Is there coherence in the European Union’s strategy to guarantee the supply of fish products from abroad?

Abstract

a b s t r a c tThe European Union (EU) fisheries in internal waters and aquaculture are not sufficient to satisfy the EU's fish demand. For this reason, the EU's consumption depends on catches of distant water fisheries through fisheries agreements with third countries and on the import of fish products. This paper analyzes the coherence of the EU policy by focusing on four case studies. In particular, this paper attempts to identify the main synergies and conflicts amongst the varying objectives of the EU and different actors affected by the external dimension of the common fisheries policy (CFP). Results appear to show that fisheries agreements, particularly those concerning demersal resources, are more difficult to renew due to competition with local fleets, pressure from environmentalist lobbies, and budgetary issues. Thus, the EU market will increasingly be dependent on imports due to a liberalization climate encouraged by the EU processors that require raw material and fishing companies established in third countries (joint ventures). The role of the Council of the European Union, the European Parliament, and the European Commission, along with their positions of contradictory objectives, is highlighted.

The EU restrictive trade measures against IUU fishing

“…At the same time, the EU market does not produce enough fish to respond to the demand which create some dependency. The EU self-sufficiency rate for fishery products is around 45% [25] and is likely to be increasingly dependent on imports encouraged by the EU processors that require raw material from fishing companies established in third countries [25]. With the dependency of the EU on fish import, a notice engaged against a major exporter would not be economically viable for some European industries.…”

“…The general objective of the new CFP is to ensure that fishing activities "are environmentally sustainable in the long-term and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies" [24]. The explicit reference to the availability of food supply was not present in the previous regulation and indicates the increased relevance of it [25]. However in the event of conflict, a clear hierarchy between these different objectives is missing to prioritize one.…”

Adventures in cross-disciplinary studies: Grand strategy and fisheries management

“…Norwegian fisheries management from the 1960s to the 1980s sought to secure the wages of fishermen and to the transform especially northern fisheries from small-boat, highly seasonal fisheries carried out by part-time fishers to modern, efficient, larger-boat fisheries carried out by full-time fishers [66,87]. The European Common Fisheries Policy is supposed to foster the development of third countries while defending the interests and objectives of its fishing industry and several other "equally important and often contradictory objectives" [67]. Debates about the introduction of ITQs were often about the impact of this management measure on local communities, impact on employment and the ownership of and participation in the fishery, aboriginal rights and other concerns [9].…”

Seaweed Biofuel Derived from Integrated Multi-trophic Aquaculture

“…Use of antibiotics, chemicals and steroids are damaging to the ecosystem, as are the high levels of nutrient discharge from the waste from fish farms [26], [27]. Regulations will come into force, which will ultimately improve on the shortcomings of aquaculture and may lead to IMTA and seaweed production becoming standard at fish farms [28], [29].…”