I was neck-deep into the Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) world until 4 years ago, when I took a step back as here in the Pacific it was getting into the institutional positioning side of issues and they were walking away from a “centralised” repository of transactions (which for me is a key element for it to work, and I have written about) so I decided to move aside, do not compromise my beliefs, respond if asked, do technical support and focus on good PSM (which for me is another a prerequisite for a CDS to work)… in this area, the work we have done with the Marshall Islands has been a highlight of my career.
Everything starts here
I did a couple of FAO assignments on side topics (blockchain use) and in 2020 worked on the huge identification of “Critical Tracking Events (CTEs) and Key Data Elements (KDEs) along with the wild capture and aquaculture value chains” that are still being workshopped and discussed at FAO level.
So yeah… after 12 years of experience with the EU Catch Certification Scheme, my involvement in the FAO CDS guidelines, books written about it, advisor roles for institutions… and so on, still atopic i’m really keen to moving forwards, so I keep my eyes close to the game but not really playing it, while everyone just talks and argues… I like more operational jobs.
And generally, my criticism of many initiatives in the last years is that they are “theoretical’ or just reinvent the wheel, by repeating how good it would be to have CDS… in fact, to have a CDS is one of the recommendations of the IUU quantification study we published this year
For me, the reason why we don't have a multilateral, interconnected CDS system that would work as the accountancy systems for fisheries, is political decision one and not a technological one… we could borrow from banking and customs and come up with something that will work, surely will take time and mistakes, but it will work.
So when a while ago my friend and college Shelley Clarke chatted to me about a new FAO assignment she had on CDS booklet “Understanding and implementing catch documentation schemes – A guide for national authorities” I knew it would fill a niche that was needed.
Shelley is amazing, she knows her stuff and is a gifted writer (I wish I was 25% as good as she is, so my professional life would be much easier!) hence it does not come as a surprise that this publication is excellent and recommendable if you have an interest in all CDS things!
Her document seeks to align and improve existing national monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) tools, as well as product tracking systems, in order to support more effective national CDS implementation and strengthen CDS throughout the international supply chain.
The document contains chapters on the legal and policy background to CDS, an introduction to the features and requirements of existing schemes, as well as guidance on how to handle CDS information requirements and identify national key data elements. Finally, it provides a series of exercises for assessing relevant national capabilities and coordination processes, including the management and exchange of information.
I fully agree with the approaches and solutions she presents and the analysis of shortcomings of the present systems, and the need to be proactive.
Her work parallels and cements a lot of my views, that I wish I was able to articulate as clearly as she does! (and I also really appreciate the various mention of my work with Gilles Hosch and Ken Katafono in the references and the fact that her work strengthen my position on PSM and a central repository of transactions)
I recommend you download and read the original, I just quote the conclusion here:
Catch documentation schemes cannot single-handedly stamp out IUU fishing. They rely on other monitoring, control and surveillance systems to generate information about the legal provenance of catches, and depend on product-level tracking systems to prevent the mixing of illegal and legal catch throughout the supply chain. In providing a framework for the compilation and sharing of legal provenance data, CDS represent an opportunity for cooperation and collaboration between different States along the seafood supply chain. Strengthening each State’s contribution to that framework therefore strengthens the system as a whole.
In their day-to-day participation in CDS, States face an array of choices which balance risk, cost and other factors. They must determine how and when data are collected and provided; what quality assurance underlies the data; and how such data are stored in order to respond to queries.
States may aim to: meet the minimum standards of the CDS in which they are currently participating, uphold a higher standard required by the more advanced of the existing CDS (in the event that their fisheries or markets expand), or go beyond all of the existing CDS to anticipate future standards. Those that are proactive can protect the value of certified catch for their stakeholders, and avoid the broad-scale reputational damage of being associated with IUU fishing activities.
This analysis has presented several ways that national authorities can assess their tools and systems against CDS requirements in order to identify issues and formulate actions to address them. These include identifying national catch tracking KDEs, evaluating national fish product tracking systems, assessing verification tools and systems, and weighing the benefits and costs of expanding CDS coverage. States which undertake these kinds of exercises not only stand to improve their own national systems, but will also set higher benchmarks for the ongoing evolution and expansion of CDS. Continuing improvement in the documentation of legal provenance, both CDS and its implementation at the national level, will serve as a potent deterrent to persistent IUU fishing activities.