Early last year, I discussed in this column the blue economy, where I put forward the case that the exploitation of marine resources should be done in a way that preserves them for future generations. My argument was premised on the potential of Tanzania’s fisheries sector. I mentioned that Tanzania currently earns about $2 billion annually with the potential to reach $3 billion per year by 2030 — a figure that remains far below what South Africa ($17bn), Morocco ($11bn) and Mauritius ($3bn) earn from the blue economy.
The WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies is a binding global trade agreement adopted in June 2022 and entered into force in September 2025. Its main goal is to stop governments from financially supporting destructive fishing practices. The argument is straightforward: when a country subsidises its fishing industry, it encourages overfishing, which leads to illegal fishing and ultimately results in the depletion of fish stocks.
A total of 24 African countries have already ratified the Agreement. In East Africa, Kenya, Uganda, and Seychelles have ratified it. Tanzania, though it adopted the Agreement in June 2022, has not yet ratified it — understandably, perhaps, due to legal and institutional considerations. My view, however, is that Tanzania should expedite whatever due diligence it is undertaking and proceed to ratify it.
I support ratification for two reasons. First, Tanzania’s subsidies to the fishing industry are negligible — just about $0.5 to $2 million per year — and are mostly directed not towards large fishing industries, but towards artisanal fishing. This can be compared with Morocco, which subsidises its sector by $100–$200 million annually. Hence, Tanzania should not be overly concerned about adverse ramifications.
Secondly, ratification comes with significant benefits. It would strengthen Tanzania’s fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The Agreement explicitly prohibits subsidies to operators engaged in illegal fishing, a persistent problem that costs Tanzania billions in lost revenue and depleted fish stocks. By committing to these rules under the World Trade Organisation framework, Tanzania would gain access to technical assistance, monitoring systems, and international cooperation mechanisms. This would significantly enhance enforcement capacity, particularly in the Exclusive Economic Zone, where illegal foreign vessels often operate with impunity and without detection.
However, as Tanzania moves towards ratification, this process should be accompanied by key strategic safeguards. First is the protection of small-scale fishers. Tanzania should fully utilise the Agreement’s special and differential treatment provisions for developing countries. This allows continued support for artisanal fisheries — such as safety equipment, gear improvement, and access to markets — provided they do not contribute to overfishing.
Second, effective implementation requires investment in monitoring, control and surveillance systems. Strengthening Beach Management Units (BMUs), digitising vessel registration, and improving data systems will ensure compliance while reducing illegal fishing.
Third, Tanzania should clearly define “development-friendly subsidies” within its policy framework and ensure that support for infrastructure, research and climate resilience remains intact.
In conclusion, ratifying the Agreement should not be seen as a surrender of sovereignty but as a strategic step towards sustainable prosperity. With the right safeguards, Tanzania can curb overfishing, protect livelihoods and secure long-term economic gains.
