Rapid removal of illegal fishing gear as an operational link in life-cycle fishing gear governance: comparative institutional analysis and pilot evidence from South Korea

Illegal fishing gear (IFG) may remain in the marine environment when administrative procedures, field capacity, and downstream handling do not operate on the timescale required for fisheries enforcement. This study examines rapid IFG removal in South Korea as an operational link between fisheries enforcement and downstream handling. Guided by the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, the analysis combined legal and policy review, official administrative records, a structured comparison with the United States, Japan, and the European Union, and document-based process tracing of eight deployments in a 2024–2025 South Korean pilot. Official Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries materials described the ordinary pre-amendment administrative-execution pathway as requiring more than two months, while pre-pilot records showed that suitable removal vessels also had to be secured on a case-by-case basis. The cross-jurisdictional comparison identified five recurring functions relevant to timely intervention: intervention authority, field implementation capacity, interagency coordination, post-removal readiness, and reporting and accountability. In the pilot, two dedicated 89-t repurposed vessels completed eight deployments, including four removal operations that recovered 16.5 gear sets of illegal Chinese-style stow-net gear weighing 100.1 tons. Process tracing showed that dedicated vessels, predefined interagency roles, and pre-arranged unloading, weighing, treatment, and digital reporting supported operational readiness, whereas vessel failures, weather, target availability, and competing missions constrained actual removal activity. These results indicate that rapid IFG removal depends on linking legal authority with field-ready capacity and traceable downstream handling. The Fisheries Act amendment that entered into force in 2026 addresses the legal-procedural component of this governance chain, while sustained implementation will also depend on the operational capacities identified in the pilot.