45. The Commission reviewed an analysis of regional arrangements for fisheries in the Asia-Pacific region based on document APFIC/04/6. The analysis grouped these bodies or arrangements into (i) Regional Fishery Bodies (RFBs); (ii) Economic cooperation arrangements; and (iii) Coordinating arrangements. Regional Fishery Bodies were further sub-divided into three categories, viz., (i) those that have a mandate for fisheries management and are empowered to establish management measures; (ii) those that provide members with scientific and management advice; and (iii) those that provide scientific advice and information.
46. The Commission noted that the region is relatively well served with coordination and advisory bodies and arrangements, especially those that relate to providing information sharing and dissemination. However, although the Asia-Pacific region is the highest production region in the world, it only has two regional fisheries management bodies. These are the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) and the newly-formed Commission for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (WCPFC).
47. The Commission also noted the number of economic cooperation arrangements in the region, notably the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC); the Association of the South East Asian Nations (ASEAN); the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC); and the Pacific Island Forum (PIF), formerly South Pacific Forum. It was thought that these economic cooperation arrangements may play a larger role in future regional or sub-regional fisheries arrangements. Many general coordinating mechanisms have fisheries amongst their mandates, although several of them are project-based and of limited duration. These included the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) funded project on 'Reversing environmental degradation trends in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand'; the Coordinating Body for the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) which implements the East Asian Seas Action Plan; and the GEF/UNDP/IMO Partnership for Environmental Management of the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA). For inland waters, the Mekong River Commission (MRC) has a fisheries Programme that provides advice and coordination amongst the member States.
48. Several members commented that the analysis had identified some gaps in coverage among the existing arrangements, but also suggested that any future arrangements should build on these existing arrangements. The Commission re-affirmed that APFIC should not evolve into a management body, but that it could facilitate the evolution of such arrangements, as required, for smaller geographical sub-regions.
49. The Commission supported the view that opportunities exist for closer collaboration between Regional Fishery Bodies, the Regional Sea Programmes and the Large Marine Ecosystem projects and that this should be promoted. It agreed that APFIC's Regional Fisheries Consultative Forum could be one of the avenues to facilitate such collaboration and it was suggested that a useful role of the new APFIC would be to inform Members on important activities and achievements of the various regional bodies and arrangements, as they relate to fisheries issues.
