1

European Policies in West Africa: who Benefits from Fishery Agreements?

by Vlad M. Kaczyski

and Dave L. Fluharty

School of Marine AffairsUniversity of Washington

Seattle, USA

Symposium on Marine Fisheries, Ecosystems and Societies in West Africa:

Half a Century of Change

Dakar, June 24–28, 2002

2

International-legal framework for EU economic cooperation with developing countries:

• Maastricht Treaty (reduce poverty and promote sustainable development);

• Lome Convention IV (expired end of 1999): fishery cooperation is to promote development of ACP coastal states’ fishery resource use capabilities;

• Fishery cooperation agreements ( = commercial arrangements) signed by EU with West African coastal states.

3

Comparing the interests of the EU with those of West African Coastal States

Coastal States– Unloading harvested resources for

processing,

– Investment in land infrastructures,

– Participation of EU in resource conservation,

– Environmental protection,

– Transfer of technology and know-how,

– Creation of local harvesting and processing capabilities;

– Payment for access by distant water fleets.

EUEU– Fishery agreements are purely Fishery agreements are purely

commercial deals;commercial deals;– Harvested resources should be Harvested resources should be

processed in EU; processed in EU; – Agreements help to employ excess of Agreements help to employ excess of

EU fishing capabilities;EU fishing capabilities;– Minimum costs of exploitation; Minimum costs of exploitation; – Promotion of the employment of EU Promotion of the employment of EU

fishers and processing workers; fishers and processing workers; – Subsidies are to facilitate access to Subsidies are to facilitate access to

West African resources; West African resources; – Minimum information on EU fleet Minimum information on EU fleet

activity and on protocols to the activity and on protocols to the agreements.agreements.

4

EU agreements in numbers

• In 1996 - US $ 229 million paid as subsidies to support EU fleets operating in West Africa;

• 14 agreements signed with African coastal states;

• 240 000 tons of catch per year in the region;

• 38 840 jobs in Europe including 13,440 fishers onboard 800 vessels;

• Added value through processing of African fish is approx. 100 million Euro per year.

5

How do EU subsidies work?

• Coastal countries became increasingly dependent on hard currency revenues from payments by the European Commission (example: Guinea-Bissau receives over 40% of cash revenues from its Fishery agreements with the EU);

• Agreements do not limit the catch that EU fleets can take; rather, their total Gross Registered Tonnage (GRT) is negotiated and lump sums for the access are paid in several installments;

• Average yearly subsidy for EU fleets is paid in the form of pre-payment between 74 and 82% of the value of total license fees to be paid EU vessel owners for five main species groups (shrimp, demersal fish, molluscs, tuna and small pelagics);

• EU reserves to itself the right to increase negotiated fleet size if it decides that resource abundance justifies its decision.

6

Main features considered in per country review of fisheries agreements*:

• Duration of the agreement;

• GRT of trawlers allowed to fish;

• Number of authorized tuna boats;

• Yearly ‘compensation’ (including dedicated funds).

*Kaczynski and Fluharty (2002, Marine Policy)

7

Mauritania: agreements signed from 1987 - 2001

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

7/87 - 6/90 8/90 - 7/93 8/93 - 7/96 8/96 - 7/01*

GR

T (

103 )

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Nu

mb

er o

f tu

na

boa

ts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7/87 - 6/90 8/90 - 7/93 8/93 - 7/96 8/96 - 7/01*

Val

ue

(106 ;

Eu

ro)

8

Senegal 1988 - 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2/88 -2/90

5/90 -4/92

10/92-10/94

10/94-10/96

5/97-4/01*

GR

T (

103 )

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Nu

mb

er o

f tu

na

boa

ts

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2/88 - 2/90 5/90 - 4/92 10/92-10/94

10/94-10/96

5/97-4/01*

Val

ue

(106 ;

Eu

ro)

9

The Gambia 1987 - 1996

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

7/87-6/90 7/90-6/93 7/93-6/96

GR

T (

103 )

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Nu

mb

er o

f tu

na

boa

ts

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

7/87-6/90 7/90-6/93 7/93-6/96

Val

ue

(106 ;

Eu

ro)

10

Republic of Guinea 1983 – 2001

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2/83-2/86

2/86-2/89

1/90-1/91

1/92 -12/93

1/94 -12/95

1/95-12/97

1/98-12/99

GR

T (

103 )

0102030405060708090

Nu

mb

er o

f tu

na

boa

ts

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2/83-2/86

2/86-2/89

1/90-1/91

1/92 -12/93

1/94 -12/95

1/95-12/97

1/98-12/99

Val

ue

(106 ;

Eu

ro)

11

Guinea-Bissau 1981 - 2001

02468

1012141618

1/81 -

12/8

5

6/86 -

6/89

6/89 -

6/91

6/91 -

6/93

6/93 -

6/95

6/95 -

6/97

6/97-

6/01

6/01-

6/06

GR

T (

103 )

0102030405060708090100

Nu

mb

er o

f tu

na

boa

ts

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1/81 -12/85

6/86 -6/89

6/89 -6/91

6/91 -6/93

6/93 -6/95

6/95 -6/97

6/97-6/01

6/01-6/06

Val

ue

(106 ;

Eu

ro)

12

EU fleet catches in Guinea-Bissau waters 1997

Shrimp24%

Cephalopods35%

Demersal fish27%

Other14%

13

Foreign fleet activity in Guinea-Bissau EEZ: Catch composition 1997

Spain

Shrimp55%

Cephalopods15%

Demersal fish25%

Other5%

Portugal

Shrimp27%

Cephalopods2%

Demersal fish44%

Other27%

Italy

Shrimp8%

Cephalopods65%

Demersal fish17%

Other10%

14

Value of catch (incl. tuna) by four EU countries in Guinea-Bissau waters, 1996

05

1015202530354045

Spain Portugal Italy France

Val

ue

(106 ;

US

$)

15

Catch composition of foreign fleets: Guinea-Bissau 200 mile EEZ, 1997

All Catch Shrimps11%

Cephalopods13%

Demersal fish 76%

Target species:Demersal fish

Shrimp 8%

Demersal fish 92%

Shrimp 11%

Cephalopods 13%

16

By-Catch of foreign fleets: Guinea-Bissau 200 mile EEZ, 1997

Shrimp

22.9%

Demersal Fish 63.8%

Cephalopods 13.3%

Target species: Shrimp

Shrimps 22.9%

Target species:

Cephalopods 67.2%

Shrimps 0.3%

Demersal Fish

32.5%

17

Guinea-Bissau: estimated value of tuna harvested and license payments by all foreign tuna fleets (in US$)

-5

1015202530354045

19941995 -II

Sem

1996 19971998 -I Sem

Har

vest

val

ue

(106 ;

US

$)

-20406080100120140160

Lic

ense

pay

men

t (1

03 ; U

S$)

18

Comparing economic benefits (dollar values) from coastal resources between

Guinea-Bissau and EU (1996)

European Union93%

Guinea-Bissau

7%

19

Average Yearly Compensation (Subsidy) Benefiting EU Fleets Operating in Coastal Waters of the West African States

1993 - 1997

Average Yearly Operator's Share Compensation in License Payment

Coastal Country TOTAL (Euro) % (Euro) %

Mauritania 33,751 28,580 85 5,071 15Gambia 312 286 92 26 8Senegal 10,496 9,368 90 1,028 10Guinea-Bissau 9,431 6,912 74 2,419 26Rep. of Guinea 2,601 2,092 84 409 16

EU's Subsidies for European Operators

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Operator's Share in License

Payment

%

EU Compensation-subsidy

Conclusions

• The marine resources of West Africa still have a great potential to become an engine of growth and poverty reduction in the region, provided their use patterns are radically changed;

• Today, most of these resources is taken away by foreign fleets from the EU, countries from the former Soviet Bloc, and East Asian states;

• These fleets enjoy subsidies and support of business-as-usual international fishery cooperation agreements. There is no integration of their activity with the coastal states’ economies.

21

What is needed?

By the EU: • A substantial transformation of the EU policy

toward coastal West African states

By the West African coastal states: • Joint sub-regional coordination of fishery

agreements with EU and other foreign entities;

• Internal policy reforms (improved investment climate, changing resource access laws, increased protection and conservation of the coastal resources).