vessels, there are safety implications for the artisanal fleet as well. Any efforts to control IUU fishing can only have positive outcomes for the Countries in general and for the artisanal and small-scale sector in particular. Major Provisions The measures focus on all State responsibilities, flag state responsibilities, coastal State measures, port State measures, internationally agreed market-related measures, research and the role of regional fisheries management organizations. In the IPOA IUU, the role of the flag State is given a high profile despite the clear recognition of the sovereignty of the port State over its ports under international law. The instrument does not explicitly encourage flag States to cooperate with port States in the implementation of the IPOA IUU. There is also the presumption that flag States will act upon information concerning IUU fishing by their vessels provided by port States following inspections. 44

57 Specifically the IPOA IUU: Requires advance notice of foreign vessels wishing to enter port and expects them to provide appropriate documentation including authorizations to fish, fishing trip details and the amount of fish on board, With respect to the operational aspects of vessel inspection, the IPOA IUU indicates that port States should collect vessel details relating to the flag and identification, name, nationality and the qualifications of the master and fishing master, fishing gear, catch on board (including its origin, species, form and quantity), other information required by RFMOs or international agreements and total landed and transshipped catch. Suggests that Information collected from vessels undergoing inspection should be forwarded to flag States and, as appropriate, RFMOs. Encourage a professional approach to the implementation and supervision of port State measures by urging port States to publicize a national strategy and procedures for port State controls Proposes that RFMOs identify fair, transparent and non-discriminatory measures (e.g. denial of access to port and its services) to be taken by their members against vessels unable to demonstrate that fish harvested in their respective areas was not taken in a manner consistent with the RFMO s conservation and management measures. Emphasizes that the exchange of information, especially between port and flag States, is a key consideration underpinning the success of its implementation. Encourages the full participation of stakeholders, including industry, fishing communities and NGOs in combating IUU fishing PORT STATE MEASURES AGREEMENT Short Title: Port State Measures Acronym: PSMA Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Agreement Date and Place of Adoption: 22 November 2009, FAO, Rome, Italy Date of Entry into Force: Thirty (30) days after 25th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. By 11 August Parties Description The FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing envisages that parties, in their capacities as port States, will apply the Agreement in an effective manner to foreign vessels when seeking entry to ports or while they are in port. The Agreement is binding and stipulates minimum port State measures. However, countries are free to adopt more stringent measures than those outlined in the Agreement. The conclusion of the 2009 FAO Port State Measures Agreement heralded an advance in international law and a major development in efforts to deal more effectively with IUU fishing. Significantly, the Agreement extends the port State measure provisions of the 1982 UN Convention and entrenches these measures as a fisheries management tool. The Agreement marked a move away from the strong international focus and reliance on flag State enforcement as a means of attempting to control IUU fishing vessels. The Agreement placed port State measures at the centre of international efforts to combat IUU fishing. This shift in emphasis reflected several factors including: the increase in the number of irresponsible States over the past two decades operating open registries, offering flags of non-compliance ; 45

58 international impatience with flag States over their inability or unwillingness to exercise effective control over vessels flying their flags in accordance with international law; and the realization that port State measures in respect of fishing vessels should be elaborated given their lack of presence in international law. Objectives The main purpose of the Agreement is to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing through the implementation of robust port State measures that underpin a carefully constructed framework that is grounded in and builds upon several international fisheries instruments. Relevance As a fisheries management tool, port State measures have many advantages. In particular, they have the capacity to promote compliance with national and regional conservation and management requirements and, at the same time, to facilitate enhanced regional cooperation and harmonization. Furthermore, the measures should serve to hinder and block the movement of IUU-caught fish onto national and international markets. These additional marketing difficulties should, in turn, have knock-on effects by causing IUU-caught fish prices to fall, thereby reducing the revenue and consequently the incentive for fishers to continue to engage in illicit activities. Port State measures have the advantage of being cheaper and safer than alternative, more conventional air and surface compliance tools. By having access to vessel logs and other operational information, port inspectors have a long-arm capability, in that they can check on fishing activities beyond EEZs (e.g. in the EEZs of neighbouring countries and high seas areas covered by RFMOs). Moreover, port inspections are considerably less expensive in terms of money and less dangerous than are those carried out at sea Major Provisions The Agreement is structured into ten Parts and five Annexes. In essence: Part 1 lays the groundwork for interpretation and application of the Agreement, and includes fundamental international law and practice. Parts 2 4 provide step-by-step requirements and procedures for vessels and port States, from the time prior to entry into port of a vessel through the use of ports, inspections and follow-up actions by the port State. Parts 5 and 6 contain important related considerations regarding the role of flag States and the requirements of developing States. Parts 7 10 address topics commonly included in international agreements on dispute settlement, non-parties, monitoring, review and assessment and final provisions including entry into force. 46

59 VOLUNTARY GUIDELINES FOR SECURING SUSTAINABLE SMALL-SCALE FISHERIES IN THE CONTEXT OF FOOD SECURITY AND POVERTY ERADICATION Short Tile: Voluntary Guidelines SSF Acronym: VGSSF Legal Status: Voluntary Type of Instrument: Guidelines Date and Place of Adoption: 14 June 2014, FAO, Rome, Italy Description: First global instrument on small-scale fisheries as part of FAO s Blue Growth initiative which seeks to restore the potential of the oceans and wetlands through the adoption of responsible and sustainable approaches to harmonize economic growth, food security and the conservation of aquatic resources. The guidelines offers guidance on how to deliver on the promise of sustainable small-scale fisheries in a way that is ecosystem-friendly, participatory and sensitive to cultural context. The guidelines give strong new impetus to the importance of inclusiveness in setting goals and designing management systems that can work for communities, with emphasis on the key role that women play in sustainable fishing communities. The Guidelines complements other international instruments such as the Code of Conduct for Responsible fisheries, Right to Food Guidelines on Voluntary Guideline on Gender and Tenure (VGGT) Objectives The objectives of the Guidelines are to: a. Enhance the contribution of small-scale fisheries to global food security and nutrition and to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food, b. Contribute to the equitable development of small-scale fishing communities and poverty eradication and to improve the socio-economic situation of fishers and fish workers within the context of sustainable fisheries management, c. Achieve the sustainable utilization, prudent and responsible management and conservation of fisheries resources consistent with the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (the Code) and related instruments, d. Promote the contribution of small-scale fisheries to an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable future for the planet and its people, e. Provide guidance that could be considered by States and stakeholders for the development and implementation of ecosystem friendly and participatory policies, strategies and legal frameworks for the enhancement of responsible and sustainable small-scale fisheries, and f. Enhance public awareness and promote the advancement of knowledge on the culture, role, contribution and potential of small-scale fisheries, considering ancestral and traditional knowledge, and their related constraints and opportunities. Relevance Small-scale fisheries is key for food security and nutrition and livelihoods in the Region The Guidelines are in line with principles and priorities identified for the Region The Guidelines provide a holistic approach and guidance to tackle problems in small scale fisheries in order to: improving the governance and management of the aquatic living resources the conservation of their biodiversity and habitats the empowerment of concerned communities 47

60 Major Provisions Besides the nature and scope, guiding principles and relationship with other international instruments, the key provisions are: Responsible Fisheries and Sustainable Development Secure rights to fishery resources and land and the ability to benefit from them Sustainability, effective management and stewardship Social development issues in SSF (e.g. access to services, need for equality and equity, living standards) Secure incomes and safe, fair and decent working conditions Specific issues related to the postharvest sector and trade Highlights gender based issues and the need to promote equality and equity Reduction of vulnerability and increased resilience Ensuring an enabling environment and supporting implementation Pro-poor policy coherence and cross-sectoral collaboration Interrelated aspects of access to information and capacity development Enhancing information and research on SSF and the need for capacity development at all levels and scales Potential challenges for implementation and strategies to ensure that the SSF Guidelines are applied 2010 EUROPEAN UNION ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING (IUU) REGULATION Short Title: EU IUU Regulation Acronym: IUU Regulation Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Regulation Date of and Place of Adoption: 29 September 2008, Brussels, Belgium; Council Resolution (EC) No 1005/2009 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU Regulation) Date of Entry into Force: 1 January 2010, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1010/2009 of 22 October 2009 laying down the rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 Description The Regulation is a key instrument contributing to the EU s overall goals to improve global fisheries sustainability, combat IUU fishing, and strengthen regional fisheries enforcement frameworks within RFMOs. The Regulation limits the accessibility of any country or fishing vessel wishing to export fish products into EU based on their individual record for addressing and reducing IUU fishing. It specifies sanctions and trade measures that may be used against fishing vessels and foreign States, which either support IUU fishing or fail to meet the requirements in the Regulation. This restriction of imports is accomplished through the implementation of: port state control of third country vessels, the establishment of a Community IUU vessel list, the establishment of a non-cooperating third countries list and the implementation of catch certification requirements for all fisheries products. Objectives The objectives of the EU IUU Regulation is to control the movement of fisheries products entering the EU Market and hence limit access to the EU market dependent on the extent the country, area, or region of 48

61 origin of the exported fish product is completely free or increasingly free of IUU fishing Relevance Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) depletes fish stocks, destroys marine habitats, distorts competition, puts honest fishers at an unfair disadvantage, and weakens coastal communities, particularly in developing countries including those in the Central African Region bearing in mind that some of these countries have fishing access agreements with the EU. In this regard the coherent application of the Regulation will ensure that: Only marine fisheries products validated as legal by the competent flag state or exporting state can be imported to or exported from the EU An IUU vessel list is issued regularly, based on IUU vessels identified by Regional Fisheries Management Organizations The IUU Regulation also offers possibilities to blacklist states that turn a blind eye to illegal fishing activities EU operators who fish illegally anywhere in the world, under any flag, face substantial penalties proportionate to the economic value of their catch, which deprive them of any profit. Major Provisions The core elements of the Regulation are measures to address (1) Port State Control of Third Countries; (2) Community Alert System; (3) Catch Certification; (4) Community IUU Vessel List; (5) Non-Cooperating Third Country List and (6) Enforcement Measures and Sanctions. CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Short Title: Acronym: CBD Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and place of Adoption: 22 May 1992 (Nairobi, Kenya) Date of Entry into Force: 29 December 1993 Description The Convention represents the first international instrument in which biodiversity issues are addressed in a comprehensive manner. It recognizes that conservation of biological diversity is a common concern of all and an integral part of the development process and the Convention provides for the management of biodiversity including marine biodiversity through the Jakarta Mandate. The convention establishes an overall umbrella of generic obligations that Parties are to detail at the national level. The majority of provisions allow flexibility in implementation, recognizing that biodiversity conservation and loss may vary widely. The Convention also establishes a new international system for the transfer of genetic resources. Objectives: To provide for the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources 49

62 Relevance The Convention is relevant to fisheries management and aquaculture development in the Region in that biological diversity is a common concern of all and an integral part of the development process. The introduction of alien species could adversely affect biodiversity and threaten ecosystems, habitats and species. The Convention requires Parties to cooperate to achieve sustainable use of biodiversity outside national jurisdictions, as well as on other matters of mutual interest; and Article 22.2 provides that the Convention shall be implemented consistent with rights and obligations under UNCLOS. The Convention has several provisions that are of relevance to, and can protect the interests of, small-scale and artisanal fishing communities. For example Article 8(j) recognizes the need to respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, and to promote their wider application. Major Provisions With respect to aquatic (marine and coastal) biological diversity the five key thematic issues are: 1. Integrated marine and coastal area management (IMCAM); 2. Marine and coastal living resources; 3. Marine and coastal protected areas; 4. Mariculture; 5. Alien species and genotypes Each of the five thematic issues in the Jakarta Mandate have an associate work programme, which sets out specific activities and timeframes for the achievement of operational objectives established for each theme. In addition the Convention stipulates that Parties must: create national plans, strategies or programs for conservation and sustainable use; inventory and monitor the biodiversity within their own territories; identify and regulate destructive activities; and, integrate consideration of biodiversity into national decision making. CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA Short Title: 1973 Washington Convention Acronym: CITES Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and Place of Adoption: 3 March 1973, Washington, DC, USA Date of Entry into Force: 1 July 1975 Description: The Convention regulates international trade in about 30,000 species. Despite the Convention s name, only a small percentage of these are currently endangered, the majority being species for which trade measures have been introduced to avoid extinction threats. CITES Parties agree to implement international trade controls on species listed in one of the three Appendices, according to the level of threat they face. Many marine species are currently listed. In practice, CITES is widely used to promote sustainable use of wild species, including fish. Some listed species are traded in high volumes: for instance, the international trade in skins of crocodilians listed on Appendix II is worth around US$200 million a year. 50

63 Objectives: To use trade measures as a means to protect endangered species from threats of extinction Relevance: Commercial fisheries can pose risks of long-term detrimental impacts to, or extinction of, certain marine species the majority being species for which trade measures have been introduced to avoid extinction threats Potential beneficial synergy exists between fisheries management and CITES listing under certain circumstances. Listing of fish species on Appendix II can contribute to sustainable fisheries management by: 1. Providing support to existing national, bilateral and multilateral fisheries management measures; 2. Providing a tool to combat IUU fishing, where this targets fish that primarily enter international trade; and 3. Providing a standardized global monitoring system for application of trade-related measures to marine fish Major Provisions: The key provisions are with respect of listings of fish species to certain Appendices. These listings could also impact fishing communities. For example Appendix II has a few species of shark and seahorse listed. Banning trade in these species has implications for the livelihoods of small-scale fishers in developing countries dependent on these species. The listing of some of the commercially important aquatic species could have impacts on the employment, income and food security of fish workers in developing countries. Banning trade in turtle, and special protection for the conservation of turtles, for example, has impacts on the livelihoods of fish workers, as seen in a few countries. CONVENTION ON WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE ESPECIALLY AS WATERFOWL HABITAT Short Title: Convention on Wetlands or the Ramsar Convention Acronym: Ramsar Convention Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and Place of adoption: 2 February 1971 (Ramsar, Iran) Date of Entry into Force: 21 December 1975 Description: The Ramsar Convention provides a framework for voluntary international cooperation for wetland conservation. The Convention defines wetlands as areas of marsh, fen peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters. Wetlands should be selected for inclusion in a list of Wetland of International Importance on account of their international significance in terms of ecology, botany, zoology, limnology or hydrology. Objectives: Promote the conservation and wise use of wetlands through local, regional and national action and international cooperation, as a contribution toward achieving sustain able development throughout the world. 51

64 Relevance: Coastal wetlands are known to be highly productive and are extensively used as feeding and spawning grounds and nurseries by fish and shellfish, including those with open-water adult stages. Healthy and productive wetlands are essential for healthy fisheries and, hence, the emphasis on their conservation and sustainable management is vital from a fisheries perspective especially in the Central African Region where there are large expanses of wetlands that contribute to healthy inland fisheries. The preamble to the resolution emphasized the importance of the increased recognition of the importance of wetlands as fish habitats. It also noted that in many instances commercial fisheries are regulated by statutes whose objectives are incompatible with the sustainable exploitation of fishing resources with due regard for the aquatic environment. Major Provisions Recognizes wetlands importance to communities, cultures, governments, and businesses and encourages wetland conservation and wise use of wetlands. Establishes criteria for designating rivers, marshes, coral reefs and other areas as a Wetland of international importance. The Ramsar Secretariat facilitates implementation of wetlands conservation decisions adopted by nations, by preparing wise use guidelines, creating training opportunities, and providing access to financial resources. Contracting Parties shall promote wetland and waterfowl conservation by establishing nature reserves and wetlands and provide adequately for their protection Contracting Parties to consult with each other especially in case of a wetland extending over the territories of more than one Contracting Party or where a water system is shared by Contracting Parties Contracting Parties to endevour to coordinate and support present and future policies and regulations concerning the conservation of wetlands and their flora and fauna. UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE Short Title: Rio Convention Acronym: UNFCCC Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and Place of Adoption: 9 May 1992, New York, USA Date of Entry into Force: 21 March 1994 Description The Framework Convention on Climate Change is one of the major outcomes of UNCED 1992 but since then the Conference of Parties (CoP) has held meetings virtually on an annual basis to refine and improve their commitments. The Convention aims to protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Political will as well as the use of excellent science and technology is important to meeting the objectives of the Convention. Objectives To stabilize the greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level to be achieved within a 52

65 time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change; To ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner Relevance Though precise consequences cannot yet be forecast, climate change is likely to affect fisheries and aquaculture, their dependent communities and related economic activities along three main pathways: 1. Indirect wider socio-economic effects (e.g. fresh water use conflicts affect all food production systems, adaptation and mitigation strategies in other sectors impact aquatic systems in general or fisheries and aquaculture directly); 2. Biological and ecological responses to physical changes (e.g. productivity, species abundance, ecosystem stability, stock locations, pathogen levels and impacts); and 3. Direct physical effects (e.g. sea level change, flooding, storm impacts). Fishers, fish farmers and coastal inhabitants will bear the full force of these impacts through less stable livelihoods, changes in the availability and quality of fish for food, and rising risks to their health, safety and homes. Many fisheries-dependent communities already live a precarious and vulnerable existence because of poverty, lack of social services and essential infrastructure. The fragility of these communities is further undermined by overexploited fishery resources and degraded ecosystems. The implications of climate change for food security and livelihoods in small island states and many developing countries as the Central Region of Africa are profound. Major Provisions Develop, periodically update, publish and make available to the Conference of the Parties, in accordance with Article 12, national inventories of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, using comparable methodologies to be agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties; Formulate, implement, publish and regularly update national and, where appropriate, regional programmes containing measures to mitigate climate change by addressing anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, and measures to facilitate adequate adaptation to climate change; Promote and cooperate in the development, application and diffusion, including transfer, of technologies, practices and processes that control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol in all relevant sectors, including the energy, transport, industry, agriculture, forestry and waste management sectors; Promote sustainable management, and promote and cooperate in the conservation and enhancement, as appropriate, of sinks and reservoirs of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, including biomass, forests and oceans as well as other terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems; Cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change; develop and elaborate appropriate and integrated plans for coastal zone management, water resources and agriculture, and for the protection and rehabilitation of areas, particularly in Africa, affected by drought and desertification, as well as floods; Take climate change considerations into account, to the extent feasible, in their relevant social, economic and environmental policies and actions, and employ appropriate methods, for example impact assessments, formulated and determined nationally, with a view to minimizing adverse effects on the economy, on public health and on the quality of the environment, of projects or measures undertaken by them to mitigate or adapt to climate change; 53

66 Promote and cooperate in scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and other research, systematic observation and development of data archives related to the climate system and intended to further the understanding and to reduce or eliminate the remaining uncertainties regarding the causes, effects, magnitude and timing of climate change and the economic and social consequences of various response strategies; Promote and cooperate in the full, open and prompt exchange of relevant scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and legal information related to the climate system and climate change, and to the economic and social consequences of various response strategies; Promote and cooperate in education, training and public awareness related to climate change and encourage the widest participation in this process, including that of non-governmental organizations Communicate to the Conference of the Parties information related to implementation, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention. AGREEMENT ON THE APPLICATION OF SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES Short Title: Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Acronym: SPS Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Agreement Date and Place of Adoption: Date of Entry into Force: Description This Agreement of 14 Articles and three annexes defines the rights and obligations of Members to take sanitary and phytosanitary measures necessary for the protection of human, animal or plant life or health and the spread of pests. Sanitary or phytosanitary measures include all relevant laws, decrees, regulations, requirements and procedures including, inter alia, end product criteria; processes and production methods; testing, inspection, certification and approval procedures; quarantine treatments including relevant requirements associated with the transport of animals or plants, or with the materials necessary for their survival during transport; provisions on relevant statistical methods, sampling procedures and methods of risk assessment; and packaging and labelling requirements directly related to food safety Objectives: Aims to provide for basic rules for food safety, and animal and plant health standards Relevance Fish contributes significantly to food and nutrition security as well as the economies of Member States in Central African Region and ensuring that only fish and fishery products that meet international standards are consumed locally or exported is of paramount importance. According to this Agreement, Members have the right to take sanitary and phytosanitary measures necessary for the protection of human, animal or plant life or health, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Agreement. Major Provisions The basic important provisions under the SPS Agreement that are relevant for trade in fish and fish products are: the harmonization principle, equivalence principle and scientific evidence. In this regard the Agreement calls on Members to: 54

67 ensure their sanitary and phytosanitary measures conform to international standards, guidelines or recommendations harmonize sanitary and phytosanitary measures on as wide a basis as possible, base their sanitary or phytosanitary measures on international standards, guidelines or recommendations, where they exist, except as otherwise provided for in the SPS Agreement accept the sanitary or phytosanitary measures of other Members as equivalent, even if these measures differ from their own or from those used by other Members trading in the same product, if the exporting Member objectively demonstrates to the importing Member that its measures achieve the importing Member s appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection. In addition: Members shall, upon request, enter into consultations with the aim of achieving bilateral and multilateral agreements on recognition of the equivalence of specified sanitary or phytosanitary measures. Members shall ensure that any sanitary or phytosanitary measure is applied only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health, is based on scientific principles and is not maintained without sufficient scientific evidence, except as provided for in paragraph 7 of Article 5 of the SPS Agreement. Members shall ensure that their sanitary and phytosanitary measures do not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between Members where identical or similar conditions prevail, including between their own territory and that of other Members. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures shall not be applied in a manner which would constitute a disguised restriction on international trade. Nota Bene: An annex to the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement names the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) for food, and the International Animal Health Organization (Office International des Epizootics OIE) for animal health. In the definitions listed in the Annex, animal includes fish. Short Title: Technical Barriers to Trade Acronym: TBT Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Agreement Date and Place of adoption AGREEMENT ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE Description The Agreement which contains 15 articles and two annexes sets out a code of good practice for the preparation, adoption and application of standards by central government bodies. It also includes provisions describing how local government and non-governmental bodies should apply their own regulations normally they should use the same principles that apply to central governments. The Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement covers all technical regulations, voluntary standards and the procedures to ensure that these are met, except when these are sanitary or phytosanitary measures as defined by the SPS Agreement. The principles of the TBT agreement are harmonization, avoidance of unnecessary obstacles to trade, non-discrimination and national treatment, equivalence of technical regulations, mutual recognition of conformity assessment procedures and transparency. 55

68 Objectives To encourage the development of international standards and conformity assessment systems Relevance Technical regulations and standards applied to fish products, such as labelling disputes or testing procedures, at times lead to distortions or obstacles to trade. The TBT Agreement sets the rules for procedures and requirements for these standards Major Provisions To ensure that technical regulations and standards, including packaging, marking and labelling requirements, and procedures for assessment of conformity with technical regulations and standards do not create unnecessary obstacles to international trade and to protect human safety or health, protect animal and plant life or health, protect environment and prevent deceptive practices Members shall ensure that in respect of technical regulations, products imported from the territory of any Member shall be accorded treatment no less favourable than that accorded to like products of national in any other country. Members shall ensure that technical regulations are not prepared, adopted or applied with a view to or with the effect of creating unnecessary obstacles to international trade. For this purpose, technical regulations shall not be more trade-restrictive than necessary to fulfil a legitimate objective, taking account of the risks non-fulfilment would create. Such legitimate objectives are, inter alia: national security requirements; the prevention of deceptive practices; protection of human health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment. In assessing such risks, relevant elements of consideration are, inter alia: available scientific and technical information related processing technology or intended end-uses of products. THE CONVENTION FOR THE CO-OPERATION IN THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION Short Title: Abidjan Convention Acronym: Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and Place of Adoption: 1981, Abidjan, Cote d Ivoire Date of Entry into Force: 5 August 1984 Description The Abidjan Convention is a comprehensive umbrella agreement for the protection and management of the marine and coastal areas and related inland waters falling within the jurisdiction of the States of the West, Central and parts of southern African Region, from Mauritania to South Africa inclusive, which have become Contracting Parties to the Convention. The Convention has two major protocols concerning cooperation in combating marine/coastal pollutions: Protocol concerning cooperating in combating pollution in cases of emergency (1984) and the Protocol concerning Land-based Sources and Activities (2012). By Decision-/CP.10/15 the Parties to the Abidjan Convention have strengthened cooperation with Regional Fisheries Bodies (RFBs) to give a priority role to RFBs to work together with the Secretariat of the Abidjan Convention, in the elaboration and implementation of sustainable fisheries management 56

69 policies, programmes and projects; and to strengthen coordination and cooperation with the RFBs whose areas of competence overlap with or are adjacent to that of the Abidjan Convention to achieve common. Objectives In Article 4, the Abidjan Convention obligates the Contracting Parties to take all appropriate measures to prevent, reduce, combat, and control pollution and to ensure the sound environmental management of natural resources in the Convention area. Relevance The coastline of the area covered by the Abidjan Convention from Mauritania to South Africa exceeds 14,000 km Spanning 22 countries and marked by the Canary, Guinea and Benguela large marine ecosystems (LMEs). These LMEs are richly endowed with both living and non-living resources from large oil and gas reserves as well as diamonds to abundant fisheries and unrivaled natural beauty. From the fisheries perspectives these LMEs possess significant marine biodiversity and habitats (include deltas, mangroves, seagrass, meadows, wetlands, barriers and lagoons, etc.) that provide the coastal countries with some of the world s most productive fishing grounds. Estimated production from these LMEs in 2014 was over 4900 million tonnes. Pollution of all types has negative effects on the ecosystems, on the livelihoods of communities and national economies. Hence, the projects in the Canary Current are focused on protecting the ecosystem from degradation from over-fishing and pollution. The projects in the Guinea Current are designed to improve the sustainability of the fisheries and to reduce land and sea-based pollution. The projects in the Benguela Current are concentrated on implementing integrated, sustainable management and use of resources. Major Provisions The key provisions include: Study and combat the effects of pollution from normal or accidental discharge from ships; pollution caused by dumping from ships and aircraft; pollution caused by discharge from rivers, estuaries, coastal establishments, and outfalls, or emanating from any other sources on the Contracting Parties territories; Study and combat the effects of pollution from activities relating to the exploration and exploitation of the sea-bed; pollution from or through the atmosphere; and coastal erosion caused by human activity, such as land reclamation and coastal engineering. Establishing protected areas for fragile ecosystems and endangered species and Controlling activities likely to have adverse effects on endangered species, ecosystems, or biological processes Promote scientific and technological co-operation To meet their obligations, the Contracting Parties are called upon to cooperate with relevant international, regional, and sub-regional organizations to establish and adopt recommended practices, procedures, and measures designed to fight pollution. These initiatives should be supported by the national laws. 57

70 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE PREVENTION OF POLLUTION FROM SHIPS, 1973 AS MODIFIED BY THE PROTOCOL OF 1978 RELATING THERETO Short Title: MARPOL Convention Acronym: MARPOL Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and Place of Adoption: 2 November 1973 and 17 February 1978 (Protocol), London United Kingdom Date of Entry into Force: 2 October 1983 Description The Convention covers pollution by oil, chemicals and harmful substances in packaged form, sewage and garbage. The Convention includes regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships both accidental pollution and that from routine operations. This comprehensive Convention to combat pollution at sea consists of 20 Articles and six technical Annexes of which Annex 1: Regulation for the Prevention of Pollution by oil and Annex II: Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk are binding but the four others Annex III: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged Form; Annex IV: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships; Annex V: Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships; and Annex VI: Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships are voluntary Objectives To prevent the pollution of the marine environment by the discharge of harmful substances or effluents containing such substances in contravention of the convention Relevance Wastes such as oil, heavy metals and untreated sewage may be directly toxic to some marine organisms. Release of toxic materials can result in the mass kill of fish in the short term, or it can result in the slow poisoning of fish in the long term, which may result in reduced catch, apart from the disruption of the food web and accumulation of toxics in the fish, which make them unfit for consumption by humans. Eggs and larvae of many commercially important marine organisms are particularly sensitive to the toxic effects of pollutants as are organisms living at the ocean surface and on the seabed, where wastes tend to accumulate. Better implementation of this convention will have clear benefits for fishers. In this respect, the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries asks owners, charterers and managers of fishing vessels to ensure that their vessels are fitted with appropriate equipment required by MARPOL 73/78, and that the crew of fishing vessels should be conversant with proper shipboard procedures in order to ensure that discharges do not exceed the levels set by MARPOL 73/78. Major Provisions The Convention covers pollution by oil, chemicals, and harmful substances in packaged form, sewage and garbage. The Convention includes regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships both accidental pollution and that from routine operations. Better implementation of this convention will have clear benefits for fishers. In Annexes I, II and V, MARPOL 73/78 defines certain sea areas as special areas in which, for technical reasons relating to their oceanographical and ecological condition and to their sea traffic, the adoption of special mandatory methods for the prevention of sea pollution is required. 58

71 Under the Convention, these special areas are provided with a higher level of protection than other areas of the sea CODE OF SAFETY FOR FISHERMEN AND FISHING VESSELS, 1968 Short Title: Code of Safety Legal Status: Non-binding Type of Instrument: Voluntary code Date and Place of Adoption: 4-13 September 1968, Geneva, Switzerland Description The Code of Safety for fishermen and fishing vessels provides safety principles designed to reduce risk of injury to fishermen, danger to the vessel and damage to equipment, incorporating provisions on navigation, fishing operations, life-saving appliances and other aspects of safety. The Code is divided into two parts Part A for skippers and crews, and Part B for fishing vessel builders and owners. Part A of the Code has 11 chapters and 6 appendices, which provide for the safety of the vessel, on deck, in fishing operations, in machinery spaces and of mechanical equipment; lifesaving appliances; and firefighting and fire precautions. Part B of the Code covers safety and health requirements with respect to the construction and equipment of fishing vessels, Objectives to provide information with a view to promote the safety and health of fishermen to provide information on design, construction and equipment of fishing vessels with a view to promoting the safety of the vessel and safety and health of the crew Relevance Fishing is a precarious activity and the introduction to the Code points out that fishing has grown from being a primitive occupation to a highly developed industry, employing complex machinery. This development necessitates the introduction and expansion of safety measures along lines similar to those that apply to other major industries. The Code therefore deals with the fundamentals of safety and health of fishermen, and presents safety principles that should be common knowledge and practice and which, if followed, should greatly reduce the risk of injury to fishermen and accidents to equipment. Major Provisions The key provisions include guidelines and principles on fishing vessels, safety at sea, equipment, communication, signals, lights, radar, construction, design, fishing operations, certification, education, hygiene, health and safety, medical examination, vocational training, accommodation, fire and crew. Many of the provisions can be adapted to small-scale fisheries and fishing conditions in the Central region. 59

72 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF ATLANTIC TUNAS Short Title: ICCAT Convention Acronym: ICCAT Legal Status: Binding Type of Instrument: Convention Date and place of adoption: 14 May 1966, FAO, Rome Italy Date of Entry into Force: 21 March 1969 Description The Convention objectives are to maintain or restore populations of tuna in the Atlantic Ocean. The Convention also undertakes research in tuna and tuna-like fishes (the Scombriformes with the exception of the families Trichiuridae and Gempylidae and the genus Scomber) and other species of fishes exploited in tuna fishing in the Convention area as are not under investigation by another international fishery organization. Relevance Tuna fish stocks are prevent in the Central African Region coast and the area falls within the Convention Area of ICCAT. Some Countries in the Region are Members of ICCAT. The ICCAT Commission has the authority to recommend management actions to sustain or restore populations. These recommendations are binding for all members of the Convention. There is a Compliance Committee that monitors compliance with recommendations by member states. Current recommended management measures are primarily geographically based quotas for each species and minimum size limits for tunas and tuna-like species. Recent actions by the Commission to encourage members and nonmember to comply with these measures include the boycotting of tuna products from countries that disregard the Commission s recommendations. Major Provisions The Contracting Parties agree to take all action necessary to ensure the enforcement of this Convention and to transmit to the Commission, biennially or as required, a statement of the action taken by it for these purposes. Each recommendation made by the Commission shall become effective for all Contracting Parties six months after the date of notification. The Contracting Parties will provide any available statistical, biological and other scientific information the Commission may need for the purposes of the Convention. Contracting Parties are to collaborate with each other implement effective measures to ensure the Convention is implemented and in particular to set up a system of international enforcement in the Convention area except the territorial sea and other waters of a State is entitled under international law to exercise jurisdiction over fisheries. Each Contracting Party shall contribute annually to the budget of the Commission. 60

73 (AU-IBAR) Kenindia Business Park Museum Hill, Westlands Road PO Box Nairobi Kenya Tel: +254 (20) Fax: +254 (20) / ibar.office@au-ibar.org Website: