☰
World NewsCovid-19NewsUK NewsUS NewsPolitics2020 electionCultureLifePeopleTechEntertainmentIdentitiesGenderClassLGBTQ+RaceEducation
Start writing a post

Why Brexit is making the future of fish look so bleak

October 23, 2020
orange and white fish in water
Photo by Maksym Sirman on Unsplash
Andrew Sharpless

The future of fish looks bleak in Europe.

Nearly nine months since the official Brexit and after multiple rounds of fisheries negotiations, the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) are racing against the clock to conclude a fisheries agreement. The problem? The UK is gambling with the long-term health and abundance of the highly productive northeast Atlantic fisheries.

Both in its new Fisheries Bill and negotiations with the EU, the UK has so far refused to unequivocally commit to the minimum international standard for fisheries management called Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). In doing so, the UK is undermining the existing science-based regulations that ensure enough fish to catch – regulations that the country has, commendably, previously strongly championed. It is also undermining international law – the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The EU and the UK share over 100 fish stocks, most of which are the main commercial fish populations in northeast Atlantic waters. Both entities are highly interconnected and depend on each other: 35-40% of EU Atlantic catches come from UK waters, and 70% of the UK's seafood production is exported to the EU.

While the EU is pushing to maintain existing rules (including their continued access to UK waters), the UK is pushing for an agreement that dramatically changes the status quo. The UK wants control of its waters and the ability to exclude EU fishing vessels and a significantly larger quota allocation. The UK is also pushing for annual negotiations on quota shares and access to UK and EU waters.

Unfortunately, the emphasis on who catches which fish threatens to divert attention from, and potentially lead to the abandonment of, existing science-based management of the North Sea and other relevant fisheries. A no-deal scenario would most likely lead to both parties' unilaterally deciding their own fishing limits for the over 100 fish stocks they share.

A weak deal could see both parties negotiating on fishing limits, catch shares, and access to waters annually, for over 100 stocks, and with no obligation to manage these resources sustainably. Both scenarios could very well lead to widespread and persistent overfishing, putting the recovery progress achieved in past decades at serious risk.

We cannot allow short-term debates about how to share the fish get in the way of ensuring that there are maximally abundant stocks of fish to share.

If the UK really wants to come to an agreement, as they've indicated, sustainable management, backed by science, must be the cornerstone of the conversation. Short-term yearly negotiations should be avoided because they tend to undermine the policies that maximize long term abundance. More critically, the UK has made only general statements about maintaining 'sustainable fishing'. This is a half-promise. Instead, they should make a legally binding commitment to management in line with the best available scientific advice and delivering MSY. This commitment should be enshrined in the pending Fisheries Bill as well.

MSY is a scientifically determined number for the maximum fish catch that can be sustained over time. Fishing at or below MSY rates allows fish populations to recover and reproduce, creating an environment that benefits the oceans, jobs, and the economy. Without it, conditions of fish stocks will worsen. If the UK can pivot to a long-term approach steeped in science, both parties' economies and their shared seas can thrive well into the future.

I'll never forget the sight of pro-Brexit fishing boats clashing with counter-protesters on the River Thames in the lead up to that fateful referendum vote in 2016. Their call for the UK to get a larger share of the northeast Atlantic fish catch initiated a tug of war not resolvable by reference to objective standards.

But in its fight for a bigger catch share, it is irresponsible for the UK to walk away from established scientific standards on catch limits. Catch limits and catch allocation are separate issues. Precisely because fishing remains a core issue in Brexit's politics, the government should use it to confirm its longstanding commitment to science-driven policy-making unambiguously.

Andrew Sharpless is the CEO of Oceana, the world's largest international ocean conservation organization.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
northeast atlantic fisheries

Trending Topics

Can tech help female entrepreneurs break the bias?

Women founders continue to come up against common challenges and biases
Photo by Christina @ wocintechchat.com on Unsplash

Written by Kelly Devine, Division President UK & Ireland, Mastercard

Starting a business may have historically been perceived as a man’s game, but this couldn’t be further from reality. Research shows women are actually more likely than men to actively choose to start their own business – often motivated by the desire to be their own boss or to have a better work-life balance and spend more time with their family.

The recently published Mastercard Index of Women Entrepreneurship 2021 found that in the category of 'Aspiration Driven Entrepreneurship’ – capturing those who actively choose to start their own business – women in the UK surpass men: 60% vs 56%. And Mastercard research from February 2022 found 10% of female business owners started their business in the past two years compared to 6% of men – meaning women were 67% more likely to have started a business during the pandemic.

Yet, there are common challenges that women founders continue to come up against - not least the gender imbalance in the household and long-held biases which are still prevalent.

In the UK, women are almost three times more likely to be balancing care and home commitments than men, and this was exacerbated during the pandemic as the additional barriers of school closures and lockdowns meant that the care time of dependents rose significantly on a day-to-day level for women. In addition, women were less likely to have access to a home office, greatly impacting the work they were able to accomplish when working from home was the only option.

It's also widely known that female business owners are still more likely to struggle to access funding for their business ideas. According to Dealroom, all-women founding teams received just 1.4% of the €23.7bn invested into UK start-ups in 2021, while all-male leadership teams have taken almost 90% of the available capital.

Without financial support, and when juggling significant time pressures both at home and at work, how can women grow their companies and #BreaktheBias (as this year’s International Women’s Day termed it)? What tools or support can save them time and money, and give them the headspace they need to focus on building their business?

With female owned businesses collectively estimating revenue growth of £120 billion over the next five years, solving this problem is bigger than supporting women – it’s about supporting the national economy.

Using tech to level the playing field

There are clearly societal issues at play that need to be resolved. But when we look at the rise in technology businesses during the pandemic, we can plainly see an alternative source of support critical for business growth: digital tools.

A third of female business owners say new technologies will be crucial to the success of their business in the future and one in five say it is the most important thing for business growth.

With new technology comes new ways to pay, create, and work. And yet there are barriers that prevent business owners accessing this technology. Women are significantly more likely to say they want to use more digital tools but don’t know what is best for their business and also more concerned about the security of digital tools.

When technology is adopted by businesses – whether using online accounting solutions or messenger services for communicating with staff – it saves them time, allows them to maintain and grow their customer base, and ultimately increases cost savings and profit.

By drastically improving the training and support that is available to women-owned business to access and utilise technology we will allow these businesses to grow and succeed. And we know there is demand for it.

Research done by the IFC and Dalberg shows that female entrepreneurs are more likely to invest time and money in business development. This includes product development, customer base expansion, and digital tools and training and there are plenty of services available offering this type of support – many of them for free.

One such programme is Strive UK – an initiative of the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth – which aims to reach 650,000 micro and small business owners across the UK and empower them with the tools they need to thrive in the digital economy through free guidance, helpful tools and one-to-one mentoring.

Working together with small business experts – Enterprise Nation, Be the Business and Digital Boost – we hope to ensure hundreds of thousands of UK female business owners have the tools they need to succeed and reach their ambitious goals. Because this ambition remains strong in the UK, with female business owners largely optimistic about the future despite the multitude of challenges they are facing. Four in ten say they will grow their business in the next five years – compared to only a third of male business owners – and they’re also 35% less likely than men to say they plan to downsize or close the business.

But if we do not empower female entrepreneurs to access the tools and technology they need to grow, there is a risk this optimism could be misplaced. Support programmes that provide business owners with guidance and mentorship can help ensure this isn’t the case, allowing female entrepreneurs to not only survive but thrive in the months and years ahead.