Powered Relations Affect the Management of the Fishing Industry in Kiribati - Case Study Example

Compare and contrast how powered relations affect the management of the fishing industry in Kiribati Name: Course: Institution: Date: Compare and contrast how powered relations affect the management of the fishing industry in Kiribati Part 1: Report Executive summary Kiribati is one of the countries in the pacific region that are richly endowed with tuna and other marine resources. The country provides permits to deep sea fishing nations and this is considered as an essential source of revenue(Teiwaki 1988, p.11). The declaration of Kiribati as an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) was aimed at ensuring the maximization of the fishing resource in the deep waters. In addition, EEZ was also aimed at monitoring the activities of the deep water fishing nations. Kiribati has however begun the process of diversifying sources revenue by engaging in artisan fishing and exportation of its aquaculture (Paskal 2010, p. 6). This was aimed at ensuring that the citizens are empowered for self-reliance and to ensure a reduction on the dependence on foreign aid. Issues of consideration Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) Kiribati is well endowed with numerous marine resources considering that it is an extensive Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The extraction of these marine resources from the deep sea waters rests with the abilities and technological capacities of distant water fishing nations that pay permit fees to the government of Kiribati (King 1991, p. 100). The EEZ has enabled the fishing sector in Kiribati to become a source of essential livelihood for subsistence(Van Dyke et al 2013, 15). In addition, fishing industry is also considered as a source of revenue through the promotion of the country’s vast store of tuna and other marine life. In an attempt to exploit its marine resources, Kiribati, togetherwith other countries in the South Pacific declared a 200 mile EEZ in 1979 (King 1991, p. 100). Through the declaration, these countries demanded for an improvement in the surveillance and monitoring of distant water fishing nations as a way of maximizing income from licensing through an effective enforcement of EEZ (Paskal 2010, p. 9). Inshore exports and aquaculture Through the declaration of EEZ, Kiribati has been able to accrue numerous benefits to its people. One of the major highlights of this development is the need to improve on technology, acquisition of relevant skills and acquisition of more financial resources. For small islands such as Kiribati, the marking of the territorial boundaries was largely due to the protection of highly migratory species (King 1991, p. 101). These are also sources of economic gain considering that the goals of Kiribati is to generate and save foreign change and reducing the levels of dependency by seeking to export aquaculture into the highly competitive marine market. This has been acknowledge through the promotion of inshore and aquaculture development (IMF 2009, p. 4).in addition, the country has also been engaging in the promotion of artisanal fishing as a way of improving on the capacity of its citizens and reducing dependence on foreign aid. The government of Kiribati through the department of fishing has experienced an increasing marine export (Paskal, 2010, p. 10). Other marine resources such as the aquarium fish have been generating more revenue for the government since1998. Seaweed has also become a highly valued niche product which has been experiencing fluctuation in price in the international market and destruction due tounpredictable weather conditions. Despitethese challenges, sea weed farming has proven to be a valuable venture in the Pacific. This is largely because this initiative requires relatively lower levels of technology and investment for successful harvesting of the weeds. This is a perfect income generating activity for rural subsistence communities (IMF 2009, p. 5). Japan and China in Kiribati The struggle for hegemony between Japan and China has been the main source of power struggles in Kiribati. Just like China, Japan envisions to establish its authority as a partner with Kiribati as a way of ensuring more dominance in East Asia and the Pacific region (Firth 2006, p. 120). Through numerous trades agreement japan intends to engage in deep sea fishing in the tuna rich waters while at the same time providing economic aid to Kiribati (Firth 2006, p. 120). Options of expansion Artisanal fishing This is a relatively cheaper venture considering that it requires less capital characterized by the use of small vessels and simple fishing gear.in addition, this venture also requires little or no processing of the marine resources (IMF 2009, p. 6). Benefits Readily available markets in Kiribati for marine products Provides employment opportunities for locals Relatively cheaper venture Risks Use of less sophisticated gear limits the ability of maximizing on the catch Limited knowledge on professional fishing among the locals Little or no processing of marine products limits the target market Deep- sea fishing This is an area that requires capital investment considering that there is need for large sea vessels that are able to withstand extreme weather conditions in deep sea. Benefits Access to tuna rich marine areas Job opportunities to professional fisherman Ability to capture large marine resources Ability to target larger marine markets Risks Climate change and rising sea levels a threat to the tuna resources and other marine life Highly competitive capital-intensive Recommendations There is need for the company to invest in both artisanal fishing and deep-sea tuna fishing. This will enable the company to satisfy the local market in Kiribati and other highly competitive markets on the international platform There is need to embrace initiatives of environmental stability to help protect marine life and fishing sites. Part 2: Essay Introduction Kiribati acquired its independence in 1979. Since this time the country has been dependent on migration, remittances, fishing fees, aid from different countries and its bureaucratic system of governance (Bidesi 2014, p. 1). These have made the economy of the country to be relatively stagnant which has increased pressure on government’s resulting in high dependency on foreign aid and disturbances, china and Japan have been influential in determine the economic progress of the country especially in the fishing industry, which is a major economic contributor in the country (Teiwaki 1988, p.15). The main objective of this paper is to compare and contrast the role of power struggles between China and Japan in the management of the fishing industry in Kiribati. Power relations between Kiribati and powerful countries in Pacific Ocean Power relations between Kiribati and China The need to ensure that there is adequate development in certain infrastructural areas in Kiribati has been the main source of power struggles between Taiwan and China. The refusal by the government of Kiribati to lease land to China for a satellite tracking facility was a contributing factor to the collapse of Kiribati government in 2003 (Crocombe 2007, p. 12). The election of the opposition leader as the president of Kiribati in 2004 terminated the land lease to china and established technological and business relations with Taiwan (Kavalski 2009, p. 32). Kiribati is multiparty democracy where there are numerous political parties that are loosely due to lack of political ideology and developmental agenda. These parties are largely organized along tribal lines (Sutter 2012, p.121). This increased instances of corruption and abuse of social problems, and this according to different members of the political class has resulted in an increase in the number of Chinese owned businesses (Kavalski 2009, p. 33). This led to the notion that that the increase in corruption matters facilitated the granting immigration permits to Chinese investors and other foreign investors. According to the studies by Transparency International in 2011, Kiribati was ranked at position 95 out of 183countries (Sutter 2012, p.126). China, just like the United States and Japan, have been influential in the fishing industry in Kiribati considering that the country is strategically located in the Pacific Ocean and this makes it a platform for different countries to engage in power struggles with the desire to realize Maximum profits in the industry (Crocombe 2007, p. 14). China is currently one of the emerging economies in the world and in East Asia. The desire to ensure its control on the political and economic platforms in Asia led to protest by the Chinese government against the intention by Kiribati to establish ties with Taiwan. China, through its foreign relations ministry, considered this move as incorrect and that Kiribati must take responsibility for its actions by revoking its supposed treaty with Taiwan (Kavalski 2009, p. 33). The move by Kiribati was considered as a threat to the dominance of China in Asia considering that China had in 1980 signed a communique agreement that was about the establishment of diplomatic relations between Kiribati and China(King 1991, p. 111). The ability of Kiribati to lease its waters to different countries interested in the fishing industry makes the country a platform for power struggles especially on how to secure fishing spots within the island (Sutter 2012, p.126). The installation of Chinese satellite tracking facilities in Kiribati was not only meant to monitor the activities of the country in the matters related to the fishing industry but also to monitor the activities of other powerful forces such as the United Sates and their desire to engage in missile testing activities in neighbouring countries such as the Marshall Islands. Through such monitoring activities China is able to understand the activities of the United States in Asia (Crocombe 2007, p. 18). The demand for deep sea tuna in China has also been a contributing factor to the development of Chinese interest in Kiribati. The ability of the government to lease part of its sea water has not only contributed to the economic development on Kiribati, one of the poorest nations globally, but also improved investment in the fishing industry (Kavalski 2009, p. 34). Other than the economic aspects related with the investments in China, the country envisions using Kiribati as a platform for the realization of its space ambitions (Sutter 2012, p.125). In addition, the country also desires to use the leased land in Kiribati for the development of its military prowess on the increasingly violent international platform (Magstadt2008, p. 100). This is viewed as a drive towards cementing its power as a world power in Asia and on the global arena (Sutter 2012, p.125). Power relations between Kiribati and Japan In 1981, Japan withdrew its fishing fleet from the rich tuna waters in Kiribati. This was due to the inability of the government in Kiribati and Japan to reach to the terms of agreement on aspects of licensing (Trumbull 1981, p. 1). Kiribati is considered as one of the areas in the Pacific Ocean that controls the richest fishing areas(King 1991, p. 121). These are considered to be of great importance to Japan considering that the Japanese have for a long time relied on fish as the source of most of their proteins in relation to the country’s diet. The government of Kiribati has however declared that its economic zone encompass 200 miles from each island(Trumbull 1981, p. 1). The government of Kiribati also has the responsibility of issuing the sale of government licenses to other nations interested in acquiring fishing zone within the jurisdiction of the country. This licensing of fishing areas is considered as a principle source of the country’s revenues(Paskal 2010, p. 8). Unlike China which is not only interested in the acquisition of fishing zones but also the establishment of tracking system within the island as a means of checking the activities of the United States in Asia, Japan balks at increase (Crocombe 2007, p. 21). The country is also one of the earliest sign ups that agreed to pay about $600,000 for a permit to fish in tuna rich waters of Kiribati (Trumbull 1981, p. 1). This permit was bound to allow trawlers into the fishing grounds in Kiribati or a period of one year. Japan was also to provide economic aid to Kiribati in the period when they were allowed to send its trawlers into the deep waters of the island. The problems between Kiribati and Japan began in 1981when the former decided to raise the permit fee to $ 1 million (Trumbull 1981, p. 1). This was considered by Japan as a means of exploitation by the island considering that the country still demanded Japan to provide economic aid as an additional incentive to acquiring the permit to fish in its deep sea waters. The raise in the cost of permit acquisition made Japan to balk out of the deal to access fishing grounds in other parts of the Pacific (Trumbull 1981, p. 1). This move according to Japanese Fisheries Agency also meant an end to the economic aid that Japan was providing to Kiribati. The Japanese according to this agency would only return to the island under new terms of agreement (Lal 2000, p. 23). It is important to note that as at 1999 environmental factors especially those related to climate change and the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere had become important in understanding the role of Japanese government in protecting the coral reefs in deep waters of Kiribati. Japan, due its involvement in the Second World War has been identified as a contributor in climate change matters that threaten the existence of Kiribati considering the rising sea levels (Van Dyke et al 2013, p. 11). During the Pacific Island Summit of 2000 in Kiribati, Japan announced its intentions to negotiate compensation claims with those in Kiribati concerning the damages resulting from the Second World War (Crocombe 2007, p. 23). In an attempt to improve on its relationship with Kiribati, Japan negotiated numerous informal agreements with Kiribati and this included the decision to attempt to find solutions to the dispute over tuna fishing which was a consequent of the refusal of the Japanese government to sign a convention geared towards the protection of tuna in the central and western areas of the Pacific ocean. This included agreements on whaling and nuclear fuels shipment (Van Dyke et al 2013, 14). Conclusion China is increasingly concerned with establishing its power in Asian pacific. To be able to establish this relationship the country has leased land to China for a satellite tracking facility. This has increased the ability of China to ensure constant surveillance of the activities of other powers such as the United States in Asia. Kiribati is not only strategically located for fishing in the Chinese perspective but also a platform for surveillance. The relationship between Japan and Kiribati is majorly on matters of finding. Despite the rejection by the Japanese government on the high fees for acquiring fishing permits, the country has been trying to amend its relationship with Kiribati by negotiating terms of compensating victims of Second world war and the protection of Tuna in the deep seas References Bidesi, Van Ram. 2014, An Economic Assessment of Destructive Fishing Methods in Kiribati: A case Study of teororo fishing in Tarawa. School of Marine Studies, University of South Pacific, http://www.spc.int/DigitalLibrary/Doc/FAME/InfoBull/FishNews/135/FishNews135_21_Ram-Bidesi.pdf Crocombe, R. G, 2007,Asia in the Pacific Islands: replacing the West. Suva, Fiji: IPS Publications, University of the South Pacific. Firth, S. 2006. Globalisation and governance in the Pacific Islands. Canberra: ANU E Press.http://bibpurl.oclc.org/web/54211. International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009, Kiribati: Selected Issues and Statistical Appendix. IMF Publication Services, Washington, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2009/cr09196.pdf Kavalski, E, 2009,China and the global politics of regionalization.Farnham, England: Ashgate. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=476379. King, M. G. 1991,Fisheries in the economy of the South Pacific. [Suva, Fiji]: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific. Lal, Brij V., and Kate Fortune, 2000,The Pacific Islands: an encyclopedia. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Magstadt, T, M. 2008. Understanding politics: ideas, institutions, and reform. Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth. Paskal, C, 2010, Drawing Lines in the Water, In Global Warring: How Environmental, Economic and Political Crisis will Redraw the world map, Palgrave Macmillan, United States, New York. Available at http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=fTjjb6sDs5MC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=Drawing+Lines++in+the+Water,+In+Global+Warring&source=bl&ots=PG05TOUyco&sig=MFV5lwiha37c04v03k4fnCRV5ZU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OrYrVOzwKs7xaPzvgOgE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Drawing%20Lines%20%20in%20the%20Water%2C%20In%20Global%20Warring&f=false Sutter, Robert G. 2012. Chinese foreign relations: power and policy since the Cold War. Lanham, Md: Rowman& Littlefield Publishers. Teiwaki, Roniti, 1988. Management of marine resources in Kiribati. [Tarawa, Kiribati]: Atoll Research Unit. Trumbull, R, 1981, Japan Withdraw Fishing Fleet from Kiribati. The New York Times. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/20/world/japan-withdraws-fishing-fleet-from-kiribati.html (October 1, 2014) Van Dyke, Jon M., Sherry P. Broder, Sŏg-u Yi, and Chin-hyŏnPaek.2013. Governing ocean resources: new challenges and emerging regimes : a tribute to Judge Choon-Ho Park. Read More