The Compliance Monitoring Scheme Intersessional Working Group (CMS IWG), formed in 2019, strengthens how WCPFC monitors and reviews members’ compliance with fishing rules in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. It reviews and upgrades the Compliance Monitoring Scheme (CMS), the yearly process that checks whether each country follows agreed conservation and management measures. By improving policies, tools, and procedures, the group promotes a system that is more effective, fair, and transparent and supports sustainable and responsible fisheries management.
Background and Purpose
WCPFC introduced its Compliance Monitoring Scheme in 2011 as a systematic way to assess how well each member (CCM) implements Commission rules. The scheme operated on a trial basis and grew more complex over time, with recurring implementation gaps and particular challenges for developing states. In 2017, an independent review confirmed the need for a more efficient, transparent, and supportive compliance system. It recommended clearer evaluation criteria, a focus on the most serious issues, and stronger follow up on non-compliance, including support for those with limited capacity and consequences for persistent non-compliance.
At its 16th Regular Session in 2019, the Commission created the CMS Intersessional Working Group under the TCC Vice-Chair to carry out the CMS future work plan. This included developing a risk-based approach to reviewing obligations, standardizing how compliance is judged for each rule, and designing a fair process to address non-compliance. The CMS IWG is open to all WCPFC members, participating territories, and observer organizations and works mainly between annual meetings. The Secretariat, Scientific Committee, and Technical and Compliance Committee support the group with data, technical advice, and recommendations. The group follows an inclusive, consensus-based approach that balances the perspectives of large fishing nations and small island developing states and seeks a scheme that promotes both accountability and practical support, including capacity building where needed. By agreeing common standards and guidelines, members aim for a compliance process that is more uniform, objective, and supportive.
Why Monitor Compliance?
Strong rules only help fisheries if members follow them. The Compliance Monitoring Scheme provides a structured way to check this and to correct problems when they arise.
- Ensuring rules are implemented: WCPFC members agree on many measures, such as catch limits, gear bans, data reporting, and observer coverage. The CMS provides a yearly report card on how each member meets these obligations and highlights issues such as late reporting or exceeded limits. Regular review helps identify problems early and turns commitments into concrete action for tuna conservation and marine protection.
- Fairness and credibility: All participants need confidence that others follow the same rules. A transparent compliance scheme supports a level playing field, as compliance issues are documented and discussed among members. This deters deliberate non-compliance, builds trust in the management regime, and shows that WCPFC measures are taken seriously in practice.
- Improving management and capacity: The CMS is also a tool for learning and improvement. Review results highlight patterns, such as several states struggling with the same reporting rule or unclear obligations. Members can explain challenges and request assistance, and the Commission can respond with training, funding, or technical support. Where obligations are consistently problematic, this signals a need to refine the measure itself. The introduction of audit points, which spell out what is required for each obligation, reduces ambiguity and supports more consistent assessments.
- Addressing non-compliance and incentivizing improvement: Non-compliance occurs in any system. The CMS process allows members to explain violations and outline remedial steps, and it keeps track of repeated issues. The CMS IWG has worked to develop a graduated approach to corrective actions, ranging from warnings and remediation plans to stricter scrutiny or, for serious and unresolved cases, possible penalties. Agreed responses create clearer incentives for improvement and reassure all participants that the Commission responds when rules are ignored.
The Compliance Monitoring Scheme is a core part of making fisheries management work in practice. The CMS IWG’s efforts, including risk-based prioritization, standardized audit points, and clearer follow up on non-compliance, sharpen this tool. Focusing on key obligations, clarifying expectations, and defining responses helps ensure that negotiated measures translate into real outcomes on the water, which supports healthy tuna stocks, a credible management regime, and communities that depend on these fisheries.
Historical Highlights
Since its inception, the Compliance Monitoring Scheme and the CMS IWG have steadily strengthened WCPFC’s approach to enforcing rules. Key milestones include:
- 2011: Launch of the CMS: WCPFC implements its first Compliance Monitoring Scheme on a trial basis, with an annual cycle of reporting, Secretariat analysis, TCC review, and Commission consideration. The early scheme supports routine accountability but remains broad and mainly focused on compiling information, with limited guidance on follow up actions and a sunset clause requiring regular renewal.
- 2012 to 2016: Evolution and growing workload: The Commission extends and adjusts the CMS each year, adding new obligations as conservation measures expand. The volume of information grows, some obligations remain vague, and TCC reviews struggle with workload. Developing states highlight that capacity constraints, not intent, often explain findings of non-compliance, and members begin to discuss a more structured, supportive approach to assistance and possible penalties.
- 2017: Independent review: WCPFC commissions an independent three person panel to review the CMS and compare it with global best practice. Members and observers report concerns about inconsistent assessments and heavy workload. The Commission extends the scheme through 2018 while awaiting recommendations, which call for risk-based focus, clearer criteria, and a more systematic response to non-compliance.
- 2018: Groundwork for reform: WCPFC15 negotiates reform options but runs short on time for a full overhaul. The Commission adopts a bridging measure to carry the scheme through 2019 and continues intersessional work. Proposals emerge for streamlining reporting, selecting a priority list of obligations for review, and introducing graduated responses to non-compliance.
- 2019: New CMS measure and IWG formation: WCPFC16 adopts a revised CMS measure (CMM 2019 06) that focuses on priority obligations and calls for development of audit points, a risk-based framework, and an intersessional working group. The CMS IWG is established under the TCC Vice-Chair to lead this future work, mainly through virtual processes, and to bring concrete recommendations back to TCC and the Commission.
- 2020: Prioritizing work streams: As the pandemic limits in person meetings, the Commission identifies four priority work areas for the IWG: a risk-based assessment framework, audit points for obligations, improved handling of aggregate compliance information, and guidance on observer participation. Sub-groups led by members such as New Zealand and Marshall Islands begin technical work through email and online discussions.
- 2021: Drafting solutions: By TCC17, the IWG presents initial proposals for a Risk-Based Assessment Framework and a first set of audit points. Experience from trial aggregate tables supports ideas to streamline TCC review. Draft guidance emerges on observer participation, seeking a balance between confidentiality for sensitive matters and increased transparency. WCPFC18 rolls the CMS forward and endorses continued work on these elements.
- 2022: Interim improvements adopted: Under new leadership from the Federated States of Micronesia, the IWG finalizes standardized audit points for priority obligations and refines the risk framework. WCPFC19 agrees to use audit points in the 2023 review cycle and to apply a risk-based lens that emphasizes key obligations such as catch limits, observer coverage, and measures against illegal fishing. The Commission also clarifies the role of observer organizations in non confidential parts of the compliance review.
- 2023: Corrective actions framework: With New Zealand as TCC Vice-Chair, the IWG focuses on responses to non-compliance. Members work toward a graduated Corrective Actions Framework that includes options such as letters of concern, remediation plans, long term action plans linked to capacity building, and, in serious cases, stronger steps. By WCPFC20, the IWG reports that the main elements of the future work plan are either completed or ready for decision.
- 2024: A comprehensive scheme: At WCPFC21, members agree on an updated Compliance Monitoring Scheme that integrates the IWG’s work, with no sunset clause. The new scheme is more streamlined and includes clear benchmarks and defined follow up. With this in place, the formal mandate of the CMS IWG concludes, and further adjustments move into regular committee work.
Recent Developments and Future Outlook
As of 2025, the strengthened Compliance Monitoring Scheme is in full use. The risk-based assessment approach makes annual reviews more strategic by focusing effort on the most important conservation requirements and known problem areas, instead of spreading attention across many minor issues. Audit points now guide assessments for each obligation, giving members and the Secretariat shared checklists and definitions and improving consistency across members.
Transparency and inclusivity have also increased. Observer organizations, including environmental groups and industry bodies, hold a clearer role in the process and contribute information on compliance issues. The Commission provides improved public communication on compliance outcomes, such as summaries that highlight general areas of progress and concern while respecting confidentiality. This supports confidence among stakeholders and consumers that WCPFC addresses compliance seriously.
The new Corrective Actions Framework is a key step. For minor first time issues, responses include notification and support for improvement. For more serious or repeated problems, members prepare remediation plans that the Commission tracks over time. In severe cases of deliberate non-compliance, the framework allows consideration of stronger responses, such as public censure or recommendations for restrictions, subject to Commission agreement. The presence of an agreed playbook makes it harder for non-compliance to remain unaddressed and supports members that follow the rules.
The scheme is set up to adapt over time. As WCPFC adopts new conservation measures, including those related to emerging issues such as climate impacts, the compliance scheme will incorporate new obligations and update audit points. The risk framework will adjust as trends change, so that emerging risks receive higher priority. Committees retain the option to form new small groups if major challenges arise, but they now work from a stronger baseline system.
For the public and for Pacific Island countries, these changes strengthen confidence in the sustainability of tuna and other migratory fish from the region. Each fishing nation faces regular scrutiny of its performance and must address problems that arise. A fair, transparent compliance system helps ensure that distant water fleets respect agreements and supports long term benefits from tuna resources. Stronger compliance improves the chances that measures such as catch limits, bycatch reduction, and seasonal closures achieve intended outcomes for both ecosystems and coastal communities.
The period from 2011 to 2025 reflects steady improvement and sustained negotiation among members with different perspectives. Through the CMS IWG, members worked through sensitive issues such as the level of transparency and the strength of responses to non-compliance and arrived at a balanced package. The result is a modernized Compliance Monitoring Scheme that supports a culture of compliance and reinforces WCPFC’s credibility. This helps ensure that conservation and management measures adopted on paper translate into action on the water.