Throughout the 1990s, the international community has made several attempts to enhance and develop the legal framework for fisheries management described in the 1982 Convention. Such negotiations have led to the adoption of the 1992 Rio Declaration and Agenda 21, the 1993 Compliance Agreement, the 1995 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the 1995 Rome Consensus on World Fisheries, the 1995 Kyoto Declaration and Plan of Action, and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement. Contemporary fishery issues referred to in these instruments include, inter alia, excess fleet capacity; by-catch and discards; MCS of fishing fleets; measures to enhance data collection; and application of the precautionary approach. This report has examined the extent to which the above mentioned instruments have, or have not, been implemented by both FAO and non-FAO RFBs.

For the purposes of this report, the broad definition of RFBs offered by FAO in the 1998 Text of Documents Placed Before the High Level Panel of External Experts in Fisheries, has been adopted with one qualification and a few important bilateral arrangements have been included in the present review.

The report reaffirms that current international relations are marked by a division between wealthy, developed States and a majority of less wealthy and poor developing States, and that international cooperation is needed to address inequities and fulfil the provisions of the "world order" envisaged by major international agreements such as the UN Charter, the 1982 Convention, and the subsequent international fisheries instruments. RFBs play a significant role in expressing and developing the notion of regional cooperation. This fact has been recognized by the international community which has given an increasingly important role to RFBs for the conservation and management of marine capture fisheries. The consequence is that RFBs must now be viewed as critical to the successful implementation of the international fisheries regime.

The report has noted that for RFBs to implement the requirements contained in the various instruments, there is likely to be a necessity for the body to amend its founding agreement, constitution or convention. In many cases, the original RFB terms of reference or mandates were constructed in an era pre-dating the 1990s instruments. However, from information made available to FAO in the course of this study, only two RFBs are acting to investigate just how their mandates should be amended to allow them to implement the above mentioned requirements.

Partly as a consequence of this legal lack of ability to implement changes in the legal regime, the report has concluded that few RFBs have achieved real progress in addressing the post-1982 fishery instruments. This conclusion should be qualified by noting that many RFBs are at least examining through appropriately constituted working groups, the implementation of the instruments. The importance of applying the precautionary approach to the conservation and management of marine capture fisheries is demonstrated by the fact that all but one of the RFBs under review, are examining the application of the approach to their respective regimes. However, only nine RFBs have actually taken concrete steps to implement the precautionary approach, in some measure, within their respective regimes. RFBs initiating measures to more fully comply with the total provisions of the post-1982 instruments, are much fewer in number.

This conclusion is perhaps not surprising. The post 1982 instruments present complex scientific, managerial and political considerations that cannot be resolved quickly. Furthermore, other factors impacting upon the RFB capacity to address the functions described in these fishery instruments are elaborated within the report. Specifically, these include the problems of incongruent fishery interests amongst Contracting Parties within a RFB, funding and staffing difficulties which weaken the ability of some secretariats to function effectively, and lack of political will on the part of many Contracting Parties to accept and/or implement the international instruments described above.

The final result of this state of affairs is that despite international expectations for RFBs to more effectively conserve and manage marine capture fisheries. There is little facility for this to occur unless their rules and functions are strengthened as presented in recent international fishery instruments. The strengthening of regional fisheries management must be addressed in a more comprehensive and rational manner if sustainable utilization of the resources is to be achieved. This is critical because under existing international law, and within the current paradigm for the management of shared fish stocks, RFBs provide the only realistic option for the conservation and management of these stocks.