11 May 2006, 9h00-18h00International Environment House 1, Room 3

13 chemin des Anémones, Geneva, Switzerland

Session 1:KEY OBJECTIVES AND THEIR LOCATION IN THE

NEGOTIATIONS

David K. Schorr

Development and Sustainability in the WTO Fishery Subsidies Negotiations: Issues and Alternatives

“What are we here to talk about . . . ?”

RULESPOLICIESINTERESTS PROGRAMMES

RULESPOLICIESINTERESTS PROGRAMMES

IN COMMON?? IN TENSION??

CONTEXTS?

Note: this data, from Thorpe (FAO 2005) is presented to illustrate the diversity of national contexts only; no endorsement of the data or analysis is intended

Note: this data from Thorpe (FAO 2005) is presented to illustrate the diversity of national contexts only; no endorsement of the data or analysis is intended

Note: this data, from Thorpe (FAO 2005) is presented to illustrate the diversity of national contexts only; no endorsement of the data or analysis is intended

Note: this data from Thorpe (FAO 2005) is presented to illustrate the diversity of national contexts only; no endorsement of the data or analysis is intended

Note: this data, from Thorpe (FAO 2005) is presented to illustrate the diversity of national contexts only; no endorsement of the data or analysis is intended

CONTEXTS?

INTERESTS?

IN COMMON?? IN TENSION??

. . . Clearly both . . . but:

1. General strategic interests at WTO seem shared more than different contexts might imply . . .

2. The tensions that do exist are not always international . . . But often raise questions of domestic policy coherence

General Interests

WHAT? HOW?

LIVELIHOODS ACCESS . . . TO:

SOCIAL SAFETY NET CAPITAL | TECHNOLOGY | MARKETS

EMPLOYMENT . . . AND RESOURCES (FISHERIES)

FOOD SECURITY

DEVELOPMENT PREFERENTIAL COMPETITION

General Interests

WHAT? HOW?

LIVELIHOODS ACCESS . . . TO:

SOCIAL SAFETY NET CAPITAL | TECHNOLOGY | MARKETS

EMPLOYMENT . . . AND RESOURCES (FISHERIES)

FOOD SECURITY

DEVELOPMENT COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

(OR REMOVAL OF DISADVANGAGES!)

These basic interests seem widely shared . . .

. . . but their programmatic implications vary substantially per context and policy preferences

General Interests

WHAT? HOW?

LIVELIHOODS ACCESS . . . TO:

SOCIAL SAFETY NET CAPITAL | TECHNOLOGY | MARKETS

EMPLOYMENT . . . AND RESOURCES (FISHERIES)

FOOD SECURITY

DEVELOPMENT COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

(OR REMOVAL OF DISADVANGAGES!)

These basic interests seem widely shared . . .

. . . but their programmatic implications vary substantially per context and policy preferences

These basic interests seem widely shared . . .

. . . but their programmatic implications vary substantially per context and policy preferences

For example:

• access arrangements: may be part of a fisheries industry development strategy . . . or not!

• social safety nets may aim to smooth very different transitions

. . . e.g., to a smaller industry or a larger one

. . . from labor to capital intensive

. . . from domestic to international markets

These basic interests seem widely shared . . .

. . . but their programmatic implications vary substantially per context and policy preferences

Another good example . . . the discussion of “Artisanal Fishing”

(see UNEP paper)

Category Definitional Elements Typical Examples

Physical Attributes Vessel type Canoe, dory

Vessel size Short (e.g., < 10m); light

Vessel motor Unmotorized or small engine

Pattern of Fishing Fishing gear/technique Manual or small nets; passive; low tech

Location of land base Rural

Location of fishery In-shore

Target type Multi-species

Social Structure Of fishery Traditional (clan or community)

Of fishing enterprise Family crew, owner on board

Economic Condition

Market orientation Direct consumption or local market

Income level Subsistence or very poor

Table 1 — Elements of a Definition of “Artisanal Fishing”

Based on Schorr, Artisanal Fishing: Promoting Poverty Reduction and Community Development Through New WTO Rules on Fisheries Subsidies (UNEP 2006)

Category Definitional Elements Typical Examples

Physical Attributes Vessel type Canoe, dory . . . or a trawler . . .

Vessel size Short (e.g., < 10m); light . . . or big . . .

Vessel motor Unmotorized or small engine …or powerful …

Pattern of Fishing Fishing gear/technique Manual or small nets; passive; low tech . . . or using GSP, winches, sonor . . .

Location of land base Rural . . . or city-based . . .

Location of fishery In-shore . . . or off-shore . . .

Target type Multi-species . . . or single species . . .

Social Structure Of fishery Traditional (clan or community) . . . or corporate . . .

Of fishing enterprise Family crew, owner on board . . .

Economic Condition

Market orientation Direct consumption or local market . . .

Income level Subsistence or very poor . . .

Table 1 — Elements of a Definition of “Artisanal Fishing”

Category Definitional Elements Typical Examples

Physical Attributes Vessel type Canoe, dory . . . or a trawler . . .

Vessel size Short (e.g., < 10m); light . . . or big . . .

Vessel motor Unmotorized or small engine …or powerful …

Pattern of Fishing Fishing gear/technique Manual or small nets; passive; low tech . . . or using GSP, winches, sonor . . .

Location of land base Rural . . . or city-based . . .

Location of fishery In-shore . . . or off-shore . . .

Target type Multi-species . . . or single species . . .

Social Structure Of fishery Traditional (clan or community) . . . or corporate . . .

Of fishing enterprise Family crew, owner on board . . .

Economic Condition

Market orientation Direct consumption or local market . . .

Income level Subsistence or very poor . . .

Table 1 — Elements of a Definition of “Artisanal Fishing”

““Industrial A

rtisanal F

ishing”??

Industrial A

rtisanal F

ishing”??

INTERESTS?

IN COMMON?? IN TENSION??

. . . Clearly both . . . but:

1. General strategic interests at WTO seem shared more than different contexts might imply . . .

2. The tensions that do exist are not always international . . . But often raise questions of domestic policy coherence

Challenges to Policy Coherence

OFFENSIVE / DEFENSIVE TRADE POLICY GOALS

Seeking “preferential competition” AND an even playing field?

(including where S-S competition matters)

DEVELOPMENT (GROWTH) + SUSTAINABILITY

Challenges to Policy Coherence

OFFENSIVE / DEFENSIVE TRADE POLICY GOALS

Seeking “preferential competition” AND an even playing field?

(including where S-S competition matters)

DEVELOPMENT (GROWTH) + SUSTAINABILITY

(especially if industrialization and/or industry growth is desired)

1. The task we face . . . = DRAFTING RULES

2. So far, concrete proposals on developing country interests have been relatively few, and often vague

3. The technical discussion has floated among several rule elements:

• S&DT• “Artisanal Fishing” (and small scale?)• Access agreements (definition of a subsidy)

4. Diverse interests have been reflected in a common and imprecise vocabulary.

5. THE BIG CHALLENGE = STRIKING THE RIGHT BALANCE

1. The task we face . . . = DRAFTING RULES

2. So far, concrete proposals on developing country interests have been relatively few, and mostly vague

3. The technical discussion has floated among several rule elements:

• S&DT• “Artisanal Fishing” (and small scale?)• Access agreements (definition of a subsidy)

4. Diverse interests have been reflected in a common and imprecise vocabulary.

5. THE BIG CHALLENGE = STRIKING THE RIGHT BALANCE

THE BIG CHALLENGE = STRIKING THE RIGHT BALANCE

. . . which requires a careful articulation of what is at stake . . .

. . . THUS . . . this workshop invites delegations to work from interests to text, rather than reacting to text based on interests . . .

. . . And so, this first session opens with the questions:

What are the specific development and sustainability objectives of governments in these negotiations?

What kind of programmes or policies are currently in place, or are envisioned for the future, to meet these objectives? Specific examples?

What are the key technical questions that most need answering in order to achieve the desired outcome?