Just one wee obstacle to overcome yet, and that's for governments to differentiate growth from development, and economic from environmental sustainability.
Hit them where it hurts, and show them how much revenue is lost through illegal fishing. However, not everything, particularly development, is measured in terms of GDP. One can grow without developing, and develop without growth.
The only way to develop is to outlaw these weapons of mass destruction, bottom trawls, in areas that have not been already trawled (it is too late in areas that have been trawled). That would be true progress, and progress to me means to develop; growth is just exploitation in a supposed sustainably economic manner, but there's no economic sustainability/stability to be had if the so-called legal fishers continue to use the same-old barbaric techniques that threaten to destroy the habitat of the very thing that they are exploiting. Everything is interconnected ... the system is crashing.
As an aside, but an interesting parallel, I find it hilarious that governments today are concerned about invasive species, and spend millions on it to supposedly protect or be prepared to protect their indigenous biodiversity. Yet people today are driven towards homogenisation - one global trade, global economy, currency, religion and language. What then is so wrong with a global fauna and flora? It's hypocrisy. Only when it hits governments and business in the pocket, threatens their valuable trade, forests and aquaculture, are people in the least concerned about the environment, and concede that it is fragile, interconnected, and that even the smallest of perturbations, the introduction of a single 'invasive species', could really upset the balance. I must ask, WHY then don't they give a rats arse when we stuff up huge systems in the deep sea? That's equally, if not more so interconnected!
Invasive species, Homo sapiens!
Bottom trawling will be one day illegal. Ban Homo sapiens!!