WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/GEN/47 
10 June 2005 
 (05-2394) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
  
 
IUU FISHING AND FISHERIES SUBSIDIES 
 
Paper from Japan  
 
 
 The following communication, dated 2 June 2005, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Japan.   The submitting delegation has requested that th is paper, which was submitted to the Rules 
Negotiating Group as an informal document (JOB(05)/ 100), also be circulated as a formal document. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
 
1. In the February 2005 meeting of the Negotiati ng Group on Rules, Japan submitted a paper as a 
contribution to the discussion on the framework for th e new disciplines on the fisheries subsidies with 
the Republic of Korea and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu 
(TN/RL/W/172).  In the paper, Japan and the other co-sponsors proposed the candidates of the 
prohibited subsidies including those related to 
illegal, unreported, and unregulated （IUU）fishing. Japan 
is now submitting this paper to provide detailed in formation on key issues and the current situation of 
IUU fisheries and to share some ideas on fisheries subsidies to prevent IUU fishing. 
 
2. This paper is submitted without  prejudice to the position of Japa n on this matter in the future 
negotiating process. 
 
3. According to FAO, “75% of the world major marine fish stocks are overexploited, fully exploited, 
significantly depleted, or recovering from overexploitation”.  Moreover, IUU fishing is greatly threatening 
the conservation and management of those stocks already in peril.  In order to eradicate IUU fishing, international cooperative actions have been one of the most important tasks for many international fora such as the United Nations, FAO and World Su mmit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) as well as 
regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs). 
 4. IUU fishing can be characterized as fisheries which do not comply with catch quotas and other regulatory measures set domestically or internationally, do not report the results and other relevant information of their operations to the appropriate authorities, and are not controlled by any management 
framework. Whether or not their flag states are CPCs  (contracting parties, cooperating non-contracting 
parties, entities or fishing entities) to RFMOs does no t matter to their IUU status.  However, today’s most 
serious problems related to IUU fisheries are cause d by Flag of Convenience (FOC) Operations on the 
high seas, which are conducted by vessels temporar ily re-flagged to non-CPCs which possess neither the 
ability nor the will to manage those vessels while the virtual owners of those vessels live in other countries.  
Based on this background, this paper mainly focuses on IUU operations conducted by FOC vessels on the high seas.  TN/RL/GEN/47 
Page 2  
 
 II. CURRENT STATUS OF IUU FISHING 
 
5. Currently, IUU operations on tuna species and Patagonian toothfish ( Dissostichus eleginoides ) are 
of the most serious global concern.  Most stocks of both species are already heavily exploited and still many IUU vessels, mainly FOC vessels, are targeting those species around the world.  
6. The global catch of tuna 
species has been multiplied by 8 times during the past fifty years and has increased by 50% since 1990 (see 
Fig.).  With rega rd to longliners
1 which 
target mainly the Japanese sashimi  
(raw fish) market, there were 1,400 properly licensed longliners world 
wide in 2000 while 250 IUU vessels 
were there simultaneously.  Since they frequently change their flag states, it is difficult to trace their movements.  However, after considerable 
international efforts which will be 
explained below, the number of IUU longliners decreased substantially to 100 in 2002 and to 25 in 2004.  
Nonetheless, resurgence of IUU 
longliners is quite possible once the price of the Japanese sashimi  market soars again. 
 
7. On the other hand, FOC tuna purse-seiners
2 are increasing as IUU longliners decrease.  According 
to the South Pacific Forum Fisheries Agency, many h uge FOC purse-seiners larger than 2,000 GT have 
been constructed in recent years and the number reached at least 15 in 2004.  The fishing capacity of a large-scale purse-seiner, which exceeds 100 MT of catch per day, is by far larger than that of a longliner, which is 5-10 MT a day and, thus, FOC purse-seine rs’ operations are becoming increasingly of global 
concern. 
 
8. Patagonian toothfish are being caught in sub-Antarctic ocean and their international commercial value has been steadily rising in recent years by the increase of world consumption.  The species are internationally managed under the framework of CCAMLR (Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic 
Marine Living Resources) but the catch by IUU operations is substantial compared with the TAC (total 
allowable catch) set by the organization (In 2002/03 fishing season, TAC allocated to the Parties of CCAMLR was 16,262 MT while the catch by IUU vessels was estimated to exceed 10,000 MT.).  Tireless monitoring and surveillance efforts made by the authorities of the Parties sometimes resulted in the pursuit 
and even capture of IUU vessels but these management activities under severe natural conditions in semi-
polar areas are not an easy task at all. CCAMLR ha s identified about 15 IUU vessels for Patagonian 
toothfish so far, but many more are suspected to exist
3. 
 
III. FACTORS BENEFITING IUU FISHERIES 
 
9. The re-flagging of vessels for the purpose of reduction of tax payment or operational cost has been a common practice among commercial vessels for long time.  Activities of general commercial vessels on the surface are limited and their activities, which are pr imarily conducted at port, are relatively easy to 
monitor and be managed there.  Therefore, the management of FOC vessels has not created serious 
problems, although the responsibility of flag states  is gaining attention because of the occurrence of 
                                                      
1 Angling fishery using gear composed of ma in line and many branch liens with hooks 
2 Net fishery which encircles fish with net (purse seine) and then gradually tightens the net 
3 http://www.ccamlr.org/pu/E/ sc/fish-monit/IUU%20list.pdf   Fig. W orld Producti on of Tunas
0123456
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
yearproduction (million MT) TN/RL/GEN/47 
 Page 3 
 
 
 environmental problems such as discharge of waste from vessels. On the other hand, the monitoring and 
management of fishing vessels, whose activities are pr imarily conducted not at port but on the surface, are 
substantially more difficult, especially on the high seas where management responsibility lies with flag 
states. When a fishing vessel is operating under the flag of a country whose management system does not 
work effectively enough and the owner lives in a different country, the management of such a vessel would be even more difficult, if not impossible. 
 
10. The direct incentive of IUU fish eries is considered to be an econ omic benefit; the investors pursue 
an economic gain by operating freely outside the framework of an international management system and exporting their products caught with less cost.  Due to the deterioration of commercial fish resources 
worldwide as mentioned at the outset, TACs set by RFMOs are gradually being reduced and naturally so 
are the allocations to each CPC, which sometime s require vessel decommissioning.  Under such 
circumstances, if a vessel is re-flagged to a non-CPC, it  can operate freely regardless of the ever-tightening 
international management measures.  This financial advantage attracts not only the re-flagging of existing 
fishing vessels but also new investment to build vessels to be registered to non-CPCs of RFMOs with the 
intention to start the IUU fisheries business.  11. The following is non-exhaustive list which could be considered as the factors which benefit IUU 
fisheries; 
 
(1) Unsatisfactory control by the flag states as we ll as the states where the virtual owners live; 
(Nonfulfilment of their national responsibilities, such as maintaining insufficient vessel registrations, by the flag states or the states  where the virtual owners live clearly creates 
an advantage for FOC vessels engaging in IUU fisheries in terms of the competition with 
the other vessels.  We believe this has the same effect as a financial contribution to the IUU fisheries.  However, since we are awar e that this does not really fall into the 
“financial contribution” under the SCM Agreemen t and this is the issue for other fora , we 
will not pursue it further in this paper.), 
 (2) Unrestricted transfer of products from IUU fish eries, especially in international trade;  
(When the products are consumed domestically , IUU operations would be discouraged by 
public surveillance.  When, however, the prod ucts are primarily exported and domestic 
consumption  is negligible, a disincentive of such inappropriate activities is not given and 
IUU operations expand.), and, 
 (3) Subsidies; (Direct subsidies to IUU operations are inconceivable.  However, certain types 
of subsidies might benefit IUU operations indirectly as described in paragraph 15 below.). 
 
IV. INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE IUU FISHERIES 
 
12. Recognizing the factors and motivations to engage in the IUU operations mentioned above, 
substantial international efforts have been made to date to combat them.  Most of those efforts deal with factors described in paragraph 11 (1) and (2), namely to collectively work on flag states and states where 
virtual owners live or to introduce trade related measures such as statistical document programmes.
4 
 
13. For example, the following measures have been  taken to combat with IUU fisheries and their 
effects have been gradually materialized.  Japan has b een taking a central role for those measures to be 
implemented.  
(1) To announce publicly the IUU vessels list, in order to prevent those vessels from 
obtaining further market access or a new registry. 
 
                                                      
4 Under this programme, flag states are required to va lidate the name of fishing vessel, the area of catch and 
amount of fish for export.  TN/RL/GEN/47 
Page 4  
 
 (2) To work on flag states internationally to deal wi th the issue.  To identify states responsible 
for IUU fisheries at RFMOs, if necessary. 
 
(3) To return the registry of FOC vessels to the country where the owner lives, in order to 
control them under the domestic management scheme of the country including scrapping them when excess capacity exists. 
 
(4) To strengthen the management by flag states through the introduction of appropriate 
measures such as a vessel registry system, a licensing system, as well as monitoring the 
location of fishing vessels by the Vessel Monitoring System which uses satellites. 
 
(5) To eliminate products by IUU operations from markets. 
¾ Trade restriction of fisheries products targeted by IUU operations from countries 
which are identified by RFMOs to undermine the effectiveness of the conservation and 
management measures of such RFMOs. 
¾ Issuance of statistical documents by the appr opriate authorities of flag states to the 
products caught by duly au thorized fishing vessels.  Only products accompanied by 
such certificates can be imported.  This scheme has been introduced by many international fisheries management organizations such as ICCAT, IOTC, IATTC, 
CCSBT
5 (for tuna), and CCAMLR (for Patagonian toothfish). 
 14. However, further actions are needed to eradicat e IUU fisheries more effectively.  In 2001, FAO 
members adopted the International Plan of Actio n to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing
6, which 
reads that “states should, to the extent possible in their national law, avoid conferring economic support, 
including subsidies, to companies, vessels or persons that are involved in IUU fishing”.  The Plan of Implementation of WSSD approved in Johannesburg in 2002 has requested the elimination of subsidies 
that contribute to IUU fisheries.
7  More recently, the FAO Ministerial Declaration adopted in March 2005, 
calls “to identify, reduce and ultimately eliminate the economic incentives that lead to IUU fishing”.8  
                                                      
5 ICCAT: International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas 
  IATTC: Inter-American  Tropical Tuna Commission 
  IOTC: Indian Ocean Tuna Commission 
  CCSBT: Convention for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna 
 
6 http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.a sp?url_file=/DOCREP/003/y1224E/Y1224E00.HTM   
In the International Plan of Action, IUU fishing is defined as follows; 
3.1 Illegal fishing refers to activities: 
3.1.1 conducted by national or foreign vessels in waters under the jurisdic tion of a State, without the permission of 
that State, or in contraventi on of its laws and regulations;  
3.1.2 conducted by vessels flying the fl ag of States that are parties to a relevant regional fisheries management 
organization but operate in contravention of the cons ervation and management measures adopted by that 
organization and by which the States are bound, or relevant  provisions of the applicable international law; or 
3.1.3 in violation of national laws or  international obligations, including thos e undertaken by cooperating States to 
a relevant regional fisherie s management organization. 
3.2 Unreported fishing refers to fishing activities: 
3.2.1 which have not been reported, or have been misrepor ted, to the relevant national authority, in contravention 
of national laws and regulations; or  
3.2.2 undertaken in the area of competence of a releva nt regional fisheries manageme nt organization which have 
not been reported or have been misreported, in contrave ntion of the reporting procedures of that organization. 
3.3 Unregulated fishing refe rs to fishing activities: 
3.3.1 in the area of application of a relevant regional  fisheries management organi zation that are conducted by 
vessels without nationality, or by those flying the flag of a State not party to that organization, or by a fishing 
entity, in a manner that is not consistent with or cont ravenes the conservation and ma nagement measures of that 
organization; or  
3.3.2 in areas or for fish stocks in relation to which th ere are no applicable conservation or management measures 
and where such fishing activities are conducted in a ma nner inconsistent with State responsibilities for the 
conservation of living marine res ources under international law.  
7 http://www.johannesburgsummit. org/html/documents/summit_doc s/131302_wssd_report_reissued.pdf   
8 http://www.fao.org/newsroom /common/ecg/100200_en_mm.iuu.pdf    TN/RL/GEN/47 
 Page 5 
 
 
 Therefore, the discussion at the WTO to eliminat e fisheries subsidies benefiting IUU fisheries will 
certainly contribute to the international requirements in the battle against IUU fisheries. 
 V. FISHERIES SUBSIDIES AND IUU FISHERIES 
 
15.  Reflecting on what is mentioned in paragraphs 9 and 10, the most typical subsidies which might 
benefit IUU fisheries would be subsidies for overseas tr ansfers of fishing vessels to non-CPCs of RFMOs.  
Overseas transfers of fish ing vessels to non-CPCs of RFMOs could directly result in IUU fisheries and 
therefore subsidies for those activities should be proh ibited.  Furthermore, the re-transfer to non-CPCs 
through CPCs of RFMOs is also problematic.  Such a ca se can be prevented by establishing an appropriate 
bilateral arrangement between exporting and importin g countries. Subsidies for overseas transfers of 
fishing vessels to CPCs of RFMOs might also be among the prohibited subsidies, unless such a bilateral arrangement exists.  
16. There should be other types of fisheries subsidies which are not direct subsidies to IUU 
operations, but still benefit those operations.  Input from other Members on these types of fisheries subsidies will be appreciated.  In addition, information from Members on how they design their fisheries subsidies in order not to facilitate or contribute to I UU fisheries should be shared in this Group, to further 
elaborate on this issue.  For example, in the case of Ja pan, no subsidies are provided to the construction of 
the fishing vessels which have capacity to operate on the high seas without proper authorization for 
fishing.  Also, the vessel subject to the decommissioning programme must be scrapped including its engine and equipment in order to avoid the leakage of vessels and gears to other fisheries. In addition, the fishing licenses associated with the decommissioned vessels have to be withdrawn. 
 
__________