Blocking change: facing the drag of status quo fisheries institutions
Under what conditions can international environmental institutions survive changing power alignments? This article argues that relatively declining powers and private domestic actors play an important role in preserving the status quo because they are eager to retain advantages that existing institutions afford them. This effort to block change affects fisheries negotiations, in particular, by allowing powerful actors to avoid new rules once an institution is in place. I hypothesize, first, that relatively declining fishing powers attempt to retain past institutional successes, while emerging fishing powers seek to alter the status quo. Second, negotiating positions reflect not only a country’s position in the world, but also the access provided to domestic stakeholders who wish to gain, or fear losses, from new agreements. Therefore, I hypothesize that powerful beneficiaries in domestic politics push relatively declining powers to support the status quo when those private actors benefit from highly legalized past agreements and participate in foreign policy decisions. I test these hypotheses by exploring US and EU approaches to fisheries treaty negotiations through archival research and interviews with fisheries negotiators. The evidence supports hypotheses that status quo powers seek to protect earlier deals more intensely when they negotiate with rising fishing powers, and when private parties are most influential. As hypothesized, both governments are particularly protective of the most complex earlier agreements under these conditions.
KeywordsFisheries negotiations Historical institutionalism Power shifts Domestic politics Path dependence
This study benefited from thoughtful anonymous reviewer comments, as well as comments on earlier iterations by Tim Büthe, Joe Grieco, Margaret McKean, Michael Schechter, David Soskice, Bill Taylor, and participants in the 2014 Norwich Conference on Earth System Governance. I also thank the US and EU officials who gave their time to discuss negotiating experiences.
- Aggarwal, V. K. (Ed.). (1998). Institutional designs for a complex world: Bargaining, linkages and nesting. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
- Balton, D. A. (2004). International fisheries: Testimony before the House Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans. http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/2004/32245.htm. Accessed December 4, 2007.
- Balton, D. A. (2005). Ocean treaties: Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/54128.htm. Accessed December 4, 2007.
- Barkin, J. S., & DeSombre, E. R. (2013). Saving global fisheries: Reducing fishing capacity to promote sustainability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Bennett, A. (2004). Case study methods: Design, use, and comparative advantages. In D. F. Sprinz & Y. Wolinsky-Nahmias (Eds.), Models, numbers, and cases: Methods for studying international relations (pp. 19–55). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
- Council of the European Union. (2004). Communication from the Commission on an Integrated Framework for Fisheries Partnership Agreements with Third Countries—Draft Council conclusions. COM(2002) 637 final (15243/02 PECHE 224). 7 July.Google Scholar
- Deere, C. (2000). Net gains: Linking fisheries management, international trade and sustainable development. Cambridge: IUCN.Google Scholar
- DeSombre, E. R. (2000). Domestic sources of international environmental policy: Industry, environmentalists, and U.S. power. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- DeSombre, E., & Barkin, J. S. (2000). Unilateralism and multilateralism in international fisheries management. Global Governance, 6(3), 339–360.Google Scholar
- DG Fisheries. (2006). Interview, European Commission, DG Fisheries. Belgium: Brussels.Google Scholar
- Directorate-General for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs – European Commission. (2007). The European Community External Fisheries Policy. http://europa.eu.int/comm/fisheries/policy_en.htm. Accessed 9 Oct 2007.
- Drezner, D. W. (2007). All politics is global: Explaining international regulatory regimes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (1999). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Community participation in Regional Fisheries Organisations (RFOs). COM(1999) 613 final. 8 December.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (2002). Communication from the Commission on an integrated framework for fisheries partnership agreements with third countries. COM(2002) 637 final. 23 December.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (2007). Bilateral fisheries partnership agreements between the EC and third countries. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/external_relations/bilateral_agreements_en.htm. Accessed October 9, 2007.
- European Community. (2009). The common fisheries policy: A user’s guide. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
- Eurostat/FAO. (2014). Annual catches in all regions as % of total world catches. http://europa.eu/pol/fish/index_en.htm. Accessed June 2014.
- FAO. (2012). Yearbook of fishery statistics. ftp://fao.org/fi/stat/summary/default.htm.
- FAO. (2014). Fishstat. http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/en.
- Fernandez, R., & Rodrik, D. (1991). Resistance to reform: Status quo bias in the presence of individual-specific uncertainty. American Economic Review, 81(5), 1146–1155.Google Scholar
- Johnstone, N. (1996). The economics of fisheries access agreements: Perspectives on the EU-senegal case. Environmental economics programme discussion paper. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar
- Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- LaFraniere, S. (2008). Europe takes Africa’s fish, and boatloads of migrants follow. New York City: New York Times.Google Scholar
- Mitchell, R. B. (1999). International environmental common pool resources: More common than domestic but more difficult to manage. In J. S. Barkin & G. Shambaugh (Eds.), Anarchy and the environment: The international relations of common pool resources (pp. 26–50). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
- Mutume, G. (2002). Africa seeks to safeguard its fisheries. Africa Recovery, 16(1), 12.Google Scholar
- Negroponte, J. D. (2007). The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Written testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. http://www.state.gov/s/d/2007/92921.htm. Accessed 4 Dec 2007.
- Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (2006). Conceptual foundations of institutional interaction. In S. Oberthür & T. Gehring (Eds.), Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: Synergy and conflict among international and EU policies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Pierson, P., & Skocpol, T. (2002). Historical institutionalism in contemporary political science. In I. Katznelson & H. V. Milner (Eds.), Political science: The state of the discipline. Washington, DC: Norton.Google Scholar
- Rosenthal, E. (2008). Europe’s appetite for seafood propels illegal trade. New York City: New York Times.Google Scholar
- Shaffer, G. C. (2003). Defending interests: Public–private partnerships in WTO litigation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
- Taft, W. H. (2003). Accession to the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention and ratification of the 1994 Agreement amending part XI of the Law of the Sea Convention: Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/2003/25573.htm. Accessed 4 Dec 2007.
- Turner, J. F. (2003). Accession to the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention and ratification of the 1994 Agreement amending part XI of the Law of the Sea Convention: Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/2003/25572.htm. Accessed 4 Dec 2007.
- Undercurrent News. (2015). EU, Mauritania reach new deal on fisheries. https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2015/07/13/eu-mauritania-reach-new-deal-on-fisheries/. Accessed May 3, 2016.
- United Nations. (2003). Final clauses of multilateral treaties: Handbook. United Nations.Google Scholar
- US Department of Commerce. (2007). Interview, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. Maryland: Silver Spring.Google Scholar
- US Department of State. (2003). U.S. Hosts Signing of Revised Inter-American Tropical Tuna Convention. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2003/26337.htm. Accessed 4 Dec 2007.
- US Department of State. (2007a). Interview, US Department of State, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. Washington, DC: US Department of State.Google Scholar
- US Department of State. (2007b). Interview, US Department of State, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, Office of Ecology and Terrestrial Conservation. Washington, DC: US Department of State.Google Scholar
- Webster, D. G. (2009). Adaptive governance: The dynamics of Atlantic fisheries management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar