Slow Food Fish and Ocean Grabbing: What You Need to Know

What is Ocean Grabbing?

One might think that the world’s waters are, or should be, common resources, however these assets are increasingly being privatized. Today we are witnessing a process of enclosure of the world’s oceans and fisheries resources for purposes ranging from (eco)tourism and raw material extraction, to large-scale fishing. This is known as ocean grabbing.Often facilitated through policies, laws and practices, as well as the rise of market-based approaches in fisheries, ocean grabbing leads to the relocation of access and control of fisheries resources, away from coastal communities and into the hands of large companies. This process systematically dispossesses fishers of their livelihoods, and communities of their main source of protein. In some cases it also facilitates the destruction and even the disappearance of marine resources.One reason commonly used to justify this privatization is to avoid the so-called Tragedy of the Commons, which suggests that as human nature inexorably leads to unsustainable outcomes, common resources will inevitably be depleted for personal gain. Another stems from the belief that to feed a growing population, worldwide food production needs to increase, and consequently incentives and policy frameworks encourage large-scale investments (an idea reflected in all areas of food production). However, this discourse masks the success of many community-based and small-scale fisheries all around the world, made possible through customary laws and regulations, in collectively managing their resources, preventing individuals from maximizing their private gains. What’s more this hides the fact that rather than an increase in food production, what a growing population requires is greater access to this food.

How does Ocean Grabbing happen?

It is important to remember that it is ultimately states that allocate how, for what purposes and by whom waters can be used. At an international level there are a number of initiatives that directly or otherwise have resulted in the privatization of common fisheries resources:The Individual Transferable Quota Policy (ITQ) – which is being implemented at an alarming rate – enables states to give fishing rights away in the form of individual fishing quotas, turning them into tradable commodities.The European Union (EU) Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was designed to manage fisheries resources by introducing quotas and regulations for member states. Crucially though, it doesn’t consider the rights of small-scale fishers.The World Bank Global Partnership for Oceans (GPO) is a legal framework facilitating a market-based approach to fisheries management, again denying the rights of local small-scale fishers. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), another management tool for conservation purposes, is viewed as the solution to marine problems, but often leads to “conservation refugees” as it bans local populations from accessing the sea. These are mainly poor and marginalized populations, and often traditional subsistence activities are replaced by high capital ecotourism projects.

What are the consequences?

Above all, the activities of large-scale fleets often result in the capture of the resources that had once sustained local populations and traditional fishing activities. Small-scale fleets are shrinking and quotas have become concentrated into the hands of a few. In some cases small-scale fishers are suddenly denied the legal right to fish or harvest aquatic resources owing to changes in policy, undermining their dependency on marine resources for their livelihoods and food.These rights-based fishing policies are frequently imposed without the meaningful consultation of small-scale fishers. In South Africa for example, the ITQ resulted in the over-night exclusion of 90% of the country’s 50,000 small-scale fishers.In Chile, four companies control 90% of the fishing quotas leaving 68% of the country’s population that works in the fisheries sector to share the remaining 10%. And although ocean grabbing is often centered on developing countries, the ripples of the privatization of common fisheries resources are also being felt in the developed world. In New Zealand, more than 80% of fishing rights are held by fewer than a dozen companies, while it has been estimated that in Europe alone, tens of thousands of small-scale fishers are denied the right to fish.

Is there a solution?

A variety of solutions have been touted in response to problems of environmental degradation, economic instability and social development. However, a panacea doesn’t exist: each context is affected by a multitude of factors, highlighting the need for a rounded approach.The European Commission Green Paper, which calls for the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, has made it clear that the fishing industry’s overcapacity is artificially maintained by heavy public financial support. This leads to poor economic performance, which in turn leads to a vicious cycle of overfishing. It may be the case that governments lack the institutional capacity to address the problems facing fisheries and the oceans, but there is an alternative to top-down and privatization policies. A bottom-up democratic process implemented through representative organizations and the communities whose food sovereignty depends on the resources should be central to the debate.The current management system values aquatic resources as a tradable commodity, but fails to acknowledge the dependency of millions of fishing communities on these resources. If food security is to be achieved for not just these communities, but everyone who depends on fish as a source of protein, a holistic human-rights-based approach is needed. Access rights should be collective rather than individual, and governance must be inclusive, participatory and democratic. A human rights approach would also be an opportunity to ensure greater participation of women in decision-making; after all half of those involved in small-scale fisheries are women.These principles are also echoed in the recent Voluntary Guidelines for Small-Scale Fisheries, adopted in 2014 by the fisheries committee (COFI) of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). These guidelines represent the first international tool to safeguard the interests of small-scale fishers, while another such document, the Tenure Guidelines, highlights the necessity of equitable and secure access to natural resources and ultimately the right to food. The drawback of these guidelines though is that they are merely voluntary and many feel that the fight will come in the implementation of legislati. In addition, Olivier de Schutter, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to food from 2008 to 2014, has called on governments to rethink which fishery models they support, highlighting that small-scale fishers actually catch more fish per gallon of fuel than industrial fleets, and discard fewer fish. It is apparent that allocating private property rights to fisheries resources, in a way that fosters speculation and consolidation of the industry, is inherently unfair both to the public, who’s resources are given away, and to fishing communities, who lose access to the resource. Furthermore, it does not systematically improve marine environments, nor food or economic security. Only if we reconsider the commodification of our resources and begin to holistically consider the impacts of the current system can we achieve environmental stability, and ultimately economic and social prosperity.