Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing is a threat to both marine ecology and maritime security. Evaluate global and Indian responses.

IUU fishing takes place outside the rules on licensing, catch reporting and management. It drains already overfished stocks. Because these vessels go untracked, it also blurs the line between fishing and maritime crime. Global and Indian responses now have solid legal backing, but enforcement and capacity still lag.

Global responses: strengths

• FAO Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA): the first binding treaty aimed specifically at IUU fishing. It denies ports and markets to illegal catch [1].
• WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS): in force since 15 September 2025 after 111 acceptances. It bans subsidies for IUU fishing, for overfished stocks and for fishing on the unregulated high seas [2].
• Fish Fund (Article 7): gives developing countries and LDCs grants to build their capacity [3].

Global responses: gaps

• Subsidies for fuel, gear and vessels, which drive overcapacity, are left to the still-pending Phase 2 [4].
• Article 12 sunset clause: the AFS lapses if comprehensive disciplines are not adopted within four years [5].
• Enforcement depends on the political will of individual port and flag states.

Indian responses: strengths

• Treaty commitment: India became the 123rd Member to accept the AFS (20 July 2026) [6].
• Vessel Communication and Support System (VCSS) under PMMSY: ISRO-built transponders for one lakh vessels (₹364 crore). They give SOS alerts and geo-fenced alerts on the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) [7], so fisheries monitoring also supports coastal security.
• EEZ Rules, 2025: an Access Pass for mechanised vessels and a bar on foreign vessels. They also ban LED light, pair and bull trawling and provide for a National Plan of Action on IUU fishing [8].

Indian responses: gaps

• The National Plan of Action on IUU fishing still has to be framed, and transponders are still being fitted [8][7].
• The AFS needs credible IUU determinations and stock assessments, and India's capacity for these is thin. The Fish Fund can help [3].
• India's support is only about US$15 per fisher [4], so curbing subsidies alone will not stop IUU fishing.

Verdict: The global framework sets clear rules but enforces them weakly. India has moved from relying on welfare support towards active surveillance, which is the right direction, but implementation is still incomplete.

Ending IUU fishing therefore needs rules, technology and capacity working together. India should finalise its National Plan of Action quickly and finish fitting transponders. It should also use the Fish Fund for stock science and work with Bay of Bengal partners to shape Phase 2 before the sunset deadline. This would advance SDG 14.4 and 14.6 and support a secure, sustainable Blue Economy.