Fishers groups ask govt not to ratify ‘unequal’ WTO pact

Fishers groups ask govt not to ratify ‘unequal’ WTO pact

Subject: Economy

Section: External Sector

Context:

• Fishermen trade bodies urge the government to not sign the fisheries subsidies agreement which is being ratified at the WTO saying it will not be favourable for Indian fishing communities.

Key Points:

• A trade trade body representing thousands of fish workers in India has urged the commerce and industry minister Piyush Goyal to not sign the Fisheries Subsidies agreement at the World Trade Organization (WTO) during the upcoming ministerial conference in Geneva, arguing that it would destroy fishermen’s livelihoods and food security for millions in the country.
• The representation by the trade body has appealed to the government to get together with other developing nations to ensure that the “unequal” pact does not come into effect.

What is the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement?:

• The WTO proposal aims to eliminate subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing and promote sustainable fishing.
• The Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies was concluded at the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12) of the WTO in Geneva in June 2022 and it is now being ratified by members individually.
• India is pressing for a longer transition period under the agreement as the sector is still at a nascent stage.
• India has highlighted that developing countries not engaged in distant water fishing should be exempted from overfishing subsidy prohibitions for at least 25 years.

Why the pact is “unequal”?

• The agreement caps the subsidies for all countries based on fishing area, which indirectly favors the developed countries. The subsidy should be on the basis of per fisher subsidy, but the WTO agreement does not acknowledge this fact.
• The negotiations so far failed to make a distinction between small subsidisers and large subsidisers.
• India had demanded that there should be discipline in use of non-specific subsidies (which are not specific to the fishing sector but general fuel subsidies) but it was rejected in the negotiations and ignored in the final agreement.
• The Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) provisions for developing countries and LDCs in the agreement were highly inadequate as they allowed a transition period of only two years from the date of entry into force of this agreement.
• Developed countries have obtained ‘reverse S&DT’, where they do not have to cut their subsidies if they can show these as sustainable and replenishing fish stocks.

Way out?

• Instead of ratifying the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement, India should begin talks on the Comprehensive Agreement which is already mandated on disciplines for industrial fishing nations under Article 5 pertaining to overcapacity and overfishing.
• This should specifically target the infrastructural subsidies which are overwhelmingly provided by the developed countries and thus need to be disciplined.