By Categories: Geography

According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), an international agreement in force since 1994 regarding international activity in the world’s oceans, Article 55 of the document defines the legal regime of the Exclusive Economic Zone.

The article defines an area of ocean marked as an Exclusive Economic Zone (or EEZ) as –

“The exclusive economic zone is an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea, subject to the specific legal regime established in this Part, under which the rights and jurisdiction of the coastal State and the rights and freedoms of other States are governed by the relevant provisions of this Convention” (UNCLOS, 2001).

The Convention replaces the older concept of international waters apart from national rights extending for nations over belts of coastal waters through the maritime boundaries of nations. It was borne out of the desire of certain nations to extend their rights beyond their coastal belts, to exploit natural resources, protect fishing areas and check pollution levels.

Having international waters that were zones of free opportunity made enumeration, economic regulation and conservation efforts extremely difficult, and the Convention attempts to provide guidelines for sustainable use of resources from the world’s oceans. The document can be said to be primarily based on economic regulations on nation-state activity, and though conservation extends beyond the EEZs, the Convention has an important bearing on limiting the fishing industry by placing sustainable limits on fishing extraction from the world’s oceans.

Map of India 2

The maritime boundaries of the EEZ for India

 

 

 

 

 

 

The clauses of the Convention are specific to region and each member state interprets its legal strategy for its EEZ in its own manner. In 1976 India enacted the Territorial Waters, Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and Other Maritime Zones Act, 1976 that followed its incorporation in Article 297 of Chapter III, Part XII of the Constitution with the introduction of the concept of the EEZ by the UNCLOS.

By June 1997, India had ratified to the UNCLOS III segment of the treaty, that signified its agreement with the region specific agenda of the treaty. The Act places between 2.2 to 2.8 million square km of sea under India’s jurisdiction. The boundaries however, are not clearly demarcated and are sometimes disputed, such as the critical one between Indian and Pakistani waters, that includes the Sir Creek area. The EEZ usually have boundaries that are not clearly marked, and the limits are evaluated relative to the member state’s coastal boundary. This sometimes causes clashes and overlapping of different EEZs, usually without investments in markers such as buoys throughout the boundaries.

Fishing in India is largely seen in coastal areas as a source of budget-friendly nutrition, in opposition to meat diets, although the fishing industry is currently mired in disputes and competition between local fishermen and commercial fishing. A. Mathew concluded a study for UNCLOS in 2009 that reported the depletion of the share of marine fishing output as compared to the inland fishing output in India by 2005-06. The study also noted a depletion in marine stock landings in 2005 as compared to 2000. Apart from destruction of ecosystems by practices such as fishing even during the breeding season, some significant issues that Mathew reports include threatened shark populations, reduced opportunity for sea birds, use of destructive fishing gears such as bottom trawling and increased competition in fishing due to a developing income divide (A. Mathew, 2009).

However, certain policy measures have been taken, such as fixing a cap on trawling capacity, ceasing introduction of more trawler fleets by coastal states along with registration of mechanized fishing vessels, discouragement of environmentally harmful practices, and demarcation of ‘EEZ’ that limit access areas and limit fishing to resource-specific vessels (A.Mathew, 2009). The question that reigns is how the EEZ has been utilized by the Indian government in relation to fishing activities.

With regard to the EEZ, Mathew reports that certain measures have been instituted by the Government of India. The measures that have been adopted include (A. Mathew, 2009) –

  1. Legislation has been enacted by the Centre over the regulation of fishing and fisheries by Indian fishing vessels operating in the EEZ.
  2. Fishing within areas under the EEZs cannot occur without the mandatory approval of the Central government.
  3. Enforcement of the Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of fishing by foreign vessels) Act, 1981, that prevents fishing by a foreign vessel within a country’s EEZ unless a licence or permit is obtained from the Central Government to the contrary.
  4. The Comprehensive Marine Fishing Policy, 2004, that establishes guidelines for sustainable fishing with legislative support in this regard, and also towards the interests of small-scale traditional fishermen.
  5. N.G.K. Pillai and U. Ganga in their paper ‘Sustainable Management of Marine Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone of India’, 2011, report how for the Indian government, the unrestricted growth of fishing fleets and over-exploitation of fishing resources was a major issue since the 1980s, leading to a trend in thought towards sustainable methods. The major goal of sustainable fishing, the authors cite, is the prevention of over-fishing, or the moderation of over-fished stocks such that they are eventually replenished, and also fishing operations should be engineered to minimize damage to ecosystems (N.G.K. Pillai and U. Ganga, 2011).

Other than excessive offshore fishing, the Indian Ocean also has its fair share of piracy, with hundreds of attacks between 2008 and 2012. The year 2011 alone witnessed 237 attacks (The Indian Express, 2017). Piracy is most common close to countries with a food or resource crisis, such as Somalia. There has been a sharp decline in piracy however, since international navies stepped up patrols in an ongoing battle.

Another related issue is poaching and illegal trade in marine goods such as sea horses and sea cucumbers (A. Vashishtha, 2014), which are prised for commercial reasons. These problems require states to build international co-operation in maritime conservation such that imbalances are not caused to fishing economies due to extraction from the oceans. The UNCLOS offers a ratified basis of co-operation sanctified by legal processes and the resolution of disputes as based on the terms of the agreement. The agreement could be useful as a powerful tool in achieving international co-operation over maritime problems.

Part XII of the UNCLOS is titled ‘Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment’ which obliges states to protect the environment, along with comprehensive clauses throughout the agreement for the protection of marine life (H.S. Schiffman, 2017). Marine conservation in the treaty is addressed in a region-specific manner, as mentioned earlier, and states have a right to work out their policies around clauses given in the treaty. The treaty and the demarcation of EEZs ultimately aim towards sustainable management of marine ecosystems. India’s position with its fishing industry is such that depleting fishing stocks imply that it cannot do without a sustainable approach, and meeting the sustainability criteria of the treaty in consort with domestic policy might be a positive practice in this regard.

 


 

 

 

Share is Caring, Choose Your Platform!

Recent Posts


  • In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).


    States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.

    In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody GovernanceGrowth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.

    The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.

    At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.

    This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance

    The Equity Principle

    The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.

    This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.

    Growth and its Discontents

    Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.

    The Pursuit Of Sustainability

    The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.

     

    The Curious Case Of The Delta

    The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.

    Key Findings:-

    1. In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
    2. In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
    3. In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
    4. Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.

    In the Scheme of Things

    The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.

    The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).

    National Health Mission (NHM)

    • In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
    • In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.

     

    INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)

    • Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
    • Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh

     

    MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)

    • Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
    • Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers

     

    SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)

    • West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
    • In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three

     

    MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)

    • Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
    • In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam