The NFFO recently participated in a major seminar in Roskilde, Denmark, organised by the European Fisheries Control Agency, on how the EU landings obligation, which will be phased into effect for demersal species from 1st January 2016, will be monitored and controlled. The NFFO’s contribution to the conference, both directly and through the advisory councils, was based on the following paper:
Culture
of Compliance
The
most significant feature of a fully effective monitoring and control regime is
the degree to which a culture of
compliance has been established. In
other words, where and when fishermen perceive the rules and management
arrangements to be broadly fair, rational and proportionate, there is a much higher
probability that those rules will be respected; whether those are quota limits,
technical measures or monitoring requirements.
In
the context of our fisheries (multiple and varied units operating on the basis
of complex spatial and temporal patterns, over a wide geographical area, under
multiple jurisdictions, in an ever-changing marine environment) the degree to
which the management rules are considered reasonable and legitimate is of
critical significance.
The
experience of the CFP over the last 20 years has shown us the limitations of a
top-down, command and control
approach to managing our fisheries. It has also offered however, glimpses of
what can be achieved through a collaborative, results-based approach, through which management objectives are
achieved by delegating responsibility to the fishing industry, within an
overall framework of supervision.
The
EU landings obligation can be considered both a hybrid and a transitional
approach. It contains unhelpful elements of prescriptive micro-management but
also scope for a significant degree of delegated responsibility to regional
member states and potentially, to fishing vessel operators and their
organisations.
This
is the context within which we, collectively, must design a control regime that
can deliver the objectives of the new CFP.
Landings
Obligation: control at the point of landing to control at sea
The
landings obligation involves a shift from control principally at the point of
landing, to monitoring and control at sea, where operational enforcement will
be infinitely more challenging. Apart from the shift in location at which
enforcement will take place, there will be complex set of rules about what must
be retained on board and what must be returned to the sea. This change is of
fundamental importance and it is of utmost significance that it is handled
well.
In
this period of financial stress, it is not insignificant that enforcement at
sea will be considerably more resource hungry than a control regime focused on
the point of landing.
Although
there remain a few black spots, on the whole, the period after 2000 has seen a
major shift in fisheries management, in which non-compliance has been pushed to
the margins. This contrasts with the period before 2000 which was more or less
anarchic in many of our fisheries. In some respects, this disregard for the
management controls was a response to, and consequence of, a dysfunctional
management system in which overcapacity and chronic absence of profitability
fed evasion, circumvention of blunt and poorly designed rules, and in some
cases outright illegality.
We
have no wish for the industry to return to this dystopia, not least for the
significance that it holds for reversing positive trends in the key indices of
fishing mortality and biomass.
Control
is not a stand-alone preoccupation. It takes place within a matrix of
management decisions, economic political, biological and physical realities.
For that reason, to deal with the challenges of the landings obligation, it
will have to be both adaptable and responsive and avoid the silo mentality that
control issues have tended to be dealt with in the past.
Elements
of a Successful Regime
An
absolutist approach to enforcement of the landings obligation has the potential
to set us back decades. We should learn lessons from other countries where
workable discard bans are in place. The keys to an effective monitoring and
control regime are:
- Clarity in the legal requirements
- Pragmatism
- Dialogue where problems
arise - Coherence between the
different elements of the management system - Proportionality and a
risk-based approach - Securing a positive
industry mind-set - An adaptive approach
that applies lessons learnt
Technology
Technology,
especially new kinds of information technology, will have its place to play but
it will not be a panacea. Technological developments, especially in remote sensing, will be of most utility
when they are seen by fishermen as an easier and more cost effective way to
demonstrate compliance than the alternatives. Ways should be sought to
significantly lift administrative and cost burdens in return for commitments to
fully documented fisheries. Technology provides us with opportunities to trial
new cost-effective approaches such as the use of reference fleets.
Crew
welfare
The
landings obligation is going to significantly increase the cost of fishing and
the amount of work on deck, in the fishroom, and in the wheelhouse. It will
take time to develop solutions to reduce unwanted catch. In some fisheries this
will be easier than in others. Increased workload can have implications for
crew welfare. It can also lead to diluted income with lower crew shares. In
addition, in some fisheries and classes of vessel, space, stability and
logistical problems arising from retention of unwanted catch will be real. It
is of the utmost importance that these issues are treated with seriousness and
empathy by the control authorities.
Conclusion
The landings obligation, as
it is progressively implemented, will amount to the most significant change to
the fisheries management regime in the experience of most fishermen working
today. The CFP has an unenviable record of launching grandiose, eye-catching,
initiatives that deliver much less that is anticipated or desired; or even
create perverse outcomes. If the landings obligation is to avoid this fate, it
will require fisheries managers, fisheries scientists, and fisheries control
authorities to work closely with the fisheries stakeholders to develop workable
systems that are fit for purpose.