Exploring hypothetical transfer of harmful fisheries subsidies to support low-income fishers

Decreasing fish stocks are impacting low-income fishers in many coastal countries around the world.

Over 3 billion people around the world rely on fish for their daily nutrition. Not only a cheap and accessible food source, fish is also a source of income for low-income fishers working in fisheries. However, relying on fish is becoming a risky gamble.

Global fish stocks are depleting at an alarming rate as a result of climate change, overfishing and pollution. For low-income fishers depending on fish for both their employment and food source, this is a precarious position and leaves them with a very difficult decision to make. Do they increase fishing efforts to sustain their families and further deplete fish stocks or do they stop fishing and risk their livelihoods and food security?

There may be another option.

A recent UBC study published in npj Ocean Sustainability investigated whether the funds going to harmful fisheries subsidies could be diverted to lift fishers out of poverty. Focusing on 30 least developed countries (LDCs) in coastal areas, the study showed that redirecting harmful subsidies could cover the poverty income gap in many of these countries.

“Fishers in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries are living below the poverty line, and this has severe socio-economic consequences for their well-being, nutrition and health,” said Louise Teh, lead author and researcher in the Fisheries Economics Research Unit at the Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries. “But now we can show that there is an existing source of financing that can help close this poverty gap.”

The poverty gap represents the gap between poverty line income and average fishing incomes, which is a harsh reality for billions of people worldwide. The study covers 30 coastal countries categorized as “least developed” by the United Nations. The average fisher in these countries do not even earn USD 1.90 per person per day, which is the World Bank’s benchmark for extreme poverty. The average income of fishers in 90 per cent of these countries also fell below their national minimum living wage.

Some of the reasons for this is the combination of ocean unsustainability and resource overexploitation combined with the COVID-19 pandemic. Overfishing by large commercial fishing fleets often occurs in the waters of developing countries while the profits of the catch goes to the developed nation funding the commercial fleet. Even within developing countries, governments focus on financing huge fishing operations that may bring more harm than good.

Much of this harm is created through harmful fisheries subsidies — direct or indirect governmental financial contributions to the private sector that increases the revenue (or lowers the cost) of fishing. These subsidies are harmful because they can lead to excess fishing capacity, and also encourage the inequitable distribution of resources, especially since large-scale sectors receive about 80 per cent of the current global fisheries subsidies, the bulk of them being harmful subsidies.

So, what would happen if the funds for these harmful subsidies were diverted to close the poverty income gap?

A fisher in a least developed country. Credits: Louise Teh

“For the first time, a paper actually computed how much harmful fisheries subsidies, if repurposed, can help reduce poverty levels in 30 less developed coastal countries,” said Rashid Sumaila, study author, professor and Canada Research Chair (Tier 1) at the Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, and the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs.

“Before this people just talked about this possibility but now, we have some numbers.”

In total, global fisheries subsidies amounted to USD 35.4 billion in 2018, of which USD 22.2 billion were spent on harmful subsidies. For low-income people living in the 30 coastal countries, diverting the USD 850 million going towards harmful subsidies can make all the difference. Closing the poverty gap has the potential to benefit 7 million fishers, and up to 33 million people globally.

“We need to start identifying appropriate mechanisms for getting the harmful fisheries subsidy funds to these fishing communities,” said Teh. “It is also crucial that strategies for alleviating poverty are aligned with efforts to improve fishers’ capacities to adapt to climate change, which affects vulnerable coastal communities the most.”

Least developed countries can benefit greatly from getting rid of fisheries subsidies because subsidized fishing fleets from major fishing nations are one of the main reasons for the overexploitation of fisheries resources. Much of this exploitation happens in the waters of LDCs in western Africa and the Pacific islands.

Along with helping to alleviate poverty in fishing communities, stopping these harmful fisheries subsidies will also help improve marine and fisheries management. This, in turn, will help enable resilient marine socio-ecological systems that are able to support sustainable and socially just fisheries.

“Already we are having a discussion with possible funders to extend this work to the global scale,” said Sumaila. “This will help the global community develop policies that would reduce overfishing while also reducing poverty in coastal fishing communities around the world.”

Tags: Africa, coastal countries, Coastline, finance, fishers, fishing fleets, harmful fisheries subsidies, IOF Research Associates, least developed countries, Louise Teh, low-income fishers, nutrition, Pacific Islands, poverty, Rashid Sumaila, Research, Subsidies