In line with the ten recommendations made by a collective of NGOs and artisanal professional fisheries organisations, CFFA is taking the opportunity of the global evaluation of the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) that will be carried out by the European Commission in 2021. The aim is to deepen the reflection on the implementation of SFPA provisions which are impacting African coastal communities, and to make a series of proposals so that they can better respond to the needs of these communities in the long term.
In 2013, the basic regulation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (1380/2013) introduced significant advances to the legal framework of the SFPAs by taking into account the needs of local communities (Art. 31.2, 1380/2013). In practice too, there have been improvements in the management of the SFPAs, especially with regard to the transparency of activities concerning the EU fleets and to contributions to the fisheries sectors of the partner countries, particularly for the artisanal sector. In particular, the European Union (EU) has made progress on the publication of lists of fishing authorisations for vessels in its external fleet and we encourage it to continue to monitor these vessels in a transparent manner.
However, there is a need for a paradigm shift so that the European taxpayer can be assured that the EU is working coherently through its various policies for responsible fisheries outside its waters. We believe that for these SFPAs to be truly sustainable and equitable, some adjustments are unavoidable, in particular in terms of promoting sustainable fisheries management and the sustainable development of the local sector, especially the artisanal sector, as provided for in the Regulation.
As the Commission is carrying out an evaluation of SFPAs, we would like the focus to be placed on fundamental aspects of their implementation, which need to be reviewed in order to ensure their sustainability. In this document, we identify a series of aspects, relevant to the sustainable development of the local sector, especially the craft sector, and then make proposals for necessary adjustments to be made.
1. Clarifying governance objectives of SFPAs in relation to the new EU commitments
Overall, the general and even specific objectives of SFPAs need to be made explicit in order to really assess the impact of SFPAs on sustainable fisheries management and the development of artisanal fisheries in the countries of the region.
the evaluators…
...will have to assess the implementation of the commitment to governance objectives, in the light of the priorities of transparency and civil society participation, as we will develop further;
...should look at the implementation of the human rights clause and the contribution of SFPAs to the implementation of the FAO Guidelines on Small-scale Fisheries and how this could be taken into account through SFPAs (through sectoral support and access conditions);
...will have to assess how the Commission integrates, and/or is preparing to integrate into its external dimension the commitments made in the Green Deal, IOG, etc.
2. Improving the definition of stocks and the way in which they are allocated
The current basic Regulation does not provide a clear explanation of which fish stocks are subject to an access on the basis of a surplus (to be defined by the coastal State) and which are subject to quotas defined by RFMOs (Art. 31.1,4, 1380/2013). The management of these stocks is totally different and has distinct implications in the partner countries.
Indeed, access to surplus for artisanal fisheries is of crucial importance for fleets in waters under national jurisdiction, while the notion of surplus is meaningless for tuna fisheries in EEZs.
the evaluators…
...will have to analyse the surplus definition clause in light of the resources which are shared with neighbouring countries and how each agreement fits into the region, especially in terms of the management of small pelagics.
3. Enhancing stakeholder's participation, especially civil society
Although the CFP Regulation states that the SFPAs "shall be in the mutual interest of the Union and the third countries concerned, including their local populations and fishing industry" (Art. 31.2, 1380/2013), and that they allow "to establish the governance framework, including [...] promoting the consultation processes of interest groups" (Art. 32.1.b....), they are also a means of "establishing the governance framework, including [...] promoting the consultation processes of interest groups" (Art. 32.1.b...), 1380/2013), SFPAs are still being negotiated without adequate consultation with all stakeholders, particularly in partner countries. Likewise, the needs of the communities most affected by the SFPAs are often not properly taken into account.
the evaluators…
...will have to assess the implementation of this commitment on consultation and on the effective participation of stakeholders, including civil society, and the consideration of their needs in the negotiations.
4. Assessing the implementation of the transparency clause
Transparency is key in fisheries governance. Publishing information related to SFPAs is crucial for local stakeholders.
We recommend an increased effort in this area on the following points:
1. PUBLISHING DATA CONCERNING ACCESS AND FISHING EFFORT IN PARTNER COUNTRIES' WATERS
It is essential to know the overall fishing effort in the waters of the partner countries. The Commission has gradually incorporated clauses in SFPAs encouraging, and even obliging, coastal partner states to be transparent about the agreements they have with countries other than the EU (as is the case with many RFMOs).
the evaluators…
...will have to assess how these non-discrimination and transparency clauses are implemented, in line with the FiTI standard, particularly with regard to catches and the prices paid for access; and
...will have to evaluate whether they can be included in all SFPAs.
2. TRANSPARENCY ON THE USE OF PUBLIC MONEY: PUBLICATION OF SECTORAL SUPPORT ACHIEVEMENTS
Sectoral support is financed by the public money of European citizens. The Joint Commissions and the monitoring that is done by DG MARE agents allow the follow-up on the implementation. However, the publication on the achievements made with the sectoral support is still too incomplete. This is necessary for issues of transparency and ownership of results by the communities concerned, and that they can be seen in particular when their authorities do not publish them.
the evaluators…
...will have to assess the real contributions of sectoral support to the needs of the sector, including artisanal fisheries, identified in the matrixes beforehand; and
...should examine ways in which the Commission could, by involving the various departments concerned, better communicate on the implementation of sectoral support and on the projects carried out, in order to better track the use of public money.
5. Analysing in-depth the budgetary efficiency and economic viability of SFPAs
The budgets allocated to the SFPAs should be dedicated to the development of a framework for sustainable fisheries in the partner countries, in consultation with all other EU actions affecting fisheries in the partner country, combining budgetary rigour and capacity building, for an efficient use of funding, and a fruitful partnership. Our objective is to encourage the EU to carry out a real strengthening of fisheries management policies in the framework of its partnership with developing countries.
Furthermore, public money from European citizens should no longer be used to support fleets but to support fisheries governance and the development of robust fisheries management policies in partner countries, in line with the objectives of the external dimension of the CFP (in particular in the fight against IUU fishing).
the evaluators…
...will have to carry out a comprehensive review of the implementation and monitoring of sectoral support, and of the effectiveness of this tool;
...will need to examine opportunities for capacity building, with partnerships such as with EFCA (e.g. EFCA-DEVCO); and
...will also need to revise the cost of access, and the capacity of fleets to bear the costs of access.
6. Reviewing the basis for calculating financial compensation
The amounts of financial compensation are currently calculated separately for the different fisheries. For tuna vessels, the amount is calculated in relation to a reference catch tonnage. For other fleets, it is calculated on the basis of the fishing possibilities offered for a certain number of vessels (small pelagic trawlers), or a certain capacity (for coastal trawlers).
When the amount depends on the quantities that have been captured, there is a danger of under-reporting of catches in order to pay less. Although the SFPAs include strict catch reporting measures, landings are rarely made in partner countries' harbours, making catch monitoring complex, all the more so because of the shortcomings of the monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) systems of the partner states. Flag States are also not always very active in monitoring and sharing catch data.
the evaluators…
...will have to evaluate the methods and bases of calculation, comparing them with other systems, in order to identify the most suitable systems to enable third countries to receive fair compensation for the access offered to European vessels; and
.... will have to study the possibility of creating mechanisms for sharing information with coastal states, via the ERS.
7. Evaluating control procedures and their shortcomings
We have seen that despite the Commission's efforts, shortcomings remain in the control of European fleets outside EU waters, even though Member States have an obligation to control the activities of their fishing vessels inside and outside EU waters (Preamble §17, Control regulation - 1224/2009).
Coastal states are responsible for control in waters under their jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the capacities of EU partner states in terms of MCS are often limited. Although SFPAs encourage MCS capacity building, particularly through sectoral support, this can only be done concretely through capacity building in addition to the allocation of funds.
To this end, the basic regulation provides for "establishing the governance framework, including the establishment and maintenance of the necessary scientific and research institutes, promoting consultation processes with interest groups and providing for monitoring, control and surveillance capacities, as well as other elements relating to capacity building for the development of a sustainable fisheries policy by the third country" (art. 32.1.b., 1380/2013).
the evaluators…
...will have to assess what is Commission doing concretely to monitor the activity of EU fleets;
...will have to evaluate whether and how Member States are effectively providing detailed information on the activities of their fleets and whether accountability mechanisms are in place; and
...will also need to assess how sectoral support contributes concretely to the partner state's MCS capacity building (see below).
8. Assessing fish value chains
Very few European catches enter third countries because, in general, resources fished by European vessels for the EU market are not landed or processed in partner countries. The possible entry-points for assessing value chains are based on catches landed in third countries and on the arrangements that sectoral support puts in place to bolster processing and commercialisation processes in partner countries.
As women are particularly involved in the processing and marketing, the impacts of the SFPAs on women in fisheries in the partner country, on land (trade and processing) or at sea, as well as their needs, should also be studied. This would help to identify, including through interviews with local women's groups, the needs that should be duly taken into account when part of the sectoral support is earmarked for the development of local fisheries.
The evaluators…
...should make an inventory of the value chains of European catches landed, of their landings (see if the landing clauses are respected, and if so why not) and tracking of the catches landed; and
...should study the impacts of the SFPAs on women in third country fisheries in order to identify needs that could be taken into account in sectoral support.
9. Evaluating the implementation of the social clause
SFPAs provide in the annex the conditions for the boarding of seafarers from partner countries, as well as seafarers from ACP countries. Since 2015, there has been a social clause agreed by the European social partners (Europêche shipowners and the ETF trade union), which they wanted to see inserted in SFPAs, relating to work and social protectionvstandards. This clause aims to guarantee decent working conditions for non-European fishermen working on board vessels operating under SFPAs. It should also be noted that ILO Directive 2017/159 ILO C188 applies since 2019.
the evaluators…
...will have to assess whether and how the conditions for the boarding of seafarers are respected and any difficulties encountered, and the modalities for the implementation of this social clause; and
...should explore the possibilities of STCW trainings.
10. Assessing the obligation for policy coherence for development
We would like to recall the European Commission's commitments to policy coherence for development and the importance of ensuring this coherence in the implementation of fisheries partnerships with partner countries.
The basic regulation recalls on several occasions the need for cohesion between the various external policies of the EU and in particular "with the general objectives of the Union's development policy" (preamble § 52, article 28.2.b, 1380/2013).
the evaluators…
...will have to assess the implementation of the principle of coherence with other EU policies and how "effective coordination" is achieved in practice; and
...will also have to evaluate the political commitments for a coherent approach of the Commission's actions and projects on the seas and fisheries at regional level.
Note: This article is a shortened version of the full position paper which also includes suggestions for further improvements to the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements.
The author makes 4 recommendations to make the external dimension of the CFP more effective: (1) the EU should shift from access agreements to fisheries governance agreements, while (2) continuing to support informed participation of stakeholders in third countries; (3) it should also ensure that all vessels of EU origin, including those reflagged, abide by sustainability standards; and (4) it should actively engage, at international level, to promote transparent, fair, and sustainable access arrangements applicable to all fleets of foreign origin fishing in developing countries.