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:
Costa Rican Constitutional Chamber Orders the Fisheries Authority to Issue Regulations Within the Next 3 Months
PRESS CONTACT: Gladys Martínez de Lemos, AIDA (506) 83214263 [email protected] Costa Rican Constitutional Chamber Orders the Fisheries Authority to Issue Regulations Within the Next 3 Months SAN JOSÉ, Costa Rica, May 20, 2009 – The Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica favorably resolved an injunction brought by students from the University of Costa Rica, represented by Attorney Alvaro Sagot and supported by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and other Costa Rican NGOs (APREFLOFAS, CEDARENA, Fundación Keto, Humane Society International, Justicia para la Naturaleza, MARVIVA, PRETOMA and PROMAR)., In its ruling, The Chamber ordered the Executive Authority, within a maximum of 3 months, to administrate the fishery law in a manner that protects the constitutional right to a healthy environment. The Chamber also mandated that this process be carried out with public participation, which is essential to protecting this human right. “This decision is vital to the protection of coastal marine resources. The Fishery and Aquaculture Law had given the Executive Authority a period of 90 days to promulgate regulations, starting from April 25th, 2005 when the law was first published. However, after more than four years, the Executive Authority, represented by INCOPESCA, had still not issued the regulation,” stated attorney Gladys Martínez. “We understand the complexities of the issue, but these cannot be excuses to continue leaving a legal void that directly affects the conservation of Costa Rican and the planet’s, resources”, added Martínez. The plaintiffs petitioned the Constitutional Chamber to protect the human right to a healthy environment and balanced ecology and assure compliance with international obligations by carrying out its responsibility to promulgate regulations to implement this law. There are fundamental aspects to marine resource protection, such as aquaculture development, illegal fishing in protected areas, and containment of excessive fishing, the control of which is nonexistent or deficient, making this regulation imperative. “We at AIDA applaud the Chamber’s decision, as it recognizes the importance of effective protection of marine biodiversity and establishes a precedent of requiring public participation in the process”, commented Anna Cederstav from California, Co-Director of AIDA, “Given the grave situation of the world’s oceans and marine resources, and the necessity to counteract excessive exploitation and avoid impacts to current and future generations, it is urgent that this issue be resolved as soon as possible. Furthermore, Costa Rica has the opportunity to be an example in the conservation of oceans and their resources”, concluded Cederstav.
Read moreColombian Constitutional Court Admits AIDA's Complaint Against Mining Code (Spanish Text Only)
CORTE CONSTITUCIONAL ADMITE NUEVA DEMANDA CONTRA CÓDIGO DE MINAS PARA DEFENDER EL PRINCIPIO DE PRECAUCIÓN FRENTE A LAS ACTIVIDADES MINERAS PARA PUBLICACIÓN INMEDIATA CONTACTOS: Jerónimo Rodríguez, AIDA, Tel. (571) 2681804 Andrés Idarraga, CENSAT, Tel. (571) 2440581 [email protected] [email protected] BOGOTÁ, 20 de mayo de 2009.- La Corte Constitucional colombiana admitió esta semana la acción de inconstitucionalidad presentada por la Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA), CENSAT – Agua Viva, el Observatorio de Conflictos Ambientales de la Universidad de Caldas y la Corporación Gestión por los Intereses Ambientales y Públicos (Iniciativa GESAP) contra los artículos 203 y 213 del Código de Minas, que permiten el uso de los recursos naturales para la exploración minera sin licencia ambiental y limitan las causales por las que las autoridades ambientales pueden negar una licencia ambiental para actividades mineras. Los artículos del Código de Minas demandados violan la Constitución de Colombia y la legislación ambiental internacional. Estos artículos priorizan la actividad minera sobre la protección ambiental, al punto de limitar las capacidades de las propias autoridades para verificar las condiciones de la explotación, y eventualmente autorizar la exploración y explotación con condiciones que sean ambientalmente sostenibles. Por esto, se violan entre otros, los principios de desarrollo sostenible y el principio de precaución que son parte fundamental de nuestra legislación. “Reconocemos que la minería es una industria importante para nuestro país, pero también lo es la protección de los recursos naturales, que garantizan la existencia misma de la especie humana en la actualidad y en el futuro. Por esto solicitamos a la Corte que aplique el principio de desarrollo sostenible reconocido en nuestra Constitución para que la minería se implemente sin la generación de daños severos e irreversibles a zonas estratégicas, como los páramos, y de las que dependen muchas comunidades”, señaló Jerónimo Rodríguez, asesor legal de AIDA en Colombia. Esta demanda se une a la presentada por AIDA y otros contra el artículo 34 del Código de Minas, que está pendiente de sentencia por la Corte Constitucional Colombiana. Ambas demandas recogen e insisten sobre las preocupaciones del Ministerio de Ambiente y de la Procuraduría General de la Nación frente a los efectos de las actividades mineras en el ambiente y la necesidad imperiosa de control, sin debilitar aún más las normas. “Buscamos con esta demanda de inconstitucionalidad la efectiva protección al ambiente y que el uso ocasional o transitorio de los recursos naturales en las actividades de exploración deba evaluarse por las autoridades ambientales. Además que las licencias ambientales no estén limitadas por causales formales, sino que las autoridades ambientales puedan, cuando sea necesario para protección ambiental y del interés público, negar licencias para la minería en aplicación del principio de precaución y de normas ambientales aplicables”, concluyó Rodríguez. AIDA es una ONG legal ambiental hemisférica que trabaja para fortalecer la capacidad de las personas para garantizar su derecho individual y colectivo a un ambiente sano por medio del desarrollo, aplicación y cumplimiento efectivo de la legislación nacional e internacional. Entre otros temas, AIDA prioriza la protección del derecho al agua y asegurar recursos de agua dulce adecuados para las comunidades y los ecosistemas.
Read moreCosta Rican Court Orders Expropriation Of Land Slated For Tourism Development In The Leatherback Marine National Park
For immediate release: May 14, 2008 Press contacts: Rolando Castro, Attorney, CEDARENA Gladys Martínez, Attorney, AIDA (506) 2837080, [email protected] (506) 2837080, [email protected] COSTA RICAN COURT ORDERS EXPROPRIATION OF LAND SLATED FOR TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN THE LEATHERBACK MARINE NATIONAL PARK SAN JOSÉ— On May 5th, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica ordered the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE) to begin expropriating private lands slated for tourism development within the Leatherback Marine National Park (LMNP) in Guanacaste. This decision follows a lawsuit filed in March 2005 by AIDA and its participating organizations in Costa Rica, the Center for Environmental Law and Natural Resources (CEDARENA), and Justice for Nature (JPN). The complaint alleged that the National Environmental Technical Secretary (SETENA), the Municipality of Santa Cruz, the Ministry of Finance, and MINAE violated the constitutional right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment by not protecting the LMNP and the nesting sites of the leatherback turtle located therein. This is a very important precedent in Costa Rica and the hemisphere, given that tourism development is proceeding at an unprecedented pace throughout the Americas. The Municipality of Santa Cruz and SETENA had issued construction permits within the park, ignoring the impacts that tourism development would have upon the leatherback turtles. With this decision, these permits are now invalid. “We hope that the Municipality and SETENA have received a clear message that they must take extreme caution with regard to national parks, and not approve projects that endanger what the parks were created to protect,” stated Rolando Castro, an attorney for CEDARENA. “Construction and operation of tourist sites within the LMNP would aggravate existing threats to the beach,” he added. Leatherback turtles are animals from the Jurassic age that have been declared an endangered species on the international level. They require particular nesting conditions that can be easily disturbed by the presence of human beings and construction lights. Hence, the development of tourist sites can severely affect the turtles’ reproduction, and consequently, their survival. The Leatherback Marine National Park has become the most important nesting site for this species in the Western Pacific Ocean. “MINAE should immediately heed this order to prevent the destruction that has occurred at other Costa Rican nesting beaches, such as Flamingo and Tamarindo,” affirmed Gladys Martinez, AIDA attorney. “All authorities within the Costa Rican government have an obligation to protect this species, which is part of our common patrimony, in addition to being a tourist attraction and hence a valuable economic resource for the country,” she added.
Read more