...
A major problem facing the enforcement of international fishing regulations is the issue of flag hopping and fishing under flags of convenience. The phenomenon is a direct result of many countries opening their fishing registries to fishing companies of other nationalities. By allowing this, countries can increase the revenue that they gain from fishing, and this has made the idea of open registry very popular in poorer countries such as Panama and Bolivia. All of this sounds fine, when the country allowing open registry follows international protocol. However, the reason flag hopping is so detrimental to international fishing regulations is that many countries where open registry is popular, do not abide by international fishing laws nor do they sign on to international treaties. This means that fishing companies that register under the flag of these countries no longer have to abide by these laws either. They can go into marine reserves and fish, they can fish as much as they want to and with no fear of repercussion, and if they country decides that they wish to comply with international regulations then the fishing company can simply switch flags in order to continue fishing outside of regulations, hence the term flag hopping. Boats can switch flags without ever docking in the port of the country that they wish to switch to. This phenomenon creates a tremendous loophole in the enforcement of international fishing regulations and negatively curbs the effects of fishing regulations One of the only effective ways proposed to solve this issue is fish trade restrictions with countries who do not comply with international fishing regulations and allow companies under them to do the same. This provides a strong economical incentive for these countries to join an international fishing policy and abide by it, making it more profitable for them to follow environmental policy than it is for them to disregard it and leaving flag hoppers with nowhere to jump.
Main Source: "Fishing Under Flags of Convenience: Using Market Power to Increase Compliance with International Regulations" Elizabeth R. Desombre. Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2005
History of Compliance with International Mandates:
As our plans involve producing behavioral changes on a global scale, the issue of compliance and enforcement are major factors to consider. Throughout history, there have been multiple instances of international mandates imposed upon the entire international community, with varying degrees of success. In each of the two cases, the probable motivating factors and relevance to our solution are considered.
One of the most significant international agreements from the past century is the Geneva Convention , which dictates the rules of war and attempts to bring a little humanity and order into an otherwise chaotic and barbaric means of settling disagreements between nations. This mandate, accepted by virtually all major countries in the world today, bans certain weapons, such as chemical and biological agents, and guarantees basic rights to soldiers in enemy hands. However, despite the wide-spread acceptance of the Geneva Convention, the primary motivating factor appears to be self-preservation; people follow the rules in the hope that should the tides change, their opponents will treat them decently as well. For those with nothing to lose, like terrorists, the Geneva Convention is simply disregarded. The situation with preserving global fisheries does not pose the same imminent alternative of painful death and torture, making it more difficult to ensure compliance.
Another such international mandate is the Kyoto Protocol. Dealing with the carbon emissions of developed nations, this agreement is concerned with staving off the projected disastrous effects of global warming. Each country receives a pre-determined limit on the amount of carbon its factories and industries release into the atmosphere, prompting nations to find more environmentally friendly means of conducting business. Like the case of the ocean's fisheries, the atmosphere is an international resource that is threatened by the actions of every person on Earth, with consequences that can disrupt the livelihood of the entire world. Unfortunately, conforming to the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol is extremely costly; though potentially beneficial in the long term, the immediate costs often deter nations from complying, or even agreeing to the Kyoto Protocol at all. Furthermore, the current punitive measures stated in the agreement have proved to be worthless; nations that exceed their carbon limit are supposed to do better the year after, and the economic sanctions are minor to nonexistent. Aside from being loosely enforced, the punishment itself is counterintuitive. At present, the economic incentives to ignore the Kyoto Protocol have far outweighed the benefits. Saving the Earth sounds lovely, but between the economy and the environment, it appears that most nations will choose financial stability first.
Sources: http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/pqdweb?did=1307667221&sid=5&Fmt=2&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD;
http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/pqdweb?did=801652851&sid=5&Fmt=2&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD;
http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxyberklee.flo.org/pqdweb?did=784211311&sid=5&Fmt=3&clientId=5482&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Our preliminary ideas for a solution (from the international standpoint):
...