of management measures, or the lack of rigor of the arrangements. Amongst the
flaws are the lack of “management plans”, as well as the concrete monitoring and
enforcement of protective measures. For some OSPAR MPAs situated beyond
200 nm, there is still no management plan in place, as in the case of the Josephine
submarine mount.
107
Finally, reference should be made to Decree no. 4.810/2003, which regulates the
operation of fishing vessels in Brazilian fishing areas and the high seas, referring a
few times to fishing on the continental shelf. That diploma launches the general
objective to sustainably exploit fishing resources with Brazilian and international
waters—Art. 4 (VII), and declares the intention to deepen knowledge of living
resources on the continental shelf as a goal of the National Policy for Developing
Oceanic Fishing.
108 Yet, the Decree cannot be considered an environmental norm,
but rather an administrative act dedicated to regulating the operation of national and
foreign fishing fleets in areas under Brazilian jurisdiction, so as to reach the rational
exploitation of fish stocks and species. In so doing, the Brazilian norm mirrors
provisions of UNCLOS and UNFSA, thus reverence for the international legislation
on the issue of living resources of the EEZ and the continental shelf.
In light of the implementation difficulties raised above, it would be advisable for
the Brazilian authorities to engage in a few strategic steps. Firstly, to detect further
priority continental shelf areas that deserve some sort of conservation, apart from
enforcing management measures in the recently designated marine areas of São
Pedro and São Paulo and Vitória and Martim Vaz. Secondly, the country ought to
strengthen the National Coastal Management Program (GERCO). Concerning
coastal ecosystems, it is the case not to develop newer policies, a step which
would only add confusion to the current “spaghetti-bowl” of Brazilian marine
environmental legislation, but to implement existing norms and materialize existing
plans.
109 Thirdly, Brazilian authorities should specify strategies for the protection of
marine systems and expand the protected areas of all large marine ecosystems, thus
executing the Marine Protected Areas Project (also known as GEF Mar), approved
in 2014 and financed by World Bank.
110 Finally, the country ought to approve and
engage in very possible efforts to implement a National Policy for the Marine Biome
(PNCMar), particularly its Title IV on the specially protected marine areas.
111
107 Ribeiro (2015), p. 62.
108 Art. 4 (VI), Decree no. 4.810/2003.
109 Such a view is also shared by Milton Asmus, President of the Forum “Conselho do Mar”. See
MMA (2018), p. 70.
110 Detailed information on the GEF Mar project is available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/
curated/en/608051468215124739/Brazil-BR-Marine-Protected-Areas-Project-P128968-Implemen
tation-Status-Results-Report-Sequence-03. Accessed 12 April 2020.
111 Art. 17, single paragraph, PNCMar: “Brazil shall stimulate and support international actions,
programs and agencies aimed at defining specially protected areas beyond national jurisdictions,
especially those potentially located in the South Atlantic Ocean basin”.
10.2 How Far Has Brazil Gone?
333
flaws are the lack of “management plans”, as well as the concrete monitoring and
enforcement of protective measures. For some OSPAR MPAs situated beyond
200 nm, there is still no management plan in place, as in the case of the Josephine
submarine mount.
107
Finally, reference should be made to Decree no. 4.810/2003, which regulates the
operation of fishing vessels in Brazilian fishing areas and the high seas, referring a
few times to fishing on the continental shelf. That diploma launches the general
objective to sustainably exploit fishing resources with Brazilian and international
waters—Art. 4 (VII), and declares the intention to deepen knowledge of living
resources on the continental shelf as a goal of the National Policy for Developing
Oceanic Fishing.
108 Yet, the Decree cannot be considered an environmental norm,
but rather an administrative act dedicated to regulating the operation of national and
foreign fishing fleets in areas under Brazilian jurisdiction, so as to reach the rational
exploitation of fish stocks and species. In so doing, the Brazilian norm mirrors
provisions of UNCLOS and UNFSA, thus reverence for the international legislation
on the issue of living resources of the EEZ and the continental shelf.
In light of the implementation difficulties raised above, it would be advisable for
the Brazilian authorities to engage in a few strategic steps. Firstly, to detect further
priority continental shelf areas that deserve some sort of conservation, apart from
enforcing management measures in the recently designated marine areas of São
Pedro and São Paulo and Vitória and Martim Vaz. Secondly, the country ought to
strengthen the National Coastal Management Program (GERCO). Concerning
coastal ecosystems, it is the case not to develop newer policies, a step which
would only add confusion to the current “spaghetti-bowl” of Brazilian marine
environmental legislation, but to implement existing norms and materialize existing
plans.
109 Thirdly, Brazilian authorities should specify strategies for the protection of
marine systems and expand the protected areas of all large marine ecosystems, thus
executing the Marine Protected Areas Project (also known as GEF Mar), approved
in 2014 and financed by World Bank.
110 Finally, the country ought to approve and
engage in very possible efforts to implement a National Policy for the Marine Biome
(PNCMar), particularly its Title IV on the specially protected marine areas.
111
107 Ribeiro (2015), p. 62.
108 Art. 4 (VI), Decree no. 4.810/2003.
109 Such a view is also shared by Milton Asmus, President of the Forum “Conselho do Mar”. See
MMA (2018), p. 70.
110 Detailed information on the GEF Mar project is available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/
curated/en/608051468215124739/Brazil-BR-Marine-Protected-Areas-Project-P128968-Implemen
tation-Status-Results-Report-Sequence-03. Accessed 12 April 2020.
111 Art. 17, single paragraph, PNCMar: “Brazil shall stimulate and support international actions,
programs and agencies aimed at defining specially protected areas beyond national jurisdictions,
especially those potentially located in the South Atlantic Ocean basin”.
10.2 How Far Has Brazil Gone?
333