• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.9-20
• /
• 1991

The authors investigated the existing international fishery relationship in the sea around the Korean Peninsula, and prospected on the reformation of the fishery order which might be followed by mutation of the international political condition and by effectuation of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea in the future. It can be explained that the existing international fishery order in this sea has been constituted on the basis of restricting Japanese indiscriminate fishery expansion. But. when the South Korea and China proclaim the 200-mile EEZ in the future, a considerable part of existing fishery agreements will forfeit the role as general norms of the international fishery relationship. Accordingly a counterplan against the revision or abrogation of the Korea-Japan Fishery Agreement must be considered. And also a rational fishery relationship between Korea and China, as confronting countries, must be organized. The South-North Korea fishery relationship must be settled on the basis of co-operation. trust, and common interest. For this purpose, a political discussion on the establishment of the joint fishery zone around the military demarcation line and on the conservation for the fishery resources must be begun in earnest.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.99-120
• /
• 1997

The official talks on the amendment of the Korean - Japanese Fisheries Agreement which was concluded in 1965 are under way since 1996. The convention area of the existing fisheries agreement is the high sea, but it should be changed to the exclusive economic zone(EEZ) for the newly amended fisheries agreement. Accordingly, the fundamental policies to be embodied within the amended fisheries agreement are summarized as follows : 1. One of the basic doctrine of the new agreement should be the formulation of a device of international cooperation for the fishery development as well as the conservation and management of the fishery resources. 2. The preparation of the future-oriented international relationship which reflects the specific character of the fishery relationship between both countries. 3. The existing fishery results of both parties should be protected on the ground of the reciprocity principle. 4. Both parties should reach an agreement upon the joint conservation and management measures for the transboundary fishery resources. 5. In consideration of the difficulty of EEZ delimitation between both countries, a provisional fisheries agreement can be an alternative measure.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.21-34
• /
• 1990

The U.S.-Korea fisheries relationship was concluded on the legal basis of Korea as a distant-water fishing nation and U.S. as a coastal state, and aiming effective conservation, management and rational utilization of the marine living resources. The existing two legal problems on U.S.-Korea fisheries relationship are the pelagic driftnet fishing on the high seas and trawl fishing in the Bering Sea. The results and countermeasure discussed on the positive legal systems of both countries which simultaneously rationalize the conflicting standpoints each other are as follows : 1. For the sake of rational conservation and utilization of the high seas fishery resources, an international organization composing of all the coastal states and fishing nations concerned must be established, and it shall be shall be more desirable to manage the resources by the international joint control system than by the bilateral agreements between the countries concerned. 2. The U.S.-Korea Fisheries Agreement being based on the MFCMA was concluded by mutual understanding between both countries. Accordingly, no protest exists against legal status of the Agreement because it has acted as a customary norm in keeping fisheries relationship between both countries within the U.S. EEZ. 3. The existing fisheries legislative system of Korea is insufficient to support development of the industry satisfactorily. Therefore a special legislation, for example $\ulcorner$Distant-water Fishery Promotion Act$\lrcorner$, is required. And a perfect legal system for effective conservation and management of fishery resources must be established.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.150-183
• /
• 1999

Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement concluded in 1965 made a contribution to the stable development of fisheries relationship for both countries until the year of 1980. From the time on thereafter a series of respectable fishery disputes occurred throughout the period of fisheries self-regulation in accordance with alteration of home and abroad conditions. And both countries marched into a cooperation era by enforcement of the new fisheries agreement from the 23 January 1999, because the Fisheries Agreement system of 1965 had many limitations to settle the fundamental fisheries problems. In this paper, the author carried out the legal interpretation, arrangement of historical facts and evaluation of actual results of the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement of 1965. The key contents of the Fisheries Agreement were the establishment of 12-nautical mile exclusive fishery zone and the joint-control fishery zone under the principles of maintenance of MSY for fishery resources, freedom of high seas and mutual cooperation. The legal foundation of the conclusion of the Fisheries Agreement were the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952 and the four International Conventions on the Law of the Sea of 1958. During the 33 years, the fisheries power of Korea made a rapid stride, on the other hand that of Japan was almost stagnated. And in the meantime, there were very important development on the international law of the sea, for instant, the settlement of 12-nautical mile territorial sea regime and the establishment of 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone regime. Annual meetings of the Joint Fisheries Committee were not successful to fill the role for conservation of fishery resources. The Fisheries Self-Regulation Agreement concluded in 1980 was also insufficient to accept the new international regime on the law of the sea, for that reason it was terminated on 23 January 1999. But it is true that the Fisheries Agreement of 1965 made a contribution to normalization of fisheries relationship between both countries and fisheries development of Korea.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.97-118
• /
• 1999

This study discussed the international reorganization of fisheries in the East China Sea and the Yellow Sea, for the cases of Korea, China and Japan, through the fishery competition and the division of sea areas and resources. In these sea areas, each country has done mutual operation, which causes the fishery competition and controls fishery development. Besides, Exclusive Economic Zon(EEZ) established in 1996 resulted in the prominent changes of fishery development as well as fishery relationship among each country, demands reorganization of fisheries. New fishery order in these sea areas is controlled by BEZ system. The fishery reorganization according to EEZ is a common issue of each country and it also includes the importance of mutual fishery agreement. Resources of fisheries could be used continuously under reasonable management. Each country should consider the stability and existence of fisheries in the international viewpoint. At this point of time, those should be considered such as adjustment of interests according to the division of sea areas, establishment of resource management system and insurance of fishery management, for the subject of fishery reorganization.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.55 no.3
• /
• pp.264-272
• /
• 2019

The aim of this study is to analyze the relationship between international oil price as a fuel cost in overseas fisheries and skipjack tuna price as a part of main products in overseas fisheries using monthly time series data from 2008 to 2017. The study also tried to analyze the change of fishing profits by fuel cost. For a time series analysis, this study conducted both the unit-root test for stability of data and the Johansen cointegration test for long-term equilibrium relations among variables. In addition, it used not only the Granger causality test to examine interactions among variables, but also the Vector Auto Regressive (VAR) model to estimate statistical impacts among variables used in the model. Results of this study are as follows. First, each data on variables was not found to be stationary from the ADF unit-root test and long-term equilibrium relations among variables were not found from a Johansen cointegration test. Second, the Granger causality test showed that the international oil prices would directly cause changes in skipjack tuna prices. Third, the VAR model indicated that the posterior t-2 period change of international oil price would have an statistically significant effect on changes of skipjack tuna prices. Finally, fishing profits from skipjack would be decreased by 0.06% if the fuel cost increases by 1%.

• Ocean policy research
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.57-82
• /
• 2018

This study aimed to review the reorganization of fisheries and the future tasks in accordance with the establishment of new fishery order in the Northeast Asian Seas. As the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which recognized the sovereign rights of Coastal States in a 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), entered into force in 1994, the three countries of Korea, China and Japan ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1996 and started negotiations to establish a new fishery order consistent with the EEZ system. However, a conflict of interest occurred because of differences in fisheries between countries, negotiations many times have proceeded, resulting in the signing of fishery agreement between China and Japan in 1997, Korea and Japan in 1998, and Korea and China in 2000. Each fishery arrangement consists of a dual system of EEZ and provisional waters (middle waters, provisional waters). The two countries are engaged in mutual fishing based on coastal states in EEZ, and in the fishing operation under the principle of flag state in provisional waters. There are overlapping or ambiguous jurisdictions in the intermediate waters and provisional waters that are jointly available to both fisheries. The presence of these seas is a challenge to the establishment of a reasonable international fisheries management system for the entire Northeast Asian Seas. In this context, the challenges of the reorganization of the new fisheries order are as follows: 1) conversion to a fishery order for coexistence of fisheries, 2) expansion to an international fishery management system, and 3) establishment of a multilateral fishery cooperation system. Although the jurisdiction of their own waters has been expanded through the establishment of EEZ according to new fishery order, the need for mutual cooperation grows when considering the movement and migration of fishery resources, fishery management, fish consumption and trade. In addition to the fisheries cooperation between the governments, it is also necessary to revitalize the civil cooperation focused on fishermen who exploit fishing grounds together.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.51-72
• /
• 2001

This study intends to review the development of Squid Angling Fisheries of Korea and Japan and subsequent changes in the fisheries regime as well as management conditions and to examine reorganization directions. Although catches and productivity are all increasing in Korea and Japan as the squid resource in the East Sea is improving, the number of fishing vessels and the conditions of fisheries management are showing a symmetrical relationship. The former is increasing in Korea and decreasing in Japan while the latter is aggravating in Korea and rather stable in Japan. And while the competition between the two countries for more fishing grounds and catches are not that serious since the resource is relatively increasing, the catch and price competition with other domestic fisheries is a more significant problem. Furthermore, even though light restriction is implemented in both countries in order to suppress over-competition, it is adopted as a means to curtail management costs and block over-investment rather than to adjust international or inter-fisheries circumstances. Japan has been implementing the TAC system on squid resources since 1998. However, it has a different meaning than as a resource management method in its original sense because it is based on the highest catch level of the past and takes into consideration the fishermen's management conditions. In case of Korea, it is necessary to establish a plan to strengthen its fisheries management competence to address its shrinking catch in the Japanese waters. The developments mentioned so far have appeared amidst the increase of squid resources, and if such conditions disappear, problems such as international allocation of catches and fishing seasons, access to fishing grounds, and domestic conflicts among different fisheries will emerge.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.1053-1062
• /
• 2015

This research assesses the implementation of the bilateral fisheries order of the China-Japan fisheries agreement. After establishment of UNCLOS, the China-Japanese fisheries agreement has played as a basis for the fisheries order in the East China Sea. The China-Japanese fisheries agreement intends that the fisheries industries in China and Japan can utilize the renewable natural resources in the East China Sea. As the EEZ of China overlaps with that of Japanese in the East China Sea, the two countries established the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone and Middle Zone in the Sea. Even though the three coastal States (e.g. Korea, China, and Japan) in the East China Sea are involved in managing these zones, there has been little effort to coordinate each county's management. Additionally, the Taiwan-Japan fisheries agreement, which is for the area of N $27^{\circ}$, has made costal States to establish and implement united measures to conduct effective fisheries management. Regarding access to the joint fishing zone in EEZ, Chinese fisheries regulations have been enforced in the zone because the fishing capacity of China exceeds all of other countries, reducing the number of fishing licenses and catch quotas. It turned out that a nation that has authority over fisheries resources tends to establish specific conditions of fishing operations to maximize its national interest. In the China-Japan Provisional Measure Zone, Chinese and Japanese authorities have introduced united measures to manage fisheries resources. However, in the Middle Zone between China and Japan, there is no regulation on fishing; both countries' fishing vessels can have free access to the zone. Thus, it is recommended that one should introduce an international fisheries management regime for the Middle Zone. In this regard, Korea should play a leading role in establishing the international management regime because Korea has middle position in terms of geographical standpoint, the degree of dependence on commercial fishing, and its fishing capacity.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.146-167
• /
• 2001

Korea and China are two opposite countries located aside Yellow Sea and co-utilize the East China Sea. The two countries are close together from geological point of view, however, the competitive development of resources was more emphasized than the cooperative development of resources between the two countries because the special policy relationship. Additionally, after the communist government of China was founded in 1949, the political conception between the two countries was quite different. Therefore the establishment of appropriate international fisheries co-operation was impossible, and the international management problems of fisheries resources in Yellow Sea and East China Sea were let alone. UN convention on the Law of the Sea came to force in 1994, Korea and China adopted the exclusive economic zone system in 1996. On the other hand, Fisheries Law in Korea was enacted in 1953 in order to management of fisheries resources, and also China was enacted fisheries law in 1986. The two countries control the fisheries effort through fisheries license system, meanwhile through prohibition fishing area, prohibition fishing period, limitation of net size, and limitation of body length to conserve and manage the fisheries resource. The serious management methods of resource management in the two countries are similar such as the creation of promptly decreased species and those species that have commercial value, discharge of fish seedling stock, settlement of artificial reef and clean of fishing ground. Therefore, the two countries should consider not only the improvement of formal law system, but also how to recover the fisheries resources in circumference water zone and how to improve the efficiency of fisheries resource management. Specially the settlement and management of artificial reef should be chosen in the area that have the highest benefit to two countries, and should establish the common management system of discharge of fish seedling stock. And the two countries should adopt the same criteria through technical management and limitation of net size, limitation of body length, and prohibition area of special fisheries to ensure the highest fisheries benefit of fisherman in the two countries and the highest efficiency of fisheries resource management.