REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Implementation of the Technical Measures Regulation (Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1241)
Date: 2021-09-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: catch quota, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishery resources, fishing area, fishing regulations, marine ecosystem, protection of animal life, sea fishing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 23.9.2021  COM(2021) 583 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Implementation of the Technical Measures Regulation (Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1241)   {SWD(2021) 268 final}  
 
 
1.  Introduction 

On  14 August 2019,  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1241  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council1  (‘the  Regulation’)  entered  into  force.  It  sets  out  the  EU’s  technical  conservation 
measures that govern how, where and when fishing may take place. 

The  purpose  of  these  technical  measures  is  to  contribute  to  achieving  the  objectives  of  the 
common  fisheries  policy  (‘CFP’)  [as  defined  in  Regulation  1380/20132  (‘CFP  Regulation’)] 
and  to  contribute  to  achieving  good  environmental  status  as  set  out  in  the  Marine  Strategy 
Framework  Directive  (‘MSFD’)3  and  the  relevant  provisions  of  the  Birds4  and  Habitats 
Directives5.    Fishing  at  maximum  sustainable  yield  with  appropriate  technical  measures 
serves to increase yield from targeted fish stocks while reducing unwanted (by-)catches and 
impacts on sensitive habitats, either through size selectivity  (avoiding small fish) or species 
selectivity  (avoiding  certain  species).  The  measures  are  central  to  effectively  implementing 
the  EU’s  discard  policy  and  the  landing  obligation.  Member  States  and  operators6  should 
prioritise  selecting  better  fishing  gear  and  techniques  to  avoid  and  reduce,  as  much  as 
possible, unwanted catches. 

The Regulation introduced results-based approaches supported by ‘regionalisation.’ It set out 
the  general  rules  that  apply  to  all  EU  waters  and  provided  for  the  adoption  of  technical 
measures  that  respond  to  the  regional  specificities  of  fisheries.  This  results-based 
regionalisation approach is conceived under the CFP in order to bring decision-making closer 
to the fishers. It also provides Member States and the fishing sector with an incentive to play 
an active role in its creation and implementation.  

1  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1241  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  June  2019  on  the 
conservation  of  fisheries  resources  and  the  protection  of  marine  ecosystems  through  technical  measures, 
amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1967/2006, (EC) No 1224/2009 and Regulations (EU) No 1380/2013, 
(EU)  2016/1139, (EU)  2018/973, (EU)  2019/472  and  (EU)  2019/1022  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council,  and  repealing  Council  Regulations  (EC)  No  894/97,  (EC)  No 850/98,  (EC)  No 2549/2000,  (EC)  No 
254/2002, (EC) No 812/2004 and (EC) No 2187/2005 (OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105). 
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. 22–61 
3 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a 
framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework 
Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19). 
4 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the 
conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7–25). 
5 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and 
flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50). 
6 As defined in Article 4(1)30 of 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. 22–61) 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
In  line  with  Article  31(1)  of  the  Regulation,  this  report  reviews  how  the  Regulation  is 
currently  being  implemented.  This  first  report  was  due  by  31 December 2020,  but  was 
postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The report includes the latest available scientific 
advice.  

This report is published only two years following the entry into force of the Regulation. Due 
to the short period of time that has lapsed between adoption, implementation and monitoring, 
data collection and scientific and technical assessment, it has not been possible to fully assess 
if  the  Regulation  has  met  its  objectives  at  regional  or  EU  level.  Therefore,  this  first  report 
focuses on analysing:  

 
 
 

the impact of previous technical measures;  
the current situation; and  
the actions planned for the near future to implement the Regulation.  

The current report while responding to the mandate of Article 31(1) of the Regulation, also 
presents  the  basis  under  which  the  CFP  will  contribute  to  the  “Action  Plan  to  conserve 
fisheries resources and protect marine ecosystems” (hereafter “action plan”) as announced in 
the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 20307. It will indicate those areas in which more efforts are 
needed. 

2.  Sources of information 

This  report  builds  upon  scientific  assessments  and  contributions  from  the  Scientific, 
Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (‘STECF’)8 and the International Council 
for  the  Exploration  of  the  Sea  (‘ICES’)9.  It  takes  full  account  of  the  views  and  opinions 
received from 23 Member States, 8 Advisory councils10 and 37 stakeholders by means of a 
targeted  online  consultation11.  A  detailed  description  of  the  scientific  contributions  and 
consultation outcomes is provided in the staff working document accompanying this report.   

7 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Biodiversity 
Strategy for 2030 Bringing nature back into our lives. COM/2020/380 final 
8 https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/web/stecf/ewg2002 
9 https://www.ices.dk/news-and-events/news-archive/news/Pages/InnovativeFishingGear.aspx 
10 https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/partners/advisory-councils_en 
11 https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/targeted-stakeholder-consultation-technical-measures-regulation-
fisheries_en 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
3.  Measuring  progress  

Results-based  management  combined  with  active  stakeholders  and  Member  States 
participation  requires  results  to  be  monitored,  measured  and  followed  up  with  revised 
technical  measures  developed  over  time.  Previous  regulations  did  not  include  metrics  to 
measure the impact and success of implementing the technical measures12. This means that it 
was  not  possible  to  determine  in  detail  how  the technical  measures  have  contributed  to  the 
above-mentioned objectives.  

The latest scientific analysis carried out by STECF13 indicates that there has been a slow and 
very gradual trend towards catching a bigger proportion of larger fish  . While experimental 
studies have shown that improved selectivity can be achieved using  particular fishing gears 
under controlled conditions, it has proven difficult to establish direct causal links between the 
application of particular fishing gear regulations, changes in fishing gear used, and the overall 
size  selectivity  of  fishing  fleets.  Sufficiently  fine-scale  data  are  not  available  that  could 
identify  such  links.  In  addition,  it  is  believed  that  operational  factors  (choice  of  where  and 
when to fish, and fine details of gear rigging) also have major effects on selectivity that are 
not governed by regulatory obligations. 

The  Regulation,  looking  at  more  results-based  approaches  to  the  definition  of  measures, 
includes targets for technical measures to:  

reduce unwanted catches (especially of sensitive species); 

 
  optimise exploitation patterns;  
  contribute to improved yields;  and 
  ensure  impacts  of  fishing  on  seabed  habitats  are  in  line  with  EU  environmental 

legislation.  

The need for improved methods to measure selectivity and its effects becomes more obvious 
and  urgent.  Effectiveness  can  only  be  assessed  through  visible  results:  better  protection  of 
juveniles,  of  spawning  grounds,  lower  incidental  catches  of  sensitive  marine  species,  lower 
negative  environmental  impacts  and  positive  contributions  to  the  environmental  legislation. 
Such  measurement  methods  serve  two  purposes:    (i)  the  preliminary  evaluation  of  the 
potential  results  from  the  measures  proposed  and  developed,  and  (ii)  the  assessment  of  the 
measures in terms of the results obtained from such measures.  

12 COM(2016)134final of 11.3.2016. 
13 STECF 20-02. (https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/web/stecf/ewg2002) 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Selectivity  is  determined  by  both  the  type  of  fishing  gear  being  used  and  by  the  way  it  is 
deployed by the fishing masters and fishers with respect to place, season, time of day, speed 
and other operational choices. Improving selectivity depends not only on using legislation to 
change the structure of fishing gear but also on using legislation to create incentives for the 
fishers  to  operate  the  gears  with  better  practices.  This  means  that  improved  methods  of 
monitoring selectivity are needed, by measuring more accurately the quantities of small fish 
or  of  sensitive  species  that  are  caught.  Current  monitoring  methods  only  provided  data 
adequate for STECF to evaluate broad trends in size selectivity in large fleet segments. In its 
forthcoming  action  plan  the  Commission  will  consider  recommendations  to  Member  States 
additional means for gathering the information necessary to make this policy work. 

4.  Contribution to achieving the EU’s environmental objectives 

Technical measures also need to contribute to achieving good environmental status set out in 
the  MSFD.  Measures  aimed  at  the  conservation  of  marine  biological  resources  within  the 
framework of the CFP, that also contribute to marine environment protection, fall under the  
EU’s exclusive competence. Coherence with EU environmental legislation is required in the 
CFP and the Regulation builds on the targets established therein.  

Quantitative  environmental  targets  are  being  developed  under  the  MSFD,  but  most 
environmental  objectives  are  still  qualitative,  for  example  the  “favourable  conservation 
status” referred to in Article 1( e) and Article 2 of the Habitats Directive.  

Feedback  from  the  consultations  confirm  that  time  is  needed  to  adapt  to  the  Regulation 
(which  consolidates  and  replaces  more  than  30  prior  regulations)  and  to  move  from 
prescriptive  rules  to  regionally  adapted  measures  through  the  regionalisation  process.  Most 
Member States, Advisory Councils, stakeholders and STECF confirmed that it is too soon to 
measure the effect of the Regulation. Most NGOs consider that the Regulation so far has not 
contributed  to  the  objectives  and  targets  of  the  Regulation  and  has  failed  to  prevent  the 
negative  environmental  impacts  of  fishing.  These  stakeholders  also  advocate  a  result-based 
approach  here,  further  aligned  with  the  ambitions  of  the  European  Green  Deal  and  the  EU 
Biodiversity strategy for 2030.  

Fishing is a key pressure affecting ecosystems, sensitive species and impacts on seabeds. A 
recent review by the European Court of Auditors14 concluded that the loss of habitat and of 
marine diversity remains a challenge. The Commission agrees with the Court of Auditors that 
further  action  is  needed,  and  considers  the  development  of  appropriate  technical  measures 
under the Regulation as being key to achieve this.   

In this report, sensitive species include those protected under EU legislation and international 
agreements  binding  on  the  EU  such  as  dolphins,  porpoises,  seabirds,  sharks  and  some  fish 
and  turtle  species  that  are  under  immediate  threat  of  extinction.  Many  large-bodied,  slow-
growing  fish  and  other  animals  are  now  extinct  in  large  parts  of  their  previous  range,  and 
others are critically endangered15. Fishing can be a major threat to these species, and in some 

14 European Court of Auditors (2020). Marine environment: EU protection is wide but not deep. Special report. 
15 For example, Mediterranean monk seal, Baltic proper harbour porpoise, Balearic shearwater, porbeagle, 
Angel shark, manta and mobula rays, large skate and butterfly ray. 

4 

 
 
                                                           
cases, technical measures can help mitigate this threat. There is large evidence of incidental 
catches  of  the  following  species.  For  example,  seabirds  can  be  caught  and  drowned  in 
longlining  operations  or  in  coastal  gillnets.  Harbour  porpoises  and  dolphins  can  also  be 
caught in gillnets and also in (pelagic) trawl gear.  Turtles are caught in gillnets and they can 
be  hooked  on  surface  longlines,  deep-sea  sharks  are  caught  in  longlines  and  gillnets,  large 
pelagic sharks are caught in longline fishery for tunas. Juvenile large sharks, rays and skates 
are caught in bottom trawl gear due to their large body size.  

Some  obvious  cases  that  are  at  risk  of  extinction  are  known,  but  general  knowledge  on 
incidental catches of sensitive species is not sufficient to estimate the impacts of such catches 
accurately.  STECF16  identified  coastal  static  nets  (gillnets  and  trammel  nets)  as  having  the 
largest and most widespread impact on sensitive species, reviewed methods to reduce these 
incidental catches and identified an array of possible measures such as seasonal closures, use 
of  acoustic  deterrent  devices  and  bird-scaring  lines.  The  Regulation  continues  to  ban  drift 
nets  and  restricts  the  use  of  other  types  of  gear  with  known  negative  impact  on  the 
environment,  and  builds  on  the  measures  formerly  provided  in  the  repealed  Cetaceans 
Regulation17,  including  the  monitoring  obligations  that  were  intended  to  complement  the 
more  comprehensive  data  collection  under  the  past  data  collection  framework18  (where  by-
catch  data  are  part  of  a  much  larger  comprehensive  data  collection  exercise).  This  targeted 
cetacean  monitoring  has  proven  difficult  and 
its 
effectiveness19. The amount of by-catches remains largely unknown.  

there  are  clear  concerns  about 

The  Regulation  also  provides  the  framework  to  implement  the  action  plan  for  reducing 
incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gear20 and provides possibilities for Member States to 
adopt measures for their waters or in regional context, as a means to effectively contribute to 
the Regulation’s objective and targets. 

The  Commission  adopted  on  3 July 2020  an  implementing  regulation  on  acoustic  deterrent 
devices21.  Two  Member  State  regional  groups  are  working  on  measures  to  protect  the 
critically endangered Baltic Proper harbour porpoise and the common dolphin in the Bay of 
Biscay  based  on  the  advice  by  ICES  in  May  202022.  Some  Member  States  have  used  the 
possibility  under  the  Regulation  to  establish  national  measures,  for  example  increased 
monitoring or moving on provisions. 

16 STECF 20-02, https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/web/stecf/ewg2002, page 151 et seq. 
17 Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004 of 26.4.2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches of 
cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98 (OJ L 150, 30.4.2004, p. 12). 
18 https://datacollection.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ 
19 ICES. (2020). Bycatch of protected and potentially vulnerable marine vertebrates – review of national reports 
under Council Regulation (EC) No. 812/2004 and other information. In Report of the ICES Advisory 
Committee, 2020. ICES Advice 2020, byc.eu, https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.7474 
20 COM(2012) 0665 final. 
21 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/967 of 3 July 2020 laying down the detailed rules on the 
signal and implementation characteristics of acoustic deterrent devices as referred to in Part A of Annex XIII of 
Regulation  (EU)  2019/1241  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  conservation  of  fisheries 
resources and the protection of marine ecosystems through technical measures (OJ L 213, 6.7.2020, p. 4). 
22 https://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2020/Special_Requests/eu.2020.04.pdf 

5 

 
 
                                                           
Stakeholders23 identified shortcomings in the mitigation measures laid down in Article 11(4) 
of  the  Regulation  and  in  the  list  of  prohibited  species  set  out  in  Annex  I.    Stakeholders 
expressed  more  concerns  over  the  lack  of  action  and  development  of  further  measures 
including  absence  of  electronic  monitoring24,  rather  than  on  the  content  of  currently 
applicable provisions of the Regulation.  Member States did not express major concerns over 
the legal provisions.  A number of Member States recognised the need for further monitoring 
to inform the preparation of measures.  

To  support  Member  States’  in  implementing  the  Regulation,  the  Commission,  in  its  action 
plan  will  identify  actions  to  increase  selectivity  and  reduce  by-catch  of  sensitive  species, 
focusing on those threatened with extinction and in unfavourable conservation status.  

Fishing  can  have  an  impact  on  ecosystems  and  habitats  beyond  the  extraction  of  fished 
species and sensitive species. The extent of this impact varies with the fishing intensity, the 
habitats where the fishing takes place, and the target species in question. The CFP seeks to 
reduce such impacts as much as possible. Impacts also vary by gear type: bottom trawling can 
affect sea-floor sediments,  their  vertical  porosity  and  geochemical  content, reducing  habitat 
complexity and changing species composition. Longlining (notably in outermost regions) can 
snag and fracture corals.   

Article 12 of the Regulation also aims to protect sensitive habitats by specifying areas where 
certain fishing gears are banned. This can be amended through regionalisation in accordance 
with the procedure laid down in Article 11(2) and (3) of CFP Regulation. Member States may 
also  establish  closed  areas  or  other  conservation  measures  through  national  measures,  or 
regionalisation in accordance with Article 15(2) of the Regulation. 

Certain bans on fishing gear are already in place to protect sensitive habitats, such as the use 
of  explosives,  percussive  instruments,  coral-harvesting  dredges  and  grabs,  trawl  gear  used 
deeper  than  800 m25.  Further  rules  exist  under  the  Mediterranean  Regulation26,  which  bans 
fishing  with  mobile  gear  above  seagrass  beds,  coralligenous  habitats  and  maerl  beds.  In 
addition, the use of sponge dredges, towed gears and purse seines is banned in coastal zones 
(specific conditions and derogations may apply). Restrictions also apply to the gear that may 
be  used  in  Mediterranean  recreational  fisheries,  where  the  use  of  towed  nets,  surrounding 
nets, seine nets, dredges, and static nets are banned.  

Scientific work is in progress to map the distribution of different seabed habitat types and the 
impacts  of  fishing  activities  on  or  above  them.  This  will  enable  an  assessment  of  the  areas 
where  biodiversity  is  at  greatest  risk  and  where  protective  measures  are  most  needed  to  be 

23 Based on the replies received to the online consultation. See Annex I of the accompanying SWD.  
24 E.g.  Closed circuit television (‘CCTV’), Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)  
25 Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/2336 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 
2016 establishing specific conditions for fishing for deep-sea stocks in the north-east Atlantic and provisions for 
fishing in international waters of the north-east Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 
(OJ L 354, 23.12.2016, p. 1–19). 
26 Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006of 21 December 2006 concerning management measures for the 
sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean Sea, amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 
and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 (OJ L 409, 30.12.2006, p. 11). 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
carried  out.    STECF27  has  highlighted  alternative  fishing  gear  with  the  potential  to  reduce 
impacts on the seabed: electric pulse-trawl, semi-pelagic trawl doors, benthos release panels, 
raised-footrope trawls, soft brush ground gear and electric dredges for razor clams. 

The  consultation  provided  information  on  actions  already  taken  or  being  developed  by 
Member  States  and  work  ongoing  in  the  regional  groups  to  develop  habitat  protection 
measures,  complementing  the  measures  being  taken  by  Member  States  individually  to 
comply with their obligations under EU environmental legislation.  

In line with the commitment in the EU Biodiversity strategy for 2030, the Commission, in its 
action  plan,  will  identify  measures  to  limit  the  use  of  fishing  gear  most  harmful  to 
biodiversity,  including  on  the  seabed  and  explore  ways  to  improve  the  implementation  of 
fisheries management measures in particular in Natura 2000 sites and other marine protected 
areas.  

5.  Scientific research, innovation and pilot projects 

The  Regulation  facilitates  scientific  research  and  the  fisheries’  sectors  participation  in 
scientific  activities.  Member  States  can  be  granted  derogations  for  fishing  operations 
scientific research when the necessary conditions provided for by Article 25(1), points (a) to 
(f) of the Regulation are met.  Since the entry into force of the Regulation, 17 Member States 
informed  the  Commission  of  67  fishing  operations  conducted  for  scientific  investigations. 
Two  applications  were  received  for  scientific  research  involving  more  than  six  commercial 
vessels  and  therefore  subject  to  specific  scrutiny.  The  Commission,  upon  advice  by  the 
STECF28, concluded that in both cases the level of participation was not justified on scientific 
grounds  requiring  the  Member  States  to  amend  the  conditions  of  the  scientific  research 
accordingly. 

Article  20  of  the  Regulation  also  includes  the  possibility  for  Member  States,  through 
regionalisation,  to  allow  the  use  of  innovative  fishing  gear.  To  help  in  this  process,  ICES 
produced  an  assessment  of  innovative  gear.  While  preliminary  conclusions  could  be 
presented on this basis29, both  ICES and STECF underlined the need to further develop the 
assessment,  in  particular  to  better  take  account  of  socioeconomic  factors  that  play  an 
important role when it comes to the uptake of the innovative gear by the fisheries’ sector.  

While  Article  23  of  the  Regulation  provides  for  the  possibility  to  define  pilot  projects  to 
develop  a  system  of  full  documentation  of  catches  and  discards  based  on  measurable 
objectives, none of the regional groups have put forward joint recommendations to this end.  

27 See page 189 of STECF – Review of technical measures (part 1) (STECF-20-02). EUR 28359 EN, 
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-27161-1, doi:10.2760/734593, 
JRC123092. 
28 Croatia request for scientific fishing authorisation of more than 6 volantina vessels in Western Istria waters 
(2019), STECF 20-03, and Italy request for scientific fishing authorization of more than 6 vessels beach seines 
in  Italy  territorial  waters  targeting  (Italy  request  of  scientific  research  on  “SARDELLA”  (S.  pilchardus)  in 
Liguria (GSA 9), STECF 20-02 
29 https://www.ices.dk/news-and-events/news-archive/news/Pages/InnovativeFishingGear.aspx 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The  Regulation  also  requires  in  Annex  XIII  point  2  that  Member  States  take  the  necessary 
steps  to  collect  scientific  data  on  incidental  catches  of  sensitive  species  which  is  not  yet 
sufficiently done. 

Bearing in  mind that innovative techniques  can  contribute to  the European Green Deal  and 
the  EU  Biodiversity  strategy  for  2030  objectives,  the  Commission,  in  its  action  plan,  will 
identify  ways  to  encourage  stakeholders  and  Member  States  to  explore  possibilities  to 
maximum extent possible and make use of all opportunities available. 

6.  Implementation of the Regulation  

Although it is too early to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the implementation of the 
Regulation, evidence shows that some concerns arose due to the new regionalised set-up and 
the  absence  of  detailed  definitions.  Work  is  ongoing  to  guide  Member  States  in  their 
implementation and further specification through the regionalised approach and through the 
future implementing regulation.   

Apart  from  the  national  implementation,  the  main  method  for  implementation  is  the 
development  of  joint  recommendations  by  regional  groups  with  the  advice  of  stakeholders 
setting out the necessary regional technical measures. In accordance with Article 15(2) of the 
Regulation, the measures proposed in such joint recommendations, when compatible with the 
relevant  objectives  and  obligations,  may  be  adopted  by  the  Commission  by  means  of 
delegated acts.  

The work carried out so far gives an impression of the process and demonstrates that Member 
States are indeed working together to complement and adapt measures to their regional needs. 
And that they usually manage to  agree on measures relatively swiftly where such measures 
are  aimed  to  refine  rules  in  line  with  previously  applicable  regulations.  Member  States’ 
cooperation  in  regionalisation  also  seems  to  be  effective  when  it  concerns  joint 
recommendations aiming to provide for derogations from the landing obligation as provided 
for under Article 15 of the CFP Regulation and regional specific multiannual plans. However, 
there are concerns in terms of the level of speed and ambition when it comes to developing 
and  agreeing  joint  recommendations  on  measures  aimed  at  improving  selectivity  or 
restricting  fisheries  with  a  view  to  contributing  to  EU  environmental  legislation.  The 
Regulation indeed requires Member States30  to submit joint recommendations for additional 
mitigation measures as a result of scientific evidence of negative impacts of fishing gears on 
sensitive  species.  For  example,  to  date,  only  two  joint  recommendations  have  been  put 
forward  by  Member  States  for  additional  mitigation  measures  as  a  result  of  scientific 
evidence  of  negative  impacts  of  fishing  gears  on  sensitive  species  as  required  by  the 
Regulation    

As highlighted in the recent Commission Communication ‘Towards more sustainable fishing 
in  the  EU:  state  of  play  and  orientations  for  2022’31,  the  COVID-19  pandemic  has  had  an 
effect on the timing and preparation of some of the joint  recommendations. Since the entry 

30 Annex XIII, point 3. 
31  COMMUNICATION  FROM  THE  COMMISSION  TO  THE  EUROPEAN  PARLIAMENT  AND  THE 
COUNCIL Towards more sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2022. COM/2021/279 
final. 

8 

 
 
 
                                                           
into  force  of  the  Regulation,  17  joint  recommendations32  have  been  proposed  by  Member 
States’  regional  groups  of  which  6  have  been  implemented  into  legislation  by  way  of  a 
Commission  delegated  act.  Others  are  pending  adoption,  under  assessment  by  STECF,  or 
being reconsidered for improvement in view of the scientific advice obtained. In terms of the 
regional specificity, the joint recommendations put forward a wide variety of measures, needs 
and approaches. Some aim to include technical measures in new discard plans, others include 
technical measures only.   

Article  7  of  the  Regulation  bans  activities  with  especially  damaging  effects  on  the 
environment  including,  as  from  1 July 2021,  fishing  with  electric  pulse  gear.  ICES,  at  the 
request of the Netherlands, advised in May 2020 that there were several positive effects for 
the ecosystem and environment from using this gear, although some uncertainties remain33. 
The Netherlands brought an action before the European Court of Justice for the annulment of 
the provisions of the Regulation prohibiting electric pulse fishing. This request was dismissed 
by  the  Court  on  15 April 202134.  The  Regulation  allows  for  and  encourages  scientific 
investigations as a possible means to develop knowledge and to inform future assessments. 

7.  Conclusion 

The  Regulation  provides  the  framework  needed  to  implement  the  CFP  and  effectively 
contribute  to  EU  environmental  legislation,  through  direct  application  but  mostly  by 
providing Member States with the tools needed to adopt fisheries measures.  

There are however shortcomings in the implementation of the Regulation for what concerns 
its contribution to the protection of sensitive species and sensitive habitats, with some species 
close  to  extinction.  Efforts  to  monitor  effects  of  fishing  on  ecosystems  need  substantial 
improvements.  The  Regulation  provides  the  legislative  instruments  for  Member  States  to 
address  these  issues  and  complement  their  implementation  of  EU  environmental  legislation 
with fisheries measures adopted under regionalisation and it is now incumbent on them to do 
so. Although Member States have begun to put forward joint recommendations, more needs 
to be done. Stakeholders should also be encouraged to participate in this process.  

The variety of joint recommendations already put forward demonstrates that regionalisation 
is  effective  and  most  suitable  to  provide  targeted  and  tailor-made  technical  measures. 
Member  States  have  demonstrated  that  the  regional  cooperation  can  be  swift  and  efficient. 
However, improvements need to be made in terms of the level of speed and ambition when it 
comes  to  developing  and  agreeing  joint  recommendations  on  measures  aimed  at  improving 
selectivity or restricting fisheries with a view to contributing to EU environmental legislation,   
and the Commission will continue to provide all the necessary support and guidance to ensure 
that environmental objectives are appropriately addressed in joint recommendations.    

32 Final figure to be updated before the adoption.  
33 ICES, 2020. https://www.ices.dk/news-and-events/news-archive/news/Pages/PulseTrawlAdvice.aspx 
34 Judgment of 15 April 2021, The Netherlands v Council and Parliament, C-733/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:272 

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Bearing  in  mind  the  European  Green  Deal  and  the  EU  Biodiversity  strategy  for  2030,  the 
Commission  will  complement  the  current  report  as  part  of  the  action  plan  to  conserve 
fisheries resources  and protect marine ecosystems to further improve the implementation of 
the Regulation and fully exploit the links between fisheries and environmental policies.  

10