This chapter examines Peru’s monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement systems to deter illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities. Peru employs extensive and diverse monitoring, control, and surveillance systems, combining satellite tracking, vessel identification, and physical inspections. Industrial and foreign vessels are fully monitored, and artisanal vessels must adopt satellite tracking technologies by 2026. Despite these advances, enforcement capacity varies significantly across regions, where limited resources, training gaps, and high informality hinder effective oversight. Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing persists, particularly involving foreign fleets targeting jumbo flying squid. Although Peru has strong legal tools, frequent fine reductions and amnesties and limited resources for control and enforcement have undermined their deterrent effect. Strengthening inter‑agency co-ordination, eliminating amnesty practices, and fully integrating artisanal fleets into electronic tracking systems are key to improving compliance and reducing IUU risks.
Policies for the Future of Fisheries and Aquaculture in Peru
Abstract
Through the General Fisheries Law (GFL) and its implementing Regulations Peru has a comprehensive legal framework for the monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of the fisheries sector.
Peru has good inter-agency co-ordination on enforcement actions, most notably between the Ministry of Production (PRODUCE) and the Directorate General of Captaincies and Coast Guard. This co-operation is underpinned by electronic monitoring, namely SISESAT (a satellite monitoring system for fishing vessels) and SIMTRAC (an automatic identification systems for all waterborne vessels, maritime and inland).
For small-scale and artisanal fisheries activities, supervisory, inspection and oversight competences are shared between the national government and regional governments. MCS activities are carried out jointly between PRODUCE and the reginal governments in collaboration with other relevant agencies. However, regional governments often lack the capacity to carry out their monitoring function effectively.
Peru has comprehensive registration and authorisation systems in place, covering all industrial fishing vessels and operators as well as small-scale and artisanal fisheries. However, informality remains an important challenge in the artisanal fisheries segment, notably in the remote coastal communities, but also in more developed segments of the fisheries sector, which limits the effectiveness of MCS.
Peru’s legal framework defines illegal fishing under the Supreme Decree that regulates the GFL and under Legislative Decree 1393, which regulates measures against illegal fishing activities. It has also adopted the FAO International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing and has incorporated in its national legislation the Port State Measures Agreement, including its definitions.
The GFL and implementing instruments detail prohibited practices and actions in the context of fishing activities and to a lesser extent in the context of fishing-related activities. Notably, they detail over 135 offenses, including unauthorised transshipment activities. However, the deterrent effect of this legislation has been undermined by recent amnesties on paying fines.
In June 2025, Peru adhered to the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Eliminating Government Support to Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing [OECD/LEGAL/0507], a legal instrument that provides practical policy guidance for governments to ensure no public money supports illegal fishing.
Recommendations
Strive for expanding the coverage of SISESAT (satellite tracking system) in artisanal fisheries by ensuring Supreme Decree 001-2025-PRODUCE, which mandates the installation of the system by the end of 2026, is implemented effectively.
Strengthen inter-institutional efforts to prosecute and prevent the illegal construction and modification of fishing vessels, in particular by applying strict controls to close and prevent the operation of illegal shipyards.
Continue improving the capacities of regional governments in the context of monitoring, control and surveillance, notably through capacity building and improved technological resources.
Reinforce the sanctioning system for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and strengthen their deterrent effect by ensuring they are proportional to the nature and gravity of the infringements and avoiding new amnesties for the payment of fines.
The fight against IUU fishing is a continuing effort undertaken by each OECD Member country and the international community. Eradicating IUU fishing requires effective MMCS and enforcement policies on fishing and fishing-related activities by individual countries and co‑operatively between countries (OECD, 2020[1]). The work of RFMOs and information-sharing between countries are key in allowing for such co-operative sustainable fisheries management to take place (Hutniczak, Delpeuch and Leroy, 2019[2]). Effective management and MCS need to be complemented by the sanctioning of IUU fishing activities in a way that effectively reduces its expected net benefits (Delpeuch, Migliaccio and Symes, 2022[3]).
5.1.1. Comprehensive and recently updated legal framework
The GFL is the main legal instrument that governs fishing activity in Peru, including all aspects related to MCS and the fight against IUU fishing and fishing-related activities. The GFL is implemented through Supreme Decree 012-2001, which under Title VIII further develops the legal guidelines concerning MCS in the fisheries sector and is complemented by derivative legal instruments. Together they form a comprehensive package covering Peru’s responsibilities in each of its roles as flag, coastal, port and market states (FAO, 2001[4]). Additionally, Peru has issued implementing legal instruments to address emerging challenges and adapt to evolving technological and legal developments. Most recently, on 25 September 2024, Supreme Decree No. 014-2024 was issued, adopting new measures directed at FFV conducting fishing activities on the high seas adjacent to Peru’s maritime domain.
PRODUCE is responsible for formulating and implementing national level policies for MCS of fishing activities in the maritime environment. Within the ministry, the Directorate General of Supervision, Inspection and Sanction (GDSIS) is the competent national level technical body. At the regional level, regional directorates are responsible for enforcing PRODUCE’s policies in their respective regions. The SDSIS has three specialised directions, one responsible for supervision and inspection, another competent for surveillance and control, and the third in charge of sanctions. The GDSIS’ main functions are:
formulate plans, programmes or projects for supervision, inspection, control and surveillance in fisheries and aquaculture matters of national scope
conduct supervision, inspection, control and surveillance activities
manage and supervise the administrative sanctioning procedure (first administrative instance)
formulate and execute international instruments related to the fight against IUU fishing.
To this end, the GDSIS has its own operational force of trained inspectors and a “Program for Surveillance and Control of Fishing and Aquaculture Activities in the National Scope”. In 2023, Peru counted a total of 489 fisheries inspectors. Of these, 206 were directly attached to PRODUCE and 283 were part of the Program for Surveillance and Control (Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]). The inspectors are distributed across the various control points along the Peruvian coastline where fishing and aquaculture production activities take place.
5.1.2. Inter-agency co-operation and integrated monitoring systems underpin monitoring, control and surveillance operations
The GFL states that PRODUCE is responsible for MCS of fishing activities and shall co-ordinate actions with other ministries and agencies to correctly implement the fisheries’ legal framework. MCS actions and interventions at sea against IUU fishing are carried out jointly with DICAPI.
These MCS actions and interventions are co-ordinated with other relevant institutions at the national and regional levels (Table 5.1) and are complemented by the use of diverse technological tools (see below). While maintaining their independence and autonomy, there is a good degree of co-operation and co-ordination between the different authorities competent for fisheries monitoring and control activities at sea or on land.
Sources: Government of Peru (1992[6]); General Fisheries Law, https://spij.minjus.gob.pe/spij-ext-web/#/detallenorma/H757193; Government of Peru (2024[7]), Review of Peru’s fisheries and aquaculture: Policy information request for the background report informing the formal opinion of the OECD Fisheries Committee (COFI) on the accession of Peru to the Organisation.
MCS actions in Peru are conducted using different and complementary electronic systems and physical inspections. Notably, Peru has two fishing vessels tracking systems:
The Satellite Monitoring System for fishing vessels (SISESAT) was created in 2001 and further expanded in 2014 through Supreme Decree No. 001-2014-PRODUCE. It is managed by PRODUCE and allows for the MCS activities of fishing activities in Peru’s EEZ. It consists of a GPS signal which is always emitted automatically and at established regular intervals by fishing vessels; the signal includes time and data of position, transmitter ID, co‑ordinates, speed, and the trajectory of the fishing vessel.
It is mandatory for large-scale industrial fishing vessels fishing in the EEZ to use SISESAT, whether national or foreign flagged. In 2024, PRODUCE made it mandatory for all foreign vessels engaged in the capture of straddling or transboundary fishery resources and vessels seeking to enter Peruvian ports for activities such as repairs, crew changes or supplies to install the SISESAT equipment. Furthermore, in February 2025, PRODUCE adopted a new decree (D.S 001-2025) that requires the installation of SISESAT on artisanal fishing vessels by 2026.
The Aquatic Traffic Identification and Monitoring System (SIMTRAC), created in July 2011 through Supreme Decree 008-2011-DE, is an automatic vessel positioning system created to determine the position and operation of vessels. It includes navigation, access, stay and departure of vessels located in ports, anchorages and waters of national jurisdiction. It is applicable to all vessels flying the national flag that are navigating outside the aquatic environment of Peru, industrial fishing vessels of national flag, all FFV operating or in transit within Peru’s maritime territory. SIMTRAC is managed and regulated by DICAPI. All fishing vessels, including FFV operating in the Peruvian maritime domain, must have installed SIMTRAC.
PRODUCE and DICAPI have institutional mechanisms to share relevant information from these platforms and co-ordinate inspection and control actions. These two systems are complemented by different electronic platforms and databases developed by other government agencies involved in the fisheries sector, notably SITAPESCA,1 the maritime authority database, and single window for international trade (VUCE), among others. They are also complemented with information from satellites tracking systems and maritime security systems from other countries, regional organisations and non-governmental initiatives, including the Information Fusion Centre, the Indo-Pacific Information Sharing platform, SeaVision, MDA – Dark Vessel detection and the Windward Maritime Analytics platform (Government of Peru, 2024[7]; Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]).
In Peru, electronic surveillance of fishing activities is integrated with physical inspections through a complementary approach that improves the effectiveness, coverage and capacity of state oversight of the fishing sector. This integration is achieved through the interoperability of electronic systems with field operations carried out by inspectors from PRODUCE, the Environmental Assessment and Oversight Agency (OEFA), SANIPES, DICAPI and the regional directorates (Figure 5.1).
Note: SISESAT: Satellite Monitoring System for Fishing Vessels; SIMTRAC: Aquatic Traffic Identification and Monitoring System; SITRAPESCA: Fisheries and Aquaculture Traceability System; OEFA: Environmental Assessment and Oversight Agency; PRODUCE; Ministry of Production; SANIPES: National Fisheries Health Agency.
Under the lead of the GDSIS, a total of 117 719 inspection and control activities were carried out in 2023, of which 3 096 were deployed in co-ordination with two or more public institutions. As a result, in that same year, 1 236 infractions were identified (representing only 1% of total inspections) and 3 425 t of fish produce were seized (Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]). This was complemented by the National Maritime Authority, which conducted 1 620 actions against IUU fishing that year, 480 of which were multisectoral operations co-ordinated with different institutions (Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]).
While significant investment has strengthened MCS activities, the government and other stakeholders highlight some remaining challenges to improve the efficiency of MCS and enforcement processes, including improving and strengthening the institutional capacity of enforcement entities and increasing investment in human resources, equipment and technology (Gozzer-Wuest, Alonso-Población and Tingley, 2021[8]; Paredes et al., 2024[9]; Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]; OECD/ECLAC, 2017[10]). To this end, Peruvian authorities are currently introducing different improvements to the regulatory framework and continue to invest in technology resources. Notably, PRODUCE is developing an online inspection project to expand the scope of inspections and make them more effective.
5.1.3. Regional governments – potentially a weak link in the monitoring, control and surveillance system
For small-scale and artisanal fisheries’ activities, supervisory, inspection and oversight competences are shared between the national and regional governments. MCS activities are carried out jointly between PRODUCE and the regional governments. Regional governments, through their respective regional directorates, are responsible for enforcing regulations related to artisanal fishing within their territorial jurisdictions, including sanctioning violations, where applicable.
Regional governments and PRODUCE co-ordinate actions and implement joint measures to prevent and sanction fishing-related infractions. Notably, there are efforts to conduct collaborative capacity-building activities aimed at engaging local communities in the effective management of marine resources, fostering a proper understanding of the relevant regulations and ensuring awareness of the associated fines and penalties for non-compliance. In addition, PRODUCE collaborates with local inspectors from the regional directorates to provide training in the use of technological tools for MCS activities, as well as in the enforcement of penalties. Joint control and supervision actions between PRODUCE and regional directorates take place at sea, in landing sites and markets. Regional governments are also involved in general joint control actions executed by PRODUCE, DICAPI and the national police.
Although the legal frameworks that define the competences and responsibilities of regional governments in the MCS for artisanal fisheries are clear and well-defined, capacity constraints can hamper their implementation, undermining the control of fishing activities. These constraints include the limited resources (human and technological) available to local institutions to carry out MCS activities and inspectors’ lack of knowledge and training about fisheries practices. These challenges are also exacerbated by the low levels of trust that fishers’ communities have in local enforcement authorities (Mendo et al., 2023[11]; McKinley et al., 2018[12]; Paredes et al., 2024[9]; Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]; Gozzer-Wuest, Alonso-Población and Tingley, 2021[8]). Finally, these issues are further compounded by the high degree of informality that characterises the fisheries sector in remote coastal regions, not only in relation to fishing activities but also with regard to unregulated shipyards, informal marketing practices and registration and authorisation systems, as further developed below.
5.2.1. There is long-standing use of electronic systems to manage data across the Peruvian fisheries sector
Peru has comprehensive registration and authorisation systems in place, covering all industrial fishing vessels and operators as well as small-scale and artisanal fisheries. However, informality remains an important challenge in the artisanal fisheries segment, notably in the remote coastal communities, but also in more developed segments of the fisheries sector.
Peru has a register of vessels, available for public consultation on DICAPI’s website in compliance with its obligation as a flag state. It makes available a list of fishing vessels with current navigation licenses, covering Peruvian and FFV. It provides details on the vessel name, IMO (International Maritime Organisation) and licence numbers, among others.
Peru also has a comprehensive record of fishing vessels The record, publicly accessible, is administered by PRODUCE, contains details on the characteristics of the vessel, licence number, shipowner, fishing authorisations, and any sanctions or administrative procedures, among others.
These registers allow effectively exercising jurisdiction and control over industrial fishing vessels. According to the GFL, all vessels, fishermen and fishing facilities must be registered in the National Fisheries and Aquaculture Registry. Fishing permits are issued subject to specific conditions (area, species, volume, fishing gear) to facilitate control and effective management.
Finally, commercial fishers can electronically deliver catch and landings data through e‑logbooks. Import or re-exportation catch certificates and processing statements, as well catch certificates validated for exports from their own vessels, are monitored through its electronic systems. The systems are generally similar to those in place and implemented across the OECD and which allow flag states to better monitor national vessels and effectively eliminate fishing operations in contravention of applicable laws (Hutniczak, Delpeuch and Leroy, 2019[2]).
5.2.2. Activities from foreign fleets pose important challenges for the sustainability of resources
One of the priority areas identified by Peruvian authorities and by industrial and artisanal fishers in terms of marine fisheries management is related to the control and enforcement of activities by the foreign fleets operating in Peruvian fisheries. Over the last few years, PRODUCE, in collaboration with the relevant institutions, has updated and modernised the legal framework for controlling the activities of FFV operating in Peruvian waters and, where relevant, in international waters.
FFV are governed and regulated by the GFL and its derived Regulations. Peruvian legislation determines the terms and conditions under which foreign fishing activities can take place, how they can exploit fisheries resources, and the inspection and control procedures that apply. Moreover, FFV activity is also regulated by a series of supreme decrees, which establish MCS measures applied by PRODUCE and DICAPI.
According to the GFL, Peruvian vessels have first rights to Peruvian fisheries quotas, hence, FFV operating in Peruvian waters may only extract resources within the quota not used by the national fishing fleet, limiting their fishing activity potential. The fishing regulations require FFV in all cases to have a fishing permit granted by PRODUCE, to have a navigation permit issued by DICAPI, to install SISESAT and SIMTRAC, and to carry an IMARPE-appointed technical-scientific observer on board. Fishing permits for foreign vessels are not transferable and detail the areas of operation; assigned catch quota; fees to be paid; and the requirements, conditions and control mechanisms that apply. The GFL and derived regulations do not impose restrictions on the participation of foreign capital for vessels registered in Peru; however, it requires that at least 30% of the crew of FFV operating in jurisdictional waters be Peruvian nationals. Likewise, foreign shipowners must prove residence and legal representation in Peru.
The GFL also defines the conditions in which FFV can access marine resources. It requires signing a contract with a national company to exploit specific resources or to undertake research fishing. Likewise, FFV may also fish in Peruvian waters under agreements Peru has signed with other countries or regional organisations, or by signing framework agreements between PRODUCE and foreign private entities. Finally, FFV have the obligation to inform PRODUCE of their catches by species and fishing areas where they operate. FFV that complete their fishing operations and must leave jurisdictional waters due to logistical reasons must request an inspection and verification of the products on board.
Despite this sound legal framework, in practice there are significant challenges in the control of FFV operating in Peruvian waters and government institutions, industrial and artisanal fishers, and other stakeholders have identified IUU practices, notably in the areas of the Peruvian EEZ adjacent to the high seas, which are more difficult to control (Gozzer-Wuest, Alonso-Población and Tingley, 2021[8]; Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]; Paredes et al., 2024[9]). Importantly, much of the IUU activities detected concern the jumbo flying squid fishery, which is extremely important to artisanal fishers in Peru (Box 5.1).
The jumbo flying squid (Dosidicus gigas) is a highly migratory species mainly located in the Southeast Pacific region whose stock produces one of the biggest catches worldwide. According to the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO), annual catch averaged 800 000 tonnes (t) from 2015 to 2020 (SPRMFO, 2022[13]).
Peru and the People’s Republic of China (hereafter “China”) are the two most prominent countries fishing jumbo flying squid. Jumbo flying squid is the second most important fishery in Peru after anchoveta, with 622 000 t landed in 2023 (PRODUCE, 2024[14]; 2024[15]) and annual catches averaging more than 400 000 t from 2015 to 2020 (SPRMFO, 2022[13]). All landings come from the Peruvian artisanal fleet, which has exclusive access to the jumbo flying squid fishery (S.D. N.014-2011-PRODUCE). Today, there are around 4 500 official vessels in the artisanal fleet that fish jumbo flying squid (IMARPE, 2024[16]). Furthermore, jumbo flying squid has by far been the most fished species by artisanal fishers over recent years. In 2023, it accounted for 49.2% of the total landings of the sector (PRODUCE, 2024[14]). Jumbo flying squid catch is destined for both local consumption and exports: of the 622 000 t landed in 2023, 341 000 t were exported (55% of total landings). The main exports destination was China, with 34% of the total value of exports of the species products (USD 282 million) (Silva, 2024[17]; PRODUCE, 2024[14]; PROMPERU, 2023[18]).
China has an industrial squid fleet, which consisted of 671 registered squid jigging vessels in 2024 (SPRMFO, 2024[19]). Chinese presence in the jumbo flying squid fishery has grown rapidly over recent years, increasing from an estimated 104 vessels in 2010 to 671 in 2024 (Aroni, 2020[20]; SPRMFO, 2024[19]). From 2015 to 2020, China accounted for an average annual catch of more than 300 000 t from fishing in the high seas, with a total of 358 000 t in 2020 (SPRMFO, 2022[13]). The increases in the Chinese flagged squid fleet in recent years and the proximity of the fishing grounds to Peruvian waters has increased the opportunity both for conflict with Peruvian fishers and for illegal fishing activity in Peruvian waters.
To address these challenges, Peru has taken steps to update and strengthen the legal framework to improve MCS activity and the enforcement of fishing activities by FFV. On 25 September 2024, PRODUCE issued Supreme Decree No. 014-2024, which adopts new measures specifically directed at FFV conducting fishing activities targeting highly migratory, straddling or transboundary aquatic species on the high seas adjacent to Peru’s maritime domain (see above).
Peru’s legal framework defines illegal fishing under the Supreme Decree that regulates the GFL and Legislative Decree 1393, which regulates measures against illegal fishing activities. Peru has also adopted the FAO International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing and has incorporated in its national legislation the PSMA, including its definitions.
5.3.1. Peru implements the measures specified in the PSMA
Peru has measures for port control of fishing vessels intended to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing. The main legal basis of these measures is the GFL and its regulations and the PSMA. The PSMA sets out universal minimum standards to prevent IUU fishing products from being landed in ports by FFV (by covering entry into ports, the use of ports, inspections and follow-up actions). Port state measures are increasingly used across the OECD as an additional, often less expensive, and safer tool to fight IUU fishing than monitoring and inspecting vessels at sea (OECD, 2020[1]).2
Peru ratified the PSMA in September 2017 and the Agreement came into force in October of the same year. As part of the implementation, Peru provides information into the FAO World Register of Fishing, Refrigerated Transport and Supply Vessels and the FAO Global Information Exchange System. Also, Peru is progressively adopting a risk management approach to vessel inspection applicable prior to a vessel’s arrival in port, to improve efficiency.
In September 2024, Peru updated its regulatory framework to fight IUU fishing activities and enhance the implementation of the PSMA through Supreme Decree 014-2024. The decree enhances control measures in the context of vessel inspection, which now apply to any FFV requesting or requiring operations, activities or services within the Peruvian territory. This includes transshipment activities; storage of marine products; technical assistance; provisioning; supply of food or fuel; transport; provision of fishing gear; crew changes; documentation; machinery or gear repairs; shipyard services; and other cases requiring entry to a Peruvian port, facility or anchorage. This decree provides Peru with a framework for regulating fishing-related activities, which is an area of weakness in the fight against IUU fishing globally (Hutniczak, Delpeuch and Leroy, 2019[2]; OECD, 2020[1]).
The recent updates also reinforce inter-institutional co-ordination, by assigning clear and complementary responsibilities to different public institutions. For example, as part of the efforts to improve port controls, Peru included a Port Component at the VUCE, managed by the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism. In cases of non-compliance or high risk, information is notified to the National Port Authority, which has the power to decide upon the entry of vessels to port and the conditions for access.
5.3.2. Market-related measures
As Peru is one of the most important exporters of fisheries products globally, market measures are an important dimension of its policies to tackle IUU fishing. Market measures can be a useful tool in the fight against IUU fishing, lowering the associated benefits and increasing the financial risk by closing markets to products that originate from IUU fishing (OECD, 2020[1]). Market measures generally involve improving seafood traceability, raising consumer awareness of IUU fishing, restricting public support for operators engaging in IUU fishing and restricting market access for IUU caught fish (without creating unnecessary barriers to trade seafood products). Some measures have become widespread across the OECD, such as regulations requiring exported and imported seafood to be accompanied by a certificate of origin confirming their legal sourcing. Measures by seafood-exporting and importing countries to close their markets to products originating from IUU fishing have been designed to not only affect IUU fishing benefit prospects but also to encourage exporting countries to intensify their co-operation in the fight against IUU fishing (OECD, 2020[1]).
Peru has established and implements market measures to fight IUU aligned with international practices and with standards followed by OECD Members and has in place trade-related measures which are overall in accordance with international agreements and standards (WTO, 2020[21]; FAO, 2021[22]). Notably, it has diverse mechanisms in place to track and certify that hydrobiological resources or products for export have a legal origin, including catch documentation schemes (see above). Peru also implements catch documentation schemes for captures and exports of bacalao, and CERCAP, a system to ensure that exports of fish products to the European Union are legally sourced. In the artisanal sector, Peruvian authorities require fishing co‑operatives to implement electronic catch registers and develop a traceability system, which is also intended to encourage increasing formalisation.
SANIPES regulates and oversees health and safety services at the national level for fish and aquaculture products. It approves fishery and aquaculture sanitary regulations in conformity with national regulations and international sanitary and phytosanitary measures and standards, including the provisions of the Codex Alimentarius and those of the World Organisation for Animal Health. It also issues certificates of compliance with sanitary regulations on fishery and aquaculture infrastructures, and the health, safety and traceability of hydrobiological products and veterinary and food products for use in aquaculture. To this end, inspections are carried out to verify compliance with national and international sanitary regulations (if applicable) and those contained in good practice manuals, descriptive reports, and hygiene and sanitation manuals, among others. SANIPES also applies preventive administrative measures in respect of a danger or risk to public health and/or the health status of the aquatic zones and/or compartments where the hydrobiological resources are located.
Further, trade-related measures Peru has adopted and implemented in the fisheries sector are overall in accordance with international agreements and standards, and implemented in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner (FAO, 2021[22]; WTO, 2020[21]).
While the market measures are in place, information on their effectiveness is lacking due to limited data availability. Consequently, it is challenging to assess how well the market measures exclude IUU fishers and products from IUU fishing from the market – a common issue.
5.3.3. Sanctioning regime
The GFL and implementing instruments detail the prohibited practices and actions in the context of fishing activities and to a lesser extent of fishing-related activities. Notably they detail over 135 offenses, including unauthorised transshipment activities. Further, individual ROPs also present specific infractions and sanctions applicable to specific fisheries. The most commonly identified administrative offenses are fishing without a permit or using prohibited gear for fishing activities.
The GFL also provides the general basis of the sanctioning regime. All offences (by action or omission) are administratively sanctioned by the Directorate General of Monitoring, Control and Surveillance or the regional directorates of production, without prejudice to any civil or criminal actions that may be applicable. Fishing legislation violations are sanctioned with a fine, suspension, confiscation or cancellation of the authorisation, license, concession or permit. Subsequently, cases that are found to be criminal offences are also referred to the Attorney General's Office and other competent instances.
Supreme Decree 016-2011-PRODUCE details the types of infractions and penalties applicable to fishing and aquaculture activities, depending on the gravity of the infraction, the nature of the activity (industrial or artisanal) and the type of marine resources targeted. The amount of the fine is determined in tax units (UIT) that are calculated on a yearly basis.3 It is estimated that 1 UIT for 2025 equals USD 1 450 (as per March 2025). According to the criteria established in the GFL and Supreme Decree 016-2011, fines for the fishery sector can be substantial, aiming to act as a real deterrent.
Significant efforts have been made to update the penalties and fines system, through the revision of the ROPs and the GFL, notably looking to make the penalties a real deterrent and to strengthen the sanctions applicable to foreign fishing fleets found in breach of the national regulations. These modifications also address long-standing requests from different stakeholders for a stronger system of penalties (Gozzer-Wuest, Alonso-Población and Tingley, 2021[8]).
In addition, Peru has made efforts to update and strengthen various provisions of the national penal code, to improve the prosecution of crimes against natural resources, including fisheries. Through Law 31622 of 2022 and Law 31982 of 2024, the illegal extraction and processing of aquatic species and the illegal construction or modification of fishing vessels are established as a crime against natural resources, for which the penalty is a three- to five-year prison sentence and a fine (Chapter 3) (SPDA, 2023[23]).
However, these efforts have been overshadowed by different policy decisions that grant amnesties or pardons to offenders and condone or significantly reduce the payment of fines for offenders, both natural and legal persons. Most recently,4 Law 32103 of July 2024 of the Ministry of Economy and the related Supreme Decree 020-2024 of PRODUCE granted an 80% reduction for the payment of fines. These and previous exonerations have been motivated by the adverse effects of climate events or economic crisis (including the COVID-19 pandemic) and also have recognised the government’s limited administrative capacity to actually recover the outstanding monetary sanctions in many cases. Moreover, this is not an issue unique to fisheries, as structural challenges such as corruption and widespread informality undermine the proper implementation and enforcement of regulation across other sectors of the economy such as agriculture. These amnesties reduce the effectiveness of the sanctions regime and limit its usefulness as a real deterrent for infringements, particularly as they reduced the fines for all actors in the sector and apply to all types of violations.
Applying more targeted penalties for IUU fishing that take into account factors such as the nature, gravity and recurrence of the infringements could make them more effective and reduce the use of amnesties. Crucially, ensuring all fishers understand the sanction system and have sufficient guidance on when they would be applied can help prevent IUU activities from the outset (Gozzer-Wuest, Alonso-Población and Tingley, 2021[8]; Interviews in the context of the Review, 2024[5]).
5.3.4. Adherence to the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Eliminating Government Support to Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing
In April 2025, the OECD adopted a new Recommendation of the Council on Eliminating Government Support to Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, a legal instrument that provides practical policy guidance for governments to ensure no public money supports illegal fishing. Peru adhered to the Recommendation in June 2025, in the 2025 OECD Council Meeting at Ministerial Level.
While no government deliberately funds IUU fishing, strong measures are needed to prevent public resources from unintentionally ending up in the hands of unscrupulous actors. The OECD Recommendation therefore calls on Adherents to develop and implement a range of policy measures to reduce the risk that support benefits IUU fishing and to withdraw public money if it does. The Recommendation also provides guidance for governments seeking to implement some of the key disciplines of the 2022 World Trade Organization Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.
Adherents to the Recommendation agree with the objective of targeting support to sustainably managed and effectively controlled fisheries through eligibility criteria by making support available only to vessels flagged to the subsidising country and holding a fishing license from that country and by refraining from granting support to fishers that operate outside areas that are co-operatively managed, such as on the high seas outside the jurisdiction of an RFMO/A.
They also agree to develop and implement specific mechanisms to withhold and withdraw support from vessel owners and operators in proven cases of IUU fishing and to enhance the sharing of information on IUU fishing determinations, both domestically and internationally. Where practicable, these information exchanges should also cover the beneficial owners of vessels engaging in IUU fishing.
As an Adherent to the Recommendation, Peru will be invited to contribute to regular monitoring of progress in implementing the Recommendation and discussions on whether the legal instrument effectively contributes to discouraging IUU fishing.
5.3.5. Regional and international information sharing and joint activities against IUU fishing
Peru collaborates and shares information with other countries and international organisations in the context of the international efforts to fight against IUU fishing and fishing-related activities. Peru is also involved in multi-country initiatives that facilitate joint MCS and enforcement and in RFMOs that are key actors in the efforts to tackle IUU fishing (Hutniczak, Delpeuch and Leroy, 2019[2]; OECD, 2022[24]).
As a Party or Observer of different RFMOs, Peru takes part and collaborates in the fight against IUU fishing (see Chapter 2). The regional initiatives on data sharing include those managed by the SPRFMO, the Convention on Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the IATTC. At the same time, Peru benefits from training and capacity-building activities provided by these organisations.
The recently adopted Supreme Decree 014‑2024 places an important emphasis on reinforcing co‑operation with RFMOs. This revised legal framework introduces and encourages new information-sharing procedures between PRODUCE and regional organisations, like information exchange of IUU findings, mutual recognition schemes of vessel monitoring systems, and further collaboration across contracting parties and secretariats of these organisations.
Further, Peru is one of the 17 contracting states that ratified the 2012 Cape Town Agreement, an International Maritime Organization treaty for safety of fishing vessels and a tool to help deter IUU fishing by establishing international safety standards for fishing vessels.
Peru has also submitted information to the FAO’s Global Record of Fishing Vessels, Refrigerated Transport Vessels and Supply Vessels, including details on vessels, authorisations and ports, which goes beyond the minimum mandatory information requirements.
At the regional level, Peru actively participates in the “Network for Exchange of Information and Experiences between Latin American and Caribbean Countries to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing”,5 which aims to facilitate the exchange of information and experiences for decision making to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing through co-operation and capacity building. The network also collaborates with institutional partners like the FAO, the SPRFMO, the IATTC, and the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, among others. Finally, DICAPI maintains communication channels with relevant authorities of other countries in the region, including Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Ecuador.
References
[20] Aroni, E. (2020), “Follow the lights: Squid fishing in the Southeast Pacific Ocean”, Global Fishing Watch, https://globalfishingwatch.org/article/squid-fishing-southeast-pacific.
[3] Delpeuch, C., E. Migliaccio and W. Symes (2022), “Eliminating government support to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 178, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f09ab3a0-en.
[22] FAO (2021), Checklists and Technical Guidelines to Combat Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome, https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5992en.
[4] FAO (2001), International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/a80c3bfb-1d5b-4ee6-9c85-54b7e83986a2/content.
[7] Government of Peru (2024), Review of Peru’s fisheries and aquaculture: Policy information request for the background report informing the formal opinion of the OECD Fisheries Committee (COFI) on the accession of Peru to the Organisation.
[6] Government of Peru (1992), General Fisheries Law, https://spij.minjus.gob.pe/spij-ext-web/#/detallenorma/H757193.
[8] Gozzer-Wuest, R., E. Alonso-Población and G. Tingley (2021), “Identifying priority areas for improvement in Peruvian Fisheries”, Marine Policy, Vol. 129, p. 104545, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104545.
[2] Hutniczak, B., C. Delpeuch and A. Leroy (2019), “Intensifying the fight against IUU fishing at the regional level”, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 121, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b7b9f17d-en.
[16] IMARPE (2024), Cuarta encuesta estructural de la pesqueria artesanal en el litoral peruano, ENEPA IV 2022-2023, Institute of the Sea of Peru, https://cdn.www.gob.pe/uploads/document/file/6908889/5966295-cuarta-encuesta-estructural-de-la-pesqueria-artesanal-en-el-litoral-peruano-enepa-iv-2022-2023.pdf.
[5] Interviews in the context of the Review (2024), Interviews conducted with Peru’s government representatives and stakeholders in the context of the Review.
[12] McKinley, E. et al. (2018), “Charting the course for a blue economy in Peru: A research agenda”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 21/5, pp. 2253-2275, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0133-z.
[11] Mendo, T. et al. (2023), “Minimising discards while taking revenue into account: Spatio-temporal assessment of catches in an artisanal shrimp trawl fishery in Peru”, Fisheries Research, Vol. 261, p. 106623, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2023.106623.
[24] OECD (2022), OECD Review of Fisheries 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9c3ad238-en.
[1] OECD (2020), OECD Review of Fisheries 2020, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7946bc8a-en.
[10] OECD/ECLAC (2017), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Peru 2017, OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264283138-en.
[9] Paredes, C. et al. (2024), La pesca en el Perú: Una ruta hacia un futuro próspero y sostenible, Universidad Continental, Fondo Editorial, Huancayo, Peru, https://doi.org/10.18259/978-612-4443-64-0.
[15] PRODUCE (2024), Desempeno e importancia del sector pesca 2023, Ministry of Production, https://www.producempresarial.pe/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/AM-Desempeno-del-Sector-Pesca-2023_26.01.2023-revf.pdf.
[14] PRODUCE (2024), Reporte coyuntural: Sector pesca artesanal, Ministry of Production, https://www.producempresarial.pe/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Reporte-Sectorial-de-Desempeno-del-Sector-Pesca-Artesanal-2023_rev21.02.2024.pdf.
[18] PROMPERU (2023), Desenvolvimiento del comercio exterior: Pesquero y acuicola, 2023, Trade, Tourism and Investment Commission of Peru, https://recursos.exportemos.pe/desenvolvimiento-del-comercio-exterior-pesquero-y-acuicola-2023.pdf.pdf.pdf.
[17] Silva, R. (2024), “Piura: Precio de la pota sube de S/4 a S/18 por kilo y pescadores artesanales acusan escasez por barcos chinos ilegales en el mar”, Infobae, https://www.infobae.com/peru/2024/09/19/piura-precio-de-la-pota-sube-de-s4-a-s18-por-kilo-y-pescadores-artesanales-acusan-escasez-por-barcos-chinos-ilegales-en-el-mar/.
[23] SPDA (2023), Sintesis de propuesta normativa: Inclusion del delito de construccion ilegal de embarcaciones, Peruvian Society for Environmental Law, Lima, https://spda.org.pe/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/sintesis-de-propuesta-normativa-embarcaciones_SPDA.pdf.
[19] SPRMFO (2024), Conservation and Management Measure on the Management of the Jumbo Flying Squid Fishery, South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation, Wellington, https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management-Measures/2024-CMMs/CMM-18-2024-Squid-1Mar2024.pdf.
[13] SPRMFO (2022), 10th Meeting of the SPRFMO Commission: Catch Data Submitted to the SPRFMO Secretariat, South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation, Wellington, https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/01-COMM/10th-Commission-2022-COMM10/information-papers/COMM10-Inf01-rev1-Data-Submitted-to-the-Secretariat.pdf.
[21] WTO (2020), Trade Policy Review of Peru: Report by the Secretariat, World Trade Organization, Geneva, https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S006.aspx?Query=%20(@Symbol=WT/TPR/S/*)%20and%20((%20@Title=Peru%20)%20or%20(@CountryConcerned=%22Peru%22))&Language=ENGLISH&Context=FomerScriptedSearch&languageUIChanged=true#.
← 1. System created under Supreme Decree 024 of 2021 of PRODUCE to ensure full traceability of aquatic resources and products. It is a platform for registering fisheries capture and aquaculture activity, for the extraction, unloading, processing, marketing and transportation stages, mainly for the industrial fishing activities. The information registers serve as the basis to produce certificates of origin for the transportation of fishmeal, fish oil and other products, between warehouses or final recipients (export).
← 2. Those measures include designating a list of ports for use by FFV to better direct available control capacity, demanding advance requests from FFV to use ports (with a view to allow coastal states to verify information with the vessel’s flag state) and the possibility to deny port entry to vessels suspected of IUU fishing.
← 3. Tax units stand for “unidad impositiva tributaria” (UIT). It is the value in Peruvian soles established by the Ministry of Economy and Finance to determine taxes, infractions, fines and other tax aspects. Values are available at: https://www.gob.pe/435-valor-de-la-uit.
← 4. Similar exonerations were granted in 2018 (Supreme Decree 006‑2018) and 2022 (Supreme Decree 007‑2022), which granted a 59% and 70% average reduction in the total amount of fines, respectively.