INTRODUCTION

1. At the time this document was written, June 2000, two GFCM members (Malta and Turkey) had deposited their instruments of acceptance of the amendments to the Agreement of GFCM relative to the autonomous budget. Two-thirds of the membership - 15 countries - should accept these amendments before the autonomous budget comes into force, and then it comes into force only for those members who have accepted it. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that the Twenty-fifth Session of GFCM will be in a position to adopt an autonomous budget for the year 2001.

2. Each time the budget is determined an agreed procedure (algorithm) will be used to determine the scale of contributions. The scale of contributions will be expressed in terms of shares (percentages) of the total budget. Each Member will have a specified share. The scale of contributions - that is the percentage of the budget that each Member countributes - is not established once and for all. It should vary principally depending on the extent to which the particular Member participates in the fishery. Therefore, the key issue is the agreement on a procedure - or algorithm - to be used to calculate the scale of contributions. In contrast to what is the case for the scale of contributions the algorithm will be decided once and for all.

3. The discussion at the Extraordinary Session and at the Twenty-fourth Session in Alicante, Spain, July 1999, showed that few GFCM members were willing to officially agree to an algorithm before a consensus has been reached on all its aspects. However, it seems that a shared understanding has been reached and that the following three factors should be considered: membership, the wealth of a member (wealth component), and the extent of the Member's fishing and aquaculture activities (catch component). Also there seems to be a consensus that the Members' contribution in the form of a membership fee should amount to 10 percent of the autonomous budget.

4. So the Commission now needs to consider:

• which weight/importance to give to the catch component and which weight to give to the wealth component, and
• to agree on how to measure the three factors.

5. For illustrative purposes, it is useful for the discussion to apply the proposed scale of contributions to a hypothetical figure, representing the foreseen normal total size of the autonomous budget.

6. An algorithm is suggested below. It builds on the discussion that was held during the Twenty-fourth Session of GFCM.

Which factors to consider:

• membership: a fixed proportion of the budget; equally shared amongst members¹
• the wealth of the Member (wealth component): and,
• the total capture fishery and aquaculture production of the Member (catch component)

Which weight to give to each factor (as percentage of total autonomous budget):

• Membership: 10 percent
• Wealth component: 35 percent
• Catch component: 55 percent

How to measure the factors:

• Membership: all countries plus the EU
• Wealth component: according to per caput GDP (measured in US $ as published by the World Bank); members falling into four categories: below US$ 1 000; between US$ 1 000 and US$ 9 999; between US$ 10 000 and US$ 29 999 and US$ 30 000 and above. The first category is excempt from the wealth component. The second pays one share; the third pays 10 shares, and the fourth category pays 20 shares. Exceptions are made for countries with a total GDP below US$ 5 thousand million (1997). These countries (Cyprus, Malta and Monaco) are brought down to the first category and, as a result, are exempt from the wealth component (as long as their annual GDP remains below US$ 5 thousand million).
• Catch component. All fish are not equally valuable. This is reflected by giving a reduced weight to small pelagics. Thus the "GFCM catch" is calculated by applying a factor of 4 to all fish produced by members in the Mediterranean and in the Black Sea and its adjacent waters, except small pelagics. The catch/production figures to be used are those published by FAO. A three-year average is calculated using the period ending two years prior to that for which the budget will apply. In the attached "model autonomous budget" for Members, also members of the EU, the part of the budget corresponding to the catch component have been, at the request of the EU, combined and allocated to the EU instead of to the respective EU members.

Size of the autonomous budget (for illustrative purposes): US$ 750 000 per year

(See "model autonomous budget" at the end of the document).

DISCUSSION

7. Using the above algorithm, and using the data applicable in June 2000, the scale of contributions provides the results given in "model autonomous budget". In this version of the scale of contributions, the EU and its member states would pay 55.3 percent of the autonomous budget, Turkey would pay 11.3 percent and Japan 10.2 percent. The remainder, 23.2 percent, would be shared amongst the other 15 members.

8. It should be noted that Members' shares of the budget will go up slowly if they produce an increasing share of all fish produced in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean. Likewise, if their share of production were to decline, their contribution to the GFCM autonomous budget would also decline. Modifications in the per caput GDP for members will be slow to result in modifications of their share of the "Wealth Component" of the Autonomous Budget.

SUGGESTED ACTION BY THE COMMISSION

9. The Commission is invited to discuss and agree in principle on the above algorithm for calculating the scale of contributions for an autonomous GFCM budget.

1 For the EU this amount represents a sum to cover administrative and other expenses of membership.