When the Indonesian government announced its intention to make the country’s fishing industry sustainable in early 2019, Arifsyah Nasution welcomed the news. The head of Greenpeace’s ocean campaign in Southeast Asia has long sounded the alarm bells on endangered fish stocks in Indonesian waters. But he’s skeptical that the situation will change a lot by 2025.

With more than 7 million tonnes of catches per year, Indonesia is the second largest fishing country after China. Most are for domestic consumption, with the 270 million inhabitants consuming more than three times as much fish and seafood as the world average. This has far-reaching consequences: most of the fish stocks in Indonesia are completely depleted or already overexploited. According to the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, 90 percent of Indonesian vessels draw their catches from areas already overexploited and crowded with boats.

Indonesian waters are home to 37% of the world’s marine species, many of which are threatened by fishing. Shrimp, for example, is already overfished in more than two-thirds of Indonesian waters and is therefore becoming increasingly scarce. Quotas have already been used up in other parts of the country as well. The drop in stocks is alarming. The problem is not easy to solve, however, because often the economic aspect, the volume of sales, is the center of attention. Nasution said DW “It is not about the demand of the world market, but about the survival of the Indonesian people.”

Subsidies as drivers of overfishing

Subsidies in Indonesia’s fishing sector, such as lower fuel prices and tax deductions, have also contributed to a steady increase in catches over the past decades. Many scientists therefore criticize them: harmful subsidies can lead to overfishing, loss of biodiversity and destruction of marine areas. This happens, for example, when fishing is undertaken beyond sustainable levels or when subsidies encourage harmful fishing practices. More than 60 percent of global subsidies in the fishing industry are potentially harmful to the oceans, according to a study from the University of British Columbia in Canada.

The World Trade Organization has advocated for the abolition of harmful subsidies in the fishing industry since 2001, but has so far failed. “Two decades is too long to end the subsidies that fund the relentless over-exploitation of our ocean. […] We need these rules for the sake of the environment, food security and livelihoods around the world, ”WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said in a speech to mark World Day. from the ocean in June.

Shifting subsidies from harmful to beneficial

So far, Indonesia subsidizes fisheries more than other developing countries, spending more than $ 932 million (€ 825 million) in 2018. Peru, which catches almost as much, spends only a third of what Indonesia in subsidies to the fishing industry. Indonesia spends more on capacity building, harmful subsidies (60 percent) in total US dollars, but, as a percentage of budget, Peru’s spending is much higher. These capacity building grants involve support for the construction and renovation of boats as well as larger projects such as the development of fishing ports.

Although small-scale fishing operations represent nearly 95 percent of the sector, experts say it is mainly the large-scale fishing fleets that benefit from the subsidies. On the other hand, targeted and beneficial subsidies can help maintain biodiversity and protect ecosystems. In Indonesia, about a third of the grants have so far been used for this purpose. Part of the funds was devoted to the promotion of marine protected areas, which aim to protect ecosystems threatened from human exploitation.

A successful example is Raja Ampat in eastern Indonesia, where several marine protected areas were designated in 2004. They now cover 4.6 million hectares (11.3 million acres) and are considered the most biodiverse protected region in the world, home to more than 1,600 species. of fish and hundreds of corals. The abundance of fish attracts many tourists – but also a few poachers, who have repeatedly caused damage by fishing with dynamite, for example.

Around the world, however, Raja Ampat is regarded as a success story for cooperation between NGOs, fishing communities and the Indonesian government. NGOs have focused more on research and communication to increase public awareness and inform stakeholders. The government, for example, has focused more on establishing structures such as a surveillance force to protect the area.

Protected areas cannot be established everywhere and it is not yet possible to completely eliminate harmful subsidies. With entire industries dependent on these funds, there is a risk of economic collapse without them, said Simon Funge-Smith, senior fisheries officer at FAO’s Asia-Pacific regional office in Bangkok, adding that the consequences would be far-reaching. . “The loss of jobs, the loss of livelihoods, is political dynamite.”

Almost 7 million people are employed in the fishing industry in Indonesia. If the government suddenly stopped all harmful subsidies, artisanal fishermen would suffer in particular, according to Indonesia for Global Justice, an NGO that advocates a fair trade system. The government must therefore plan carefully, gradually converting harmful subsidies into beneficial subsidies while continuing to ensure the economic viability of the industry, Funge-Smith said.

Politics hinders sustainable development

It’s easier said than done. In recent years, there has been little continuity within the Indonesian Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. Since 2019 alone, the minister in charge has changed several times. As a result, a ban on particularly harmful trawls was temporarily lifted in November 2020 before being reintroduced in July 2021. However, in order to encourage responsible management of fisheries, “all stakeholders, including civil society, must continue and focus on advocating for fishing issues in Indonesia at local, national and international levels, ”said Nasution of Greenpeace.

After all, he said, the department’s knowledge of sustainable fishing has grown significantly in recent years. However, leadership issues within the ministry and the government’s focus on attractive investments from abroad have hampered these efforts. Foreign investment is mainly focused on profit, which increases the pressure on marine resources.

Beginning in 2014, the Indonesian government used drastic methods against illegal boats, sinking more than 300 foreign and domestic ships in four years. The number of foreign fishing boats fell by a quarter, but local fishermen were more active, according to a study by the ministry and American and Indonesian researchers at various universities. The authors observed an overall rebuilding of fish stocks around this time, but noted the risk that this could be wiped out by a sharp increase in local fishing.

No data, no control

Another crucial problem in the fight against overfishing is the lack of reliable data to monitor compliance with regulations and make the decisions necessary to protect the ocean. The sheer size of the Indonesian archipelago, with its 17,500 islands and over half a million fishing boats, makes surveillance tricky. And most boats don’t have electronic devices on board for easy tracking.

Several pilot projects could provide a solution. One of them is FishFace, which automatically records catches and species using cameras connected on board. The technology enables real-time remote monitoring. Developments like this give observers, including Funge-Smith, cause for optimism, even if Indonesia ends up missing its declared goal of sustainable fisheries by 2025. “Any progress towards this goal is great,” he said. he declared.