COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
The Crisis in the 
Community's Fishing Industry COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 
ANP THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT C0M(94) 335 final 
Brussels, 19.07.1994 
Contents 
Introduction 
Part Qne:The organization of the market in fishery products: 
historical context, main features and constraints 
A-Historical development 
B.Economic aspects 
1. Pattern of supply to the Community market 
2. Comparisons with agriculture 
C.Constraints on the import arrangements for fishery products 
1. Tariff policy 
2. GATT rules 
Part Two:Analysis of the causes of the crisis 
AFactors external to the fishing industry 
1. The general economic and trading climate 
2. Cyclical factors 
B.Factors specific to the fishing industry 
1. Excess capacity 
2. Overfishing and its implications 
3. Operating losses 
4. Unsuitable marketing structures and channels 
Part Three: Suggested responses 
A Measures already taken at Community level 
1. In the context of the common organization of the market 
2. Under resource management policy 
3. At structural level 
B. New measures to be implemented 
1. Resource conservation 
2. Controls 
3. Structures 
4. Markets 
Conclusions 
Starting early in 1993, the Community's fishing industry has been experiencing one 
of its most serious recessions since the beginnings of the Community itself, if indeed it is not 
the worst in view of the generally adverse economic climate. 
This crisis has most immediately affected the production sector but is inevitably 
having knock-on effects in activities upstream and, to a lesser extent, downstream of 
production proper. The most obvious sign has been the generalized price decline across all 
species, so that fishermen took the crisis at first sight to be a market collapse made worse by 
the economic recession and competition from non-Community products on a Community 
market highly dependent on imports. 
The Commission realized the seriousness of the situation from the start and took 
emergency measures in the form of minimum import prices for the main fishery products and 
closer supervision of direct landings by vessels from non-Community countries. The purpose 
of these measures was to safeguard the incomes of producers, in view of the need in the short 
term to cushion the difficulties faced by fishermen both commercially and, in some cases, in 
terms of their whole livelihood. 
At the same time, however, the Commission has continued to feel that the fall in 
prices, although made worse by a variety of cyclical factors, has not been the only reason for 
the lack of profitability shown by many enterprises over a number of years already and which 
became considerably worse in early 1993, aggravated by a depressed economic situation. 
It can fairly be said, therefore, that the decline in producer prices, now an ineluctable 
mid- to long-term trend, has revealed the growing difficulty which parts of the production 
sector are having in adapting to changes in competitive conditions. In other words, what 
appear to be irreversible market trends over the medium term have served to bring out the 
major lack of competitiveness among at least some sections of the Community fishing fleet. 
In this context, the Commission would like to stress that the common organization of 
the market in fishery products is not designed to be, and should not be regarded as, a system 
for ensuring guaranteed producer prices. 
The purpose of the market organization has been to regulate competitive conditions 
on the Community market and prevent unfair competition emanating from non-Community 
countries, while at the same time complying with the Community's international comrnitments. 
The market organization is designed to be a regulatory framework in an open market 
where production is not directly controllable; it is not a "fully comprehensive insurance 
policy". The history of this regulatory framework and the constraints it is subject to are dealt 
with first in this communication. 
The Commission is accordingly of the opinion that, for the industry to survive, it 
cannot avoid deep-reaching adjustments based on a clear and objective analysis of the current 
situation. This analysis forms the se oiid part of the report, followed in Part Three by possible 
responses. 
This communication is intended to start a process that will need to be continued at 
national level, since the industry is affected to differing extents in different countries. In 
proposing possible responses, the Commission feels that its own determination to safeguard 
the future of the Community fishing industry will fall short if it is not backed up at all the 
various levels involved, both public and private, including fishing enterprises themselves. 
PART ONE: The organization of the market in fishery products: historical context, main 
features and constraints 
The first essential step before analysing the underlying reasons for the crisis in the 
fishing industry is to review the historical context in which the market organization was 
created, its main economic features and the legal constraints to which it is subject. 
A Historical development 
A major feature of the Community market for fishery products is its very strong 
dependence on imports from non-member countries. Community output alone is no longer 
able to satisfy much of Community demand 
What today appears self-evident is the result of relatively recent historical 
developments. 
On the one hand, the legal context in which fishing activities are carried out has 
undergone a genuine revolution during the last twenty years. The generalized extension of 
fishing zones to 200 miles from baselines has radically modified both fishing possibilities and 
the conditions of access to resources, as well as their exploitation and marketing. This 
development has substantially changed the pattern of international trade in fishery products 
and, consequently, the trading relationships between exporting and importing countries. 
At the time of the signature of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, access to fishery resources 
was conditioned by the general context of the intemational law of the sea as accepted at the 
time. The Convention on the Law of the Sea signed in Geneva in 1959 did not envisage 
claims on fishery resources beyond territorial waters, the maximum limit of which was twelve 
miles. Except for some cases, mainly in South America, this legal situation determined the 
conditions of access to fishery resources until the middle of the 1970s. 
A further development in the law of the sea was approved in the convention signed 
at Montego Bay in 1983, which left 93% of available fishery resources to coastal States. 
Another important development marked this period as regards the role of fisheries 
within the Community. It was the result of the successive enlargements of the Community, 
in 1973 to include the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark and in 1986 Spain and 
Portugal, which not only modified the dimension of the fishery problems inside the 
Community but also changed the kind of problems to be dealt with by the Community. The 
prospect of enlargement to yet more countries can only add to this trend. 
B. Economic aspects 
1. Pattern of supply to the Cornmunity market 
Community output of products from the sea, not counting aquaculture, is about 
6 million tonnes, worth on landing about ECU 7 billion. Imports of marine products into the 
Community in 1992 were about ECU 7.5 billion and exports ECU 1.5 billion. 
As the following table shows, the Community market depends increasingly on imports 
.for its supplies 
EUR-12 PECHE 
EVOLUTION RATIO IMPORTATIONS/CAPTURES 
!BM:k4,iA;*3;Bl-
84 65 86 87 66 89 90 91 92 
00 XIVO-4/MOV 
MS» IN) 
In 1983, an important milestone in the development of the common fisheries policy 
(CFP), the twelve Member States currently constituting the Corrirn'inity accounted for 
production of 7 million tonnes of fish (excluding aquaculture), i.e. around 9% of world 
catches, which were in the region of 77.5 million tonnes. In 1990 Community output was 
5.5 million tonnes, accounting for 6% of world production of 97 million tonnes. During the 
same period, consumption per head in the Community went from approximately 15 kg to 
22 kg.After 1992, however, the figures show that per capita consumption levelled out, or even 
declined 
Community output is therefore experiencing a relative decline, which should be offset 
by the accesion of Norway (about 2 million tonnes). 
2. Comparisons with agriculture 
Imports of fishery products account for 17% of total imports of foodstuffs (ECU 7.5 
billion out of a total of ECU 45 billion in 1991) and 57% of the external trade deficit in 
foodstuffs overall (ECU 6 billion out of a total of ECU 10.5 billion in 1991). 
The organization of the market in fishery products is the component of the CFP which 
most resembles the common agricultural policy (CAP). However, it has one essential 
difference from most agricultural market organizations. This difference stems mainly from the 
way fishery products are dealt with in GATT compared with agricultural products (see below 
under C.l, developments relating to tariff binding). This GAIT aspect has considerably 
influenced Community policy in regard to the adoption of market management mechanisms, 
both from an internal point of view and in relations with non-member countries. This situation 
is the result of a political choice at the time of the initial constitution of the CFP and the 
CAP; it does not result from the state of stocks. 
C. Constraints on the import arrangements for fishery products 
Although the crisis which rapidly developed from February 1993 onwards had multiple 
causes, imports from non-member countries were accused of being at the root of the market 
disturbances, in particular by the industry itself. The Community import arrangements for 
fishery products are in fact frequently criticized by Community producers. 
The situation of dependence in which the Community market finds itself means that 
it is always in delicate balance. The market needs to be supplied to meet demand from 
consumers and from the processing industry, while at the same time safeguarding the interests 
of Community producers. 
There is no point in arguing over the relative contribution of imports to causing this 
crisis. On the other hand, it is worth reconsidering the Community's legislation on imports and 
how it might be improved. 
1. Tariff policy 
The system that currently applies to imports of fishery is the result of the customs 
tariff policy pursued by the Community with its international partners for over thi: y years. 
The common customs tariff (OCT) applicable to fishery products has been almost 
entirely bound under GATr since the birth of the Community (Dillon Round, 1960-61). 
This tariff binding has the effect of denying the Community any possibility of 
increasing the tariff and non-tariff protection already negotiated. A bound duty cannot be 
increased unilaterally without offering condensation to the trading partners adversely affected. 
The binding of duties is thus one of the most important disciplines of GATT. The situation 
of most developed countries is in this respect similar to that of the Community. 
During later GAIT negotiations (Kennedy Round, 1964-67, and Tokyo Round, 1973-
79), adjustments or additional concessions were granted to non-Community countries. In 
accordance with the logic of GATT, these concessions have never been called into question 
even when the law of the sea underwent a major revolution from 1976 onwards with the 
generalized extension of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) to 200 miles. 
This new factor was, however, used as an argument by the Community in the Uruguay 
Round negotiations. It said clearly to its partners that it would agree to take part in the 
discussions in the fisheries sector only if all the specific factors influencing the sector and 
affecting trade in fishery products were taken into account. This position was summed up in 
the phrase "market access in return for access to resources". 
The CCT as now bound is thus the only expression of the principle of Community 
preference vis-à-vis non-member countries. It is still one of the tariffs ensuring the highest 
theoretical level of protection as compared with the situations prevailing in the other countries 
with developed market economies, even after the end of the Uruguay Round. 
The CCT contains, however, many exceptions which mean that almost two thirds of 
Community imports are covered by a derogation arrangement. 
Because of the constraints arising from the principle of tariff binding, deviations from 
the CCT are always towards reducing the tariff rate. Among these exceptions, a large number 
have a scope going beyond the common fisheries policy. 
The Lomé Convention and the generalized preference scheme (the GSP), in particular 
the GSP concessions related to the fight against drugs granted to certain Latin America 
countries, have resulted in very generous concessions to non-member countries without any 
compensation as regards fisheries. 
In the case of the agreement on the European Economic Area, although it provides 
some compensation in the form of access to fishery resources on a basis of "market access 
in return for access to resources", the overall balance of the agreement was settled at a 
political level well above the fisheries sector alone. In the end, the Community agreed to tariff 
reductions worth about ECU 48 million in duties forgone while the concessions from the 
EFTA countries totalled only ECU 11 million. The Community did secure the consolidation 
of certain fishing rights in Norwegian and Swedish waters. It also obtained undertakings on 
the conclusion of fishery agreements with Iceland (3 000 tonnes of redfish for Community 
vessels, partially offset by 30 000 tonnes of capelin for Iceland) and Norway (6 000 tonnes 
of cod for the Community in Norwegian waters, gradually rising to 11 000 tonnes in 1997, 
partially offset by fishing rights for Norwegian vessels in Community waters). 
This complex tariff situation is accompanied by a relatively sophisticated system of 
rules of origin, making it possible to confine the advantages of tariff reductions to the 
countries for which they are intended. As in any complex regulatory system, there is 
considerable risk of fraud requiring constant efforts on the part of the national customs 
services. 
2. GATT rules 
In view of the binding of the CCT under GATT, the general regime for imports of 
fishery products is subject to the principle of liberalization. This principle prohibits any 
quantitative restrictions on imports as well as any measure having an equivalent effect, except 
for measures which may be adopted under safeguard mechanisms on condition that they 
comply with the rules specifically provided for in GATT. It also prohibits production aid 
schemes likely to distort competition by imdermining the concession granted. 
The terms on which the Commission can introduce safeguard measures are set out in 
Articles 22 and 24 of the basic Regulation on the common organization of the market 
(Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 of 17 December 1992). Such measures must be in conformity 
with the international commitments made by the Community within GATT. 
The international commitments entered into by the Community do not allow it, 
therefore, to re-examine at the theoretical level the arrangements governing imports of fishery 
products from non-member countries. On the other hand, it is essential to monitor the existing 
regulations strictly in order to avoid giving the impression of being too lax in the 
Community's relations with non-member countries and to make the mechanisms already 
envisaged by Community legislation function correctly, enabling the Commission to react 
quickly again in the event of disturbance. 
PART TWO: Analysis of the causes of the crisis 
Although the "acquis communautaire" represented by the common fisheries policy 
displays a high degree of integration and has made it possible to sustain a considerable 
volume of Community production, it has to be said that, in terms of factors on which 
competitiveness depends, there are big disparities between Member States and even within 
some Member States. It is a telling fact that the worst effects of the recession are being felt 
by sections of the Community fleet which suffer simultaneously from several handicaps such 
as overcapacity, high indebtedness, distance from fishing waters, high operating costs and 
maladjusted marketing channels, particularly for fresh products. 
These structural factors internal to the industry exist against a background of general 
liberalization of trade and the emergence of world-wide markets, i.e. a long-term trend, 
combined with a particularly sharp cyclical downturn which served to spark off the crisis. 
A Factors external to the fishing industry 
The external factors result first of all from the economic environment in which fishing 
activities are pursued, like any other productive activity in a market economy, and from 
cyclical events which add to the general climate. 
1. The general economic and trading climate. 
No-one would deny that the fishing industry is inevitably caught up in the major 
trends and changes already well under way within the context of international trade; these 
include: 
the general lowering of tariff barriers and the gradual dismantling of other barriers to 
trade, as agreed in particular during the latest round of multilateral trade talks; 
the rapid decline in prices for competing products such as pigmeat and poultrymeat, 
in turn caused by the drop in cereals prices; this trend will continue because all cereals 
(except maize) are in surplus in the European Union, putting the market price at 
around the intervention price, and because the reform of the CAP provides for an 
annual cut of 8% in intervention prices up to and including the 1995/96 marketing 
year;l 
1 See OJ No L 181, 1.7.1992, p.23. 
10 
Evolution des prix relatifs 1980-100 
Poissons - Poulets - Porc 
no 
110 -
IBM 19*1 1982 1983 IBM 1965 19M 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 
année 
— CaMaud* -«*- UawNoir»- -*- Egteftw* 
-e- Mcrius * » Poulets *' * Porc *" 
ECueanttti* Iw'iMO 
* »ra «ayant on •> pom rtprMantatiU ECU'IOOKo, Sourct XIV-t-4 
•• •wdumire'tf CE ECU'IOOkj Save* DGVi 
"••* CEE ECU'lOOHj Souret OG VI 
the introduction of the European Economie Area in western Europe, which is a 
regional market within which goods can circulate freely, together with the prospect of 
enlargement of the European Union, which will change competitive conditions within 
the Union. It has to be remembered that several EFTA countries, whether or not they 
wish to join the Community, have shorter distances to fishery resources than a large 
part of the Community fishing fleet and therefore a commercially more advantageous 
access to them. At the same time, the state of stocks is a factor just as important as 
ease of access in determining the competitiveness of a fleet inside an enlarged market 
with no customs duties. 
It is worth pointing out in this connection that the cod stock in the Barents Sea (with 
a TAC of 500 000 tonnes in 1993 and 700 000 tonnes in 1994) belongs to a different 
league from the cod TAC in the North Sea (about 250 000 tonnes). 
easier, faster and cheaper transport which, in the longer run, will tend to undermine 
the preferential situation enjoyed by domestic production. Fresh fish can now be air­
freighted from North and South America to Europe's capital cities on commercially 
competitive terms. 
All these developments have assisted the penetration into the Community market of new 
fishery products able to replace traditional species in which there are shortfalls from time to 
time, and often at attractive prices for consumers. 
11 
There is no reason why these products, which frequently come from developing countries, 
should not continue to increase their market share. Up until now, Third World countries have 
played only a secondary role in Europe but they account for the larger part (around 60%) of 
the imports into Japan and the United States. If, with this in mind, one compares average 
import prices in the Community of Twelve, the United States and Japan, it seems inevitable 
that there will be price declines in coming years on the Community market too. 
Prix moyens à l'importation 1985=100 
Poissons frais, réfrigérés ou congelés 
Total mondial -*J- USA t Canada -B»- Japon -{||j- EuR-12 ' 
* Comprend le Commerce Intracommunautaire 
" Les importations pour l'Islande ne sont pas significatives 
Déflation base=1980 USA Valeur $ constants/tm Source : FAO 
12 
Community fisheries have also recently started to incur competition from aquaculture, 
which is now achieving significant production levels and is concentrated on high-value 
products that make up a large proportion of the turnover of artisanal or small-scale fishing. 
This is the case for salmon, for instance, with an estimated annual output in Norway (1994) 
of 220 000 tonnes compared with 60 000 tonnes in the Community, and for some whitefish 
(especially sea-bream and sea-bass) which have a very high production potential. The farming 
of fish also enjoys one key advantage, which is that it can adapt supply to market demand, 
while hunting fish will always involve a random element. 
The table below illustrates the growth in aquaculture production in the Community 
(trout, salmon, bream/bass, other finfish, mussels, oysters, venus clams) over recent years. 
Product 
Fish (trout,salmon, 
bream,bass, other) 
Mussels,oysters, 
venus clams 
TOTAL 1985 
163 800 
669 100 
832 900 1989 
245 050 
673 250 
918 300 1990 
269 200 
610 250 
879 450 1991 
280 900 
701 500 
982 400 1992 
288 500 
685 550 
974 050 1992/85 
+76% 
+ 2% 
+17% 
2. Cyclical factors 
There have been two main kinds of cyclical factor: 
A sharpening of the recession since 1991, bringing a general drop in demand for 
consumables and - as far as foodstuffs are concerned - a switch to mid-range and 
bottom range products or directly competing products offered at very low prices. In 
the case of fish, some consumer demand has switched to poultrymeat and pigmeat, 
prices for which have also been affected by the decline in cereals prices. At the same 
time, younger people are turning away from eating whole fresh fish, a trend that is not 
only cyclical. 
A number of currency fluctuations, bringing readjustments of parities within the 
European Monetary System and reducing the conpetitive edge of those Member States 
with strong currencies, both in terms of exports and on their domestic market. 
The impact of these phenomena was all the greater as they occurred at the end of a 
period (1985-90) in which prices were very high, even over-high, because of the 
limited resources and, above all, the rise in demand triggered by the opening of the 
markets of the new Member States. 
13 
B. Factors specific to the fishing industry 
Some cyclical or seasonal factors can in part explain recent developments in an 
underlying and longer term crisis: 
increased taking of haddock in the North Sea; 
in winter, a classic alternation of no catches due to bad weather and good catches 
when there are concentrations of spawning stock. 
In the main, however, the difficulties faced by Community fishermen, particularly in 
France, in trying to stay commercially healthy at the prices they have been able to attain can 
be traced back to a stmctural problem of competitiveness. They are competing with non-
Community countries, aquaculture and agriculture. This has to be understood and incorporated 
in any analysis of the situation or projection into the future. And aside from this outside 
œmpetition, the fishermen of the Community are competing with each other. When prices 
offer an adequate return, relative differences in competitiveness are hidden. The worsening 
of the overall situation has shown up specific weaknesses in some sections of the fleet, again 
particularly in France. But institutions cannot dictate market prices, just as no regulation can 
give fishermen back their lost competitiveness. 
There is no doubt that the production sector is under pressure from various endogenous 
factors which, when taken together in the context sketched in section A, have reinforced an 
apparently irreversible crisis without there being a political will to promote and support the 
structural changes that have to be made. 
1. Excess capacity 
Since the mid-1980s, the Commission has repeatedly pointed out the consequences of 
overfishing of resources because of excess fleet capacity. The consequences translate first of 
all into a threat to biological equilibrium in the context of resource conservation and, 
secondly, a threat to the sustainability of fishing in a context of stock depletion. 
It is relevant to point out that when the 3rd generation MGPs were being prepared 
(1992-96) the Commission proposed, in the light of the findings in the Gulland report, that 
substantial cuts should be made in fishing effort. But the proposal was judged to be too severe 
by the Council. 
Many stocks have since begun to suffer in this way, mainly demersal species, the 
corollary of the depletion being that, with more demand from consumers and processors being 
met by imported products of the species affected, Community fishermen have found it 
increasingly difficult to make up for lost income due to scarcity of resources by keeping 
prices high, because world prices now influence considerably the markets in key species. 
14 
In light of situations like this, the minimum import prices imposed during the acute 
phases of the crisis are only of short-term effect and provide no solution at the real roots of 
the problem. Excessive application of minimum import prices, in fact can have distorting 
effects a/i encourage cheating. In any case, such measures cannot be introduced on a 
permanent basis without courting objections from our GATT trading partners. 
The only way to safeguard the Community's production sector is to step up the effort 
to adjust fishing capacity to potential resources. 
On this score it would seem that the third-generation multiannual guidance 
programmes, although pointing in the right direction, were in the end adopted too late to 
damp down the effects of the obvious overcapacity of the Community fleet that is one of the 
main causes of the market crisis. 
Even these measures could turn out to be seriously inadequate if the pace of technical 
progress in fisheries over recent years were to continue. On this assumption, the impact of 
the average reductions in fishing effort as set out in the MGPs will have been entirely offset 
by the time they are completed. 
Finally, it has to be remembered also that the MGPs are not a suitable instrument for 
adjusting the effort of vessels using passive gear, technical measures for which should soon. 
2. Overfishing and its implications 
In most Member States, the human and physical resources devoted to fisheries 
inspection fall a long way short of what is needed; this has resulted in more fraud, which in 
turn is a cause of overfishing and of the credibility gap from which the common fisheries 
policy is suffering. Taking catches of cod as an example, the amounts caught by the 
Community fleet have declined noticeably (1991: 311 500 tonnes, 1992: 282 000 t, 1993: 
241 000 t). 
Although fraudulent catches and sales cannot be quantified, their impact is not just on 
resources; they also depress prices and/or prevent them from recovering from low levels. 
At all events, the resource management policy agreed and implemented by the Union 
has not made it possible to keep stocks sufficiently abundant as to shield the competitiveness 
of the Community's fleets from the likely sharperiing of competition (see II.A above). The 
shortage of resources has in turn accelerated the trend towards more imports to supply the 
Community market. 
15 
In addition to overfishing itself, there has been evidence of behaviour that has less to 
do with ignoring the rules than with unsound management of resources measured against 
market demand. 
It ought to be clear that excessive landings early in the season, in an attempt to avoid 
loss of quota but at a time when the market is slack, is illogical in terms of business 
management and commercial return. And yet the producers' organizations have the regulatory 
powers with which they could, with the backing of the national authorities, take over the 
riianagement of all or part of a quota and decide on extending production disciplines to non-
members of their organizations. 
3. Operating losses 
Excess capacity and overfishing are very much behind the operating losses suffered 
in some parts of the Community fleet, resulting in particular from the very low productivity 
of many enterprises, i.e. a volume of catches that does not match fishing effort. The operating 
accounts are out of balance not only because of inadequate tumover but above all because of 
the high levels of debt and running costs; it is essential to return to healthier balances. The 
problem is as much due to traditional and out-of-date operating methods within fishing 
enterprises, especially small businesses, as it is to wrong analysis when making investments, 
in which certain specialist banks bear no small share of responsibility. 
4. Unsuitable marketing structures and channels 
Finally, there is no doubt - and this now seems to be generally accepted, including 
within the industry - that the production sector has to find ways of successfully and efficiently 
adapting and regulating supply to meet market requirements, and especially the needs of the 
distribution sector. All too often, fishermen seem to feel that marketing their products is not 
their business and to be mostly unaware that the only way to secure commercially viable 
prices is to supply the market with what it wants in terms of both quantity and quality. 
In the case of products marketed fresh, the Commission is as convinced as ever of the 
need for the production sector to create the means of improving quality, as described in the 
Commission's 1992 communication to the Council and Parliament.2 A majority of the 
Member States were sceptical about the idea of a Community regulatory framework in this 
field, so the Commission has not presented any proposals on this point. It would suggest, 
however, and this point is developed later, that an incentive scheme could be introduced. 
Another imperative need is for Community producers to take into account the 
constraints due to changes in patterns of consumer habits and of distribution. 
SEC(92) 353 dated 28 February 1992. 
16 
A majority of products are now sold throu^i the big distribution chains, which 
generally have a policy of buying in quantity on the basis of forecast demand. All the 
uncertainties over landings, the wide fluctuations in prices and the fragmented nature of the 
first-stage marketing sector are ~sasons why these major chains tend to avoid purchasing 
Community products. 
Lastly, inappropriate marketing channels push up consumer prices and discourage 
potential buyers. Although the responsibility for introducing tighter controls over the market 
rests with the Member States, the Commission is ready to contribute towards any effort in this 
direction. 
At the end of this Part, there seems little point - if indeed it is an option at all - in 
questioning the major trends which, whether one likes it or not, constitute the framework 
within which the fishing industry now has to operate. 
In the Commission's view, there is an urgent need to acknowledge the 
developments which are influencing this framework, i.e. the set of factors which, because 
of the maladjustment of parts of the industry to new economic realities, make a 
continuation of the crisis a probability. 
The crisis will only be overcome by a raft of vigorous and coordinated initiatives 
attacking all the aspects identified above and having to do with both production and 
marketing structures. 
The Commission realizes that the measures to be taken may cause socio-economic 
problems which will not always be easy to cope with. However, it feels it has a duty to 
point the way in this direction in view of the high stakes for the future of the fishing 
industry as a whole. In the following pages, the Commission reviews possible responses 
for supporting the necessary change and strengthening competitiveness. The types of 
action to be taken cannot all be identified at the Community level. National governments, 
fishermen's organizations and businesses in the industry must also contribute their own 
efforts and initiate their own action to deal with the present crisis. 
17 
PART THREE: Suggested responses 
Before describing the action which ÙV Commission considers to be most 
appropriate, it is worth outlining the main measures already adopted recently at 
Community level, in order to clarify what scope for initiatives exists. 
A. Measures already taken at Community level 
1. In the context of the common organization of the market (COM) 
The COM has been reformed substantially in close cooperation, during the 
preparatory stages, with representatives of the various sectors of the industry. The reform 
came into force on 1 January 1993. 
Without alteration of their basic principles, the main mechanisms have been 
adapted and improved considerably, e.g. the range of action that can be taken by 
producers' organizations and the intervention arrangements, including the introduction of 
new eligible products. 
Under the reform, the opportunity was also taken to clarify and simplify the entire 
regulatory framework for the COM, in particular the detailed rules of application, in order 
to make them easier to use by the producers' organizations and thus increase the 
effectiveness of the action they take. 
Only the arrangements applicable to tuna intended for canning have remained 
unchanged, the Commission having been requested to submit to the Council a report on 
the tuna market by 30 June 1994, followed by appropriate proposals. 
Since the beginning of the crisis (February 1993), the Commission has adopted 
minimum import prices for the main whitefish on several occasions. 
Direct landings by vessels from non-member countries are now regulated 
(Regulation No 1093/94 of 6 May 1994) to ensure that this practice is authorized only 
under specific conditions, given the risk of unfair competition it presents for Community 
production. 
Although the COM is called into question each time a crisis arises, in the 
Commission's opinion these regulations still form a coherent package of rules well suited 
to the objectives that have been set, although this does not mean that it is not possible or 
even desirable to improve certain aspects (however, cf. the œnstraints referred to above in 
part I.C). 
In any event, the Commission does not consider that a reform of the COM is an 
essential prerequisite for the success of a policy of capacity reduction. 
18 
2. I Inder resource control policy 
In view of the inadequacies of the former control Regulation, in particular as 
regards the monitoring of catches by vessels flying a third country flag in Community 
waters and landings in Community territory, on 12 October 1993 the Council adopted 
(Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93) a new control system comprising tighter rules to enable 
each Member State to effectively control catches and landings by vessels flying the flag of 
a non-member country and, more generally, imports from non-member countries. 
This Regulation, which entered into force on 1 January 1994, provides for the 
following: 
monitoring the movement of and the catches held on board vessels flying the flag 
of a non-member country by the Member State in the maritime waters of which 
they are likely to fish 
the obligation for such vessels to keep a logbook and submit a landing declaration 
to the competent authorities of the Member State in which landing takes place 
the obligation to notify 72 hours in advance the competent authorities of the 
Member State in which landing is to take place, of their time of arrival in port. 
Such vessels may not land any catch unless the competent authorities have 
confirmed receipt of such advance notification 
if they land in a Member State, they must sell at auction or their purchaser must 
submit a sales note before the quantities landed can be removed 
all fishery products landed or imported into the Community which are transported 
to a place other than that of landing or import, must be accompanied as far as the 
point of first sale by a transport document indicating the origin, destination and the 
quantities transported. Each Member State must make checks in its territory to 
verify the accuracy of that document 
to that end, the Member States must coordinate their control activities and in 
particular exercise surveillance over the movement of merchandise which may have 
been drawn to their attention as possibly being the subject of operations contrary to 
Community regulations. 
19 
3. At structural level 
Structural measures have been and continue to be implement*. 1 within the 
framework of multiannual guidance programmes (MGPs), the most recent version of 
which lays down ceilings for the fishing effort of each fleet segment for five-year periods. 
Initially these measures were not very far-reaching but were then made more 
stringent. However, they fall far short of the reductions in fishing effort recommended by 
the Commission in its initial proposal to the Council, which it considered to be the 
minimum required in response to the alarming situation of some fish stocks. 
Although the Member States have allocated resources to the implementation of 
their programmes, the results vary considerably. 
If the necessary measures had been applied as soon as overfishing was first 
acknowledged, the present crisis would certainly not be as deep as it is today, in particular 
in France where its social effects are felt most severely. 
The Commission has repeatedly stressed that the main objectives of the fleet restructuring 
measures are to restore competitiveness and maintain it at a sufficient level to safeguard 
the sector's future. 
It has also clearly stated that it would like socio-economic accompanying measures 
to be implemented in order to neutralize the undesirable effects of sector restiiicturing on 
coastal populations, in particular in areas dependent on fisheries. 
The regulatory framework and Community financing making it possible to: 
- restructure the sector, 
- restore competitiveness, and 
- implement socio-economic accompanying measures 
have been in place since the Council adopted, in July and December 1993, the FIFG 
(Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance), which integrates "fisheries" structural 
measures into the framework of the Structural Funds. 
This integration (operational in 1994) now makes it possible for Community 
appropriations to be mobilized at the level required by the Member States in those regions 
dependent on fisheries by means of regional programming or sectoral programming in 
accordance with the rules laid down by the Funds. 
20 
The Commission regrets that its initial proposal has been watered down by the 
Council adopting new measures which will diminish its real impact on sector restructuring, 
such as the increased importance attached to construction aid. 
B. New measures to be implemented 
The Commission's analysis indicates clearly that, firstly, no import restriction 
measures can be contemplated and secondly, structural measures are the most favourable 
approach to secure the future of the fisheries sector. However, no factor should be 
overlooked and other initiatives, including market initiatives, must also be considered. 
1. Resource conservation 
The objectives of resource management must continue to apply. Improved resource 
management will increase stock abundance considerably, and hence also the productivity 
and competitiveness of Community fishermen. An increase in the percentage of large-size 
fish in catches will, as a rule, increase their market value and limit competition from the 
corresponding farmed species. Restored resources will also be more stable and help 
stabilize landings from one year to the next. Furthermore, since stocks will have a more 
balanced demographic composition, catches will no longer be made up mainly of very 
young fish, and it will be possible to anticipate the inevitable variations in abundance and, 
as a result, organize fisheries better. Present policy should be strengthened so that these 
objectives can be achieved. The links with structural policies must be reinforced. Controls 
must be made more effective. This more rigorous basic approach does not mean that 
excessively rigid provisions (strictly annual and monospecies approaches) cannot be made 
more flexible. However, flexibility must always be backed by strict monitoring and 
structural measures to reduce overcapacity. 
2. Controls 
The new control Regulation, although much diluted in relation to the Commission's 
proposals, should allow considerable progress to be made. More effective catch monitoring 
cannot fail to promote conservation policy, the economic significance of which has been 
stressed above. An extension of controls to structural policy will make it possible to 
ensure overcapacity is reduced, thus reducing the inevitable risks and temptations of fraud 
where fishing capacities greatly exceed those necessary to fish the authorized catches. 
Inclusion of the market dimension will be of direct benefit in ensuring standards and 
regulations are complied with. The possibility of intervening during transport will be a 
major help in preventing the continuation or development of large-scale fraudulent 
transfers, which sometimes involve imported fish. 
21 
3. SîCiCluiss 
Measures to reduce overcapacity are the primary requirement for overcoming the 
markets crisis. For this reason the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (TFTFG) 
encourages fishing effort adjustment measures as a means of eliminating fleet 
overcapacity. The FTFG will also help place Community produce in a better position on 
the markets by promoting investments to generate high-value-added quality products. 
In order to stimulate demand for fishery products, the FTFG will also contribute 
towards the financing of promotion campaigns. 
However, fishing effort adjustment measures carry a high social cost, frequently in 
a less-favoured economic environment where there is little alternative employment. 
Consequently, it is important to develop, side by side with the fleet overcapacity reduction 
measures, socio-economic accompanying measures, the purpose of which will be to 
promote the transformation and restmcturing of the sector. The following must be borne in 
mind: 
- the inclusion of problems relating to areas dependent on fisheries in the Structural 
Funds already makes it possible to implement, under Objectives 1, 2 and 5(b), 
economic diversification measures with the aid of the ERDF and ESF. 
- furthermore, the Commission has proposed to implement a specific, targeted 
measure in the form of a Community initiative ("PESCA")1, both to help the 
fisheries sector to complete transformation successfully and to help develop 
job-creating activities. This measure must be in addition to the aid available under 
the Community support frameworks. 
finally, on 21 December 1993 the Council invited the Commission to study a 
package of accompanying socio-economic measures, linked to restructuring, and a 
report will be forwarded to the Council by the end of 1994. Among possible new 
measures the Commission could include the following approaches, within the 
framework of present resources and in line with the wishes expressed by several 
Member States: 
. part-financing of voluntary redundancy and/or early retirement schemes for crews 
affected by rjermanent laying-up measures; 
. temporary Community financial incentives for the introduction of minimum share 
payment and bad weather compensation schemes, to be maintained by contributions 
from fishery employers; 
COM(94)46 final. 
22 
. training programmes for fishermen and those employed in the sector in the 
implementation of the Fisheries Policy and value enhancement for fishery products. 
The report will contain detailed indications on the cost and financing of the 
proposed measures. 
These accompanying measures would help reduce the number of direct jobs to a 
level corresponding to the size of a restructured and profitable Community fleet. They 
would also help stabilize income drawn from fishing through financial resources made 
available from the profits generated by the sector itselfj and thus reduce the sector's 
dependency on public aid Furthermore, they would help optimize income drawn from 
fishing by improving marine resource exploitation and post-harvest processing. 
4. Markets 
Apart from the necessary speeding up of the rate at which the Member States 
forward the data required for market monitoring (cf FIDES)4, the Commission's analysis 
of the needs, in terms of quality, of the fishery product market, indicates that the 
producers' organizations must redirect some of their measures, and adopt a new position 
vis-à-vis their members and the market. As the question of regulating supplies under 
existing instruments has already been dealt with in Part IT (cf n.B.2), some thought should 
be given to other ideas. 
In this connection, the Commission notes that no substantial proposal for a change 
in the organization of the market has been submitted to it, which confirms it in the view 
that the market problems are more often due to shortcomings in the application and 
enforcement of the rules rather than to any essential inappropriateness of the present COM 
mechanisms to the economic climate prevailing at present. 
At the Fisheries Council on 10 June 1994 various suggestions for changes to the 
market regime were put forward, with a view to reinforcing the role of the producers' 
organizations and improving producers' incomes. 
After looking at all the contributions made by the Member States, the Commission 
envisages some adjustments to certain COM mechanisms and the following measures: 
FIDES - Fisheries Data Exchange System, operating between the Member States 
and the Commission to allow electronic transmission of the data relevant to 
COM management. 
23 
1. reinforcement of role of producers' organizations 
1.1. To enable producers' organizations to react more swiftly in times of crisis, the 
Commission proposes that, with regard to the extension of the PO rules, ana 
posteriori review procedure be put in place instead of the present system of a priori 
review of rules extended to producers not belonging to producers' organizations, 
subject to continued compliance with the principles governing sales, particularly 
direct sales of small quantities. 
1.2. Furthermore, the Commission proposes exploring the idea of allowing 
communication between producers' organizations and information exchange in real 
time. A large number of producers' organizations have no access to information on 
landings and prices at the main centres of the Community market. Such 
information is a major decision-making aid for any supply-side regulation policy. 
Therefore, POs often work in a regional or local market context and cannot adopt a 
dynamic position vis-à-vis purchasers. As a result the Commission suggests that 
Community aid should be allocated to the introduction of an information exchange 
network between producers' organizations on the basis of a prior assessment as part 
of a pilot project. 
1.3. In addition, as its own approach to quality improvement has met very little 
response in most of the Member States (cf II.B.4), the Commission proposes that 
producers' organizations be encouraged to implement quality improvement plans. 
It proposes an approach comparable to that existing for fruit and vegetables, 
consisting, for certain product categories (in this case some fresh produce), 
in granting specific recognition to POs which submit quality and marketing 
irriprovement plans for these products approved by the Member State. 
Such specific recognition would give entitlement, for a limited period, to 
aid from the Member State, half of which would be reimbursed by the 
Community, in accordance with rules similar to those in force for the 
start-up aid provided for in the basic "market" regulation. On a first 
estimate the cost of such aid should not exceed ECU 1 million per year. 
1.4. As for requiring all producers, in the event of serious disturbance of the market, to 
comply with the Community withdrawal price, the Commission considers that, 
from the point of view of principle, such a requirement makes our "reference 
price/minimum import price" system more consistent and more compatible with 
GATT Article XI. As it stands at present, the system is open to criticism on the 
grounds that, when minimum prices are applied, there is no general obligation to 
restrict supplies to the Community market because Conimunity producers not 
belonging to a PO are not bound to comply with the wimdrawal price. 
Apart from the question of principle, however, the feasibility of this suggestion 
must be examined. 
24 
2. Support for producers' income 
2.1. The Community proposes a measure which, in the event of a major disturbance of 
the market, will ease the financial burden on producers' organizations applying the 
Community withdrawal price, by providing for the possibility, in accordance with 
triggering criteria to be defined, of raising financial compensation for withdrawals 
to 95% of the withdrawal price for a limited period. This measure would avoid the 
need for POs to increase subscriptions from their members. 
The financial impact of such a measure should be limited (about ECU 2m per 
year). 
2.2. The proposal made by one Member State that the level of intervention for Annex I 
products covered by the COM should be increased by a deficiency payment 
system, for a given period of time, subject to an annual maximum appropriation in 
the order of ECU 30m (about twice the present appropriations from the "markets" 
budget for expenditure on withdrawals and carryover) presents various difficulties. 
On the legal level, given that it is a production aid for products bound under 
GATT, the mechanism might be perceived by our partners as aid liable to distort 
the conditions of œmpetition. The only possible formula would be a solution 
similar to that adopted for industrial tuna (autonomous suspension of customs 
duties on certain species, offset by a compensatory allowance in the event of a fall 
in prices on the market). 
On the budget level, apart from the amount of ECU 30m, account must be taken of 
the equivalent loss of income resulting from any measures to suspend tariffs. 
On the economic level, the Commission has serious doubts about the usefulness of 
such a measure, as the impact of ECU 30m spread over all the species listed in 
Annex I will inevitably be marginal. 
Under the circumstances, the Commission is of the opinion that it would be wiser 
to favour the solution of an income subsidy within the context of structural policy; 
this would be a one-off measure, aimed at facilitating restructuring the fleet, which 
would not distort cornpetitioa 
2.3. With regard to another suggestion advocating greater incentives for recourse to the 
carryover mechanism, this is not a measure involving a reform of the COM rules, 
as the producers' organizations generally make little or no use of the present 
possibilities (6% of quantities offered for sale may be "carried over"). In addition, 
the mechanism was greatly simplified when the COM was last reformed in 1992. 
2.4. Lastly, the Commission intends to initiate a series of studies and measures to gain 
more information about the sector: feasibility studies for systems of quality 
certification and labelling for fishery products, harmonization of trade descriptions, 
setting-up of databases of socio-economic and scientific data. 
25 
CONCLUSIONS 
The present crisis in the fishing mdustry will not be resolved either quickly or 
easily. Although its effects are apparent at market level it is essentially structural in origin 
and that is the level at which action must be concentrated. 
Helping to resolve the crisis also requires a change of attitude and behaviour at all 
levels, without necessarily implementing spectacular solutions. 
The overriding requirement is a global approach and long-term vision, as the crisis 
calls for solutions not only in all branches of the common fisheries policy but also at 
different levels of action. 
Clearly the general economic crisis, the currency disturbances and the competition 
from cereal-based food products cannot be resolved by measures taken at fishing industry 
level. 
Similarly, the different social costs in certain non-member countries have an 
undeniable impact on the prices obtaining in international trade, including the prices of 
fishery products. 
It must be stressed that Community fishermen are operating in a context of trade 
internationalization and increasingly open markets. Consequently, the excess costs 
generated by overinvestment in any segment of the Community fleet, delays in access to 
resources and the state of resources become determining factors of fleet competitiveness. 
All the problems of the fishing industry, situated mainly upstream, come together 
at the market stage, and the market organization has been the subject of much criticism; 
but the mechanisms of the COM are, by nature, incapable of resolving a deep structural 
crisis such as that affecting part of the Community fleet. Their main purpose is to organize 
competition on the Community market. 
In this context, the Commission does not consider that a reform of the COM, 
whatever its scale, is a necessary precondition for the success of a policy to cut fleet 
capacity. 
If adjustments, or innovations, can be incorporated in the COM, they must be 
complementary to the application of a determined policy to adjust fishing effort to 
available resources, coupled with the necesary socio-economic flanking measures and 
efforts to adapt marketing channels to the requirements of new forms of distribution. 
In addition, the Commission stresses that it is essential for the sector to apply 
determined marketing policies, with particular emphasis on product promotion at consumer 
level. 
The Commission will only be able to undertake the necessary measures if it is 
given the requisite support from the Member States of the Union, either through decisions 
adopted by the Council on the basis of proposals from the Commission or through 
initiatives launched under the responsibility of the Member States in accordance with the 
principle of subsidiarity. Such measures will only be fully effective if all economic 
operators throughout the industry make use of the legal and economic mechanisms 
available to them. 
26 
In the Commission's view the measures to be adopted by each of the agents 
concerned must be decided in a rational way and not under the pressure of events. 
Measures taken in crisis conditions to answer the immediate preoccupations of public 
opinion generally fail to resolve the real problems. The Commission repeats that it is 
ready and willing to continue the dialogue at all levels in order to find clear answers to 
the questions raised and to propose rational solutions that will help to limit the risk of 
repetition of the present situation. 
The various possible measures are detailed in a table annexed. They cover only 
aspects specific to the fishing industry; measures to improve the economic and social 
environment in general are not included. 
The Commission will shortly submit to the Council measures for the adjustment of 
the common organization of the market as itemized in point B4 of Part HT. 
27 
ACTION TYPE OF 
MEASURE1 OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS DECISION/ 
RESPONSIBILITY2 
I. CONSERVATION OF 
RESOURCES 
•fi) New CFP 
management tools 
and components 
(ii) Technical 
measures to prevent 
use of small meshed 
nets, enforce 
minimum landing 
size, boxes Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms/New 
initiatives 
Reinforcement 
of existing 
mechanisms To strengthen the 
conservation/ 
structural policy-
link; reduce 
rigidities of present 
system; help to 
conserve resources to 
ensure sustainability 
of fishing 
To protect juveniles 
and encourage 
breeding, discourage 
marketing of illegal 
catches Council 
(iii) Prevention of 
overfishing (TACs 
and quotas) 
(iv) 
Rationalization of 
national quota 
management systems 
(v) Fishing permits Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms To protect sensitive 
stocks and limit 
landings 
To match supply to 
demand, plan quota 
uptake throughout 
season 
To make fisheries 
management subject to 
limits on fishing 
effort. System 
applicable to 
Community vessels and 
third country vessels 
fishing in Community 
waters MS/fishermen's 
organizations, 
fishery 
professionals 
MS/fishermen's 
organizations 
MS/fishery 
professionals 
II. SURVEILLANCE 
(i) Setting up of 
new more efficient 
system Implementation/ 
reinforcement 
of existing 
mechanisms In a system where the 
Commission supervises 
national surveillance 
systems, to check 
landings by Community 
and third country 
vessels, health 
conditions at 
marketing stages, to 
apply penalties to 
overfishing and 
illegal landings, to 
check compliance with 
fleet restructuring 
obligations MS/Commission 
subsidiary 
competence 
Implementation or improvement of mechanisms existing in CFP rules 
or new initiatives to be launched. 
Where a decision has to be taken at Council level, the initiative 
for the proposal naturally lies with the Commission. 
2-i 
ACTION TYPE OF MEASURE OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS DECISION/ 
RESPONSIBILITY 
III. STRUCTURES 
(i) Fleet 
restructuring 
- Multiannual 
guidance programmes 
- Structural aid to 
the fleet (FIFG) Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms To reduce overcapacity 
(scrapping, transfer, 
conversion) 
To contribute to 
reimbursement of grants 
for final cessation or 
setting up of joint 
ventures and joint 
enterprises, and to 
financing of investment 
in fleet modernization 
and renewal (although 
commissioning of new 
vessels must be closely 
controlled). Follow-up by 
Commission 
pursuant to a 
Council decision 
(Art. 11 of 
Regulation 
3760/92) 
Definition of 
priorities : 
Commission/MS 
partnership 
Implementation : 
MS/regions 
(ii) Marketing and 
processing 
- Aid for improving 
and rationalizing 
marketing and 
processing 
conditions (FIFG) Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms 
- Aid for product 
promotion and new 
market prospection 
(FIFG) New initiative To contribute to 
financing of investment 
in first-sale 
facilities and 
equipment (harbour 
facilities, first-sale 
premises, wholesale 
facilites, etc.) and 
processing 
infrastructure 
To contribute to the 
organization of 
promotion campaigns and 
participation in food 
fairs, etc., and market 
surveys Definition of 
priorities : 
Commiss ion/MS 
partnership 
Implementation 
MS/regions 
Definition of 
priorities: 
Commission/MS 
partnership 
Implementation : 
MS/regions 
2? 
ACTION 
- Aid for setting up 
quality control and 
assurance systems 
(FIFG) 
- Aid for investment 
to bring processing 
and marketing 
establishments into 
line with health 
standards (FIFG) 
- Organization and 
adaptation of 
national marketing 
networks TYPE OF MEASURE 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanises 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS 
To upgrade Community 
fisheries products and 
enhance competitiveness 
To ensure equivalent 
and reliable health 
standards throughout 
the Community 
To improve structure of 
industry DECISION/ 
RESPONSIBILITY 
Definition cf 
priorities : 
Ccrrr.i s s ion /MS 
partnership 
Implementation 
MS/regions 
Definition of 
priorities: 
Commission/MS 
partnership 
Implementation 
MS/regions 
MS/fishery 
professionals, 
fishing sector 
businesses 
(iii) Socio-economic 
measures 
- Inclusion of zones 
dependent on fishing 
in Objectives 1, 2 
and 5(b) of 
Structural Funds 
Analysis of socio­
economic 
accompanying 
measures linked to 
restructuring of the 
industry. Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms 
New initiative To accompany and 
facilitate 
restructuring of the 
industry and increase 
economic growth in 
zones dependent on 
fishing. To finance 
local development 
initiatives and 
productive investment, 
together with measures 
to facilitate 
occupational retraining 
To examine the 
expediency and 
feasibility of part-
financing of voluntary 
retirement or early 
retirement schemes, 
possibility of granting 
Community financial 
incentives for setting 
up minimum guaranteed 
wage schemes and 
compensation for 
unemployment due to bad 
weather. Definition of 
priorities : 
Commission/MS 
partnership 
Implementation 
MS/regions 
Report to be 
submitted by the 
Commission before 
end 1994. Any 
proposal must be 
submitted for 
decision by the 
Council. Setting 
up early 
retirement schemes 
and minimum 
guaranteed wage 
schemes is a 
matter for which 
the Member States 
and fishermen's 
organizations are 
competent. 
3o 
ACTION TYPE OF MEASURE OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS DECISION/ 
RESPONSIBILITY 
(iv) Community 
initiative PESCA 
(supplementary to 
structural Funds) Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms/new 
initiative To encourage very 
specific projects to 
help the fishing 
industry adapt itself 
successfully and to 
diversify the socio­
economic base of 
coastal zones Definition of 
priorities : 
Commission/MS 
partnership 
Implementatio: 
MS/regions 
(v) Financial 
reorganization of 
fishing businesses 
(vi) Better 
articulation of 
structural polices 
production/ 
processing/ 
aquaculture 
(vii) Training 
Setting up of a 
training programme New initiative Restructure fishing 
businesses in order to 
improve profits 
To ensure that fishing 
industry development 
strategies and 
priorities are 
integrated and 
compatible 
To contribute towards 
training of fishermen MS/ professionals, 
fishing businesses 
MS (especially 
under the 
operational 
programmes)/ 
professionals, 
fishing businesses 
Council 
W 
ACTION TYPE OF MEASURE OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS DECISION/ \-%'ïï 
;RÉS.PON5T&tLlif: 
IV. MARKETS 
.'i) Rcle cf 
producers' 
organizations 
(ii) Extension of PO 
rules to non-members 
(iii) Aid for 
quality improvement 
plans set up by 
producers' 
organizations Implementation/ 
reinforcement 
of existing 
mechanisms 
New initiative 
New initiative To ensure fishermen's 
organizations play the 
regulatory role 
assigned to them 
To change the present 
system of a posteriori 
review 
To grant specific 
recognition to 
producers * 
organizations which 
present, for certain 
types of product, plans 
for the improvement of 
quality and marketing 
channels MS 'discipline^ 
/fishermen's 
organizations 
(fishing plans) 
Commission/ 
producers' 
organizations 
Council 
(iv) Increase of 
financial 
compensation New initiative 
(v) Pilot project to 
set up an 
information exchange 
network between PO 
(vi) Implementation 
of rules on direct 
landings 
(vii) Tariff policy 
- CCT, minimum 
import prices, 
restrictions on 
imports New initiative 
Implementat ion 
of existing 
mechanisms 
Implementation 
of existing 
mechanisms To allow, in the event 
of market disturbance, 
compensation of 
withdrawals at 95% of 
the withdrawal price 
for a limited period 
To improve 
communication of market 
data between producers' 
organizations 
To establish permanent 
rules on direct 
landings by third 
country vessels in 
Community ports 
To ensure Community 
preference. Bound under 
GATT, the CCT remains 
one of the systems 
ensuring the highest 
theoretical level of 
protection. It is 
subject to numerous 
exemptions (GSP, Lomé 
Convention, GSP-drugs, 
EEA, etc.). 
Restrictions on imports 
are prohibited. Council 
Commission/ 
Producers' 
organizations 
Council 
Any initiative 
must be consistent 
with international 
undertakings 
subscribed by the 
Community in the 
GATT framework, 
including 
conditions in 
which the 
Commission can 
adopt safeguard 
measures. 
3 
ACTION 
- System of 
reference prices/ 
notification of 
import prices TYPE OF MEASURE 
New initiative OBJECTIVES AND 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS 
To improve system cf 
reference prices in 
existence since 1982 DECISION/ 
RESPONSIBILITY 
Commission 
(proposal under 
discussion) 
V. OTHER INITIATIVES 
(i) Improvement of 
collection, 
standardization and 
reliability of 
scientific and 
socio-economic data New initiative To establish data bases 
for use by the 
Community and M.S. Commission 
- Studies, pilot 
projects and 
demonstration 
projects concerning 
post-harvest 
processing of 
fishery and 
aquaculture 
products, 
improvement of 
information exchange 
between fishing 
businesses and 
collection of socio­
economic data New initiative Idem Commission 
- Research into 
resource management 
and scientific data 
collection New initiative Idem Commission 
- Feasibility study 
of a system of 
quality 
certification New initiative To ensure greater 
transparency and better 
knowledge of different 
procedures. To 
systematize recourse to 
certification Commission 
- Methodological 
study on 
standardization of 
trade descriptions 
- Study of 
profitability of 
Community fishing 
fleets New initiative Idem Commission 
New initiative To measure the present 
productivity of the 
fleet, to identify 
factors influencing 
profitability, to 
define a theoretical 
instrument of 
measurement Commission 
33 
ACTION TYPE OF MEASURE OBJECTIVES AND DECISION/ 
SUMMARY CHARACTERISTICS RESPONSIBILITY 
- Study of socio­
economic impact of 
MGP New initiative To evaluate the 
negative and positive 
effects of MGP on local 
socio-economic fabric 
and define appropriate 
accompanying measures Com. .iss ion 
(iii) European week 
of fishery and 
aquaculture products New initiative Promote fishery 
products among 
consumers Commission 
>/ 
ISSN 0254-1475 
C0M(94) 335 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 03 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-94-365-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-72093-X 
Office for Official Publication? of the Emupean Communities 
L-2935 Luxembourg 
3s: