Accountability in International Fisheries Requires Good Data

This is the first of two articles about the four pillars of effective compliance mechanisms within regional fisheries management organizations.

Regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) govern many of the world’s shared commercial fish stocks. RFMO member countries work together to set catch limits, rules on fishing practices and other policies to help manage the fisheries in their waters. To ensure compliance, almost every RFMO monitors how its members enforce the rules within their fishing fleets and recommends corrective action when non-compliance is identified.

But not every RFMO compliance review process is as effective as it should be. A robust RFMO compliance process is built on four pillars: collection of compliance-related data, review and evaluation of that data, follow-up actions in cases of non-compliance and appropriate levels of observer participation to ensure the process is open and transparent. This article focuses on the first two pillars – data collection and review and evaluation – and includes best practices and recent progress by RFMOs in these areas.

Pillar 1: Collection of compliance-related data

To enforce their rules, RFMOs must collect and analyse a lot of data – from reports submitted by vessel captains and on-board observers to information provided by member countries and independent organizations. For example, the compliance committee of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) annually reviews data submissions from each of its 53 members that include information on their compliance with dozens of individual measures. At ICCAT, that information is collected via lengthy questionnaires that can add up to thousands of pages – creating a daunting review process.

Compliance committees should focus on requiring only the key pieces of information they need to assess compliance, so as not to overburden governments and their fisheries departments with unnecessary requests. Clear guidance from compliance committees to member governments – on the data needed, the format and the deadlines for submission – is critical to reducing the burden of compliance reviews.

RFMOs can also lean on technology to help streamline data collection. In fact, several have established electronic systems to receive, analyse and report compliance data to make it easier for members to submit detailed, timely, accurate and verifiable information in the correct format. For example, ICCAT, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission have each implemented electronic reporting systems. In some instances, these systems also generate summary tables and reports that aid members in the review and evaluation of compliance data.

Pillar 2: Review and evaluation of data

RFMO compliance committees have limited time to review and assess data related to compliance, which they do during annual RFMO meetings or at intersessional meetings set aside for this purpose.

Fortunately, RFMOs can improve both the efficiency and efficacy of their compliance reviews. To start, they should prioritize the most severe violations and those that require immediate responses while also maintaining a clear process for addressing less urgent issues. Furthermore, while decision-making at most RFMOs usually requires consensus, members should not be allowed to block or delay decisions or actions prompted by their own non-compliance.

Finally, much like they do for conservation measures, RFMOs should regularly evaluate and adapt their compliance review processes, reviewing how data is collated, analysed and displayed to ensure they have all the information they need to gauge compliance. RFMOs should also consider implementing technological solutions that strengthen database management and the presentation of information to ensure data is easy to understand and use.

By streamlining data collection and review processes, RFMOs can boost compliance with their rules, which in turn would increase fisheries sustainability – and confidence in how these important fisheries are managed.

Laura Eeles works on The Pew Charitable Trusts’ international fisheries project.