The report explores the FCWC’s regional context and needs, relating these to research findings into transhipment operations. This analysis, identifies the following key findings:

Opaqueness and conflicts in definitions which contribute to gaps in what is monitored and what is not monitored.
Imbalance between regulatory frameworks resulting in well-regulated and unregulated fisheries operating side-by-side, resulting in a non-holistic approach to monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) implementation, focusing mainly on the regulated fisheries.
Patchwork in accountability, with port States assuming the majority of responsibility and work in respect to monitoring transhipment and port State measures, while flag States’ accountability and contribution is lacking.