Fisheries Partnership Agreements and Economic Partnership Agreements : the EC approach

1
Fisheries Partnership Agreements and Economic
Partnership Agreements the EC approach

• Fabrizio DonatellaEuropean Commission - DG
  Fisheries and Maritime Affairs22 24 January
  2007ACP House, ACP Secretariat, Brussels

2

• The reform of the EC Fisheries agreements basic
  principles of the Fisheries Partnership
  Agreements (FPAs)
  
• FPAs state of play and relationships with
  EPAs
  
• The EPA process with ESA

3
The international dimension of the Communitys
Common Fisheries Policy the 2 main objectives
Exclusive EC competenceNO MS-third countries
fisheries access agreements

• Maintaining the presence of the European fleet in
  third country waters while contributing
  sustainable and viable fisheries activities is
  these waters
• To ensure the supply of the Community market
  while respecting the standards of quality,
  hygiene and the market rules and regulations

U.N.
WTO
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
DEVELOPMENT POLICY
TRADE POLICY and SOUND FINANCIAL Mgt.
4
Fisheries Partnership Agreements implementation
strategy

• Ensure coherence with
• The other aspects of Common Fisheries Policy
• The EC and third country environmental policy
• The EC and third country development policy
• The EC trade policy
• Applying the principles of
• Sound and efficient financial management
• Sound and efficient monitoring systems

5
The content / specificities of an EC Fisheries
Partnership Agreement

• Provisions related to the access by European
  shipowners to the resources / waters of a third
  country and conditions related to the
  contribution, by the Community, to sustainable
  fisheries in these waters.
• Specific provisions related to the landings,
  employment of seamen on board, observers, control
  and monitoring, catches declaration, etc.
  
• Detailed obligations and responsibilities of each
  of the parties national administration, EC,
  shipowners
  
• Main conditions exclusivity clause and
  non-discrimination
  
• VMS protocol

6

• It is not
• Development cooperation
• The only source of funding for the sector
• the only solution to ensure sustainable
  fisheries
  
• The only support to the fisheries sector in ACP
  by EC
  

7
Fisheries Partnerships Agreement current
situation in ACP countries
8
(No Transcript)
9
Negotiations of new FPAs
10
Implementation our challenges .

• Doe we contribute to overfishing ? Do we
  encourage bad fishing practices in third
  countries waters ? Do we steal the fish from the
  poors?
• Are we coherent with our trade, development and
  environmental policies ?
  
• What about value for money ?
• Fight against IUU do the Agreements provide a
   unique  response ?

11
Overfishing and bad practices .

• The only  fisheries access agreements  publicly
  available
  
• Fishing activities based on national legislations
  (e.g. Mauritania, Mozambique, etc.) and no
  competititon with local industry or coastal
  activities
• Revision of all the tuna agreements since 2003 in
  order to be in line with RFOs reccomandations
  and scientific research (reference tonnage have
  in general decreased)
• Monitoring and control are fully coherent amongs
  all the agreements
  
• Systematic use of available scientific advice
  before negotiations and during implementation of
  the Agreements

12
Are we coherent with our trade, development and
environmental policies ? .

• Systematic use of the financial contribution to
  support the fisheries sector and the
  develompement of local industries
  
• Systematic impact assesment on development and
  environmental aspects
  
• Links with EC development programs (e.g. Indian
  Ocean tagging program)
  
• Lack of willingness of MS develoment agencies to
  work with the Commission on these issues ? while
  regular links and contacts with WB, IMF and NGOs
  (e.g. Guinea Bissau, Indian Ocean, Tanzania, etc.)

13
What about FPAs cost benefit ratio?

• Systematic use of cost benefit analysis before
  negotiations (impact on agreements such as
  Mauritania, Mozambique, Senegal, etc.)
  
• Increased contribution from the private sector
  (e.g. Tuna agreements), following reccomandations
  by Court of Auditors, EP, Council, internal
  Commission financial departments)
• No agreements are proposed to EP and Council
  without a fully extended impact assesment and
  financial analysis
  
• But changes are not easy to accept and implement
  (political risks and financial implications for
  the EC budget)
  

14
Fight against IUU do the Agreements a (unique)
provide a  unique  response ?? .

• The Agreements do not provide a unique response
  to the IUU activities or to the overall problem
  of monitoring and surveillance (e.g. Comoros)
  
• But they support the efforts by third countries
  to establish better monitoring and control
  (financial and political support)
  
• Systematic data reporting and control foreseen in
  all agreements (not the case when private
  licences are used, e.g. Tanzania)
  
• Coordination is enhanced with national
  authorithies
  

15
EC position on Fisheries in the EPAs
16
What EC expect from the EPA negotiations

• Maintain duty-free and quota-free access for ACP
  fishery products
  
• Strengthening the production capacities
• Strengthening cooperation for the phytosanitary
  and sanitary aspects (SPS)
  
• Discussion on Rules of Origins (RoO)
• However, some ACP regions (e.g. ESA and PACP)
  have also expressed their interest in including
  special discussions on fisheries within the EPA
  negotiation

17
Some basic principles

• Non-discrimination the conditions applied to the
  EC fleet must be applied to other fleets in the
  same waters
  
• Management issues to be included in the EPA would
  constitute a general framework for future
  negotiations/renegotiations of bilateral
  Fisheries Partnership Agrements in the region
• RoO and market access will be discussed at a
  horizontal level, recognising however the
  importance and the specificities of the fisheries
  sector

18
EPA process with ESA
19
The EPA process with ESA ESA position

• Oct 2004  ESA Fisheries Framework
  Agreement (FFA)
  
• Sept 2006 One single Chapter in the EPA
  dedicated to Fisheries (both parties agreed on
  the structure, but have to discuss further some
  details)
• Main Objective
• sustainable utilization of ESA fisheries
  resources to contribute to economic development
  of the ESA region.
  
• Principles e.g.
• Support for the development and strenghtening of
  regional integration
  
• Conformity to the principles of UNCLOS
• Functioning monitorign system of the
  environmental, economic and social impacts in
  Partner Countries
  
• Areas of cooperation
• Vessel management and post harvest arrangements
• Fisheries management and conservation issues
• Financial and trade measures and development
  issues

20
The EPA process with ESA EC position on
fisheries

• EPA will not contain any provisions related to
  access to the ressources
  
• EC does not have the mandate to negotiate any
  access arrangement at regional level
  
• Competence and responsability of the coastal
  State to manage its own fisheries resources in
  its EEZ (UNCLOS)
  
• Some aspects (market access, RoO, sanitary
  requirements) are part of the trade and
  development aspects of the EPA
  
• EPA process should reinforce the results obtained
  from the FPAS
  
• some elements could be addressed at regional
  level in order to strenghten the cooperation and
  to ensure sustainable and responsable fisheries
  policies

21
Conclusion

• Both EPA and FPA processes are complementary
• It is misleading to think that EPAs processes
  should be opposed to FPAs.
  
• No contradiction but mutual reinforcement
  (helping to raise improvements on governance and
  awareness)
  
• Greater focus on development of sustainable
  fisheries resource in Fisheries Partnership
  Agreements