The costs of IUU fishing to the EU

Similar documents
European fishing fleet capacity management

OCEAN2012 Transforming European Fisheries

OCEAN2012 Fish Dependence Day - UK

Environmental signals Fisheries. policy issue indicator assessment. fishing fleet. for cod stock in the North Sea

4.9 92,000. Healthy fisheries are good for business How better management of European fisheries will create jobs and improve the economy

WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN

Indicator Fact Sheet (FISH11) Catches by major species and areas

Time is running out for bluefin tuna, sharks and other great pelagic fish. Oceana Recommendations for the ICCAT Commission meeting November 2008

Progress Made by Tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs)

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION. Fishing Opportunities for 2009 Policy Statement from the European Commission

BLUE ECONOMY IN THE PACIFIC REGION

85% 57% Towards the recovery of European Fisheries. Healthy stocks produce more fish. of European fish stocks are below healthy levels

INTRODUCTION. Costeas-Geitonas School Model United Nations Committee: Environment Sub-Commission 1

87% 49% North Western Waters Status and Potential Productivity of Fish Stocks. Summary. Only 10 stocks are in line with the Common Fisheries Policy.

A Vision for European Fisheries Reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy A report for WWF by MRAG Ltd

Sustainable Fisheries and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Introduction

1. (1) The title of these regulations is the Enforcement of Sea Fishing Conventions Order, 2011.

Unit C Operational Coordination

Policy Priorities for the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

The extent of IUU fishing in the Barents Sea

Recommendations to the 11th Regular Session of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission 1 5 December 2014, Apia, Samoa

Charting a Course to Sustainable Fisheries Summary

DRAFT REPORT. EN United in diversity EN. European Parliament 2017/2120(INI)

NEW COMMERCIAL VEHICLE REGISTRATIONS EUROPEAN UNION 1. July and August 2017

OECD employment rate increases to 68.4% in the third quarter of 2018

SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE NINTH REGULAR SESSION August 2013 Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION. on the State of Play of the Common Fisheries Policy and Consultation on the Fishing Opportunities for 2018

Unit C Operational Coordination

AGREEMENT ON PORT STATE MEASURES TO PREVENT, DETER AND ELIMINATE ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING

Angling Trust Save Our Sea Bass Bass Position Statement 2018

Sustainable Seafood Matching

Written Testimony of Ted Danson

How illegal discarding. failing EU fisheries. and citizens. How illegal discarding in. fisheries and citizens. Executive summary

154074/EU XXV. GP. Eingelangt am 14/09/17 PE-CONS 25/1/17 REV 1 EUROPEAN UNION. Strasbourg, 13 September 2017 (OR. en) PE-CONS 25/1/17 REV 1

Unit C Operational Coordination

Road Safety Pledge. Route to vision zero 2050 in Europe The Hague, June 14th, Malta. Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Italy

Selection statistics

13196/16 AS/JGC/sr DGB 2A

COUNCIL REGULATION (EU)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EU)

Blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou) in subareas 1 9, 12, and 14 (Northeast Atlantic and adjacent waters)

Piracy and armed robbery at sea

The European Union and Fishing Subsidies

Recovery of European fish stocks and the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy

Sharks: We re not just talking great whites. There are around 500 known species of shark. Dive for Sharks

Wednesday 13 June 2012 Afternoon

Re: Request for Comments on the Proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement, 74 Fed. Reg (December 16, 2009)

SUSTAINABLE SEAFOOD MATCHING

Sustainable Fisheries for Future Generations The Fisheries White Paper

LEGAL BASIS OBJECTIVES ACHIEVEMENTS

SUMMARY OF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS

Lecture 3 The Lisbon Strategy

Common Market Organisation (CMO) Fruit and vegetables sector Evolution of EU prices of certain F&V

L 198/8 Official Journal of the European Union

Recommendations to the 25 th Regular Meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)

October Net Loss: Overfishing Off the Pacific Coast

(Non-legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Architecture - the Market

Fishing mortality in relation to highest yield. Fishing mortality in relation to agreed target

Mackerel (Scomber scombrus) in subareas 1 8 and 14, and in Division 9.a (the Northeast Atlantic and adjacent waters)

Unit 1 Operations. 1. Background

2018 COM Doc. No. COC-303_Appendix 1 / oct.-18 (11:37 )

ACTION TO COMBAT ILLEGAL FISHING AND PROTECTING THE ENDANGERED FISH SPECIES IN AFRICA

LEGAL SHEET On the regulation of sports agent profession

THE FOURTH GLOBAL FISHERIES ENFORCEMENT TRAINING WORKSHOP

The Common Fisheries Policy (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) (No. 2) Regulations 2019

Recommendations to the 19th Special Meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas November 2014, Genoa, Italy

Recommendations to the 13th Regular Session of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission 5-9 December 2016, Nadi, Fiji

(Non-legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Yellowfin Tuna, Indian Ocean, Troll/ pole and line

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION. establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European Eel.

Preserving New Caledonia s Marine Environment The benefits of a large and highly protected marine reserve

Screening report Serbia

The revival of wolves and other large predators and its impact on farmers and their livelihood in rural regions of Europe

Blue Economy Forum November, Bangkok

DEVELOPMENT AID AT A GLANCE

Regional Plan of Action (RPOA) to Promote Responsible Fishing Practices including Combating IUU Fishing in the Region 1. Contents

Whiting (Merlangius merlangus) in Division 6.a (West of Scotland)

REC.CM-GFCM/40/2016/4

The use of dolphins in captivity in the EU and developments towards sea refuges for stranded and captive dolphins.

Road Safety Vademecum

THE FOURTH GLOBAL FISHERIES ENFORCEMENT TRAINING WORKSHOP

LEGALISED OVERFISHING

Comparison of EU and US Fishery management Systems Ernesto Penas Principal Adviser DG Mare

HUNTING WITH HOUNDS THE CASE FOR EUROPEAN UNION LEGISLATION

Wild caught sustainable seafood

Spurdog (Squalus acanthias) in the Northeast Atlantic

Joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2019

Country fact sheet South Korea

Management advisory for the Bay of Bengal hilsa fishery June 2012

Unit C Operational Coordination

EUROPEAN RIDERS, HORSES AND SHOWS AT THE FEI 2012

Swedish and European Opinions on Energy Production

Selection statistics

Wild caught sustainable seafood

Posting of workers in the European Union and EFTA countries : Report on A1 portable documents issued in 2010 and 2011

Last Christmas, Easter, Summer... fishy traditions we have lost HOW OVERFISHING IMPACTS YOU 2

Swedish Opinion on Nuclear Power

5. purse seines 3 000

Fibre to the Home: Taking your life to new horizons!

Transcription:

briefing November 2008 The costs of IUU fishing to the EU IN THIS BRIEFING Introduction 2 Overview of research 3 The costs of IUU fishing 4 The way forward 6 Recommendations 7 PEW Environment Group www.pewenvironment.eu 1

Modelling OST Introduction The full picture Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing is a serious threat to the sustainability of fisheries, globally and in Europe. The continued failure of the EU s control and enforcement measures has significant consequences for fisheries resources, the fishing industry and the communities dependent on fishing. What is IUU fishing? There are many forms of IUU fishing, including fishing without a licence, mis-reporting of catches, fishing in closed areas or with illegal gear, and taking undersized fish. In a number of EU fisheries, IUU fishing accounts for one-third to one-half of all catches. What are the costs of IUU fishing? IUU fishing incurs many costs, such as depleted fish stocks; fewer jobs in fishing and processing; distorted fisheries data, leading to less effective management; likely extinction of sensitive species; and other impacts on ecosystem services, tourism and international negotiations. Some of these costs are difficult to quantify, however it is possible to use models to calculate the cost of reduced catches, job losses and depleted stocks from IUU fishing. Overview of research The Pew Environment Group commissioned eftec an environmental economics consultancy to estimate the costs of IUU fishing to EU Member States; these costs were assumed to be significant but until now had not been calculated. Modelling method Simple surplus-production models were applied to key commercial groups representing 46 percent of fishing value in five Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) around Europe. Simulations were carried out under various management scenarios, with IUU fishing rates ranging from zero to 90 percent. Using best estimates of actual IUU fishing levels for different commercial groups in different areas, costs of IUU fishing were assessed by comparing the IUU fishing case with a zero-iuu scenario. IUU levels in different LMEs celtic-biscay Shelf Cod: 30-60% IUU Iberian coastal Tuna: 40% IUU North Sea Cod: 50% IUU All fisheries: up to 66% IUU mediterranean Tuna and swordfish: 40-50% IUU Baltic Sea Cod: 35-40% IUU Herring: 35% IUU All areas Higher risk species, including sharks: up to 75% IUU Legal loophole: possible to under-declare by 36% without risk of punishment 2 3

nalysis Key findings The costs of IUU fishing Key findings Environmental, economic and social costs to EU Member States are large and represent a significant proportion of fishing value. Summary of key costs The cost estimates for selected fish groups across the five LMEs sum to over 10 billion of lost catches by 2020 over 8 billion of lost stock value in 2020, and over 27,000 lost jobs in fishing and processing industries. In comparison, the value of all EU Member State fishing in these LMEs is about 6 billion each year. Moreover, these estimates, large as they are, do not represent the full cost as the analysis only included selected costs and key stocks with clear evidence of IUU fishing. The true costs of IUU fishing are therefore likely to be substantially higher. Environmental cost A key environmental cost is the damage to fish stocks. For instance in the North Sea, ending IUU fishing is projected to lead to increased fish stocks in 2020 worth more than 4 billion. The full environmental costs are likely to be far greater. This is because the estimate does not include all environmental costs, for instance the risk of extinction of target or by-catch species such as sharks and rays, or impacts on ecosystem services. Economic cost The total loss of catches from 2008 to 2020 arising from IUU fishing is likely to be more than twice the value of current annual fishing. In fact, the effect of stock depletion is so severe that by 2020 catches using the zero-iuu fishing scenario could be many times higher than when IUU fishing continues. Again the full economic costs are much greater, as the analysis does not include other economic impacts such as distorted competition, poorer data quality for management, or the increases in numbers of jelly fish on tourism. Social cost Depleted fish stocks lead to reduced employment in fishing and fish processing. Fisheries-related employment in EU Member States is currently more than 220,000. This figure could be at least 27,000 higher if IUU fishing was stopped. This is an average of projections for 2008 2020; the positive impact on employment from 2020 onwards would be even greater. Costs of IUU fishing until 2020 Member states Landing value modelled Stock value in million Annual value of landings Employment 2008 2020 In million % In real terms % Belgium 62% 90 9 23% 174 20% Denmark 76% 1334 117 26% 2,415 54% Estonia 91% 177 8 10% 636 8% Finland 91% 102 5 10% 367 8% France 46% 1092 130 17% 2,988 16% Germany 70% 430 38 22% 900 21% Greece 13% 175 9 3% 403 2% Ireland 47% 404 50 17% 1,097 17% Italy 13% 504 26 3% 1,162 3% Latvia 91% 189 8 10% 683 17% Lithuania 90% 25 1 10% 88 3% Netherlands 64% 863 85 26% 1,526 44% Poland 91% 140 6 10% 506 8% Portugal 46% 207 24 14% 3,238 15% Slovenia 13% 1 0 3% 3 1% Spain 34% 693 73 11% 6,800 12% Sweden 81% 482 36 21% 1,119 58% UK 60% 1,948 200 24% 3,715 32% EU 46% 8,855 827 16% 27,818 13% 4 5

Conclusions The way forward Catch limits in line with scientific advice will increase fish stocks and reduce the costs of IUU fishing. Fisheries management regimes and time horizons The total cost of IUU fishing is dependent on the management strategy for a given fishery and the time horizon. A management regime that sets catch limits according to scientific advice is better equipped to react to IUU fishing activity and to counter stock depletion. As a result, the cost of IUU fishing would be more moderate. Similarly, a number of costs are amplified over time. As a result, the cost of IUU fishing from 2020 onwards would be even greater than between 2008 and 2020. The principal finding The principal finding from the research is that there are two possible futures for EU fishing. If IUU fishing continues fish stocks will not recover from current depleted levels but decline further. If IUU activity is stopped then sound management could lead, for most commercial species, to restored fisheries approximating maximum sustainable yield levels within a short period of time. Policy Recommendations IUU fishing creates significant environmental, economic and social costs. The Pew Environment Group calls on European institutions and Member States to face the challenge of strengthening the EU control and enforcement regime by introducing: Meaningful sanctions for non-compliance; Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) on all fishing vessels regardless of their length; Independent observers and/or cameras onboard for specific fisheries with a consistent record of infringements, such as bluefin tuna; Central computerised repositories for all information relating to fisheries offences and their perpetrators; and Suspension of Community aid to the fisheries sector, including the granting of fishing rights under Fisheries Partnership Agreements, if a Member State fails to respect its control obligations. In addition, the existing overcapacity in the European fleet estimated to be about 40 percent has to be removed as it inevitably leads to unprofitable fishing operations and strong incentives to bend or break the rules. For further information see the full report, Costs of Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing in EU Fisheries, at: www.pewenvironment.eu/resources/costs_of_iuu.pdf 6 7

briefing About the Pew Environment Group The Pew Environment Group is the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a non-governmental, non-profit organisation. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improving public policy, informing the public and stimulating civic life. The objective of Pew s European Marine Programme is to support the European Union in ending global overfishing and reducing the destruction of the world s oceans. Pirate, or Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU), fishing contributes to the depletion of fish stocks worldwide jeopardises the viability of resources destroys marine habitats distorts competition for legal fishermen, and threatens the survival of coastal communities in developing countries. Our work in the EU is focused on the design and promotion of sustainable marine and fisheries policies, informed and guided by the most up-to-date and accurate scientific information. Picture credits p1: David Monjou/Fotolia, Jeff Rotman/naturepl.com, Chris Lofty/Fotolia, Nani/Fotolia. p2: David Monjou/ Fotolia, Chris Furlong/Getty Images, Heike Zidowitz, Jorge Zapata/epa/Corbis. p4: www.deepwave.org. p5: Eric Pèduzzi/Fotolia, Mtrommer/Fotolia, Jose B Ruiz/naturepl.com. p6: Kushnirov Avraham/Fotolia, Neil Holmes/Alamy. p7: Neil Lucas/naturepl.com, David Harding/Fotolia, Marcel Mochet/AFP/Getty Images, David Monjou/Fotolia. p8: Alexei Novikov/Fotolia, Elaine Davis/Fotolia, Heike Zidowitz, Kurt Amsler/Ardea London. PEW Environment Group European Marine Programme 8 Square du Bastion 1A 1050 Brussels Belgium eumarine@pewtrusts.org www.pewenvironment.eu