• 수산해양교육연구
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.1053-1062
• /
• 2015

This research assesses the implementation of the bilateral fisheries order of the China-Japan fisheries agreement. After establishment of UNCLOS, the China-Japanese fisheries agreement has played as a basis for the fisheries order in the East China Sea. The China-Japanese fisheries agreement intends that the fisheries industries in China and Japan can utilize the renewable natural resources in the East China Sea. As the EEZ of China overlaps with that of Japanese in the East China Sea, the two countries established the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone and Middle Zone in the Sea. Even though the three coastal States (e.g. Korea, China, and Japan) in the East China Sea are involved in managing these zones, there has been little effort to coordinate each county's management. Additionally, the Taiwan-Japan fisheries agreement, which is for the area of N $27^{\circ}$, has made costal States to establish and implement united measures to conduct effective fisheries management. Regarding access to the joint fishing zone in EEZ, Chinese fisheries regulations have been enforced in the zone because the fishing capacity of China exceeds all of other countries, reducing the number of fishing licenses and catch quotas. It turned out that a nation that has authority over fisheries resources tends to establish specific conditions of fishing operations to maximize its national interest. In the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone, Chinese and Japanese authorities have introduced united measures to manage fisheries resources. However, in the Middle Zone between China and Japan, there is no regulation on fishing; both countries' fishing vessels can have free access to the zone. Thus, it is recommended that one should introduce an international fisheries management regime for the Middle Zone. In this regard, Korea should play a leading role in establishing the international management regime because Korea has middle position in terms of geographical standpoint, the degree of dependence on commercial fishing, and its fishing capacity.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제47권1호
• /
• pp.31-45
• /
• 2016

This study aims to evaluate the status of implementation of bilateral-fishery order since the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement came into effect in 1999 in order to improve fisheries relationships between two countries. The agreement regulates bilateral-fishery order by the principle of the EEZ regime and mutual benefits among countries. (e.g. the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ and cooperation for resource management). However, the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement has some limitations such as reducing quotas of the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ, strengthening Japanese fisheries regulation, insufficient cooperation for fisheries management and joint countermeasures. In order to improve fisheries relationships between the two countries, it is imperative to rebalance quotas for the mutual agreed fishing in EEZ, to establish effective resource management systems in the Intermediate zone, to invigorate fisheries cooperation in the private sector, and to introduce new management systems by species over the all waters around East Asia. To accomplish such measures, it is necessary for Korean and Japanese governments to improve fisheries relationships based on trust and cooperation, achieving a win-win situation. Additionally, it is required to incorporate fisheries management among Korea, China, and Japan.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제31권2호
• /
• pp.67-91
• /
• 2000

Fisheries Agreements among Korea, China, and Japan, for the effective management of fisheries resources and protection of fisheries disputes, have been processed in a manner to conclude interim arrangements those are effective prior to the final demarcation of the maritime delimitation which often requires much time to settle among the relevant states, Based on this understanding, Korea, China, and Japan, had proceeded their mutual fisheries agreement ; and, two fisheries agreements, between Korea-Japan and China-Japan, have already entered into force on 22 January 1999 and on 1 June 2000, respectively. Lastly fisheries negotiation between Korea and China has been concluded in order to make it effective on 30 June 2001. As Korean fisheries have already experienced the impacts after the entry into force of Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement, it is inevitable that the likewise will also be true for the Korea-china Fisheries Agreement. The results of fisheries negotiation should minimize the loss by ensuring Korean flagged vessels' fishing rights to the maximum level in the counterpart's waters, and to maximize our counterpart's loss by restricting its vessels' fishing rights to the minimum level in our waters. However, such goals are almost unreachable in an intergovernmental negotiation. On this ground, regardless of the results, the negotiation is highly criticized from all the interested realms of the society. First, this study reviews the negotiation process ana subject matters of the fisheries agreement, and then evaluates the disputed items issued by academic, political, and industry areas in an international law and fisheries perspective. After the entry into farce of fisheries agreement, various activities should be accommodated as future tasks, such as the adjustments of the domestic fisheries structure, the reorganization of the resource management based fisheries structure, the construction of EEz large surveillance system, and the construction of the multilateral fisheries cooperation system Through an earlier implementation of those tasks, the Korean fisheries will be better prepared in minimizing the predicted impacts once the Korea-China Fisheries Agreement becomes effective.

• 수산해양교육연구
• /
• 제11권2호
• /
• pp.150-183
• /
• 1999

Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement concluded in 1965 made a contribution to the stable development of fisheries relationship for both countries until the year of 1980. From the time on thereafter a series of respectable fishery disputes occurred throughout the period of fisheries self-regulation in accordance with alteration of home and abroad conditions. And both countries marched into a cooperation era by enforcement of the new fisheries agreement from the 23 January 1999, because the Fisheries Agreement system of 1965 had many limitations to settle the fundamental fisheries problems. In this paper, the author carried out the legal interpretation, arrangement of historical facts and evaluation of actual results of the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement of 1965. The key contents of the Fisheries Agreement were the establishment of 12-nautical mile exclusive fishery zone and the joint-control fishery zone under the principles of maintenance of MSY for fishery resources, freedom of high seas and mutual cooperation. The legal foundation of the conclusion of the Fisheries Agreement were the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952 and the four International Conventions on the Law of the Sea of 1958. During the 33 years, the fisheries power of Korea made a rapid stride, on the other hand that of Japan was almost stagnated. And in the meantime, there were very important development on the international law of the sea, for instant, the settlement of 12-nautical mile territorial sea regime and the establishment of 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone regime. Annual meetings of the Joint Fisheries Committee were not successful to fill the role for conservation of fishery resources. The Fisheries Self-Regulation Agreement concluded in 1980 was also insufficient to accept the new international regime on the law of the sea, for that reason it was terminated on 23 January 1999. But it is true that the Fisheries Agreement of 1965 made a contribution to normalization of fisheries relationship between both countries and fisheries development of Korea.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제39권2호
• /
• pp.81-108
• /
• 2008

Since the declaration made by UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on EEZs, The open seas of Northeast Asia, considerd as a convention area, needed new agreements in conformity with the changes brought by the introduction of the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) system. The Contracting Parties of these agreements set up their own EEZs, which extend certain ranges from their baselines, Fishing in the other party's EEZ is done based on mutual agreements, which take into account traditional fishing activity in the zones. Seperate fishries management systems, in accordance with the relevant legal status of the waters, are applied to individual overlapping areas: Middle Zone in the Bast Sea and the waters south of jeju Island, Interim Measure Zone in the Yellow Sea and East China Sea, and the Transitional Zone in the Yellow Sea. They decided to conclude fisheries agreements as the provisional agreement under Article 74(3) of the UN Convention before the delimitations of the EEZs to avoid the territorial disputes. China and Japan concluded the Fishries Agreement in the November 1997, allowing each coastal State 52 mile EEZ. it was followed by Korea and Japan in September 1998, reaching a final compromise. And also Korea and China came to a satisfactary settlement in November 1998. Fisheries agreements have been established between the three North-east Asian States, the agreement are all bilateral. That implies inefficient resource management on the overlapping waters of the three states, especially on the East China Sea. The Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement and the China-Japan Fishery Agreement worked as governing rules in the North-east Asian seas before the establishment of EEZs (Exclusive Economic Zones). However the conclusion of the bilateral fishery agreements, Korea China and Japan have developed EEZs, and these three countries have competed for the exploitation of fisheries resources. Therefore, the issue of fisheries resource management was no longer a single countries' problem and emerged as a common issue facing these three countries. In recognition of the above-mentioned problem, it is needed for the construction of cooperative System fishery management in the North-east Asian seas. Therefore, cooperative measures should be establishied. The final goal of the construction of fisheries management cooperative system is to establish sustainable fisheries in the North-east Asian seas. However, there is a big difference in fisheries management tools, fishing gear, exploitation rate of species, etc. This implies that a careful approach should be taken in order to achieve the cooperative fisheries management among Korea, China and Japan. conclusionly, the Governments of Korea, China and Japan should complement three bilateral agreemens, and which they prepares to 'Fisheries Resource Restore Program' Between Korea, China and Japan in the adjacent waters south of Jeju Island.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제46권2호
• /
• pp.93-110
• /
• 2015

This research examined the transformations of the fisheries relations between Japan and Russia since the establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) system. The author reviewed the transformations with investigation on mutual fishing access to EEZ including salmon & trout catches. The Japan-Russia fisheries relations have evolved through multiple developmental stages, which include mutual fishing access to EEZ, the reductions of a fishing quota to balance catches of the nations, provision of financial and technical support, and a payment system of EEZ fishing access fee. The Japanese salmon industry also has done similar practices, continuing to catch salmon and trout in the Russian EEZ. Additionally, Japan and Russia have attempted to develop joint fisheries projects and to assure fishing operation safety around Kuril Islands. The case of Japan-Russia mutual fishing access shows that a country that has authority over crucial fisheries resources tends to establish specific conditions of mutual fishing access so that it maximizes its national interest. Thus, this case gives us implication what could be future directions of Korea-China-Japan multinational fishing access. The principle of same number of fishing vessels and quantities of catches has worked in existing mutual fishing access to EEZ among Korea, China, and Japan. However, it is expected that a nation that is endowed with abundant fisheries resources would limit counterpart's fishing access to its EEZ. Therefore, Korean fisheries administration should prepare for all possible situations like a dramatic cut in fishing quota and the termination of fishing access. International fisheries cooperation and payment of fishing access could be viable options for such a situation.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제33권1호
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2002

The sea of north-east Asia is biologically interrelated and one country's mishap in the management of fisheries could have a critical effect upon the other. Accordingly under the TAC system adopted by all the countries of Korea, Japan and China, the mismanagement o( trans-boundary fish stocks under the provisional fisheries agreement prior to the delimitation of EEZ could lead to the irrevocable depletion of fisheries resources in case of absence of close cooperation among the countries concerned. To tackle the problems above, it is necessary, from a short term perspective, to promote the combined efforts to do researches on fisheries resources, find ways to improve the transparency of fisheries management, adjust the fisheries management regulations of each country, standardize fishing gears and methods, and exchange fisheries-related statistics and data for socio-economic analysis and strengthen joint research activities for the mutual benefits. From a longer term prospective, regional fisheries organization need to be set up to oversee the whole area of north-east Asian sea. The organization as such could play a role in adjusting the conflicting interests of Korea, Japan and China, and efficiently manage the fisheries resources, which is complex and challenging in nature. In addition, unlike China, the historical fisheries relationship between Korea and Japan, spirit of reciprocity and the Article 62 of the United Nations Convention On the Law Of Sea need to be taken into account when seeking for fisheries cooperation between the two countries through the international specialization. In other words, the data obtained through the joint researches on the fisheries resources for the specific ocean along with such factors as capital, labor, fisheries technology and consumption of fish products could be used to assign the specific sector of fisheries to the country who has a comparative advantage, thus achieving the mutually benefiting results Up to the present, concerted efforts by Korea, Japan and China on the fisheries cooperation have been consistently made, but the results have yet to be materialized, It is also beyond doubt that governmental consultations among the countries should be made on a consistent basis, but non-governmental organizations' exchanges and related joint researches will more likely help bring about the desired fruition in a shorter time.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제29권2호
• /
• pp.1-19
• /
• 1998

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제22권
• /
• pp.227-254
• /
• 2004

This paper focuses on the analysis of effects on fisheries sector following Korea-Japan Free Trade Agreement and the results are found as follows. In terms of national competitiveness, the RCA(Revealed comparative advantage) index shows that Korea is higher than Japan in most species items. And the calculation of TSI(Trade Specialization Index) finds that Korea is export specialized while Japan import specialized, showing that Korean fisheries sector is internationally more competitive than Japan. The tariffs on the marine products should be completely scrapped between Korea and Japan, export of marine products to Japan increases a mere 2%, while import from Japan 13.5%. In terms of value, annual export to Japan stands at 20,135thousand USD, while import from Japan at 12,137thousands USD, resulting in trade balance improvement of 8,000thousand USD in total. The tariff measures above is expected to have a positive effect on the related industry of marine products such as Oyster, Conger eel, Ark shells and Laver, but those involved in fisheries of Alaska pollack, Hair tail, Sea-bream(live fish), Red horsehead(frozen), Saury are expected to be negatively affected. Given the results of analysis above, the effects of FTA on the fisheries would be advantageous to Korea as a whole, but at the same time, the advantage and disadvantage sustained differs by fishery type and marine products. To that effect, negotiation strategies and countermeasures should be made, taking the results into account.

• 해양정책연구
• /
• 제33권2호
• /
• pp.57-82
• /
• 2018

This study aimed to review the reorganization of fisheries and the future tasks in accordance with the establishment of new fishery order in the Northeast Asian Seas. As the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which recognized the sovereign rights of Coastal States in a 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), entered into force in 1994, the three countries of Korea, China and Japan ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1996 and started negotiations to establish a new fishery order consistent with the EEZ system. However, a conflict of interest occurred because of differences in fisheries between countries, negotiations many times have proceeded, resulting in the signing of fishery agreement between China and Japan in 1997, Korea and Japan in 1998, and Korea and China in 2000. Each fishery arrangement consists of a dual system of EEZ and provisional waters (middle waters, provisional waters). The two countries are engaged in mutual fishing based on coastal states in EEZ, and in the fishing operation under the principle of flag state in provisional waters. There are overlapping or ambiguous jurisdictions in the intermediate waters and provisional waters that are jointly available to both fisheries. The presence of these seas is a challenge to the establishment of a reasonable international fisheries management system for the entire Northeast Asian Seas. In this context, the challenges of the reorganization of the new fisheries order are as follows: 1) conversion to a fishery order for coexistence of fisheries, 2) expansion to an international fishery management system, and 3) establishment of a multilateral fishery cooperation system. Although the jurisdiction of their own waters has been expanded through the establishment of EEZ according to new fishery order, the need for mutual cooperation grows when considering the movement and migration of fishery resources, fishery management, fish consumption and trade. In addition to the fisheries cooperation between the governments, it is also necessary to revitalize the civil cooperation focused on fishermen who exploit fishing grounds together.