COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION on the State of Play of the Common Fisheries Policy and Consultation on the Fishing Opportunities for 2019
Date: 2018-06-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea, catch by species, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishing area, fishing controls, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 11.6.2018  SWD(2018) 329 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION   on the State of Play of the Common Fisheries Policy and Consultation on the Fishing Opportunities for 2019  {COM(2018) 452 final}  
 
 
Contents 

Contents ..................................................................................................................................... 1 

I. State of stocks ......................................................................................................................... 2 

II. Specific actions for the Mediterranean and Black Seas ...................................................... 13 

III. Report on the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities ....................... 16 

IV.  Economic performance of the EU fishing fleet ................................................................ 27 

V. The implementation of the Landing Obligation .................................................................. 35 

1 

 
 
 
 
I. State of stocks 

This  section  explains  in  detail  the  progress  made  on  achieving  maximum  sustainable  yield 
(FMSY) and the situation of stocks. 

1.  Progress report 

Each year, the Commission requests the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for 
Fisheries  (STECF)  to  measure  the  progress  made  on  achieving  FMSY  in  line  with  the 
objectives  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (CFP).  The  exploitation  rate  relative  to  FMSY  is 
calculated by the STECF, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and 
the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM). 

In  line  with  recommended  best  practice,  all  historical  data  series  have  been  updated.  This 
means  that  some  new  methods  have  been  introduced,  new  science  taken  into  account,  and 
new data added. 

The main findings of the STECF technical report1 are summarised below. 

1.1 Knowledge of the state of stocks 

1.1.1 ICES area2 

The number of stocks for which there is scientific advice about fishing mortality compared to 
the fishing mortality that would lead to the MSY has remained stable in general at 66. The 
slight  decrease  in  the  number  of  FMSY  assessed  stocks  from  2015  to  2016  is  due  to  a 
methodological change made  by the STECF, whereby stocks with less than 5 years of data 
were not included in the analysis. 

1 2018-XX_STECF XX-XX: Monitoring the performance of the Common Fisheries Policy (WP). 
2 Reference to the ICES area or "North-East Atlantic" covers FAO area 27 and includes the waters of the Baltic 
Sea, North Sea, Irish Sea, Celtic Sea and adjacent waters. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 1 Number of stocks in the ICES area for which estimates of F/FMSY are available 
by year 

Table 1 Number of stocks in the ICES area for which estimates of F/FMSY are available by 
ecoregion and year 

Ecoregion 
ALL 
Baltic Sea 
BoBiscay & Iberia 
Celtic Seas 
Greater North Sea 
Widely distributed 

2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016 
66 
8 
9 
23 
22 
4 

67 
8 
9 
22 
21 
7 

67 
8 
9 
22 
21 
7 

66 
8 
9 
21 
21 
7 

67 
8 
9 
22 
21 
7 

68 
8 
9 
23 
21 
7 

67 
8 
9 
22 
21 
7 

69 
8 
9 
23 
22 
7 

70 
8 
9 
24 
22 
7 

71 
8 
9 
25 
22 
7 

71 
8 
9 
25 
22 
7 

66 
8 
9 
21 
21 
7 

65 
8 
9 
20 
21 
7 

71 
8 
9 
25 
22 
7 

1.1.2. Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea 

In  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea,  there  was  a  strong  increasing  trend  in  the  number  of 
stocks assessed between 2003 and 2009, up from 22 to 47; the number of stock assessments 
remained stable until 2014, then decreased to 39 in 2015 and 21 in 2016.   For 2016, there are 
no results for any of the GFCM stock assessments and the indicator values for 2016 are based 
on the results of only 22 stock assessments. As a result, the values are not comparable with 
those of previous years. Hence in Figure 2, the 2016 value is represented as stand-alone, and 
the indicators are plotted up to 2015 only. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 2 Number of stock assessments in the Mediterranean a and Black Sea by year. 
The totals include stocks in the following GSAs only: 1, 5-7, 9, 10-19, 22-23, 25 and 29. 

1.2. Fishing compared to the maximum sustainable yield rate (FMSY) 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.2.1  North-East Atlantic 

On  trends  in  F/FMSY,  fishing  pressure  in  the  ICES  area  is  decreasing  steadily  with  the 
indicator value close to 1 in 2016; this means that over all stocks, on average, the exploitation 
levels are close to FMSY. In the ICES area, among the 65 to 71 stocks that are fully assessed 
over the years, the proportion of overexploited stocks decreased from more than 70% to close 
to 40% over the last 10 years.   

Figure 3 F/FMSY trend 

Figure 4 Number of stocks by year for which fishing mortality (F) exceeded FMSY. 

Figure 5 Number of stocks by year and ecoregion for which fishing mortality (F) 
exceeded FMSY. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 2. Number of stocks by year and ecoregion for which fishing mortality (F) 
exceeded FMSY. 

Ecoregion 

2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016 

ALL 
Baltic Sea 
BoBiscay & Iberia 
Celtic Seas 
Greater North Sea 
Widely distributed 

46 
7 
6 
13 
13 
7 

45 
6 
6 
12 
16 
5 

50 
6 
7 
14 
18 
5 

49 
6 
7 
14 
18 
4 

51 
6 
8 
16 
17 
4 

48 
6 
6 
16 
16 
4 

39 
6 
5 
13 
12 
3 

39 
6 
5 
12 
12 
4 

32 
4 
5 
10 
10 
3 

37 
5 
5 
12 
13 
2 

28 
3 
6 
8 
9 
2 

32 
2 
6 
8 
13 
3 

29 
4 
5 
8 
10 
2 

29 
4 
5 
9 
9 
2 

Figure 6 Number of stocks by year for which fishing mortality (F) did not exceed FMSY. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 7 Number of stocks by year and ecoregion for which fishing mortality (F) did not 
exceed FMSY. 

Table 3 Number of stocks by year and ecoregion for which fishing mortality (F) did not 
exceed FMSY 

Ecoregion 
ALL 
Baltic Sea 
BoBiscay & Iberia 
Celtic Seas 
Greater North Sea 
Widely distributed 

2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016 
42 
4 
4 
16 
13 
5 

33 
3 
4 
12 
9 
5 

20 
1 
3 
8 
8 
0 

16 
2 
2 
7 
3 
2 

16 
2 
1 
6 
4 
3 

19 
2 
3 
6 
5 
3 

29 
2 
4 
10 
9 
4 

28 
2 
4 
10 
9 
3 

37 
4 
4 
13 
12 
4 

43 
5 
3 
17 
13 
5 

39 
6 
3 
17 
9 
4 

42 
4 
4 
17 
12 
5 

20 
2 
3 
8 
5 
2 

18 
2 
2 
8 
3 
3 

1.2.2. Mediterranean and Black Seas 
In  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea,  the  trends  in  F/FMSY  show  a  median  level  slightly 
varying around 2.3 from 2003 to 2015, with no decreasing trend.   

Figure 8  F/FMSY trend 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.3 Biomass trends 

In ICES area3 the Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) has been genereally increasing since 
2006 and was around 39% higher on average in 2016 than in 2003.  

Figure 9 Trend in SSB relative to 2003 in the North East Atlantic

3 Reference to the  ICES area or "North-East Atlantic" covers FAO area 27 and includes the waters of the Baltic 
Sea, North Sea, Irish Sea, Celtic Sea and adjacent waters. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
For  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Seas,  the  level  of  uncertainty  makes  it  difficult  to 
conclude anything about trend. The situation remains more or less unchanged since the start 
of the series in 2003.  

Figure 10 SSB trend relative to 2003 in the Mediterranean and Black Sea 

In outermost regions, the Commission has identified4 the need for Member States to set up 
the  collection  of  fisheries  scientific  data  and  adopt  management  measures  in  line  with  the 
CFP to ensure the long-term sustainable development of Outermost regions’ fisheries. 

2.  Setting fishing opportunities 

For 2018 the number of total allowables catches (TACs) set in line with FMSY increased from 
44 in 2017 to 535 in 2018, representing 69% of the FMSY assessed TACs fished in the North-
East  Atlantic,  North  Sea  and  Baltic  Sea.  Of  the  overall  expected  catches  for  2018,  around 
12%  do  not  have  FMSY  advice,  but  are  assessed  by  ICES  based  on  precautionary  advice. 
During the discussions with Member States socio-economic considerations have been taken 
into account, with Member States sending detailed submissions to the Commission. 

4 Communication on “A stronger and renewed partnership with the EU’s Outermost regions”, COM(2017)623 
final of 24.10.2017. 
5 A TAC is considered in line with MSY if it is at or below the MSY TAC advised by ICES and if its biomass is 
above Btrigger. An example of a TAC not listed on the MSY list in 2018 is western Baltic cod, Although the 
TAC is in line with MSY 2018, its biomass is below Btrigger. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Table 4: TACs with FMSY advice (volume) 

Table 5: TACs with FMSY advice (volume in tonnes) 
EU/NO 
managed stocks  Coastal state stocks  Total 

EU stocks 

jointly 

Total  TAC  volume 
(MSY assessed stocks) 
TAC  volume  fished  at 
FMSY 
TAC volume not fished 
at FMSY 
% fished at FMSY 
% not fished at FMSY 

1.613.861 

773.444 

891.474 

1.567.277 

632.999 

28.319 

46.584 
97% 
3% 

140.445 
82% 
18% 

863.151 
3% 
97% 

3.278.779 

2.228.595 

1.043.583 
69% 
31% 

Table 6: Number of TACs with FMSY advice6 

6 Figures for 2005-2017 are taken from previous Communications. 

10 

20102012201320142015201620172018% share of TACs in line with MSY advice (volume)50%45%49%48%51%55%61%60%% share  of TACs not in line with MSY advice (volume)22%23%21%22%20%20%19%27%% share of TACs without MSY advice28%33%30%30%29%25%20%13%TACs with MSY advice (volume)Number of TACs with MSY advice2005200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018TACs with MSY advice34323335393538414662727576TACs set in accordance with or lower than advice2245111320252736364454TACs set above advice32302930282218161930363123% of TACs in accordance with or lower than advice6%6%12%14%28%37%53%61%59%58%50%59%71% 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
The following paints a more detailed picture for each sea basin: 

  The  Baltic  Sea  is  the  sea  basin  with  the  longest  experience  of  Member  States  and 
stakeholders  working  together  on  fisheries  management  measures  in  regionalisation. 
Considerable  effort  has  been  put  into  developing  new  gears  and  putting  them  in  place 
through  joint  recommendations  that  are  sent  to  the  Commission.  The  result  of  the 
commitment of stakeholders and Member States to sustainable fisheries management can 
be  seen  in  the  responsible  decisions  taken  on  the  TACs  for  2018.  These  followed  the 
Baltic Sea multiannual plan with 7 out of 8 TACs, for which we receive FMSY advice set in 
line with FMSY. In terms of volume of landings this means thatv 95% of the total catch in 
the  Baltic  Sea  is  from  sustainably  managed  stocks  in  line  with  FMSY,  while  4%  is  from 
TACs where we have precautionary advice.  

Herring and sprat were set in line with FMSY, and the TAC for the main basin salmon was 
set below FMSY. The TAC for western cod was rolled over for 2018. TAC reductions were 
adopted  for  eastern  cod  (-8%)  and  Gulf  of  Riga  herring  (-7%)  under  the  precautionary 
approach, and for Gulf of Finland salmon (-5%). The main basin salmon TAC follows the 
FMSY  approach  and  is  kept  at  a  low  level  to  help  improve  stocks  in  the  weakest  salmon 
rivers. In 2017, the Torneälven river was found to have the largest returns of wild Atlantic 
salmon in the world, thanks to sustainable management.  

 

In  the  North  Sea,  Skagerrak  and  Kattegat,  for  the  FMSY  assessed  stocks  that  are 
managed  by  the  EU  alone,  99.7%  of  expected  landings  are  from  sustainably  managed 
stocks. Thanks to the FMSY successes in the North Sea we increased TACs for cod in the 
North Sea by 10% and in the Skagerrak by 39%. Thanks to FMSY management TACs were 
increased for nephrops by 22% and for haddock by 23%. The TAC for sole was decreased 
by  4%.  These  examples  of  FMSY  management  translate  into  higher  and  sustainable 
incomes for the fishing industry. Turbot and brill represent another positive development 
with the combined TAC increased by 44 % in line with scientific advice.  

 

In  North-Western  Waters,  for  the  FMSY  assessed  stocks  that  are  managed  by  the  EU 
alone, 94% of the expected landings are from sustainably managed stocks.  

This  sea  basin  also  boasts  important  success  stories  that  poove  that  we  are  on  the  right 
track.  Examples  are  sole  stocks  in  the  Channel,  where  TACs  increased  by  2  %  for  the 
Western  Channel  and  by  25%  for  the  Eastern  Channel  in  line  with  FMSY  in  2018.  The 
positive  development  for  Eastern  Channel  sole  is  a  major  achievement  of  the  Advisory 
Council, who agreed a management approach  for  this stock in  2015. It is  thanks  to this 
that Eastern Channel sole is nowadays a FMSY success story. Northern hake continues to be 
the biggest demersal TAC and was decreased by 7% to keep it in line with FMSY.  

There  was  also  a  significant  improvement  in  the  Celtic  Sea,  with  the  TAC  for  cod 
increasing by 9% and being managed in line with FMSY in 2018. However, cod is also part 
of a wider mixed fishery, where the setting of fishing opportunities for other stocks such 
as  haddock  and  whiting  remains  challenging.  Improvements  are  needed  to  increase 
selectivity as part of the package to prevent the early disruption of fishing opportunities 
with the implementation of the landing obligation in 2019. Seabass management has been 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
challenging,  with  further,  worrying  decreases  in  the  stock  biomass;  this  calls  for  even 
more  restrictive  measures  on  both  commercial  fishing  and  recreational  angling.  While 
stringent in the short-term, these measures agreed at the Council should allow this iconic 
species to recover. 

The nephrops fishery in the Celtic Sea is another FMSY success story with an increase of 
TAC by 15% in the Irish and Celtic Seas. In the Irish Sea there was also a positive story 
in the recovery of cod, which has seen a 376% increase in the TAC in line with FMSY after 
several years of low biomass. Haddock and herring will also be fished at FMSY with a 23% 
and  70%  increase  respectively  in  their  TACs.  All  of  these  increases  again  translate 
directly into higher and sustainable incomes for the fishing industry. 

  For  South-Western  Waters,  of  the  FMSY  assessed  stocks  that  are  managed  by  the  EU 
alone,  90%  of  expected  landings  come  from  sustainably  managed  stocks.  An  important 
success story for this sea basin is the Advisory Council management approach to Bay of 
Biscay  sole  which  delivered  a  6%  increase  in  the  TAC  and  a  first  ever  listing  of  FMSY 
thanks to the efforts of the stakeholders. TACs were agreed in line with FMSY for Iberian 
anglerfish  and  horse  mackerel,  Bay  of  Biscay  anglerfish  and  horse  mackerel,  nephrops, 
sole and megrim. The TACs for horse mackerel and megrim in the Bay of Biscay were 
increased  by  20%  and  21%  respectively  in  line  with  FMSY.  For  megrim  and  Norway 
lobster  in  the  Bay  of  Biscay,  both  TACs  were  reduced  in  line  with  scientific  advice  to 
maintain FMSY status, as was the TAC for Iberian waters horse mackerel (-20%). Southern 
hake saw a 12% decrease in the TAC with the aim of achieving FMSY in 2019. Anchovy 
and  anglerfish  in  the  Bay  of  Biscay  continue  to  be  fished  sustainably  with  unchanged 
TAC levels. All of the increases again translate into higher and sustainable incomes for 
the fishing industry. 

  For  deep-sea  stocks,  fishing  opportunities  make  up  less  than  1%  of  all  landings  in  the 
EU.  They  are  fixed  under  a  two-year  cycle  and  TACs  were  set  in  November  2016  for 
2017  and  2018.  Roundnose  grenadier  in  North  Western  Waters,  was  set  in  accordance 
with FMSY. All other stocks are data- or assessment-limited.  

  For  stocks  subject  to  Coastal  States  consultations  1  out  of  10  TACs,  for  which  we 
receive  FMSY  advice,  are  set  in  line  with  FMSY,  namely  Atlanto-Scandian  herring.  This 
represents  3%  in  terms  of  volume  of  landings  of  all  Coastal  States  TACs.  While 
achieving  FMSY  by  2020  for  all  Coastal  States  stocks  will  be  difficult,  it  is  the 
Commission's  objective  to  make  as  much  progress  as  possible  together  with  our 
international partners  the Faroe Islands, Norway and Russia on  achieving  FMSY also for 
these stocks. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II. Specific actions for the Mediterranean and Black Seas 

In  recent  years  the  Commission  has  stepped-up  its  efforts  to  advance  towards  sustainable 
exploitation  levels  of  marine  resources  in  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Seas,  which  are 
threatened by intense overfishing. In particular, the signature of the  ‘Malta MedFish4Ever 
Declaration’  in March 2017 created a new strategic framework for fisheries governance in 
the  region  and  a  set  of  five  actions  with  measurable  deliverables  for  the  next  10  years7. 
Increased cooperation and political engagement enshrined in the Declaration have also helped 
make concrete progress.  

The main achievements are summarized below. 

A.  Within the framework of the GFCM 

At the 41st session of the GFCM (October 2017, Montenegro), 8 EU proposals were adopted 
as  binding  recommendations.  The  adopted  proposals  covered  three  main  areas:  fisheries 
conservation, control and Illegal, Unreported and Uregulated (IUU) fishing activities and data 
collection. This includes: 

  On  fisheries  conservation:  (i)  a  regional  adaptive  management  plan  for  the 
exploitation of red coral in the Mediterranean Sea; (ii) a fisheries restricted area 
in  the Jabuka/Pomo  Pit  in  the  Adriatic  Sea;  (iii)  the  management  of  blackspot 
seabream fisheries in the Alboran Sea; and (iv) a multiannual management plan 
for turbot fisheries in the Black Sea.  

  On control and IUU activities: (v) the implementation of an international joint 
inspection  and  surveillance  scheme  outside 
the  waters  under  national 
jurisdiction of the Strait of Sicily – to complement the multiannual plan adopted 
in  2016;  (vi)  the  implementation  of  a  regional  plan  of  action  to  combat  IUU 
fishing in the GFCM area of application.  

  On  data  collection:  (vii)  the  submission  of  data  on  fishing  activities  in  the 

GFCM area of application; and (viii) the reporting of aquaculture data.  

In addition, the GFCM adopted a set of resolutions, in particular a regional strategy for the 
sustainable  development  of  aquaculture  in  the Mediterranean  and  Black  Seas,  a  network  of 
essential fish habitats and the creation of a permanent working group on vulnerable marine 
ecosystems. 

B.  At EU level 

Important steps were also taken at EU level to strengthen the implementation of the CFP in 
the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Seas.  This  includes  work  on  MAPs  and  discard  plans, 
improving the implementation of the Mediterranean Regulation in line with the objectives of 
the CFP and strengthening enforcement and control. Member States have also launched some 
encouraging initiatives to ensure sustainable fisheries also in these basins.  

7  
Mediterranean fisheries (Malta, 30 March 2017). 

Malta  MedFish4Ever  Ministerial  Declaration.  Ministerial  conference  on  the  sustainability  of 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
  Rollout of MAPs and discard plans  

In the last year, the Commission has proposed two MAPs: one for small pelagic stocks in the 
Adriatic Sea, which was adopted in February 20178 and is currently being discussed with the 
co-legislators;  and  one  for  the  fisheries  exploiting  demersal  stocks  in  the  western 
Mediterranean Sea9, which was adopted in March 2018. The Western Mediterranean plan sets 
FMSY  ranges  and  conservation  reference  points  for  the  main  demersal  stocks,  i.e.  hake,  red 
mullet, deep-water rose shrimp, Norway lobster, giant red shrimp and blue and red shrimp. In 
line with a broad stakeholder consultation, the proposal introduces a fishing effort regime at 
EU  level  for  all  trawls  exploiting  the  concerned  stocks.  It  is  also  complemented  with 
technical conservation measures such as closure areas. As with previous plans, this proposal 
introduces provisions for the implementation of the landing obligation and regionalisation. 

On discard plans, in 2017 the Commission extended the discard plan for demersal fisheries in 
the  Mediterranean,  in  term  of  species,  area  and  fishing  gears.  In  addition,  the  de  minimis 
exemption to the landing obligation for certain small  pelagic fisheries in the Mediterranean 
has been renewed. 

  Improving the implementation of the Mediterranean Regulation  

On  the  implementation  of  the  Mediterranean  Regulation,  our  focus  is  to  align  the  national 
management plans adopted under this Regulation10 with the last CFP.  In 2017, five national 
management plans were reviewed by STECF and aligned to the extent possible with the CFP. 
These include plans for fisheries conducted with boat seines, shore seines, gangui and small 
purse  seines  in  Croatia,  France,  Greece  and  Spain.  This  process  will  accelerate  in  2018, 
where  we  expect  another  20  plans  to  be  updated  for  the  fisheries  conducted  by  trawls  and 
purse seiners. 

  Strengthening enforcement and control 

Given  the  importance  of  control  and  inspection  activities  in  the  Mediterranean  and  in 
particular for the fisheries subject to multi-annual plans, Commission implementing Decision 
2014/156/EU  establishing  a  specific  control  and  inspection  programme  (SCIP)  has  been 
amended and enlarged to incorporate the fishery exploiting hake and deep-water rose shrimp 
in the Strait of Sicily11.  

8 COM(2017)097. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multi-
annual plan for small pelagic stocks in the Adriatic Sea and the fisheries exploiting those stocks. 
9 COM(2018) 115 final. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a 
multi-annual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea 
10 Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 of 21 December 2006 (OJ L 36, 8.2.2007, p. 6). 
11  Commission  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2018/17  of  5  January  2018  amending  Implementing  Decision 
2014/156/EU establishing a specific control and inspection programme for fisheries exploiting stocks of bluefin 
tuna in the Eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, swordfish in the Mediterranean and for fisheries exploiting 
stocks of sardine and anchovy in the Northern Adriatic Sea (notified under document C(2017) 8687) (OJ L 4, 
9.1.2018, p. 20). 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
In  addition,  joint  campaigns  coordinated  by  the  European  Fisheries  Control  Agency  have 
been  stepped  up  in  2017  (from  482 inspections  in  2014  –  dedicated  to  bluefin  tuna  –  to 
2,855 inspections  in  2017  –dedicated to  bluefin tuna, swordfish,  albacore, small  pelagics in 
the Adriatic Sea and demersal species in the Strait of Sicily)12. 

  Member States initiatives 

With the support of the Commission, Member States have adopted transitional management 
measures at national level. For example, the French and Spanish national administrations, in 
close  coordination  with  stakeholders,  agreed  on  common  spatial  measures  for  the 
conservation of hake in the Gulf of Lion last November 2017. 

12  

EFCA activities in the Mediterranean and Black Seas (direct link here). 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
III. Report on the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities 

In  line  with  Article  22(4)  of  Regulation  1380/2013  (the  CFP  Regulation),  the 
Commission  must  report  annually  to  the  European  Parliament  and  to  the  Council  on 
the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities, taking into account the 
assessment by the STECF. 

This  report  covers  the  year  2016.  It  assesses  the  annual  capacity  of  all  the  EU  fleet 
segments based on the information included in the Member States’ reports submitted 
to  the  Commission  in  201713.  These  reports  must  follow  the  common  guidelines 
adopted by the Commission in 201414 and, for the fleet segments for which structural 
overcapacity  has  been  identified,  they  must  contain  an  action  plan.  The  action  plan 
must  set  out 
its 
implementation.  

tools  and  a  clear  time-frame  for 

the  adjustment 

targets, 

The submission of the annual fleet reports is an ex-ante conditionality under European 
Maritime  Fisheries  Fund  (EMFF)15.  Not  submitting    the  annual  fleet  report  and  /or 
failing  to  implement  the  action  plan  could  result  in  a  proportionate  suspension  or 
interruption  of  relevant  EU  financial  assistance  to  the  Member  States  for  the  fleet 
segments concerned as provided by the EMFF Regulation.  

1.  Member States' annual reports and action plans 

All 23 coastal Member States submitted their reports to the Commission for 2016,  13 
of which include an action plan16. The Commission requested STECF to:  

 
 

tassess balance indicators for all EU Member States fleet segments; 
review  national  reports  on  Member  States  efforts  to  achieve  balance 
between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities; and  

  assess  action  plans  submitted  for  fleet  segments  where  Member  States 

identified structural overcapacity.  

The  data  used  to  compile  the  various  indicators  were  collected  under  the  Data 
Collection  Framework  (DCF)17.  All  balance  indicators  provided  and  used  in  the 

13 Article 22(2) Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 
2013  on  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy,  amending  Council  Regulations  (EC)  No  1954/2003  and  (EC)  No 
1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 
2004/585/EC, OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 22. 
14 Guidelines for the analysis of the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities according to Art 
22  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1380/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  the  Common  Fisheries 
Policy, COM(2014) 545 final.  
15 See Annex IV of Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing 
Council Regulations (EC) No 2328/2003, (EC) No 861/2006, (EC) No 1198/2006 and (EC) No 791/2007 and 
Regulation (EU) No 1255/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 149, 20.05.2014, p. 1. 
16 Three (Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania) Member States made amendments to the previous year’s action plan 
and ten (France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and the UK) provided new 
action plans. 
17  Regulation  (EU)  2017/1004  of  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  the  establishment  of  a  Union 
framework  for  the  collection,  management  and  use  of  data  in  the  fisheries  sector  and  support  for  scientific 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
STECF Expert Working Group (EWG) 16-09 were calculated in accordance with the 
2014  Commission  Guidelines,  which  provide  a  common  approach  for  estimating  the 
balance  over  time  between  fishing  capacity  and  fishing  opportunities.  Regarding  the 
coverage  of  the  data,  the  STECF  concluded  that,  overall,  there  has  been  an 
improvement  in  the  data  quality  and  coverage  compared  to  previous  years  despite 
some discrepancies.  

Concerning the fleet segment coverage, the STECF noted that some of the indicators 
could not be calculated for all fleet segments. This is either due to lack of data or, in 
the case of economic and technical indicators, due to clustering of segments (done to 
protect  commercial  confidentiality).  Data  deficiencies  led  to  difficulties  in  the 
calculation  of  balance  indicators  for  fleet  segments,  making  them  unreliable  or  non-
representative.  In  some  cases,  only  landings  in  weight  were  provided  without  the 
corresponding landed values for all active fleet segments reported by a Member State.  

The  STECF  analysis  also  confirmed  a  significant  number  of  inactive  vessels, 
especially  in  the  fleet  segments  with  vessels  under  10  m  (small-scale  costal  fleets), 
where many vessels are only used part-time and fishing is often not the only source of 
income.  

Since  the  entry  into  force  of  new  CFP,  20  Member  States18  have  identified,  using 
biological,  economic  or  technical  indicators  and/or  supplementary  information,  fleet 
segments with fishing capacity not effectively balanced with fishing opportunities, or 
showing  latent  signs  of  being  imbalanced.  Only  three  Member  States  concluded  that 
no fleet segments clearly demonstrated imbalance and did not submit action plans19.  

advice  regarding  the  common  fisheries  policy  and  repealing  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  199/2008,  OJ  157, 
20.06.2017, p. 1.  
18  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Croatia,  Cyprus,  Denmark,  France,  Germany,  Greece    Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania, 
Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.  
19 Estonia, Finland and Netherlands. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                         
Active fleet segments out of balance  

Member 
States 

Number of 
fleet 
segments 
assesssed  

Number of 
fleet segment 
out of 
balance 

Percentage of fleet 
segment assessed  
out of balance (%) 

Area 27 
Atlantic  
Northeasat   

Area  37 
Mediterrea
n and 
Blach Sea  

Total 
number 
of active 
fleet 
segment 
8 
23 
34 
6 
19 
7 
9 
99 
21 
15 
32 
35 
3 
10 
20 
28 
19 
55 
6 
13 
90 
29 
44 
625 

IT 

FI 

IR 

EE 

FR 

DE 

BE 

DK 

HR 

BG 

CY* 

GR* 

3 
16 
12 
0 
12 
2 
1 
16 
9 
0 
6 
15 
1 
1 
4 
14 
2 
5 
2 
1 
21 
10 
12 
165 
*  No    fleet  segment  was  assessed,  either  due  to  the  lack  of  data  or  because  the  available  data  are  not  considered 
representative. 

100 
100 
100 
0 
80 
40 
25 
55.2 
100 
0 
46 
94 
100 
33.3 
80 
100 
100 
83.3 
100 
100 
72.4 
43.5 
63 

3 
16 
12 
0 
15 
5 
4 
29 
9 
0 
13 
16 
1 
3 
5 
14 
2 
6 
2 
1 
29 
23 
19 
227 

0 
16 
12 
0 
0 
0 
0 
7 
0 
0 
0 
15 
0 
0 
4 
0 
0 
0 
2 
1 
8 
0 
0 
65 

3 
0 
0 
0 
12 
2 
1 
9 
9 
0 
6 
0 
1 
1 
0 
14 
2 
2 
0 
0 
9 
10 
12 
93 

Tot 

RO 

UK 

MT 

ES 

SE 

NL 

PT 

LV 

PL 

LT 

SI 

To address situations of imbalance, Member States proposed a variety of management 
tools in their action plans including: 

- 

- 

- 

fleet  measures  (ban  of  new  vessels,  fleet  conversion,  reduction  of  the  fishing 
capacity, permanent or temporary cessation of activities and modernisation of 
fishing fleet); 
technical  measures  (monitoring  of  landings,  more  selectivity  or  energy-
efficient gear, permitting schemes for certain fisheries, space and time-related 
fishing restrictions); 
economic  measures  (support  for  development  of  marketing  initiatives  or 
assistance to improve competitiveness); and 

-  other measures, such as measures to improve the cost-effectiveness of fishing 
vessels and safety at work on board; monitoring of landing through weighing 

18 

 
 
  
of  fishery  products  on  automatic  weighing  and  labelling  machines;  fishery 
inspection  measures;  real  time  closures;  support  measures  in  the  EMFF 
Operational  Programme  (assistance  for  small-scale  fleet  vessels  to  meet 
requirements of the landing obligation, transposition of the legal requirements 
of  the  new  CFP  to  promote  a  positive  investment  climate  within  the  fishing 
industry, reduction of fleet activity20). 

Support  for  the  permanent  cessation  of  fishing  activities  through  the  scrapping  of 
vessels was eligible for funding under the EMFF  until 31 December 2017 only for the 
fleet  segments  considered  not  in  balance.  In  2016,  Member  States  used  permanent 
cessation  measures  to  decommission  vessels  from  their  fleet  and  reduce  capacity. 
According  to  the  annual  implementation  reports  for  2016,  147  fishing  vessels  were 
decommissioned  with  public  support,  with  a  total  public  expenditure  (certified 
payment)  of  almost  EUR  342  million,  of  which  EUR 171  million  came  from  the 
EMFF. 

20 See STECF-17-18, p.109-134. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2. THE OVERALL CAPACITY OF THE EU FISHING FLEET 

As of December 2017, 82.912 vessels were registered in the EU fleet register with an 
overall capacity of 1.487,983 in gross tonnage (GT) and 5.763,933 in kilowatts (KW). 
This  shows  a  reduction  in  2017  of  1.45%  in  number  of  vessels,  6,54%  in  KW  and 
9.59%  in  GT.  The  fishing  capacity  of  the  EU  fleet  was  19,51  %  below  the  capacity 
ceilings for tonnage and 13,14 % below the power ceilings. Scrapping has contributed 
to these results. 

The  Commission  attaches  great  importance  to  the  accuracy  of  the  information 
recorded  in the EU fleet register. To this end,  on 6 February 2017, it adopted  a new 
regulation  on  the  Union  fishing  fleet  register21.  This  regulation  introduces  a  new 
procedure that guarantees the update of the EU fleet register in real time. It gives the 
Commission the possibility to check the correctness and correspondence between the 
data submitted by Member State for any event and the data included in the snapshots.  

Compliance with capacity ceilings on 
December 2017 
Effective capacity as percentage of capacity ceiling by Member State  

100,00%

90,00%

80,00%

70,00%

60,00%

50,00%

40,00%

30,00%

20,00%

10,00%

0,00%

E
B

G
B

Y
C

E
D

K
D

S
E

I

E F
E

R
F

L
E

R
H

R

I

T
I

T
L

V
L

L

M

L
N

O
P

R
P

I

O S
R

E
S

K
U

T
O
T

GT

KW

21  Commission  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  2017/2018  of  6  February  2017  on  the  Union  fishing  fleet 
register, OJ, L 34, 9.5.2017, p.9. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
3. REGIONAL ASSESSMENT 

In the North East Atlantic, the fishing capacity continues to decrease both in GT and 
KW.  However,  according  to  the  STECF22,  there  are  fleet  segments  which  are  not  in 
balance with their fishing opportunities. According to Stock Harvest Indicator, in this 
area,  out  of  625  fleet  segments  active  in  2015,  93  were  out  of  balance.  The  inactive 
vessel and use indicators show a decreasing trend for most of fleet segments. 

In the Mediterranean and Black Sea, a large number of fleet segments may not be in 
balance with their fishing opportunities. These fleet segments rely on different stocks, 
among  which  turbot,  red  mullet,  Mediterranean  horse  mackerel,  anchovy,  pilchard, 
common  sole  and  swordfish.  According  to  the  STECF  analysis,  the  inactive  vessel 
indicator  shows  a  decreasing  trend.  By  contrast,  the  vessel  use  indicator  shows  an 
increasing trend.  

Finally, the fleet in the outermost regions (OR) is composed of 4.164 fishing vessels, 
which represents 5% of the total EU fleet. The fishing fleets in the outermost regions 
are  primarily  composed  by  small-scale  vessels  targeting  inshore  and  offshore 
resources.  Fleets  in  the  outermost  regions  are  also  below  their  respective  capacity 
ceilings. In the period between January 2014 and December 2017, fleet capacities in 
the outermost regions decreased in total by 3.9 % in GT and KW. STECF noted that 
some  fleet  segments  were  out  of  balance  and  rely  on  overfished  stocks.  Because  of 
lack  of  data,  it  was  not  possible  to  assess  the  balance  or  imbalance  of  all  fleet 
segments.  The  ratio  between  current  revenue  and  break-even  revenue  and  for  vessel 
use indicator shows an increasing trend. 

Total vessels in OR in Dec 2017 

774 

1.190 

2.200 

France

Portugal

Spain

22 See  STECF-17-08, table 4.7.1 p.105 and tables from 7.1.1 and 7.1.4  p. 151 and 158.  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Total GT in OR in Dec 2017 

22.622 

27.050 

14.068 

Total KW in OR in Dec 2017 

51.461 

70.703 

309.329 

22 

France

Portugal

Spain

France

Portugal

Spain

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. CONCLUSIONS 

The  capacity  of  the  EU  fleet  continued  to  decrease,  following  the  same  trend  as  in 
previous years. Between December 2016 and December 2017, the EU fleet decreased 
by 1.45%  in  number of  vessels, by 6.54%  in  kilowatts (KW) and by  9.59%  in  gross 
tonnage (GT).   

In  2017,  all  23  coastal  Member  States  complied  with  their  obligation  to  report 
information on the capacity of their fleet segments. 13 of the Member States’ reports 
included  an  action  plan.  Action  plans  contain  a  large  variety  of  measures  to  address 
overcapacity.  These  masures  range  from  fleet  measures,  such  as  temporary  or 
permanent cessation, to technical, economic and control measures.  

For  the  fleet  segments  that  are  not  in  balance,  EMFF  support  for  the  permanent 
cessation  of  fishing  activities  through  the  scrapping  of  vessels  was  eligible  until  31 
December 2017. Partly due to permanent cessation measures, in December 2017,  the 
fishing capacity of the EU fleet was 19,51 % below the capacity ceilings for tonnage 
and 13,14 % below the power ceilings. This is expected to have a positive effect on the 
conservation of marine biological resources. 

Evolution of KW capacity between 
Dec 2016 and Dec 2017 

8.000.000

6.000.000

e
l
t
i
T
s
i
x
A

4.000.000

2.000.000

0

-2.000.000

Dec-16

KW

Dec-17

KW

Series1

6.375.340

5.763.933

Δ 2016-2017 

Δ N(%) 

-9,59%

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Evolution of GT capacity between Dec 2016 and 
Dec 2017 

e
l
t
i
T
s
i
x
A

8.000.000

6.000.000

4.000.000

2.000.000

0

-2.000.000

Dec-16

GT

Series1

1.592.057

Dec-17

GT

1.487.983

Δ 2016-2017 

Δ N(%) 

-6,54%

Evolution in number of vessels betveen Dec 
2016 and Dec 2017 

e
l
t
i
T
s
i
x
A

2.000.000

0

-2.000.000

Dec-16

N

N
Dec-16
84.134

Series1

Dec-17

N

N
Dec-17
82.912

Δ 2016-2017 

Δ N(%) 

Δ N(%) 
Δ 2016-2017 
-1,45%

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 1:  decrease of the EU fishing Fleet capacity per Member State  

Evolution of the fleet between 2008-17 

Δ N (%) 

Δ KW (%) 

Δ GT (%) 

0%

-2%

-4%

-6%

-8%

-10%

-12%

-14%

-16%

-18%

-20%

Figure 1: Reduction of the EU fishing fleet between 2008 and 2017 by number of vessels (N), power (KW) 
and gross tonnage (GT) 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
25

24

23

22

21

20

Coastal MS

GT

2.000.000

1.900.000

1.800.000

1.700.000

1.600.000

1.500.000

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Figure 2: correlation between number of costal Member States and EU fishing Fleet gross tonnage (GT) 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
IV.  Economic performance of the EU fishing fleet 

The  2017  Annual  Economic  Report  (AER)  on  the  EU  fishing  fleet23  provides  a 
comprehensive  overview  of  the  latest  information  available  on  the  structure  and  economic 
performance of the 23 coastal EU Member State fishing fleets. The results indicate that the 
profitability of the EU fleet improved further in 2015, compared to 2014. This improvement 
is expected to have continued into 2016 mainly as a result of increased landings and low fuel 
prices.  Forecasts  for  2017  suggest  that  developments  are  offset  by  higher  fuel  prices 
compared to 2016.   

Direct  employment  generated  by  the  sector  amounted  to  152,700  fishers,  corresponding  to 
114,863 FTEs. Average annual wage per FTE was estimated at EUR 24.8 thousand, ranging 
from EUR 1.4 thousand for Cypriot fishers to €UR 75 thousand for Belgian fishers. The EU 
fleet spent almost 4.8 million days at sea and consumed 2.3 billion litres of fuel. According to 
the DCF data, the EU fleet landed 5 million tonnes of seafood in 2015 with a reported landed 
value of EUR 7 billion.   

The amount of Gross Value Added (GVA) and gross profit (all excl. subsidies) generated by 
the  EU  fishing  fleet  (excl.  Greece)  in  2015  was  EUR  3.9  billion  and  EUR  1.6  billion, 
respectively. GVA as a proportion of revenue was estimated at 54%, up from 52% in 2014 
and  gross  profit  margin  at  23%,  up from  22%  in  2014.  With  a  total  net  profit  of  EUR  798 
million, 11% of the revenue generated by the EU fleet in 2015 was retained as net profit.  

23 JRC107883; 19-23 June 2017, Italy -- The 2017 Annual Economic Report on the EU Fishing Fleet - (EWG 
17-01 and EWG 17-06). (pub:2017.08). 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 1: Increase in fleet profits since 2008 

Results however varied by fishing region, as discussed below: 

  The overall performance of fleets operating in the North Sea & Eastern Arctic region 
was  positive  in  2015,  and  improved  further  compared  to  previous  years.  Overall,  fleets 
operating in the region spent almost 485 thousand days at sea in 2015,  and landed 1.66 
million tonnes of seafood valued at EUR 1.8 billion. The most profitable fleets were the 
large (over 40  m)  pelagic  trawlers, with  average  gross  profits  estimated  at  around  EUR 
30,000 per day at sea. Factors that may have contributed to the positive situation include: 
(1)  recovery  of  several  stocks,  such  as  the  North  Sea  common  sole,  plaice,  herring, 
haddock, saithe and cod; (2) increased TACs for a number of species such as plaice, hake, 
cod,  nephrops,  sandeels  and  sprat;  (3)  higher  average  prices  for  a  number  of  important 
species, such as sole, plaice, common shrimp, cod and nephrops and (4) low fuel prices 
resulting  in  lower  energy  costs.  On  the  other  hand,  factors  that  may  have  hampered 
economic  performance  in  the  region  include  reduced  TACs  and  quotas  for  certain  key 
stocks, such as Atlantic mackerel.  

Figure 2 : Revenue and profits trends for Member States fleets in the North Sea & Eastern Arctic 
region 

  Overall, the EU Baltic Sea fleet spent almost 426 thousand days at sea in 2015, to land 
approximately  613  thousand  tonnes  of  seafood  valued  at  EUR  217  million.  A  slight 
increase  in revenue (3%), combined with significant reductions in operating costs (e.g. -

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
17% in fuel costs), helped the overall situation of the Baltic Sea fleet move from a loss-
making position in 2014 to post a modest net profit in 2015. The main factors that may 
have contributed to the positive situation, include: (1) decreasing fuel prices resulting in 
lower energy costs; (2) policy management instruments in quota allocation and ITQs (as 
introduced in some countries); (3) several pelagic fisheries that are exploited at FMSY and 
thus at sustainable levels; (4) vessel decommissioning schemes (these measures positively 
influenced Polish and Latvian fleet profitability) and (5) EMFF support, such as measures 
aimed at increasing the added value of products (prioritised for Small Scale and Coastal 
Fleets) and by-catch from landing obligations (for large-scale fleet). Conversely, factors 
that  may  have  negatively  influenced  the  performance,  include:  (1)  lower  average  prices 
for  several  commercially  important  species,  such  as  sprat,  herring  and  cod;  (2)  reduced 
TACs and quotas for Baltic cod, which has decreased consistently since 2014; (3) limited 
fishing activity, especially for the SSCF which is highly dependent on weather conditions 
and  even  in  the  favourable  economic  conditions  could  be  the  limiting  factor  for  fleet 
performance  and  (4)  the  long  service  life  of  the  vessels,  obsolete  equipment  and 
insufficient investments increase the maintenance costs and may therefore reduce the fleet 
profitability.   

Figure  3:  Trends  on  gross  value  added  and    gross  profit  for  Member  States  fleets 
Baltic 

operating 

the 

in 

  The  major  players  in  the  North  East  Atlantic  are  the  Spanish,  French,  British, 
Portuguese and Irish fleets. The most important species include mackerel, horse mackerel, 
hake  and  Norway  lobster.  Fleets  operating  in  this  region  spent  an  estimated  1.5  million 
days at sea and landed 1.4 million tonnes of seafood valued at EUR 2.4 billion. Despite 
the  decrease  in  landings,  overall  performance  improved,  with  the  majority  of  Member 
State fleets generating net profits in 2015. In 2015, fuel price decreased and remained low 
in  2016,  while  most  fish  prices  remained  stable  or  increased  (including  plaice  and 
common shrimp). Therefore, it is expected that economic performance further improved 
as  revenues  are  likely  to  have  increased  while  costs  decreased.  Factors  that  may  have 
contributed to the positive situation include: (1) recovery of some stocks, such as herring 
and  Northern  hake;  (2)  low  fuel  prices  resulting  in  lower  energy  costs,  especially  for 
pelagic fisheries; (3) increased TACs for Northern hake, herring and anglerfish; (4) stable 
or  higher  average  prices  for  some  species,  such  as  common  sole  and  Nephrops  have 
helped maintain profitability and (6) capacity reduction (with or without public support) 
leading to decreased fixed costs. Factors that may have hampered economic performance 

29 

 
 
 
 
in the region include: (1) reduced quotas for mackerel, common sole, plaice and cod; (2) 
lower  average  prices  and  total  landings  for  commercially  important  species,  such  as, 
plaice, common shrimp, herring and mackerel.  

Figure  4:  Trends  on  landings  in  weight  and  value  from  Member  States  fleets 
operating in the NE Atlantic fishing region24 

Figure 5: Trends on gross profit for Member States fleets operating in the NE Atlantic 
region 

24 Data source: Member States data submissions under the DCF 2017 Fleet Economic (MARE/A3/AC(2017)); 
All monetary values have been adjusted for inflation; constant prices (2015). 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 6: Trends on net profit for Member States fleets operating in the NE Atlantic 
region 

  Overall,  the  economic  situation  of  EU  fleets  operating  in  the  Mediterranean  &  Black 
Sea improved: 2015 was the best year so far analysed, in particular for the Italian fleet, 
which is the main player and contributor to trends in the region. The main species include 
anchovy,  sardine,  and  hake.  Overall,  fleets  operating  in  the  region  spent  almost  2.1 
million days at sea in 2015, and landed 368 thousand tonnes of seafood valued at EIR 1.3 
billion.  Factors  that  may  have  contributed  to  improved  economic  performance  in  the 
region include: (1) higher revenues brought on by increased landings and higher average 
prices; (2) low fuel prices, which reduce energy costs; (3) more fisheries where stocks are 
being  exploited  at  rates  consistent  with  achieving  FMSY  and  fleets  are  showing  positive 
trends,  particularly  in  landings  (e.g.  deep  sea  rose  shrimp  in  North  Tyrrhenian-Ligurian 
Sea). Other factors that affected fleet performance in this region include: (1) overfishing 
and  stock  status  -  only  very  few  demersal  stocks  are  currently  being  exploited  at  rates 
consistent  with  achieving  FMSY;  (2)  marine  resources  and  ecosystems  under  increased 
pressure, driven  by diversification and intensification of marine and maritime activities; 
(3)  high  competition  between  professional  fishers  and  recreational  fishers;  (4)  new 
management  measures,  in  particular  the  introduction  of  a  TAC  for  swordfish  and  for 
pelagic fisheries in the Adriatic Sea - fishers are concerned that these TACs will have a 
negative impact on their profits in the future; (5) introduction of two Fisheries Restricted 
Areas  (RFAs)  in  the  Strait  of  Sicily  and  (6)  lack  of  investments  in  fishing  gears  with 
lower  environmental  impact  and  greater  energy  efficiency  (energy  efficiency  has  not 
improved in the region in the recent years).   

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 7: Revenue and profits trends for Member States fleets operating in the Mediterranean & 
Black Sea25 

Preliminary  results  for  2016  indicate  a  69  %  increase  in  net  profits  compared  wih  2015, 
registering record high profits of EUR 1,3 billion for the EU fleets. Results suggest that the 
EU  fleet  as  a  whole  was  profitable  in  2016,  with  an  estimated  net  profit  margin  of  17%. 
Gains in 2016 are offset slightly in 2017 and 2018 due to the increase in fuel costs, however 
the  EU  fleet  remains  profitable  with  an  average  net  profit  margin  above  15%.  It  should  be 
noted that EU fleet moved from marginal profits in 2009 (32 millions) to register 1,3 billion 
of net profis in 2016. Similarly, gross value added and revenue increased significnatly over 
the period 2009-2016. 

The  active  EU  small-scale  coastal  fleet  (SSCF)  employes  77,708  fishers  or  47,789  in  FTE 
(including  Greece).  In  2016,  the  number  of  small-scale  coastal  vessels  increased  (+7%) 
mainly due to a significant increase in licenced Croatian SSCF vessels, while FTE increased 
by only 2.5%.  As a whole, the EU SSCF was profitable in 2015: lower energy and capital 
costs in 2015 together with higher revenues fostered a 6.5% increase in GVA, 28% increase 
in gross profit and 98.4% increase in net profit compared to 2014. Net profit increased from 
EUR  46.4  million  in  2014  to  EUR  92.1  million  in  2015  (excluding  Greece).    Projection 
results  suggest that fishing effort, in days  at  sea, decreased 2.3%  in  2016. The reduction in 
fishing  effort  combined  with  low  fuel  prices,  indicate  that  energy  costs  decreased  by  22%. 
Landed weight remained stable at around 284 thousand tonnes while landed value, estimated 
at EUR 851 million in 2016, increased 2.6%. These preliminary findings suggest that the EU 
SSCF generated EUR 650 million in GVA, an increase of 5.4% compared to 2015. Labour 
productivity  (GVA  per  FTE)  also  increased,  from  EUR  21.4  thousand  in  2015  to  EUR  22 
thousand  in  2016.  Gross  profit  was  estimated  at  EUR  236.7  million,  a  10.8%  increase  on 
2015. Positive economic developments can also be seen in the performance indicators - GVA 
to revenue estimated at 67% (+3%%) and gross profit margin estimated at 24.4% (+8.2%) in 
2016. With increased capital costs, net profit was estimated at EUR 72.3 million, a decrease 
of 21.6% compared to 2015, year with the highest net profit (EUR 92 million) observed over 
the  period  analysed  (2008-2015).  Net  profit  margin  moves  from  10.1%  in  2015  to  7.7%  in 

25 Data source: Member State data submissions under the DCF 2017 Fleet Economic (MARE/A3/AC(2017)). 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2016. However, the 2016 gains are offset slightly in 2017 with fuel costs increasing 10.3%. 
The  SSCF  remains  profitable  with  gross  and  net  profit  margins  of  23%  and  7.1%, 
respectively.  

While the EU SSCF as a whole was profitable over the time period analysed, results at the 
regional  and  Member  State  level  are  mixed.  At  the  regional  level,  results  suggest  that  the 
North  Sea,  Northeast  Atlantic,  Mediterranean  &  Black  Sea  and  Outermost  region  SSCFs 
were profitable in 2015, generating 2.8%, 8.4%, 6.6% and 8% net profit margins respectively. 
Conversely,  the  SSCFs  operating  in  the  Baltic  Sea  suffered  net  losses,  amounting  to 
EUR 18.37 million in 2015. The Danish, Finnish, Polish and Swedish Baltic SSCFs were the 
most unprofitable, collectively suffering over EUR 19 million in net losses in 2015.   

33 

 
 
 
  
 
Figure 8: Main indicators for the EU small-scale coastal fleet 2008-2015 and projections for 2016 and 2017 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
V. The implementation of the Landing Obligation 

1.  Progress Report 

For years fishers have adopted uncontrolled discarding practices, returning unwanted catches 
to  the  sea,  dead  or  alive.  The  2014  reform  of  the  CFP    aims  to  gradually  eliminate  this 
wasteful practice of discarding. For this purpose, Article 15 of the CFP Regulation introduced 
the  obligation  to  retain  and  land  all  catches  of  species  subject  to  catch  limits  and  in  the 
Mediterranean  also  under  minimum  sizes,  caught  both  in  EU    waters  or  by  Union  fishing 
vessels outside EU waters, except in waters under the national jurisdiction of a third country. 
The  CFP  provides  for  the  progressive  phasing-in  of  the  landing  obligation,  with  full 
implementation as of the  1 January 2019. 

Figure 1: Percentage of TACs partially or fully subject to the LO by sea basin and year* 

* DP: Discard plans; JR: Joint Recommendations 

By  2016,  the  proportion  of  EU  landings  value  under  the  landing  obligation  (LO)  was 
estimated to be 21%. The Member States with the highest proportion of landings (excluding 
pelagics) under the landing obligation were Belgium (61%), the Netherlands (43%), Sweden 
(39%) and Denmark (38%).  By 2019, when full implementation is planned with all EU quota 
species  and  those  with  minimum  conservation  reference  size  (MCRS)  in  the  Mediterranean 
subject to  the  landing  obligation, it is  estimated that  40%  of landed value will be under the 
landing obligation. The Member States identified in 2016 still show the highest proportion in 
landings  under  the  landing  obligation  (Belgium,  the  Netherlands,  Denmark  &  Sweden)  and 
are joined by France, the UK, Ireland, Greece and Slovenia; all with at least 40% of landings 
under the landing obligation. 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 1: Cumulative increase in dependence on species under LO (excluding pelagics) 

Based  on  the  obligation  to  report  on  the  implementation  of  the  landing  obligation  in 
Regulation (EU) No. 1380/2013, the Commission has obtained information from EU Member 
States, Advisory Councils and other relevant sources on26: 

 

 

 
 
 

the  steps  taken  by  Member  States  and  the  producer  organisations  to  comply  with  the 
landing obligation; 
the  steps  taken  by  Member  States  regarding  the  control  of  compliance  with  the  landing 
obligation; 
the socio-economic impact of the landing obligation; 
the effect of the landing obligation on safety on board fishing vessels; 
the use and outlets of catches below the minimum conservation reference size of a species 
subject to the landing obligation; 

  port infrastructures and of vessels’ fitting with regard to the landing obligation, for each 

fishery concerned; and 

26 Source: "Evaluation of Member State's Annual Reports on the Landing Obligation (for 2017)", dated March 
2018, DG MARE Contract No. ARES(2018)1564295. 

36 

total no.total no.% of segments% of top 10*Member StateValue (€)Pelagicsothers20152016201720182019fleet segmentssegments >50%>50%fleet segmentsBelgium81,894,23017%83%0%61%61%61%83%4                   3                              75%75%Bulgaria2,393,02442%58%0%0%0%0%22%16                2                              13%20%Cyprus6,076,73846%54%0%0%0%0%34%6                   1                              17%17%Germany122,209,22224%76%1%20%25%25%39%14                8                              57%60%Denmark243,002,6749%91%9%38%44%44%48%19                12                           63%70%Spain771,947,67041%59%0%11%11%11%27%59                6                              10%30%Estonia3,807,05723%77%0%0%3%3%3%4                   -                         0%0%Finland8,438,01921%79%2%2%4%4%4%5                   -                         0%0%France959,036,32937%63%0%27%27%27%51%52                17                           33%70%UK753,189,85827%73%0%33%33%33%46%29                15                           52%50%Greece102,344,16833%67%0%0%0%0%47%13                8                              62%60%Croatia29,966,95821%79%0%0%0%0%28%23                9                              39%50%Ireland149,258,77618%82%0%32%32%32%45%22                8                              36%40%Italy730,485,58649%51%0%0%0%0%33%23                3                              13%0%Lithuania3,974,3359%91%0%0%5%5%5%5                   2                              40%40%Lativia4,313,1577%93%0%0%15%15%15%4                   -                         0%0%Malta6,053,71738%62%0%0%0%0%14%20                1                              5%10%Netherlands268,498,59621%79%0%43%43%43%53%14                8                              57%60%Poland24,041,15411%89%2%2%39%39%39%7                   4                              57%57%Portugal187,939,45043%57%0%5%5%5%23%50                6                              12%10%Romania4,005,92287%13%0%0%0%0%7%4                   -                         0%0%Slovenia1,091,63629%71%0%0%0%0%57%4                   2                              50%50%Sweden65,359,03110%90%6%39%45%45%47%7                   5                              71%71%Grand Total4,529,327,30933%67%1%21%22%22%40%-              -                         0%0% 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 

the difficulties encountered in implementing the landing obligation and recommendations 
to address them. 

In  2016,  a  STECF  Expert  Working  Group  developed  a  voluntary  questionnaire  to  facilitate 
Member States and Advisory Councils to report on the impact of the landing obligation and 
on  national  steps  taken  to  implement  it.  For  the  exercise  covering  2017,  the  Commission 
addressed two additional questions to Member States, focusing on enforcement of the landing 
obligation at sea and reported infringements.  

For  2017,  the  Commission  has  received  reports  from  15  Member  States  and  2  Advisory 
Councils.  As  a  consequence,  care  is  required  in  interpreting  year  on  year  change  since  the 
composition  of  respondents  in  the  different  areas  has  changed.  It  is  also  important  to 
recognise  that  changes  reported  in  a  questionnaire  do  not  necessarily  imply  a  successful 
outcome related the landing obligation. Such an outcome will depend on confidence that there 
has been significant change in fishing practice at sea and adequate monitoring and control of 
all fishing operations to ensure that catches are fully accounted for. Moreover, it needs to take 
into consideration that the quality of the reports received vary widely: the level of detail they 
contain therein varies extensively, as many reports repeated information already included in 
the previous reports. 

Information  on  discard  quantities  presented  by  Member  States  is  scant  and,  based  on  the 
questionnaires,  it  is  not  possible  to  say  whether  there  have  been  any  changes  in  discard 
quantities. Member States continue to indicate that difficulties encountered so far have been 
minimal  but  several  highlight  that  the  most  significant  issue  they  face  is  the  industries’ 
reluctance  to  implement  the  landing  obligation  despite  considerable  efforts  to  disseminate 
information to them. They also report that fishermen seem slow to change behaviour and in 
the Mediterranean, in some Member States in the Baltic and in the Black Sea, a “business as 
usual” mentality seems to prevail.  

There continues  to  be  a  wide divergence in  the approach  to promoting compliance with  the 
landing  obligation.  Member  States  have  continued  to  make  significant  efforts  into 
disseminating  information  to  fishermen  and  to  engage  with  the  relevant  Advisory  Councils 
(for  example  in  conducting  choke  species  analysis  -  a  generally  more  prominent  activity  in 
2017). A number of Member States reported changes in 2017  to ensure compliance with the 
landing  obligation.  Specific  training  and  dedicated  workshops  for  inspectors  on  control 
elements of the landing obligation have continued with facilitation by EFCA. Some Member 
States elaborated on their risk based approach to control and monitoring and some provided 
data on last haul analysis. This approach seems to have bedded down well in some areas such 
as the Baltic.  New control tools such as  remote electronic monitoring and CCTV   continued 
to be tested in 2017 by several countries although there is little evidence of them being used 
on a mandatory basis. A number of the reports for 2017 raised the issue of ensuring a level 
playing field before being prepared to commit to these new approaches. 

A  number  of  Member  States  have  undertaken  specific  studies  and  pilot  projects  to  test 
selective  gears  or  avoidance  strategies  and  some  have  reported  outcomes  for  2017  and 
strategies  for  increasing  uptake  of  these  gears.  Fewer  actions  have  been  taken  by  Member 
States  in  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea  where  fewer  difficulties  with  implementing  the 
landing obligation have been reported.  

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Member  States  have  continued to  apply  for  various  exemptions  included  under  the regional 
discard plans and a few have adjusted their national quota management systems. Inter-species 
quota flexibility has mostly not been  used but inter-annual flexibility mechanisms have. 

Most Member States report that it remains difficult to assess the socio-economic impacts of 
the landing obligation, indicating that problems have been minimal so far but could increase 
as  more  species  are  included.  For  2017  one  Member  State  provided  details  of  a  completed 
study which highlighted problems for some, but not all, sectors.  During 2017, there was again 
no clear evidence of the landing obligation causing safety issues on board fishing vessels and 
reports from Member States were identical to the previous year. 

Landings of fish below minimum conservation reference size (MCRS) reported for 2017 by 
Member  States  are  generally  low  across  the  different  regions.  The  landed  material  below 
MCRS  has  been  used  for  fish  meal,  pet  food  or  as  bait  for  pot  fisheries.  One  study  of 
alternative  uses  suggest  that  low  prices,  limited  volume  and  variable  composition  of  below 
MCRS material makes the alternatives economically unattractive. The reports for 2017 saw an 
increase in the extent to which EMFF funding to improve the infrastructure of ports as well as 
modifications on board fishing vessels has been applied for. Specific actions so far include the 
provision  of  cold  storage  facilities  onshore  and  aboard  vessels  for  storage  of  unwanted 
catches. 

Responses  for  2017  continue  to  articulate  the  issues  raised  already  last  year  (i.e.  choke 
species, confusion in interpretation of regulation). Of greatest concern is the uncertainty over 
the  reporting  by  fishermen  of  fish  discarded  under  exemptions  (i.e.  de  minimis  and  high 
survivability),  discards of fish currently not  subject to the landing obligation  and catches  of 
fish below MCRS. In part this has been due to the Electronic recording and reporting system 
(ERS)  not being adapted to make it possible to record  such catches and, operational facilities 
need to be fit for purpose to ensure information is correctly recorded.   

Overall, it appears that the impacts of the landing obligation on Member States and the fishing 
industry are low. However, the majority of Member States and the Advisory Councils indicate 
these  will  increase  with  full  implementation  in  2019.  While  Member  States  and  Advisory 
Councils seem to be working more closely under regionalisation the reluctance of the fishing 
industry  to  embrace  change  is  a  major  concern.  The  lack  of  accurate  reporting  of  fish 
discarded under exemptions allowed for under the landing obligation, the very low volumes 
of  fish  below  MCRS  being  landed  and  the  difficulties  experienced  by  Member  States  in 
monitoring such catches are major concerns and hint to compliance problems. 

2.  State of play of discard plans 

In  principle,  details  of  the  implementation  of  the  landing  obligation  must  be  specified  in  a 
multiannual  plan  (MAP).  These  include  technical  measures,  the  fixing  of  MCRS  where 
appropriate,  high  survivability  exemptions,  and  de  minimis  exemptions  of  up  to  5%  of  the 
total annual catches. The two MAPs agreed under the new CFP so far, the Baltic MAP and the 
North  Sea MAP, contain indeed provisions on the implementation of the landing  obligation 
and introduce regionalisation as a way to shape delegated acts establishing discard plans for 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
these  sea  basins.  The  first  delegated  Regulation  on  the  implementation  of  the  landing 
obligation under a MAP, the Baltic MAP, entered into force earlier this year27.   

In the absence of MAP, the European Parliament and the Council (the co-legislators) initially 
empowered  the  Commission  to  adopt  discard  plans  through  delegated  acts  on  a  temporary 
basis and for a period of no more than three years. However, due to delays in the preparation 
and adoption of MAPs, the initial three year period was proved to be too short: several discard 
plans were expiring at the end of 2017, with no MAP to rule the details of the implementation 
of the landing obligation. Practically, this meant that the flexibilities referred to in Article 15 
CFP, in particular the possibility to introduce exemptions would be lost for the sea basins for 
which no MAP was in place.  

To tackle this issue the Commission rapidly prepared a proposal to amend Article 15(6) of the 
CFP Regulation and extend the possibility to adopt discard plans for an additional period of 3 
years, in the absence of a MAP. This proposal was agreed by the colegislators28 and all the 
discard plans expiring at the end of 2017 were renewed in time.  

The  full  list  of  discard  plans  adopted  under  Article  15(6)  CFP  currently  in  force  follows 
(chronological order of adoption): 

1.    

2.   

3.   

4.   

5.   

6.   

7.   

8.   

Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/2438  of  12  October 
2015  establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  demersal  fisheries  in 
north-western waters  
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/2439  of  12  October 
2015  establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  demersal  fisheries  in 
south-western waters  
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/2440  of  22  October 
2015 establishing a discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in the 
North Sea and in Union waters of ICES Division IIa  
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2250  of  4  October 
2016 establishing a discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in the 
North Sea and in Union waters of ICES Division IIa 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2374  of  12  October 
2016  establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  demersal  fisheries  in 
South-Western waters 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2375  of  12  October 
2016  establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  demersal  fisheries  in 
North-Western waters 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2376  of  13  October 
2016 establishing a discard plan for mollusc bivalve Venus spp. in 
the Italian territorial waters 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2377  of  14  October 
2016  amending  Delegated  Regulation 
(EU)  No  1394/2014 
establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  pelagic  fisheries  in  South-

27 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/306 of 18 December 2017 laying down specifications for the 
implementation of the landing obligation  as regards cod and plaice in Baltic Sea fisheries (OJ L 60, 2.3.2018, 
p. 1). 
28 Regulation (EU) 2017/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2017 amending 
Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the common fisheries policy, (OJ L 302, p. 1). 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
9.   

10.  

11.  

12.  

13.  

14.  

15.  

16.  

17.  

18.  

19.  

Western waters 
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/86 of 20 October 2016 
establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  demersal  fisheries  in  the 
Mediterranean Sea  
Commission Delegated Regulation EU) 2017/87 of 20 October 2016 
establishing a discard plan for turbot fisheries in the Black Sea 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2017/2167  of  5  July  2017 
amending  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2374  establishing  a 
discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in South-Western waters 
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/45 of 20 October 2017 
establishing a discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in the North 
Sea and in Union waters of ICES Division IIa for the year 2018 
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/44 of 20 October 2017 
amending  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2016/2374  establishing  a 
discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in South-Western waters 
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/46 of 20 October 2017 
establishing a discard plan for certain demersal and deep sea fisheries 
in North-Western waters for the year 2018 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2018/153  of  23  October 
2017  amending  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2017/86  establishing  a 
discard plan for certain demersal fisheries in the Mediterranean Sea 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2018/211  of  21  November 
2017 establishing a discard plan as regards salmon in the Baltic Sea 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2018/188  of  21  November 
2017  amending  Delegated  Regulation 
(EU)  No  1394/2014 
establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  pelagic  fisheries  in  South-
Western waters 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2018/189  of  23  November 
2017  amending  Delegated  Regulation 
(EU)  No  1395/2014 
establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  small  pelagic  fisheries  and 
fisheries for industrial purposes in the North Sea 
Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2018/190  of  24  November 
(EU)  No  1393/2014 
2017  amending  Delegated  Regulation 
establishing  a  discard  plan  for  certain  pelagic  fisheries  in  North-
Western waters. 

3.  Use  of  the  EMFF  for  measures  linked  to  the  implementation  of  the  landing 

obligation 

The  prohibition  to  discard  is  a  radical  change  in  the  management  of  the  fishing  activity. 
Therefore  several  measures  are  eligible  for  funding  under  the  European  Maritime  and 
Fisheries  Fund  (EMFF)  to  facilitate  the  implementation  of  the  landing  obligation.  The 
Commission  commissioned  a  study  to  assess  the  use  of  the  EMFF  to  support  the  landing 
obligation29.  

29 "FAME Support Unit, AT01.2 ad-hoc consultancy Landing Obligation Final Report (AT1.2 5/5)", Version 1, 
Febriuary 2018. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
According to this study, to  date, an overall amount  of EUR 49  million in  EMFF  funding is 
committed or planned to support the implementation of the landing obligation, i.e. less than 
1%  of  the  total  funds  allocated  to  sustainable  fisheries  under  Union  Priority  1:  Promoting 
environmentally sustainable, resource-efficient, innovative, competitive and knowledge-based 
fisheries  (UP1).  Another  EUR  59  million  was  spent  under  the  previous  funding  instrument, 
the EFF. 

The main findings of the study are discussed below: 

Four Member States (DK, IE, PT, UK) reported an uptake of measures to limit the impact of 
fishing activities on the environment and to implement the landing obligation. Most projects 
relate to the improvement of fishing gear selectivity and avoidance of protected species. Some 
Member States also funded studies on the handling and valorisation of unwanted catches. 

However, most Member States reported a delayed start of operations under UP1 in relation to 
the  need  to  finalise  administrative  and  technical  arrangements  to  manage  applications  and 
projects. Nine Member States (BE, BG, CZ, FI, FR, HU, NL, RO, SK) could not start UP1 
implementation for this reason.  

Over  the  2014-2016  period,  DK  and  UK  appear  to  be  the  two  Member  States  having 
committed  significant  EMFF  funding  to  the  implementation  of  the  LO.  Measures  include 
support  to  vessel  operators  to  reduce  the  impact  of  fishing  on  the  environment,  innovation, 
use  of  unwanted  catches,  and  port  measures  to  facilitate  compliance  with  the  obligation  to 
land all catches. 

3.1 Extent of EMFF support for the implementation of the landing obligation to date 

Regarding the extent of EMFF support, a filtering exercise was undertaken with the Infosys 
database30  to  identify  projects  that  would  be  relevant  for  the  implementation  of  the  landing 
obligation.  This  process  identified  an  interesting  distinction:  some  projects  to  reduce 
‘unwanted  catch’  are  related  to  by-catch  of  non-commercial  species  such  as  birds  or  seals. 
Therefore, although at first they they appeared to be relevant for the landing obligation, they 
are not directly supporting its implementation. 

The  analysis  below  is  based  on  aggregated  responses  from  Member  States  Managing 
Authorities,  who  reviewed  the  filtered  Infosys  data  (where  some  projects  related  to  the 
landing obligation had been identified) and provided an update. Based on this, the table below 
comprises an overview of total EMFF share of support per Member States and the focus of 
supported  operations.  The  table  is  divided  in  two  columns:  the  first  column  relates  to 
operations  which  wete  carroed  pit  under  the  EMFF  up  to  the  end  of  2016  and  which  are 
considered to have contributed to the implementation of the landing obligation. 

30 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 1242/2014 of 20 November 2014 laying down rules pursuant 
to  the  EMFF  Regulation  with  regard  to  the  presentation  of  relevant  cumulative  data  on  operations  and 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 1243/2014 of 20 November 2014 on the information to be sent 
by Member States, as well as data needs and synergies between potential data sources. 

41 

 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Table 3: Overview of EFF and EMFF support per Member States  

By the end of 2017, around EUR 30 million of EMFF had been committed to projects related 
to the landing obligation across ten Member States. Denmark has committed the most for LO-
related projects at EUR 14.7 million, accounting for around 49% of total EMFF support up to 
2017. Out of around  EUR 8.2 million EMFF support in Denmark up to 2016, about EUR 4 
million  was  focused  on  gear  selectivity,    EUR  2  million  for  ports,    EUR  1  million  for 
innovations.  

By  the  end  of  2016  the  UK  had  committed    EUR  3.4  million  to  port  investments  and  the 
Netherlands  continued  its  significant  funding  support  to  LO  implementation  with    EUR  1.7 
million committed to vessel-based research and fleet investment. 

In  2017,  the  level  of  commitment  accelerated  with  EUR  16  million  of  EMFF  support 
committed  (compared  to    EUR  14  million  in  total  from  2014-2016),  resulting  from  the 
delayed  start  to  EMFF  programme  implementation  in  most  Member  States  as  well  as  the 
increased demand to help address the landing obligation  as it was being phased in. In 2017, 
EUR  6.6  million  of  EMFF  funding  supported  additional  fleet  investments  in  Denmark  and  
EUR  3.7  million  supported  fleet  investments  in  Spain.  Ireland  and  Sweden  also  made 
commitments to port investments. 

Latvia committed EMFF funds to a major processing investment of EUR 3.5 million related 
to  the  landing  obligation.  The  projects  involve  fishermen’s  groups  and  an  NGO  and  aim  to 
increase added value and the use of unwanted catches related to the production of fish protein 
and oil. 

42 

EFFMember StateAssociated spendto 20162017Planned TotalBelgium (BE) €          12 000 039  €     122 000  €     105 500  €     227 500 Bulgaria (BG)Croatia (HR)Cyprus (CY) €            1 800 000  €     150 000  €     150 000 Denmark (DK) €   8 201 708  €   6 578 147  €   1 009 029  € 15 788 884 Estonia (EE) €   4 500 000  €   4 500 000 Finland (FI)France (FR) €            3 100 000 Germany (DE)Greece (EL) €            2 674 028  €   5 250 000  €   5 250 000 Ireland (IE) €              758 683  €     233 679  €   1 469 264  €     370 000  €   2 072 943 Italy (IT) €          74 625 594  €       77 390  €   1 315 000  €   1 392 390 Latvia (LV) €   3 526 000  €   3 526 000 Lithuania (LT) €     637 500  €     637 500 Malta (MT) €            4 233 892  €     337 500  €     337 500 Netherlands (NL) €          33 239 184  €   1 656 414  €   5 890 000  €   7 546 414 Poland (PL)Portugal  (PT) €     613 151  €     613 151 Romania (RO) €              372 963 Slovenia (SL)Spain (ES) €              867 069  €   3 697 688  €   3 697 688 Sweden (SE) €       29 286  €     303 222  €     332 508 United Kingdom (UK) €   3 429 501  €   3 429 501 total received  €        133 671 451  € 14 285 738  € 16 094 711  € 19 121 529  € 49 501 978 EFF minus Italy €          59 045 857  € 49 501 978  EMFF potential total end 2018: EMFF 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.2. Planned EMFF support for LO implementation  

The table below shows an overview of Member States estimations of planned EMFF funding 
related  to  the  landing  obligation.  In  total,  a  planned    EUR  19  million  of  EMFF  funds  is 
reported  to  be  allocated  to  address  the  implementation  of  the  landing  obligation  from  2018 
onwards. 

Table 4: Overview of planned EMFF support from 2018 onwards per Member State 

*MS not listed report no planned LO-related commitments  
Source: MA responses, FAME 2018 

The Netherlands plans the biggest spend of EUR 5.9 million on gear investment, research and 
handling  unwanted  catch.  Greece,  which  has  made  no  commitments  to  date,  is  planning 
similar levels of support from 2018 onwards with EUR 3 million on innovation, EUR 1.5m on 
value-added and EUR 0.75m on port investment. Denmark is continuing its significant fleet 
investment with EUR 1.5m of support planned. Lithuania and Cyprus are planning some port 
investment related to the landing obligation. 

43 

Member Statefrom 2018FocusCyprus (CY) €             150 000 port investmentDenmark (DK) €          1 009 029 fleet investmentEstonia (EE) €          4 500 000 processing investmentGreece (EL) €          5 250 000 3m innovation, 1,5m added value, 0,75m port investmentIreland (IE) €             370 000 gear selectivityItaly (IT) €          1 315 000 fleet investmentLithuania (LT) €             637 500 port investmentNetherlands (NL) €          5 890 000 2,6m gear investment, 2,5m research, 1m handling unwanted catchTotal €        19 121 529 EMFF 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Similar  to  Latvia  in  2017,  Estonia  reports  that  it  plans  support  of  EUR  4.5  million  for  a 
processing  investment  to  a  fishermen’s  group  under  Article  68  (processing  for  non-human 
consumption).  

3.3 EMFF operations completed 

Not many EMFF operations related to the landing obligation have been completed as yet. 
Most relevant projects are still ongoing. Notable exceptions are:  

•  Project “Valduvis” in Belgium, concerning traceability and certification;  
•  “Fast  Track  –  Sustainable  and  cost-efficient  solutions  in  fisheries  under  the  landing 
obligation”  in  Denmark;  the  project  includes  establishing  a  platform  for  cooperation  in 
order  to  identify,  collect  and  distribute  knowledge  and  best  practice  as  well  as  cost 
efficient  trials  of  selective  gear  in  order  to  ensure  sustainable  fisheries  and  improved 
management under the LO; 

•  Pilot  project  with  scientific  observers  on  board  commercial  bottom  trawlers  in 
southwestern waters, testing different gears in order to increase knowledge on selectivity 
and catch composition, including the use of video cameras attached to the net to know its 
performance in the water while trawling but also the performance of fish caught into the 
net; 

•  Project “Added value, product quality and use of unwanted by-catch” in Lithuania. 

44