The latest round of negotiations on ending harmful fishery subsidies have stalled at the World Trade Organization (WTO) after an intervention by India, which is again seeking major alterations to the draft text negotiators were hoping to finalize before the end of the year.
In response, Icelandic Ambassador to the WTO Einar Gunnarsson, who has been chairing the negotiations, said he will not bring the draft text to the table at this month’s WTO General Council meeting.
"Save for any last-minute solution, it seems to me that … the negotiations have reached a stalemate, even though nearly all members can support the current text as a basis for conclusion,” he said. “Balancing measures so strongly requested by a couple of members would clearly unbalance the text for a large group of members.”
India is seeking to change how subsidies are calculated within the draft text, specifically aiming to alter the formula from an aggregate total to a per-capita figure paid out by WTO member states to fishermen. Indian delegates said that the proposed aggregate system gives too much leeway to nations with large industrial fleets.
“The [draft text’s] approach overlooks the intensity of subsidies and fails to reflect the situation of a few countries that have already expanded their fishing capacity and continue to heavily subsidize their large-scale industrial fleets, thereby contributing to overfishing,” India’s delegation to the WTO said.
A text that features per-capita distribution of subsidies is “a more accurate and fair way to manage overfishing and capacity issues,” according to Indian delegates, who pointed out that India has a large fishing population and high aggregate spending on subsidies but miniscule sums paid per fisher compared to nations with major distant-water fishing fleets.
M. Krishnan, the former principal scientist at the Indian Council of Agricultural Research-Central Institute of Fisheries Education, told SeafoodSource earlier this year that India offers about USD 300 million (EUR 273 million) in subsidies per year, compared to subsidies of USD 7.3 billion (EUR 6.8 billion) by China, USD 3.8 billion (EUR 3.7 billion) from the E.U., and USD 3.4 billion (EUR 3.3 billion) from the U.S.
India’s subsidies add up to only USD 15 (EUR 14.50) per Indian fisher per year, while, for example, subsidies stemming from Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands total around USD 42,000 (EUR 40,740), USD 65,000 (EUR 63,050), and USD 75,000 (EUR 72,750, respectively, according to Krishnan.
The talks, which sought to limit subsidies leading to overfishing and overcapacity in fishing fleets, are now in jeopardy due to this impasse.
“At this point, it is not obvious to me how members might want to take the negotiations forward, and we need to reflect over what viable alternatives we have,” said Gunnarsson, who also announced recently that he will step down from his chair position if no deal is passed by the end of the year.
Though the impasse marks yet another frustrating delay in the negotiating process for some, others see merit in India’s claim that high-income nations around the world hand out the majority of subsidies and only a few nations globally are to blame for most of the world’s overfishing.
“The point India makes is valid and in line with a general trend in the sector,” François Mosnier, head of the oceans program at London, U.K.-based nonprofit Planet Tracker, said.
Nevertheless, others watching the talks closely said that the net positive a passed deal would elicit outweigh its downsides nations like India are hung up on.
Megan Jungwiwattanaporn, an international conservation unit officer at The Pew Charitable Trusts, said new rules “would curb damaging fisheries subsidies that enable overfishing and overcapacity.”
“These rules would have provided additional benefits to fishers in coastal communities whose livelihoods and food security are impacted by depleted fish stocks,” she said.
