The Judicial Practice Of Fishery Subsidy In International Trade

Fishery subsidy has a long history and it is one of the most important measures for coastal states to develop their fishing industry. However, with a large number of fisheries resources drying up, most of the fish-hunting countries begin to realize the harm of fisheries subsidies to fishery resources. In the meantime, they have taken measures to adjust the fishery subsidy policies for the sustainable development of fishery resources. The forms of fisheries subsidies in different countries are vary for different reasons, the question needs to be considered is that do their judicial practices reflected in international trade. The purpose of this research is to offer reference to Chinese fishery subsidy in order to adapt the international trend of sustainable development. To achieve this purpose this research discussed the different judicial practices on fishery subsidy in China and the large fish-hunting countries in the world, and also analyzed the fishery subsidy conditions in different countries and regions and the fishery subsidy negotiations in the World Trade Organization.Apart from the prelude and conclusion, there are three parts in this research:the first part is the definition of fishery subsidy. At the present, there is no uniform and determine definition of fishery subsidy, and different countries and international organizations are divergent on the issue too. Therefore in this part discussed the definition of fishery subsidy mainly through analyzing the various definitions and clarifications of fishery subsidy of the international organizations such as WTO, FAO, OECD and WB. The second part is about the domestic judicial practices on fishery subsidy in main countries and regions. In this part analyzed the legal and policy measures on fishery subsidy in Japan, South Korea, America, Canada, European Union, Norway and Iceland. As the different attitudes on fishery subsidy and different developments of fishing in the countries, their domestic judicial practices on fishery subsidy vary greatly. Therefore it can offer some references for China’s fishery subsidy practice. The third part is about the practice of the WTO fishery subsidy negotiations. This part introduced the different point views of different countries and their responses to the same question in this part. Furthermore, analyzed the attitudes of the countries to fishery subsidy, which include the "No Need" approach (It is represented by Japan and South Korea); the "Traffic Light" approach (It is represented by "Friends of Fish"); and the "Special and Differential Treatment " approach (It is represented by seven small-scale and least developed countries). Besides, this research discussed the fishery subsidy in China and explained that the fishery subsidy in China also can do harm to international trade.