Project

Shutterstock

Towards 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:


Calle de la ciudad de La Oroya en Perú

Families in La Oroya are calling on the Peruvian government to take four urgent actions to ensure effective compliance with the Inter-American Court’s ruling

In the absence of significant progress, they are calling on the government to identify the entities responsible for implementing each measure ordered by the Court, to provide comprehensive and specialized health care, to ensure the mitigation of pollution from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex, and to immediately pay compensation to the victims of the case. La Oroya, Peru. Given the minimal progress made in complying with the ruling issued two years ago by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, families affected by decades of pollution in La Oroya are demanding that the government urgently take four necessary steps to ensure the effective implementation of the ruling in the short term.On March 22, 2024, the international court issued a ruling holding the Peruvian government responsible for human rights violations against a group of 80 residents of La Oroya and ordering it to take comprehensive remediation measures.  However, implementation of the ruling remains in its early stages, primarily due to the government’s lack of political will and its constant shifting of arguments to delay the process. Progress to date has been limited to publicizing the ruling, making payments to the Victims’ Fund established by the Court, and launching criminal investigations into the stigmatization and persecution of victims for their environmental defense work.Furthermore, in the two years since the ruling was issued, the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex, having resumed operations, has once again caused pollution levels in the city to exceed those recommended by the World Health Organization.  "The reactivation of the Metallurgical Complex in March 2024, without complying with current environmental standards, once again puts the health of the entire population of La Oroya at risk. Today, neither the victims in this case nor the rest of the city’s residents are guaranteed access to healthcare in the face of pollution. Furthermore, there is no clarity on when this situation will end, which creates significant uncertainty due to the government’s failure to act," stated Rosa Peña, senior attorney at the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the organization bringing the case before the Court alongside the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH) of Peru.  In light of this situation, the group of victims in the case is calling on the Peruvian government to move forward with implementing the ruling through four urgent actions:Issue a resolution determining jurisdiction that clearly defines which entity is responsible for each court order, and establishes a budget and specific implementation deadlines.Adopt and implement a specialized protocol for comprehensive health care, developed with the active participation of victims and with sufficient funding.Suspend operations at the Metallurgical Complex until an environmental management plan is in place that complies with the standards established by the Court; and evaluate transitional measures for property owners and workers to prevent further social impacts.Pay compensation to the victims as ordered by the Court. After more than 20 years of struggle, the landmark ruling in the case has yet to translate into better living conditions for the victims or into reparations for the harm they suffered.  "It is deeply concerning that, two years after the ruling was issued, the government has not yet determined which agencies will be responsible for enforcing each of its provisions. This situation makes it impossible to even establish a forum for direct coordination on behalf of the victims and the general population of La Oroya and the country regarding mining and metallurgical activities. Let us not forget that the Court also ordered public policies at the national level to protect the environment and health in Peru," said Christian Huaylinos of APRODEH’s legal department.Although Peru’s political instability has played a role, the main obstacle to steady progress in implementing the binding international ruling has been the government’s lack of determination. Press contactLorena Zárate | AIDA | [email protected] | +52 553902 7481 

Read more

Floating house in the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta in Colombia

Trade rules for a living planet: reforming the WTO for economic and environmental justice

Contemporary global trade can be understood as a form of multilateral cooperation and capital mobilization that enables global economic flows. However, the current configuration of global trade risks perpetuating historical inequalities and accelerating natural capital degradation , since it does not adequately address the urgency of the threats described. The imbalance between economy and environment is not primarily a technological or capital constraint, both are widely available; though unequally distributed among the countries, but rather a problem of rules and institutions that incentivize intensified extraction of energy and materials, as well as labor exploitation, without accounting for long-term consequences. As civil society organizations, we view the 14th Ministerial Conference and its reform process as a pivotal historical moment: an opportunity to shape a future in which the trade rules become a tool to address inequality and environmental degradation rather than deepen them. This requires respect of consensus, Special and Differential Treatment, and genuine Member-driven governance, that effectively includes the voices of developing and least-developed countries. It is also an opportunity to initiate meaningful change in the power structures that have developed through decades of economic inequality and environmental harm. To advance these objectives, we propose that WTO Members consider some reflections during the 14th Ministerial Conference:   Read and download the document 

Read more

Zona agrícola en el municipio de Cajamarca, Colombia
Freshwater Sources, Mining

Neither AngloGold Ashanti nor Mineros S.A.: Cajamarca is a municipality free of large-scale mining

Even if the companies change, the decision of Cajamarca's citizens remains the same: to defend their territory against large-scale mining. Bogotá / Cajamarca. Following the announcement by Mineros S.A. that it has signed an agreement to acquire 100% of the shares of AngloGold Ashanti Colombia S.A.S. in the La Colosa mining project in Cajamarca, the Legal Coalition for the Defense of Cajamarca (1) reiterates a clear message: Cajamarca has already decided, and its territory must remain free of large-scale mining. For more than a decade, we have been engaged in mobilization, legal defense, and advocacy efforts to protect Cajamarca from the La Colosa mining project promoted by AngloGold Ashanti. Thanks to this collective defense of the territory and environmental regulations, exploration activities for this project are currently suspended. Since 2017, the citizens of Cajamarca have spoken out emphatically through a public consultation, in which 98% of voters rejected mining activities in the municipality. This result has full legal effect, as confirmed by two Colombian judges, and represented a milestone in participation and environmental democracy in Colombia, as well as a clear expression of the territory's desire to protect water, the municipality's agricultural vocation, and the region's strategic ecosystems.   In this context, the change of ownership of the project from AngloGold Ashanti to Mineros S.A. does not change the reality of the territory or the position of the communities. Although the companies may change, Cajamarca's decision remains the same: to defend its territory against large-scale mining. Furthermore, neither of these two companies has the necessary environmental permits to reactivate the La Colosa project, yet they insist on disregarding the community's autonomous and legitimate decisions.    The announcement of this transaction comes just days after the Cajamarca City Council approved a municipal agreement initiated by citizens that declared 33 properties belonging to AngloGold Ashanti as areas of public utility and social interest. This decision reaffirms the municipality's institutional commitment to protecting the territory. The organizations that have signed this statement reiterate that Cajamarca is not and will not be a mining territory. Whether it be AngloGold, Mineros S.A., or any other company, large-scale mining has no place in the municipality. We will continue to take all necessary social, legal, and political actions to defend the territory and ensure that Cajamarca's decision is respected. #LaConsultaSeRespeta (1) The Coalition is made up of the Cajamarca Youth Socio-Environmental Collective (COSAJUCA), the SIEMBRA Socio-Legal Center, the Mining Studies Research Group at the University of Antioquia, the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Public Action Group Legal Clinic (GAP) of the Faculty of Jurisprudence of the University of Rosario, the Legal Clinic on Law and Territory of the Javeriana University, the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), and Sibelys Mejía Rodríguez (independent researcher).Press contactsRobinson Mejía | COSAJUCA | [email protected] | 300 218 36 41 Sara Sofia Moreno | SIEMBRA | [email protected] | 300 568 33 33 | Lorena Zárate | AIDA | [email protected] | +52 553902 7481Laura Becerra | CCJ | [email protected] | 313 475 5815  

Read more