Project
ShutterstockTowards an end to subsidies that promote overfishing
Overfishing is one of the main problems for the health of our ocean. And the provision of negative subsidies to the fishing sector is one of the fundamental causes of overfishing.
Fishing subsidies are financial contributions, direct or indirect, that public entities grant to the industry.
Depending on their impacts, they can be beneficial when they promote the growth of fish stocks through conservation and fishery resource management tools. And they are considered negative or detrimental when they promote overfishing with support for, for example, increasing the catch capacity of a fishing fleet.
It is estimated that every year, governments spend approximately 22 billion dollars in negative subsidies to compensate costs for fuel, fishing gear and vessel improvements, among others.
Recent data show that, as a result of this support, 63% of fish stocks worldwide must be rebuilt and 34% are fished at "biologically unsustainable" levels.
Although negotiations on fisheries subsidies, within the framework of the World Trade Organization, officially began in 2001, it was not until the 2017 WTO Ministerial Conference that countries committed to taking action to reach an agreement.
This finally happened in June 2022, when member countries of the World Trade Organization reached, after more than two decades, a binding agreement to curb some harmful fisheries subsidies. It represents a fundamental step toward achieving the effective management of our fisheries resources, as well as toward ensuring global food security and the livelihoods of coastal communities.
The agreement reached at the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference provides for the creation of a global framework to reduce subsidies for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; subsidies for fishing overexploited stocks; and subsidies for vessels fishing on the unregulated high seas. It also includes measures aimed at greater transparency and accountability in the way governments support their fisheries sector.
The countries agreed to continue negotiating rules to curb other harmful subsidies, such as those that promote fishing in other countries' waters, overfishing and the overcapacity of a fleet to catch more fish than is sustainable.
If we want to have abundant and healthy fishery resources, it is time to change the way we have conceived fishing until now. We must focus our efforts on creating models of fishery use that allow for long-term conservation.
Partners:
NGOs fight to defend Panama’s rivers
Panama NGOs have called on the National Environmental Authority to repeal a resolution that threatens watersheds and allows large-scale projects such as hydroelectric dams to use up to 90% of the water in rivers, lakes and other ecosystems. Panama City, Panama. Three Panamanian non-governmental organizations have presented a formal petition to Panama’s National Environmental Authority (ANAM), asking it to revoke a resolution that limits to 10% the environmental flow of all the rivers in Panama. The petition calls on the government to create a regulation for environmental flow that takes into account the environmental, human and cultural values of rivers. The NGOs also offer explanation of the importance of taking into account the specific characteristics of each ecosystem in terms of their ecology and their capacity to meet the needs of the people that depend on them. The NGOs also called for the public to be given the chance to participate in determining the environmental flow of rivers. The NGOs that made the presentation are the Environmental Advocacy Center of Panama (CIAM), the Foundation for Integral Development and Conservation of Ecosystems in Panama (FUNDICCEP) and the Friends of La Amistad International Park (AMIPILA). They prepared the petition and the proposal for regulating environmental flow to protect the environment and human rights in collaboration with attorneys and scientists from the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW) and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The existing regulation affects everyone in the country, especially communities in the province of Chiriqui and Veraguas, where a large number of hydroelectric dams have severely threatened rivers and water availability," said CIAM attorney Luisa Arauz. "Our petition explains how the current ecological flow resolution breaches national and international regulations by ignoring the needs of communities and requirements of the ecosystems." Panama’s government has international obligations to protect water ecosystems and ensure the human rights of the people that depend on the water flow. "We presented a letter to ANAM highlighting the most relevant international obligations and case studies supporting the petition and the regulation proposal," said AIDA lawyer Haydée Rodríguez. ELAW attorney Pedro León said, "The proposal will allow the ANAM to grant water-use permits and concessions based on the actual load capacity of water sources, making it possible to guarantee an effective protection of the human right to water and a healthy environment." The petitioners asked ANAM to strengthen public participation in water management by convening a public consultation to discuss the proposal. The proposal calls for a classification of existing water resources based on their degree of use and by taking into account the biological characteristics and the human uses that rivers must satisfy. It also recommends the application of holistic methods to assess environmental flows in fresh water ecosystems to guarantee their adequate and sustainable use. AIDA defends the individual and collective right to a healthy environment through the development, implementation, and enforcement of national and international law. "Freshwater Preservation" is one of our five areas of institutional focus. Clean water is a cornerstone of human and environmental health, and AIDA works to protect ecosystems that serve as vital freshwater resources for nearby communities and biodiversity.
Read more
Raising people's needs in tackling climate change
Every day we hear a new story about a family affected by extreme changes in climate. Some suffer from severe droughts, others from serious rainfall and flooding, and still others from intense heat waves and forest fires. Local realities must be considered at the international level as governmental institutions decide how to provide finance for climate adaptation and mitigation. AIDA brings the concerns of communities most affected by this global issue to the attention of governments and financial institutions. We have the technical capacity to support governments’ decision making processes on climate change "They can rely on us to provide effective solutions based on our technical knowledge, research, work experience, and relationships with local communities. International decisions about project funding have direct impact on the national and local levels. Bad decisions will result in bad projects," explains Andrea Rodríguez, an AIDA attorney. Our commitment to protecting the interests of the most vulnerable communities has led us to follow closely development of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This new institution is expected to channel most financial resources for climate change projects and programs in developing countries. We have participated in GCF board meetings around the world and have made local needs heard in consultations with the Secretariat. Last month we attended the annual meeting of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) in Montego Bay, Jamaica. The CIF are multilateral climate finance funds that provide resources to 48 developing countries. We shared our experience in GCF discussions with participants and civil society observers. "It's important to share experiences of what works and what does not to ensure that civil society replicates successes and corrects failures. Civil society shares the common goal of achieving a paradigm shift in decisions that impact climate," says Rodriguez. In the first session of the CIF Stakeholder Day, Reaching into the Roots of Partnership: Experience from the Ground, panelists discussed lessons learned and next steps on effective stakeholder engagement in the CIF and other global funds. Panelist Andrea Rodriguez, Legal Advisor for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense-Americas, reflects on the session.
Read more
Letter presenting Latin American civil society organizations' concerns on the dilution of the World Bank's safeguards policies
Latin American civil society organizations "strongly recommend that CODE members send the first draft back to Management. Without structural changes to the Safeguard Policy proposal, we question if the second phase of consultations and the review process will be meaningful". According to them, dilution of the current Bank Safeguards Policy is evident throughout the draft. Basic World Bank requirements to assess and manage environmental risks and impacts before approval are now relaxed by providing the unbounded deferral of appraisal of significant environmental and social risks or impacts to implementation. A second major concern is that the draft proposed Social and Environmental Policy and ESSs significantly shift responsibility for safeguards implementation to borrowers, but provides less clarity than current exists on when/how the use of borrower systems would be preferable and acceptable. It remains unclear how the proposed draft will help the Bank and Borrowers make decisions to prepare or use borrower systems to effectively implement safeguards in countries where major dilutions of national social and environmental frameworks are being proposed or recently approved. "The proposed draft misses opportunities to meet the highest international standards. The draft provides no binding language regarding international human rights standards and allows governments to "opt out" of compliance to the Indigenous Peoples Policy to protect Indigenous Peoples rights, which unequivocally undermines the international consensus regarding the specific and fundamental rights of indigenous peoples over their lands, resources and the course of their own development", the organizations argue.
Read more