September 28, 2016 — The decision taken by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to close off 30 per cent of all marine areas from extractive activities by 2030 has caused outrage to Europêche and the European body representing producer organisations(EAPO).
The IUCN adopted the measure in its latest Congress held in Hawaii, on September 1-10, during which the entity adopted a series of non-binding commitments to recommend governments and other relevant international bodies such as FAO or the European Union.
According to Europêche, the IUCN takes decisions on fisheries issues whilst disregarding the huge socio-economic impacts that this 30 per cent area closure would have on coastal communities and food security.
“No-take zones (marine reserves) have become, in the eyes of many scientists, NGOs and lay-people, a solution for the overexploitation of fish populations. However, before we close off any area to extractive activities such as fishing we must first ask ourselves what are we protecting and why. MPAs are a tool, not an objective so in order for these closures to be successful, their existence has to be justified,” Javier Garat, President of Europêche, pointed out.
For its part, the fishing sector argues that fisheries is actually one of the most affected sectors by these recommendations, which do not take into account other impacts such as pollution and marine mining industries.
Moreover, those opposing the the decision consider the IUCN’s measure is not based on any broad consensus of the scientific community and disregards the unpleasant fact that a large proportion of MPAs already established are ‘paper parks’ with zero efficiency in meeting their objectives.
On the contrary, some scientists present at the Congress highlighted that there is little proof that the 30 per cent closure would bring about any major benefit to biodiversity and have objected very strongly to the proposal since it goes against efforts made by MPA proponents during the last decade to involve coastal communities in decision-making.
The fishing bodies also believe that any proposal which greatly impacts any economic sector should be accompanied by a thorough impact assessment from an environmental, social, economic and food security perspective, which was not the case in this decision. This would be the only tool which would highlight the consequences of the problems and allows states to decide whether to take action based on accurate, objective, comprehensive and non-discriminatory information.
The fishing sector also highlights that closing off parts of the ocean from extractive use would actually conflict with other the UN Sustainable Development Goals, such as increasing food security and reducing poverty; both of which require the use of the ocean. Closing 30 per cent of all coastal areas would be disastrous in the developing world, where coastal communities have no social safety nets and no unemployment schemes.