IUU Fishing as Maritime (In)Security in the Indian Ocean Region & Analyses of Palk Bay Conflict
IUU Fishing is an abbreviated form of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated fishing, characterised by fishing in a particular region without taking permission from the Authority, thus evading rules and regulations meant for the safeguard of the marine ecosystem. This eclectic problem transgresses region, actor, and method. Defined by FAO’s IPOA-IUU as one of the greatest threats, it has multiple dimensions and an intersectional problem, ranging from fishing to trade and even to organised crime, thus impacting sustainable fisheries management, biodiversity conservation, and legal trading. It challenges not only the Economic livelihood and food security essential for development in the Coastal areas of India but also makes a dent in national security concerns. As said earlier, it has the element of Intersectionality involving legal framework, weak enforcement, and technological gaps.
Overexploitation, bycatch, and ecological imbalances are environmental problems, while a reduction in the income of legitimate fishers leading to a reduction of national export earnings is a major problem. Inconsistency in the legal framework acts as a roadblock to effective action. Labour abuse is another dimension of Human rights concern17. A multilateral and Multilayered approach involving stronger legal frameworks, technological innovation, regional cooperation, and civil engagement is needed, given the stakes of key players like the EU and China have in the Indian Ocean region. The Food and Agriculture Organisation’s International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing (IPOA-IUU) defines "illegal fishing" as activities conducted by vessels within a state’s jurisdiction without its permission, or in contravention of its laws and regulations16. In every maritime regional space, there is a body called the regional fisheries management organisation (RFMOs), where fishing vessels have to register themselves. The challenge is that many vessels do not register; hence, without their Nationality, they trespass on the national waters of another, thus violating RFMO regulations. In simple parlance, Unreported fishing is a fishing activity either non-reported or misreported to the appropriate National Authority. Unregulated fishing is a fishing activity conducted by a vessel not registered with an RFMO; thus, they don’t have a particular national identity. 3
The FAO underscores its gravity by noting that IUU fishing is "one of the greatest threats to marine ecosystems," as it severely undermines national and regional efforts to manage fisheries sustainably and conserve marine biodiversity. Occurring across both the high seas and national waters, it affects all aspects of fishing from capture to trade and is often linked to organised crime. By depleting resources meant for lawful fishers, IUU fishing risks causing collapses of local fisheries, particularly devastating for small-scale fishers in developing countries like India. Furthermore, products derived from IUU fishing can enter international markets, exacerbating food insecurity and poverty.3
For India, a developing country with an immense dependence on marine living resources, the challenge of IUU fishing is exceptionally pressing. It threatens economic livelihoods, food security, and national maritime security. However, framing an effective national response is complicated by the broadness of the term itself. While India has its own legal frameworks and reporting systems, acts categorised as IUU fishing domestically may not necessarily be illegal under another country’s jurisdiction, highlighting a significant challenge to regional cooperation against IUU fishing. Additionally, using the term "fishing" can be misleading; it is not just fish stocks that are at risk. India’s marine biodiversity includes a range of organisms such as crustaceans, molluscs, sponges, squids, and jellyfish.2 Since each organism plays a critical ecological role in the marine ecosystem, protecting all aquatic life, not just fish, is essential for ensuring long-term sustainability and environmental balance.
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing presents a deeply interwoven set of challenges across environmental, economic, legal, technological, and security dimensions, particularly in the Indian Ocean Region. Environmentally, IUU fishing leads to the overexploitation of marine stocks and the indiscriminate harvesting of non-target species, contributing to ecological imbalance and threatening biodiversity. Pandey and Sakhuja highlight that species such as yellowfin tuna are at risk due to unsustainable practices, while bycatch from large trawlers disrupts marine food webs 13. Economically, the consequences are equally dire. IUU fishing reduces the income and resources available to legitimate, small-scale fishers, many of whom operate in developing coastal states like India. Mishra emphasises that over 28 million Indians depend on fisheries for their livelihoods, and IUU practices endanger their economic stability, national export earnings, and food security.13
The legal and jurisdictional framework further complicates the issue. India’s federal structure splits fisheries governance between the Union and State governments, resulting in fragmented and overlapping enforcement. Internationally, inconsistencies in the legal definition of IUU fishing and weak enforcement on the high seas allow violators to exploit loopholes. Sahuja points to practices like transhipment at sea, which allow illegal catches to bypass port controls and rely.15 Compounding these issues are technological and surveillance gaps.
Security concerns are also paramount. IUU fishing is frequently linked to organised criminal activities such as drug smuggling, arms trafficking, and even maritime terrorism, as noted by Pandey.13 These illegal networks undermine the rule of law and destabilise regional maritime security. While well-intended, international institutions such as the IOTC, IORA, and FAO face criticism for their limited effectiveness due to political constraints, inadequate funding, and a lack of coordinated enforcement.8 Finally, IUU fishing is an environmental or security concern and a human rights issue. The role of Civil society became critical when it comes to labourers working on IUU vessels fishing abroad in far waters from national waters, in Inhuman conditions, thus calling for working as a Watchdog, advocating for transparency and accountability.9
The Role of International Institutions in Addressing IUU Fishing in the Indian Ocean
The Indian Ocean Region (IOR) faces persistent challenges from Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, despite national efforts by regional governments to safeguard their maritime interests. Corruption, poor management and inadequate enforcement regulations are major causes for Rampant unregulated Fishing. There is an absolute need for legitimate ocean governance and robust international cooperation and coordination, thus requiring global organisations like the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)and the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC).13 It is Imperative that Multilateral organisations should take the lead, given the transnational nature of IUU fishing. And in that regard, Multilateral institutions like SAARC, BIMSTEC could prove to be influential. There is an urgent call for reform in fisheries management policies and for reinforcing sustainable fishing practices. Harmonising fisheries regulations among its member states, implementation of stricter penalties for IUU violations, and designation of new marine protected areas for conservation of vulnerable marine ecosystems are important recommendations.13 Technological advancement in artificial intelligence and vessel Monitoring systems (VMS) could strengthen marine domain awareness.13 It is emphasised that no single nation can independently tackle the marine insecurity that IUU fishing poses. Therefore, joint efforts involving regional organisations, international regulatory bodies, and national authorities are vital to ensure the sustainable use of marine resources and protect marine security.
Role of Critical Actors in Maritime Politics
The landscape of maritime geopolitics, particularly in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), has evolved significantly in recent years, with state and non-state actors playing increasingly assertive roles. Among these, China emerges as a dominant force, leveraging massive infrastructure projects and economic investments to expand its regional influence. Although China is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Chinese fishing and scientific vessels have frequently been reported violating the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of various Indian Ocean coastal states. Notably, the activities of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), which uses ostensibly civilian research vessels for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations, have heightened regional security concerns. China’s fishing fleet ranked highest on the Illegal, Unregulated, and Unreported (IUU) Fishing Index in 2019 and 2021, and operates extensively through state subsidies, often engaging in illegal fishing and espionage.4
In addition to China, the European Union (EU) plays a significant but controversial role. While the EU formally endorses an IUU policy, member states such as France and Spain have been criticised for overfishing yellowfin tuna in the Indian Ocean, leading to allegations of neocolonial exploitation by local governments. The massive use of fish-aggregating devices (FADs) by EU fleets exacerbates resource depletion, marginalising smaller Indian Ocean littoral nations that rely heavily on these fisheries for food security and livelihoods.6 Non-state actors, including private corporations and transnational fishing companies, have a considerable impact. Backed by foreign investments, these exploit legal loopholes and weak governance structures to overharvest marine resources, frequently operating outside effective regulatory oversight. Their unregulated activities threaten ecological sustainability and destabilise local economies.1
Adding another layer of complexity is the functioning of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) aim at coordinating sustainable fisheries management and improving marine governance, also face challenges due to political fragmentation and lack of stringent enforcement mechanisms., the interplay among powerful state actors like China and the EU, private commercial interests, and regional multilateral organisations defines the contemporary maritime political environment, significantly influencing security, economic competition, and environmental sustainability in the Indian Ocean.13
Case Study Of IUU Fishing in Palk Bay
In the Western Indian Ocean, reported catches averaged 2,165,792 tons between 2000 and 2003, representing 52% of the total regional catch. The lower estimate for illegal catch in this area was 229,285 tons, with a higher estimate of 559,942 tons. The estimated value of this illegal catch ranged from a lower estimate of US$206 million to a higher estimate of US$504 million. Similarly, in the East Indian Ocean, reported catches averaged 2,263,158 tons, representing 44% of the total regional catch. Illegal catch estimates ranged from 467,865 tons to 970,589 tons, valued between US$421 million and US$874 million.5
Palk Bay, a shallow stretch of sea between Southern India and Northern Sri Lanka, is a key area where the complexities of IUU fishing, particularly cross-border fishing, are evident. Fishing in Palk Bay is deeply intertwined with a complex and dynamic geopolitical situation. The drawing of the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) in 1974 divided what was historically a common fishing ground.14
A major dimension of the problem in Palk Bay is the increasing tension between Indian trawl fishers from Tamil Nadu and Sri Lankan artisanal fishers from the Northern Province. Indian trawl fishers regularly engage in cross-border fishing to the detriment of Sri Lankan artisanal fishers, whose nets are often irreparably damaged. The Sri Lankan artisanal fishers accuse the Indian trawlers of encroaching and destroying their livelihood.10 This conflict is influenced by the three-decade-long civil war in northern Sri Lanka (1983-2009), which restricted fishing by Sri Lankan fishermen, indirectly allowing Indian trawl fleets to expand and become primarily dependent on the Sri Lankan side of the Bay. While the civil war was ongoing, the conflict facilitated the ability of trawl fishers to engage in cross-border fishing because the Sri Lankan government was occupied with the LTTE. After the war, Northern Sri Lankan fishers returned to find their fishing grounds impacted by continuous trawling.14
The key actors in this conflict include the trawl fishers from Indian centres like Rameswaram and Mandapam, and the small-scale gillnetters of Northern Sri Lanka.14 The Sri Lanka Navy strictly enforces the IMBL, leading to increased arrests of Indian trawl fishers.14 While artisanal fishers generally use traditional methods, the Indian fleets involved are mechanised trawl vessels. State-promoted mechanisation of the fisheries sector in India, along with processes of capital accumulation, contributed to the dwindling fish stocks on the Indian side, compelling trawlers to fish in Sri Lankan waters.10 This transboundary fishing is a form of IUU activity, specifically illegal fishing, as it violates national laws and international obligations.11 The costs of cross-border fishing have increased significantly due to the high risks associated with fishing in Sri Lankan waters, leading to a reduction in trawling days, particularly for fishers in Rameswaram. Some trawl fishers have attempted to avoid crossing the IMBL by heading north instead of east.10
Underlying Factors and Dimensions: Understanding the "fisheries crisis" in Palk Bay requires a political ecology perspective that considers capital accumulation, fisher conflict, ethnicity, and the politics of the nation-state. The conflict happens within the same scale (intra-local) but involves processes occurring in different places, which is rarely incorporated when studying resource usage10. The differences in fisheries management between centres like Rameswaram and Mandapam are seen as an outcome of complex interactions between social, political, and economic processes both on land and at sea. Factors like ethnicity (both sides belonging to the Tamil ethnic group), prior conflicts between artisanal and trawl fishers within Tamil Nadu, and the complex political climate in India and Sri Lanka shape the dynamics of the crisis. Capital accumulation in trawl fisheries has been circuitous, influenced by artisanal activism, ethnicity, and nation-state politics.14
Impacts: The impacts of this IUU fishing manifest in several ways:
· Damage to Livelihoods: Sri Lankan artisanal fishers' nets are damaged, threatening their ability to fish.14
· Increased Tension and Conflict: The situation leads to increased animosity and clashes14. Sometimes, artisanal and industrial vessels clash, posing health and safety risks.7
· Legal Consequences: Stringent enforcement by the Sri Lanka Navy results in arrests of Indian trawl fishers.10
· Economic Costs: The crisis has human costs.10 More broadly, IUU fishing causes significant economic losses to coastal states, including loss of value in catches, landing fees, license fees, taxes, and employment. It disrupts the market and can lower the value of legally harvested fish.5
· Environmental Impact: While not specifically detailed for Palk Bay in these sources, IUU fishing globally contributes to overfishing, depletion of fish stocks, and damage to marine ecosystems.7 The depletion of fisheries stock on the Indian side of Palk Bay is mentioned as a driver for crossing the IMBL.10
Responses and Initiatives: Various measures are being explored or implemented in response to IUU fishing, relevant to the Indian Ocean context:
- International Frameworks: The FAO's International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing (IPOA-IUU) is a key international instrument, adopted by consensus in 2001.15
- Regional Cooperation: Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs), such as the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, play a role. The Indian Ocean Commission is also involved in fisheries management.5
National and Local Efforts: Australia has taken steps, particularly concerning Patagonian toothfish in the Southern Ocean and traditional fishing vessels in the Indian Ocean5. In Tamil Nadu, the Fisheries Department has supported a Palk Bay platform for responsible fisheries management, based on the assumptions that unregulated trawling must stop and fishers are key to co-management. One possible component is the buy-back of trawlers to reduce pressure on resources, which is politically sensitive. The Tamil Nadu Marine Fisheries Regulation (TNMFR) Act requires trawler licensing and restricts trawling within the first three nautical miles from the coast for artisanal fishers.10
Increased Enforcement: Increased patrolling and arrests by the Sri Lankan Navy are a form of enforcement on which the Indian government acted, which suggests that this is also an Indian issue.10
All in all, IUU fishing in the Indian Ocean isn’t just about catching fish illegally, it’s shaped by a web of factors like economic pressures, political borders, ethnic ties, and even historical legacies. Together, these forces make the problem deeply complex, with serious impacts on fish stocks, the lives of coastal communities, and the stability of the wider region.
Conclusion
In the end, Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing is not just about depleting fish stocks, it is a deeply rooted problem with ripple effects that touch almost every aspect of human and environmental wellbeing. It harms marine ecosystems, weakens economies, undermines food security, threatens national security, and even violates basic human rights. The challenge lies in its complexity: IUU fishing takes many forms, involves a wide range of actors from small fishers to powerful state-backed fleets and corporations, and thrives in the gaps created by weak laws, unclear jurisdictions, and the sheer vastness of the oceans.
For countries like India, where millions depend on the sea for food and livelihood, the stakes are especially high. The situation in Palk Bay shows how the issue is tangled up with history, politics, and poverty, often leading to conflict and pushing vulnerable communities further into hardship.
Tackling IUU fishing requires more than just stricter policing of the seas, it calls for genuine cooperation across borders and sectors. This means reinforcing global agreements like the FAO’s plan against IUU fishing, strengthening regional bodies such as the IOTC, SAARC, BIMSTEC, and IORA, and improving national laws and enforcement. It also means embracing technology for better monitoring, ensuring transparency in seafood supply chains, and involving civil society in the fight. Ultimately, the fight against IUU fishing is not just about managing fisheries, it is about safeguarding our oceans, protecting people’s dignity, and working towards a sustainable and secure future for all.
References
1. Barkin, J. Samuel. 2004. Environmental Cooperation in Southeast Asia: ASEAN's Regime for Transboundary Haze Pollution, 78–89. London: Routledge.
2. Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI). 2000. A Code List of Common Marine Living Resources of the Indian Seas. CMFRI Document.
3. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). 2022. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing. https://www.fao.org/iuu-fishing.
4. Franckx, Erik, and Tom Vander Beken. 2015. "The Globalisation of Maritime Insecurity: Trends and Challenges." International Journal of Maritime Crime and Security 17 (3): 257.
5. Hughes, J. 2011. The Piracy–Illegal Fishing Nexus in the Western Indian Ocean. Perth: Future Directions International.
6. Kingsbury, Benedict, et al., eds. 2015. The Quiet Power of Indicators: Measuring Governance, Corruption, and Rule of Law, 67–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Liddick, Don. 2014. "The Dimensions of a Transnational Crime Problem: The Case of IUU Fishing." Trends in Organized Crime 17: 290–312.
8. Maritime India. 2025a. "Indian Responses to the Challenge of IUU Fishing: A First Look At." Accessed September 2025. https://maritimeindia.org/indian-responses-to-the-challenge-of-iuu-fishing-a-first-look-at/.
9. Maritime India. 2025b. "Maritime Safety and Security in India: Fisheries MCS a Key Enabler." Accessed September 2025. https://maritimeindia.org/maritime-safety-and-security-in-india-fisheries-mcs-a-keyenabler/#:~:text=Robust%20MCS%20is%20a%20sine.
10. Menon, A., M. Bavinck, J. Stephen, and R. Manimohan. 2016. "The Political Ecology of Palk Bay Fisheries: Geographies of Capital, Fisher Conflict, Ethnicity and Nation?State." Antipode 48 (2): 393–411.
11. Metuzals, K., R. Baird, T. Pitcher, U. R. Sumaila, and P. R. A. M. O. D. Ganapathiraju. 2010. "One Fish, Two Fish, IUU, and No Fish: Unreported Fishing Worldwide." In Handbook of Marine Fisheries Conservation and Management, 165–181. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Mishra, Mayank. "The challenge of IUU fishing: A first look at Indian responses." (2024).
13. Pandey, Shivam Kumar. "A Comprehensive Classification System of Non-traditional Maritime Security Threats: a step towards Enhancing Maritime Security." International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications 13, no. 6 (2023): 227-234.
14. Stephen, J. 2014. "A Place to Live and Fish: Relational Place Making among the Trawl Fishers of Palk Bay, India." Ocean & Coastal Management 102: 224–233.
15. Sahuja, Vijay. "Six Steps to Combatting IUU Fishing." NMF Commentary 29 (2016).
16. Valli, S. V. 2023. "Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing in Indian Ocean Region. Part 2." Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law 3: 1.
17. VanderZwaag, David L., ed. 2014. Sustainable Ocean Governance: A Geographical Perspective, 145–159. Leiden: Brill.
Photo by Paul Einerhand on Unsplash
(The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views of CESCUBE.
