Hoping this document (in attached file) will be of interest.

dear oum kalthoum, many thanks for this. even though it does not discuss trade, it discusses the potential opening of DSF in the northern indian ocean, where we currently have no RFMO, and which also enters my current work and discussion on DSF in the ABNJ. thanks a lot!

Gilles: I think that you and I have discussed this before. I do not know of any publication that looks at trade in DSF products in general. Nor do I expect that anyone except FAO would produce such a study: Deep bottom fishing has special characteristics, different from shallower fishing. Fishing in ABNJ has special characteristics, different from fishing in an EEZ. But the products made from hake taken in ABNJ on the Patagonian shelf have far more in common with those made from hake in the adjacent EEZ than they do with products made from orange roughy taken from a seamount in ABNJ, so there is little reason for trade studies framed in terms of ABNJ DSF -- except for anything FAO might prepare, as a global summary related to the UNGA's special interest in ABNJ.

I am fairly sure that FAO has not yet generated such a summary (though I am guessing that that is what you are working on!).

There are, of course, studies of trade in particular seafood products, where some of the supply is drawn from deep bottom fishing in international waters. There are not many of those but there are not enough studies of any seafood trade.

hi trevor, you are of course right on all accounts, and the dichotomy of ABNJ vs EEZ only makes real sense from a management mandate/regime point of view, and much less from a trade perspective. if you want to control trade, and you subject hake to such a scheme, it should not matter whether it originates from the ABNJ or the EEZ. the point is that you either protect the species through a CDS, or you do not. in trade you cannot distinguish between both, and CCAMLR has been grappling (quite successfully) with this issue in the past. regarding studies on trade, there is only good information on toothfish, owing to the fact that it is both covered by an able CDS providing detailed trade data, and toothfish is also afforded with its own set of six-digit harmonised customs codes - by product type. all other DSF species fall under generic groupings from which it is impossible to extract any meaningful or DSF-specific information. and all my searching has brought up zero generic DSF trade analysis. so in my work, i will simply have to use toothfish as a proxy regarding trade profiles and dynamics, mixed with the discussions i had with private sector operators on the topic. that will be fair enough. best wishes, and thanks for your response! best wishes, g