The world’s fishing crisis may require more than a single global treaty, according to new research from the University of Exeter. A legal analysis of the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies argues that protecting marine ecosystems will depend on building a coordinated network of international rules, each designed to address a specific problem rather than forcing every aspect of ocean sustainability into one broad framework. The study arrives as governments confront declining fish populations, persistent illegal fishing and the growing economic pressure placed on coastal communities that depend on the sea for food and income.
The research focuses on the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, commonly known as the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement, or FSA. Adopted in 2022 after years of negotiation, the agreement entered into force on September 15, 2025. It represents a major change in the role of the global trade system because it is the first WTO treaty built around an environmental sustainability objective. The agreement seeks to limit government support that contributes to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, fishing of overexploited stocks and activities that can accelerate the depletion of marine resources.
Fishing subsidies are payments or other forms of government support that reduce the cost of fishing or increase the income of fishing operations. They may include fuel assistance, tax benefits, vessel construction grants, insurance support, low-interest loans and programs that improve fishing equipment or infrastructure. While such measures can protect livelihoods and help stabilize food supplies, they can also allow fleets to continue operating when fish populations are already under severe pressure. In economic terms, subsidies may lower the effective cost of fishing, encouraging greater effort than a stock can biologically sustain.
The study’s author, I-Ju Chen of the University of Exeter, argues that the FSA is significant precisely because it links the regulation of trade-related government support to the ecological condition of fish populations. Traditional international fisheries agreements generally establish rights and duties for states and fishers, such as rules governing access, conservation and management. However, many of these agreements rely heavily on voluntary participation, uneven enforcement or decisions made by regional organizations. The FSA introduces a more focused legal mechanism by targeting one of the financial forces that can drive overfishing.
“ The FSA recognises the importance of environmental sustainability for economic stability, food security, and ocean health,” Chen said. “It is thus the first WTO treaty to have, at its core, the goal of environmental sustainability.” The significance of this approach lies in the WTO’s existing legal infrastructure. Unlike many environmental agreements, the WTO possesses established procedures for reviewing national measures and resolving disputes. By incorporating fisheries subsidies into that system, the agreement attempts to use the influence of international trade law to support conservation objectives.
Yet the analysis warns that the agreement is not a complete solution. One major concern is the incomplete definition of what constitutes a fishery subsidy. Certain forms of support, especially assistance connected with fuel, can be difficult to classify and regulate. Fuel subsidies are particularly important because fuel represents one of the largest operating costs for many commercial fleets. Reducing that cost can make distant-water fishing profitable even when vessels must travel farther, spend longer at sea or target stocks that are already declining. If major categories of support remain outside the agreement, governments may be able to continue encouraging excessive fishing through indirect measures.
The FSA also faces difficulties in determining how responsibility should be divided among countries and institutions. Fish stocks do not respect national borders. A single population may migrate through territorial waters, exclusive economic zones and areas beyond national jurisdiction, while vessels may be registered in one country, owned by companies in another and supplied through ports elsewhere. Regional Fisheries Management Organisations play an important role in setting catch limits, monitoring fishing activity and coordinating conservation measures, but their mandates and enforcement capacity vary widely. The WTO agreement must therefore operate alongside, rather than replace, the existing law of the sea and regional fisheries regimes.
According to the research, a system made up of complementary legal instruments could provide a more realistic route to sustainability. Different rules could focus on different pressures: subsidies that expand fishing capacity, activities involving overfished stocks, illegal operations, labor and vessel registration practices, or the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems. Such specialization could allow governments and international bodies to assign responsibilities more clearly and design regulations that match the technical characteristics of each problem. A single treaty attempting to regulate every maritime sustainability issue could become too broad to enforce or too politically difficult to negotiate.
The need for effective coordination is becoming more urgent as climate change alters marine ecosystems. Warming oceans are shifting the geographic ranges of fish, changing the timing of migration and reproduction, and increasing uncertainty for fisheries managers. Ocean acidification and deoxygenation can further affect growth, survival and habitat quality. When stocks move across national boundaries or into new fishing areas, existing management systems may no longer reflect biological reality. Subsidies that once supported a local fleet may, under changing conditions, intensify competition in a newly accessible region and place additional stress on vulnerable populations.
The study describes the FSA as a promising foundation, but not an endpoint. Its dispute settlement process and legal complexity may make enforcement difficult, particularly when a measure has both economic and environmental effects. Governments may dispute whether a subsidy directly contributes to overfishing, whether a stock is genuinely overexploited or whether a regional management body has supplied sufficient scientific evidence. These questions require reliable data on catches, vessel activity, stock biomass and government spending. Without transparent monitoring and stronger scientific cooperation, even carefully drafted rules may have limited practical impact.
Chen’s analysis ultimately presents fisheries governance as a problem of institutional design. International law must balance national economic interests, the open and mobile nature of marine ecosystems, the authority of trade institutions and the need to protect food security. The FSA demonstrates that environmental goals can be incorporated into a legal system originally designed to promote trade, but it also reveals the limits of relying on one agreement. A broader framework of mutually reinforcing rules, supported by scientific monitoring and meaningful enforcement, could give depleted fish stocks a better chance of recovery while helping communities transition toward sustainable fishing. The central challenge will be turning that legal architecture into coordinated action before ecological decline makes recovery far more difficult.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Fishery Sustainability and the WTO Fisheries Subsidies Agreement: Its Causes, Consequences, and Prospects
News Publication Date: 16-Aug-2026
Keywords: Maritime law, International law, International trade, Political process, Fisheries sustainability, Fishing subsidies, Overfishing, WTO, Ocean conservation, Illegal fishing
