WTO Fisheries Subsidy Pact Ratified: Kerala's Traditional Fishermen Fear Being Left Behind

India formalised its entry into the WTO Fisheries Subsidy Agreement on July 20, 2026, by depositing its instrument of acceptance with the WTO Director-General in Geneva. The agreement, a landmark multilateral deal, aims to eliminate government support that fuels overfishing and accelerates the depletion of global marine stocks.

India's accession makes it the 123rd WTO member to ratify the pact. While the country's move signals its commitment to sustainable ocean governance, fishing communities — particularly in maritime states such as Kerala — are already questioning what the fine print will mean for their day-to-day survival.

The Coastal Area Development Agency for Liberation (KADAL), a Kerala-based fisherfolk organisation, has urged the central government to fully protect the interests of traditional fishermen during both implementation and future WTO negotiations.

KADAL leaders Bishop James Annaparambil, Joseph Jude, and Celestine Puthanpurakkal highlighted that Kerala's fishing sector is dominated by small-scale and artisanal operators who depend on a wide range of state support, including:

• Fuel subsidies and boat renovation grants
• Safety equipment and fishing harbour infrastructure
• Cold storage facilities and social security schemes

The organisation specifically flagged the Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana as a scheme that could face restrictions if classified as a prohibited subsidy under the WTO framework, a prospect they described as deeply inequitable for a sector still in its developmental phase.

Charles George, president of the Kerala Fishermen Coordination Committee, laid out the starkest illustration of the disparity at stake. While India extends approximately $15 per fishing family annually, OECD nations provide an average of $5,722 per fisheries worker. The contrast becomes even more glaring at the country level: Belgium subsidises its fisheries workers at around $62,000 each, and the Netherlands at roughly $75,000.

George alleged that developed countries collectively spend approximately $35.4 billion in annual fisheries subsidies, of which $22.2 billion supports fleet modernisation, fuel subsidies, and port infrastructure — precisely the categories the WTO agreement seeks to curtail globally.

India's fisheries sector, by contrast, supports 4.4 million workers, operates more than 3,14,000 fishing vessels, and commercially harvests 665 fish species. Nearly 68% of India's fishermen live below the poverty line, making sustained government assistance not a luxury but a structural necessity.

India has consistently argued across successive WTO ministerial conferences that developing countries must be permitted to continue fisheries subsidies for a minimum of 25 years — a position that reflects the vast developmental gap between emerging economies and industrialised fishing nations.

KADAL and allied groups argue that India is only at the beginning of its journey in deep-sea fishing, tuna fishing, and blue economy development. Subjecting New Delhi to the same subsidy disciplines as advanced economies, which built their fisheries industries over decades of state support, would constitute an uneven playing field.

Fisherfolk organisations are also calling for a policy reorientation domestically — away from a framework that, in their assessment, primarily benefits large exporters, corporate players, and intermediaries, and toward one that strengthens cooperatives and promotes value addition and entrepreneurship within traditional fishing communities.