REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products
Date: 2023-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, aquaculture, common fisheries policy, common organisation of markets, competition policy, competitiveness, consumer information, fishery product, marketing standard, producer organisation

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 21.2.2023  COM(2023) 101 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products                
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1 

2 

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 

IMPLEMENTATION  OF  THE  CMO  REGULATION  AND  CONTRIBUTION 
TO ACHIEVING THE CFP GOALS ......................................................................... 3 

2.1  Professional organisations ................................................................................. 3 

2.1.1  Contribution to achieving CFP objectives ........................................... 3 

2.1.2  Rules  on  setting  up  POs,  APOs,  IBOs  and 

transnational 

professional organisations (TPOs), objectives and measures ............. 4 

2.1.3  Recognition of POs/IBOs/TPOs .......................................................... 5 

2.1.4 

Extension of rules ................................................................................ 7 

2.1.5 

Production and marketing plans .......................................................... 7 

2.1.6 

Stabilisation of the markets ................................................................. 9 

2.2  Marketing standards .......................................................................................... 9 

Contribution to achieving CFP objectives, and setting and complying with 

marketing standards ............................................................................. 9 

2.3  Consumer information ..................................................................................... 10 

2.3.1  Contribution to achieving CFP objectives ......................................... 10 

2.3.2  Mandatory information ...................................................................... 12 

2.3.3 

Ecolabelling reporting ....................................................................... 13 

2.3.4  Additional voluntary information ...................................................... 13 

2.4  Competition rules ............................................................................................ 14 

Contribution to achieving CFP objectives and exclusions from competition 

rules ................................................................................................... 14 

2.5  Market intelligence .......................................................................................... 15 

3  CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................... 16 

ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................ 18 

Annex 1 – Legal bases .............................................................................................. 18 

Annex 2 – Public consultation .................................................................................. 20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 

INTRODUCTION  

The common organisation of the markets (CMO) in fishery and aquaculture products (FAPs) 
exists since 1970. It is the oldest pillar of the common fisheries policy (CFP), of which it is an 
integral part alongside conservation and financial measures.  

The  CMO  is  subject  to  Regulation  (EU)  No  1379/2013  on  the  common  organisation  of  the 
markets  in  fishery  and  aquaculture  products1  (the  ‘CMO  Regulation’)  and  Regulation  (EU) 
No  1380/2013  on  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy2  (the  ‘CFP  Regulation’),  in  particular  its 
Article 35. 

The CMO was reformed together with the CFP in 2013 and seeks to achieve the objectives of 
the CFP. The reform implied a series of fundamental changes for the Members States and the 
fishery  and  aquaculture  sector,  in  particular  the  strengthening  of  the  role  of  producer 
organisations (POs) by empowering operators and a new intervention logic, putting an end to 
past intervention mechanisms under which public money supported the permanent withdrawal 
of fishery products from human consumption or their destruction.  

The CMO comprises five action areas: 

  professional  organisations:  POs, 

their  associations  (APOs)  and 

inter-branch 

organisations (IBOs); 

  common  marketing  standards:  these  lay  down  uniform  characteristics  for  fishery 
products sold in the EU, whatever their origin, and help ensure a transparent internal 
market that supplies high-quality products; 

  consumer  information:  mandatory  information  supplementing  general  food  labelling 
subject  to  Regulation  (EU)  No  1169/2011  on  the  provision  of  food  information  to 
consumers3  and  a  framing  of  voluntary  information,  to  drive  consumers  towards 
sustainable consumption habits; 

  competition  rules:  exclusions  from  their  application  are  permitted  under  certain 

conditions; and 

1   Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the 
common  organisation  of  the  markets  in  fishery  and  aquaculture  products,  amending  Council  Regulations 
(EC)  No  1184/2006  and  (EC)  No  1224/2009  and  repealing  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  104/2000  (OJ  L 
354, 28.12.2013, p. 1). 

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). 

3  Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the 
provision  of  food  information  to  consumers,  amending  Regulations  (EC)  No  1924/2006  and  (EC)  No 
1925/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  and  repealing  Commission  Directive 
87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of 
the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  Commission  Directives  2002/67/EC  and  2008/5/EC  and 
Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18). 

1 

 
 
 
                                                 
  market intelligence: gathering, processing and disseminating economic information on 

FAP markets to support stakeholders’ strategies and policymaking. 

The European  Maritime  and Fisheries  Fund4 (EMFF) and the European  Maritime, Fisheries 
and  Aquaculture  Fund5  (EMFAF)  support  the  implementation  of  the  EU  market  policy  for 
FAPs. 

The CMO Regulation has been amended6 three times: 

 

firstly  in  2013  to  temporarily  exempt  products  offered  for  retail  sale  to  the  final 
consumer  in  Mayotte  from  certain  labelling  obligations,  as  a  result  of  Mayotte 
becoming an outermost region from 20147; 

  secondly  in 2015  to  align  minimum  conservation  reference  sizes  with  minimum 

marketing sizes8; and 

  most  recently9  in  2020  to  incorporate  crisis  measures  to  respond  to  the  market 
disruptions  that  resulted  from  the  COVID-19  crisis;  these  measures  served  the  same 
purposes after the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine broke out. 

This report describes the implementation and results of the CMO Regulation, in accordance 
with Article 48 of that Regulation. The report follows the structure of the CMO Regulation. 
For each section, it covers the following: 

  stocktaking  of  the  implementation  of  CMO  provisions  and  their  contribution  to 

achieving the CFP objectives; 

  main achievements, in particular those resulting from the reform; 

  challenges and shortcomings in the implementation of the Regulation; and 

4   Regulation  (EU)  No  508/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  May  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, 20.5.2014, p. 1). 

5   Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the 
European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 (OJ L 247, 
13.7.2021, p. 1). 

6 

See Annex 1. 

7  Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  1385/2013  of  17  December  2013  amending  Council  Regulations  (EC)  No 
850/98  and  (EC)  No  1224/2009,  and  Regulations  (EC)  No  1069/2009,  (EU)  No  1379/2013  and  (EU)  No 
1380/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  following  the  amendment  of  the  status  of 
Mayotte with regard to the European Union (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 86). 

8  Regulation  (EU)  2015/812  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  May  2015  amending 
Council Regulations (EC) No 850/98, (EC) No 2187/2005, (EC) No 1967/2006, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) 
No 254/2002, (EC) No 2347/2002 and (EC) No 1224/2009, and Regulations (EU) No 1379/2013 and (EU) 
No  1380/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council,  as  regards  the  landing  obligation,  and 
repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 (OJ L 133, 29.5.2015, p. 1). 

9  Regulation  (EU)  2020/560  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  23  April  2020  amending 
Regulations (EU) No 508/2014 and (EU) No 1379/2013 as regards specific measures to mitigate the impact 
of the COVID‐19 outbreak in the fishery and aquaculture sector (OJ L 130, 24.4.2020, p. 11). 

2 

 
 
                                                 
  areas  of  improvements  under  the  current  legal  framework,  or  outside,  where  other 
(more recent) instruments can more effectively or complementarily address the CMO 
objectives such as the EU Green Deal or the Farm to Fork strategy. 

2 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CMO REGULATION AND CONTRIBUTION TO ACHIEVING THE 
CFP GOALS 

2.1  Professional organisations10 

2.1.1  Contribution to achieving CFP objectives  

As  a  consequence  of  their  formal  recognition,  POs  have  obligations  with  regard  to 
implementing  the  CFP  objectives.  The  corollary  of  these  obligations  is  privileged  access  to 
financial support  and the ability to  benefit from the exclusion  from  competition rules under 
the  conditions  of  the  CMO  Regulation.  This  does  not  concern  the  various  other  types  of 
collective bodies of producers11 in the EU, at local, national or transnational levels. 

Figure 1 – Number of POs per Member State 

Therefore,  POs  form  the  backbone  of  the  fishery  and,  to  a  lesser  extent  (although 
increasingly), the aquaculture sector. POs support the day-to-day management of the CFP and 
enable its collective implementation at producer level. This is achieved by requiring each PO 
to  draw  up  and  implement  production  and  marketing  plans  (PMPs).  In  particular,  the  CMO 
Regulation provides that these plans aim to help achieve the objectives assigned to the CMO 
by  Article  35  of  the  CFP  Regulation,  and  all  objectives  assigned  to  POs  by  the  CMO 
Regulation  (Article  7  of  the  CMO  Regulation).  On  this  ground,  POs  are  empowered  to 
collectively manage their members’ activities under the strict condition that they comply with 
conservation  obligations.  They  contribute  to  food  security  by  ensuring  the  availability  and 
sustainability  of  a  wide  range  of  seafood.  By  doing  so,  POs  both  carry  out  a  public  service 
mission and optimise their members’ market opportunities.  

10  On November 2022, there  were 204 POs (163 in fisheries  and 41 in aquaculture) in 18 Member  States,  9 

APOs (in fisheries) in 7 Member States and 7 IBOs in 6 Member States.  

11  E.g. prudhommies (France), cofradías (Spain). 

3 

 
 
 
                                                 
This key role of POs to help achieve the objectives of the CFP pushed the European 
Commission to work on promoting the set-up, consolidation and financing of POs across the 
EU, particularly in Member States where primary production remained largely scattered 
(aquaculture, small-scale fisheries). A strong presence of POs is a decisive factor in the 
survival and prosperity of coastal communities and in strengthening the weight of primary 
producers in relation to the processing industry or retailers. Drawing up EMF(A)F national 
programmes was a crucial task in this regard. 

2.1.2  Rules  on  setting  up  POs,  APOs,  IBOs  and  transnational  professional  organisations 

(TPOs), objectives and measures 

EU stakeholders reported12 that the tools made available to POs under the CMO Regulation, 
and especially the PMPs, are well adapted to help them pursue their objectives, in particular to 
better  organise  the  structuring  of  fish  supplies,  in  order  to  improve  fishers’  and  farmers’ 
incomes,  and  implement  the  CFP  on  the  ground.  However,  producers  highlighted  a  lack  of 
consistency in the level of support, in particular financial support, among national authorities. 
This  creates  significant  gaps  in  the  development  and  functioning  of  POs  across  Member 
States, and challenges to ensuring a level playing field. 

To  reduce  these  imbalances,  the  Commission  made  continuous  information  and  awareness-
raising efforts in order to accompany all those involved in implementing this innovative tool 
(i.e. the PMPs). These efforts started with a detailed assessment of and recommendations on 
the  national  EMFF  programmes.  Afterwards,  the  Commission  remained  permanently 
available  to  clarify  concepts,  remove  uncertainties,  and  facilitate  sharing  of  good  practices. 
Nevertheless,  it  must be acknowledged that the  preparation, implementation  and monitoring 
process is taking place between national authorities and their POs, because in the end they are 
to  decide  on  the  content  and  level  of  support  to  the  preparation  and  implementation  of  the 
PMPs,  which  they  are  best  placed  to  do.  Naturally,  this  results  in  a  certain  degree  of 
unevenness across countries. 

For  some  categories  of  producers  (in  particular  farmers  and  small-scale  coastal  fishers),  the 
functioning of POs remains a challenge. Aquaculture producers acknowledge that the revision 
of  the  CMO  Regulation  has  helped  provide  a  more  appropriate  legal  framework  for 
aquaculture POs. Promotion and communication measures led by aquaculture POs have been 
particularly successful. However, there is still a limited number of aquaculture POs in the EU, 
so  they  are  not  fully  succeeding  in  grouping  supply,  which  could  help  them  face  the  high 
structural concentration of retail. Promoting the benefits of setting up POs among aquaculture 
producers is one of the actions under the EU strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and 
competitive EU aquaculture for 2021-203013, published in 2021.  

Reports  of  the  European  Parliament  also  called  for  a  better  structuring  of  the  small-scale 
fishing14 and aquaculture15 sectors, and for developing IBOs. 

12  Market Advisory Council advice on the functioning of the CMO, March 2022. 

13  SWD(2021)  102  final  of  12  May  2021,  Commission  staff  working  document,  Strategic  guidelines  for  a 

more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture for the period 2021 to 2030. 

14   Report on the optimisation of the value chain in the EU fishing sector (2017/2119(INI)) (rapporteur: Clara 

Eugenia Aguilera García, S&D/Spain). 

4 

 
 
 
                                                 
Small-scale  coastal  fishery  producers  report  that  they  do  not  always  receive  appropriate 
administrative  and/or  financial  support  to  set  up  and  operate  POs.  They  also  report  that 
Member  States  do  not  take  sufficient  account  of  their  specificities  laying  down  criteria  for 
recognition (e.g. sufficient economic activity in the area16). Within the limits of its role in this 
process,  the  Commission  mainly  works  to  facilitate  dialogue  and  understanding  among 
parties, in particular to  clarify concepts  and regulatory aspects. This  approach appears to be 
effective and helps facilitate the recognition process of POs of small-scale coastal fishers17. A 
further constraint is  that lower profit margins  and limited  administrative resources  of small-
scale coastal fishers weaken the financial viability of their POs and their capacity to deal with 
legal and administrative requirements linked to setting up or of running a PO. The possibility 
for small-scale fishery producers to join an existing PO, resulting in a  mixed PO (consisting 
of  small-scale  and  medium  to  large  fishers)  is  not  the  solution  either  as  it  does  not  always 
address the specific needs of small-scale coastal fishery producers. 

There  is  limited  experience  with  IBOs,  which  bring  together  representatives  from  along  the 
supply  chain  (production,  processing  and  retail),  as  they  barely  exist  in  the  sector.  In 
particular  during  the  COVID-19  crisis,  well-functioning  IBOs  have  proven  to  be  a  valuable 
instrument  to  strengthen  the  proper  functioning  of  the  value  chain  and  collectively  mitigate 
the impact on the different steps.  

The  possibility  to  recognise  TPOs  is  considered  relevant  by  both  the  sector  and  national 
authorities. However, only four POs have been formally recognised as transnational. A pilot 
project18  carried  out  in  2020  highlighted  that  in  practice,  a  lack  of  specific  legal  provisions 
causes  some  difficulties  for  both  the  recognition  and  the  functioning  of  these  organisations. 
The  funding  of  these  transnational  organisations  is  a  key  issue  since  no  formal  mechanism 
exists to share or organise the financial support of a transnational organisation between two or 
more  Member  States.  The  Commission  provided  guidance  to  Member  States19  to  clarify 
existing possibilities and organise cooperation for funding such organisations.  

2.1.3  Recognition of POs/IBOs/TPOs 

After the entry into force of the reformed CMO, the Commission provided guidance20 on the 
recognition procedure to assist both Member States and the sector in this process. In parallel, 
and to ensure compliance with CMO rules, the Commission requested all Member States to 
carry  out  checks  on  their  recognised  organisations,  and  tried  to  harmonise  the  frequency  of 
these checks across Member States.  

15   Report  Towards  a  sustainable  and  competitive  European  aquaculture  sector:  current  status  and  future 

challenges (2017/2118(INI)) (rapporteur: Carlos Iturgaiz, EPP/Spain). 

16  Article 14(1)(b) of the CMO Regulation. 

17  For example, the recognition of the PO Irish Islands Marine Resource Organisation (Ireland) in 2021 and the 

recognition of the PO Organisation de producteurs du Levant (France) in 2019.  

18  EU platform for fishery and aquaculture producer organisations. 

19  Letter  to  the  Expert  Group  for  Markets  and  Trade  in  Fishery  and  Aquaculture  Products  on  transnational 

organisations, January 2021. 

20  SWD(2016)  113  final  of  1  April  2016,  Commission  staff  working  document,  Guidance  document  on  the 
implementation of Chapter II "Professional Organisations" of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 establishing a 
common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products. 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                         
 
a.  Horizontal checks of compliance and issues identified 

Article 18 of the CMO Regulation requires Member States to verify at regular intervals that 
POs and IBOs comply with the rules for their recognition. Article 20 of the CMO Regulation 
allows the Commission to carry out checks. Accordingly, in 2016, the Commission asked all 
Member States concerned whether checks had been carried out to ascertain  POs’ and IBOs’ 
compliance with  CMO  rules, and what  the outcome of  these checks was.  In parallel  or as a 
result of these checks, 3 EU Pilot procedures and an infringement procedure were opened by 
the Commission to address identified issues of non-compliance. In one case, the Commission 
itself carried out on-the-spot checks on the recognition of POs.  

In some cases, the combination of checks carried out by the Commission and those carried out 
by Member States has resulted in the withdrawal of PO recognition, for example as it turned 
out  that  certain  POs  were  not  sufficiently  economically  active,  as  required  in  the  CMO 
Regulation.  There  have  also  been  cases  where  national  authorities  required  certain  POs  to 
change  their  statutes,  rules  or  ownership  structure  to  comply  with  the  CMO  Regulation.  In 
addition, some Member States published national guidance in particular on criteria for POs’ 
recognition or on the monitoring of recognised POs. 

The main issues identified as deficiencies in national checks on POs are set out below.  

  Compliance with the condition of plurality of members: some Member States did not 
verify in detail the ownership structure of POs and in particular the ultimate owners of 
their members. Some Member States considered that it is not necessary to check if this 
plurality  is  genuine  and  that  formal  plurality  of  members  of  the  POs  is  sufficient. 
However,  where  only  one  natural  or  legal  person  ultimately  owns  the  totality  of  the 
companies  and  vessels  operating  in  the  PO,  the  functioning  of  the  CMO  system  is 
compromised  and  the  requirements  of  Article  14(1)  read  together  with  Article  17  of 
the  CMO  Regulation  cannot  be  met.  Therefore,  national  authorities  should  carry  out 
checks to verify not only the identity of the different legal or natural persons that are 
PO  members,  but  also  of  their  ultimate  owners  or  of  the  natural  and  legal  persons 
holding the shares of the PO members. 

  Lack  of  appropriate  evidence  on  verification  of  POs’  democratic  functioning  as 
required by Article 17(d) of the CMO Regulation. The national competent authorities 
must verify whether the governance structure in  place  enables members to scrutinise 
POs’ organisation and decisions. 

 

Insufficient  checks  on  rules  on  admission  of  new  members  or  withdrawal  of 
membership as required by Article 17(f) of the CMO Regulation. 

  Absence  of  up-to-date  criteria  for  assessing  whether  an  organisation  is  sufficiently 
economically  active  in  a  given  area  (requirements  of  Article  14(1)(b)  of  the  CMO 
Regulation). 

 

In some Member States, the planned frequency of checks was insufficient.  

The Commission intends to repeat its checks to verify that Member States are fulfilling their 
obligations to carry out checks of their POs.  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
b.  Difficulties with the formal recognition of TPOs 

As regards the specific case of TPOs – in particular POs – the pilot project carried out in 2020 
highlighted a series of challenges and shortcomings generating uncertainties on: 

 
the definition of ‘transnational’, which is not provided in the CMO Regulation; and 
  how certain requirements for the recognition of POs must be applied to transnational 

organisations (e.g. criteria on sufficient economic activity). 

The  Commission  provided  clarification  to  the  Member  States  and  explained  that  Member 
States  may  decide  to  adopt  specific  rules  or  definitions  and  practical  arrangements  for 
transnational organisations if these do not conflict with the CMO Regulation or EU legislation 
in general. 

2.1.4  Extension of rules 

Section III of the CMO Regulation provides for the possibility to extend certain rules of a PO 
to cover producers operating in the area of activity of the relevant PO who are not members of 
this  PO.  This  has  rarely  been  used  since  2013:  the  Commission  authorised  only  two 
extensions of rules. The main obstacle seems to be the period of application of the extension, 
ranging from 60 days to 12 months, which is not well adapted to the volatility of the market. 
A more flexible tool with the possibility to extend the rule for a shorter period of time would 
be more effective. However, this need for more flexibility conflicts with the time constraints 
as  national  administrations  and  the  Commission  must  examine  requests  against  the 
requirements  imposed  by  the  CMO  Regulation.  Therefore,  while  the  extension  of  rules  is 
potentially a powerful tool benefiting the whole producing sector, its use is limited due to its 
intrinsic complexity.  

To  make  the  extension  of  rules  easier  to  implement,  the  Commission  has  published 
guidelines21.  In  the  future,  it  could  be  useful  to  provide  more  detailed  guidance  on  some 
to  demonstrate  POs’ 
in  particular 
specific  aspects  of 
representativeness in a given geographical area. To ensure compliance with the 1-month time 
limit  to  authorise  or  refuse  a  demand  for  extension  of  rules,  the  Commission  has  also 
empowered  the  Commissioner  for  Maritime  Affairs  and  Fisheries  to  adopt  decisions 
authorising or refusing extension of rules on the Commission’s behalf. 

the  procedure, 

the  criteria 

2.1.5  Production and marketing plans 

With the entry into force of the revised  CMO Regulation, the context in which POs operate 
changed:  intervention  mechanisms  were  abolished  (except  for  storage  aid,  see  below),  and 
support shifted to a market-driven instrument, the PMPs.  

PMPs are required for all POs. They are essential tools of the revised CMO to foster support 
to  fishers  and  fish  farmers  to  implement  the  sustainable  and  the  collective  management  of 
their  activities,  and  in  channelling  their  production  more  efficiently,  to  meet  market 

21  SWD(2016)  113  final  of  1  April  2016,  Commission  staff  working  document,  Guidance  document  on  the 
implementation of Chapter II "Professional Organisations" of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 establishing a 
common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products. 

7 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
requirements (in  quantity  and quality) and to  take advantage of market  opportunities.  When 
implementing  their  PMPs,  POs  may  deploy  a  wide  range  of  measures  to  achieve  the 
objectives  of  the  CMO  and  of  the  CFP,  including  the  management  of  fishing  opportunities 
(quotas). 

POs and Member States generally recognise PMPs as innovative, effective and flexible tools. 
In the first couple of years of implementation after the entry into force of the reformed CMO, 
some  difficulties  arose  with  regard  to  financing  and  content  of  the  plans22.  Because  the 
adoption  of  the  EMFF  was  delayed  by  several  months,  numerous  POs  did  not  have  a  clear 
vision  of  the  financial  support  they  could  expect,  which  delayed  the  first  PMPs  or  reduced 
their level of ambition.  

interactions  with  national  administrations,  POs  and 

The  nature  of  deployable  measures  deployable  and  in  particular  their  eligibility  for  public 
financial support was also an element of uncertainty for national administrations and POs. Not 
only because this tool was a novelty, but also because it introduced a different logic regarding 
eligibility  of  deployable  measures:  their  eligibility  depends  on  their  destination  and  not  on 
their  nature,  so  any  expenditure  is  potentially  eligible  as  long  as  it  helps  achieve  the  POs’ 
objectives.  Frequent 
sector 
representatives23 made it possible to progressively improve the whole process, which is now 
considered  satisfactory  and  bearing  fruit.  Under  Article  66  of  the  EMFF  Regulation24, 
financial support to PMPs was mandatory. Although this obligation has not been carried over 
into  the  EMFAF  Regulation25,  all  Member  States  concerned  expressed  their  willingness  to 
continue  or  strengthen  the  financial  support  to  their  POs’  PMPs.  Nevertheless,  it  must  be 
underlined  that  the  level  of  support  may  differ  significantly  from  one  Member  State  to 
another,  creating  level-playing-field  issues  for  POs  that  must  abide  by  the  same  rules.  The 
Commission  will  continue  its  work  on  raising  awareness  of  the  many  reasons  why  proper 
financing  is  important,  to  reduce  disparities.  Nevertheless,  differences  in  approaches  and 
treatments are inherent in a system that is designed to meet specific needs and requirements at 
national and regional levels.   

PMPs have also  proved to  be effective tools for  allocating  and managing quotas among PO 
members.  PMPs  must  consist,  among  other  things,  of  a  production  programme  and  must 
specify  measures  to  be  taken  by  the  PO  to  ensure  the  sustainable  fishing  activities  of  its 
members. This means that POs may decide on the quantities to be allocated and the best time 
for fishing activities. For example, reserving certain quantities of nephrops for the end of the 
year helps prevent stocks from being exhausted too early and  allows concerned members to 
charge higher prices during the end-of-year season. 

The  content  of  the  PMPs  and  monitoring  their  implementation  is  a  process  that  happens 
between  the  POs  and  their  competent  authorities.  Nevertheless,  there  is  clear  converge  in 

22  The Commission carried out an interim assessment of the initial difficulties encountered. 

23  The  Market  Advisory  Council  issued  guidance  for  POs  and  national  administrations  on  the  content  and 

implementation of PMPs.  

24   Regulation  (EU)  No  508/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  May  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, 20.5.2014, p. 1). 

25   Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the 
European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004 (OJ L 247, 
13.7.2021, p. 1). 

8 

 
 
                                                 
terms  of      good  status  of  stocks  (80%  of  the  species  covered  by  quotas  being  managed  by 
POs),  in  particular  in  the  North  Sea  and  the  North-East  Atlantic,  and  sound  economic 
performance  of  the  fleet,  at  least  until  the  recent  crises  that  hit  the  sector  (COVID-19  and 
Russia’s  invasion  of  Ukraine).  This  demonstrates  that  collective  management  of  quotas  by 
POs is a most effective system to manage a common-pool resource. Similarly, each time an 
external  shock hits the sector, PMPs enabled  POs to  rapidly  adapt  their  members’ activities 
and  marketing  strategies  to  abrupt  market  developments,  significantly  increasing  the 
resilience of the sector.     

2.1.6  Stabilisation of the markets 

In certain circumstances, the six market intervention mechanisms that existed until 2013 led 
to  the  destruction  or  withdrawal  of  products  from  human  consumption. Therefore,  they  had 
become  politically  unacceptable  and  economically  suboptimal.  The  revised  CMO  reduced 
these  market  intervention  mechanisms  to  a  single  storage  mechanism,  which  was  available 
during  5 years  (2014-2018).  This  temporary  mechanism  allowed  POs  to  adapt  and  to  move 
progressively  to  the  PMPs.  It  was  only  marginally  used,  confirming  that  POs  were  able  to 
adapt swiftly to the new market tools.  

The COVID-19 crisis resulted in a sudden closure of most outlets for fresh FAPs. This made 
it appropriate to restore the possibility of resorting to the storage aid mechanism and extend it 
to  cover  aquaculture  POs26  (it  was  originally  reserved  for  fisheries  POs).  The  mechanism 
became available again on 1 February 2020 and ended at the same time as the other COVID-
19 crisis measures, on 31 December 2020.  

Even  though  POs  ensure  an  efficient  planning  of  activities,  for  certain  species,  a  storage 
mechanism  would  remain  a  relevant  tool.  However,  it  has  always  been  considered  that 
restoring this mechanism on a permanent basis would be a disincentive to maintain rigorous 
strategic planning through PMPs. 

2.2  Marketing standards 

Contribution  to  achieving  CFP  objectives,  and  setting  and  complying  with  marketing 
standards  

Chapter  III  of  the  CMO  Regulation  covers  common  marketing  standards  for  FAPs.  FAPs 
covered by the marketing standards framework and intended for human consumption have to 
comply with these standards. 

The  objectives  of  the  standards  are  described  in  recital  18  of  the  CMO  Regulation. 
Specifically,  marketing  standards  should  enable  the  market  to  be  supplied  with  sustainable 
products and help to realise the full potential of the internal market in FAPs. Moreover, they 
should  facilitate  marketing  activities  based  on  fair  competition,  thereby  helping  to  improve 
the profitability of production. 

26  The list of eligible species listed in the CMO Regulation was adapted to take this change into account: the 
whole  heading  0302  of  the  combined  nomenclature  (i.e.  ‘Fish,  fresh  or  chilled,  excluding  fish  fillets  and 
other fish meat of heading 0304’) is added to the species listed in Annex II to the CMO Regulation. 

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
The  marketing  standards  incorporated  in  the  CMO  Regulation  of  2013  had  originally  been 
adopted  in  the  1980s  and  1990s27.  They  specify  harmonised  characteristics  for  preserved 
tuna / preserved bonito and preserved sardines, and a harmonised grading framework for fresh 
and  chilled  fishery  products,  including  minimum  freshness  and  size  requirements.  The 
standards apply to both EU and imported products.  

In  2019,  the  Commission  carried  out  a  dedicated  evaluation  of  the  implementation  of  the 
standards28 to assess whether the existing standards were still fit for purpose. The evaluation 
found that the marketing standards are generally relevant and efficient and add value within 
the  boundaries  of  their  current  scope  and  underlying  criteria.  However,  it  identified 
shortcomings in the existing framework in terms of its ability to achieve the objectives of the 
CMO Regulation. In particular, it was found that the framework plays only a limited role in 
ensuring that products marketed in the EU are sustainable. The evaluation and its underlying 
consultations also  identified opportunities for simplifying, streamlining and modernising the 
standards.  Finally,  the  evaluation  indicated  a  relatively  low  level  of  control  by  national 
authorities to ensure compliance with the standards.  

Based on the evaluation and the identified issue of not sufficiently addressing sustainability, 
the Commission launched a revision of the marketing standards framework and published an 
inception impact assessment in April 202029. Due to the sustainability aspect, the revision of 
the standards was included in the action plan of the Commission’s Farm to Fork Strategy30. 

The  Commission  held  a  public  consultation  from  November  2020  to  February  2021  and 
published the results on its website31. Targeted stakeholder consultations were held in parallel. 
The  consultations  confirmed  the  potential  benefits  of  an  EU  framework  for  consumer 
information on the sustainability of food products, including fishery products. As announced 
in the Farm to Fork strategy, it is important to continue work on the sustainable food system 
initiative  that  the  Commission  plans  to  propose  in  2023  for  a  harmonised  EU  approach  to 
sustainable food production. 

2.3  Consumer information 

2.3.1  Contribution to achieving CFP objectives 

In  order  for  the  CMO  to  fully  achieve  its  objectives,  it  is  essential  that  consumers  are 
informed, through marketing and educational campaigns, about the value of eating FAPs, the 
wide  variety  of  species  available,  and  the  importance  of  understanding  the  information  on 
labels. Additionally, in order for consumers to be able to make informed choices, they should 

27   Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2136/89  of  21  June  1989  laying  down  common  marketing  standards  for 
preserved sardines; Council Regulation (EEC) No 1536/92 of 9 June 1992 laying down common marketing 
standards  for preserved tuna  and bonito; and  Council  Regulation (EC) No 2406/96 of 26 November 1996 
laying down common marketing standards for certain fishery products. 

28   SWD(2019) 453 final of 20 December 2019, Commission staff working document on the evaluation of the 

marketing standards framework for fishery and aquaculture products.   

29  https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12262-Review-of-the-marketing-

standards-framework-for-fishery-and-aquaculture-products 

30   Farm to Fork Strategy (europa.eu).  

31  Fish & seafood products – review of marketing standards. 

10 

 
 
 
                                                 
receive clear and comprehensive information on the products sold on the EU market. These 
must comply with the same rules, regardless of their origin.  

To this aim, Chapter IV  of the CMO Regulation (‘Consumer information’) seeks to provide 
information to consumers through seafood labelling as a key aspect to drive more sustainable 
purchasing  choices  and  thereby  contribute  to  achieving  the  sustainability  objective  of  the 
CFP. Moreover, consumers are  important  actors  in  the governance of sustainability  because 
they make choices and have purchasing preferences. In order for consumer information to be 
provided on all FAPs, key information needs to flow along the supply chain. This can only be 
achieved  through  a  proper  traceability  system  for  all  FAPs.  To  this  end,  in  May  2018,  the 
Commission proposed32 to strengthen the traceability rules that had been in place since 2009 
(laid  down  in  the  EU  Fisheries  Control  Regulation33),  to  cover  all  FAPs.  Traceability  and 
related transparency are necessary to ensure compliance with applicable CFP rules. Supported 
by a proper labelling system, they can guarantee that the information provided to consumers is 
trustful  and  reliable.  They  are  also  indispensable  in  the  fight  against  food  fraud,  including 
mislabelling. 

The  CMO  Regulation  sets  out  rules  on  the  mandatory  and  voluntary  information  to  be 
provided for pre-packed and non-pre-packed FAPs referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (e) of 
its  Annex  I.  It  introduces  new  and  more  detailed  mandatory  information,  for  example  the 
obligation to report on the fishing gear and the detailed capture/farming area, or the explicit 
involvement  of  mass  caterers  in  the  labelling.  The  CMO  Regulation  provides  that  mass 
caterers must benefit from the same degree of information as final consumers. Mass caterers 
are thereby in a position to make more sustainable choices and contribute to better inform out-
of-home seafood consumption. 

In  2016,  the  Commission  launched  an  information  system34  to  facilitate  access  to  and 
comparison  of  commercial  designations  of  species  in  all  Member  States,  gathering  all 
commercial designations recognised in each Member State, and other useful information, such 
as scientific names, production methods and catch areas. To facilitate the understanding and 
implementation  of  consumer  information  rules,  the  Commission  published  a  pocket  guide35 
for stakeholders in 2014, and an updated list of questions and answers in 201936. 

Overall, the CMO Regulation on seafood labelling has achieved important goals on improving 
consumers’  awareness.  However,  certain  areas  of  discord  remain,  mainly  on  the  scope 
(processed  products,  caviar,  prepared  invertebrates),  the  information  on  origin/provenance, 
the  information  that  is  relevant  for  the  sustainability  of  the  product,  and  the  voluntary 
information. 

32   Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 May 2018 as regards fisheries 

control (COM(2018) 368 final). 

33  Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for 

ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy. 

34  Commercial designations of fishery and aquaculture products (europa.eu). 

35  A pocket guide to the EU’s new fish and aquaculture consumer labels. 

36  FAPs Consumer information, 2019. 

11 

 
 
 
                                                 
2.3.2  Mandatory information 

Article 35 of the CMO Regulation stipulates that marks or labels on FAPs referred to in points 
(a), (b), (c) and (e) of its Annex I that are marketed within the EU must indicate: 
the commercial designation of the species and its scientific name; 
the production method; 
the area where the product was caught or farmed, and the category of fishing gear used 
by fisheries to capture the products; 

 
 
 

  whether the product has been defrosted; and 
 

the date of minimum durability37, where appropriate. 

As the Special Eurobarometer survey on EU consumer habits regarding FAPs in 2021 reveals, 
the mandatory information considered the most valuable by consumers is the ‘use by’ or ‘best 
before’ date (69%); the name of the product and the species (57%); and whether the product is 
wild or farmed (54%). Only 24% identified the fishing gear used as information that should 
be mentioned. 

The  targeted  consultation  on  the  implementation  of  the  CMO  Regulation38  showed  that 
mandatory requirements for consumer information is highly praised as an excellent measure 
benefiting EU stakeholders and consumers.  

Nevertheless, there are some points to consider. Firstly,  many stakeholders asked to include 
processed FAPs (which represent more than 22% of EU consumption) in the scope of Article 
35  of  the  CMO  Regulation.  According  to  them,  there  is  no  justification  for  exempting 
processed products from information requirements that are important to consumers and play a 
major  role  in  assessing  the  sustainability  of  products.  Furthermore,  according  to  many 
stakeholders,  some  inconsistencies  (e.g.  products  being  identified  by  CN39  code  and  not  by 
the transformation they underwent: caviar, invertebrates) have a negative impact on achieving 
the traceability and sustainability objectives. Secondly,  most respondents to the consultation 
reported  a  lack  of  implementation  of  mandatory  requirements  for  consumer  information. 
Implementation  throughout  the  EU  is  considered  to  be  uneven  and  this  is  particularly 
significant in some segments such as fishmongers and mass caterers. Some non-governmental 
organisations  and  fishers  stressed  that  national  checks  are  insufficient  to  ensure  proper 
enforcement. Finally, experts working on the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee 
for  Fisheries  (STECF)  pointed  out  that  consumer  information  under  the  CMO  Regulation 
should  be  strengthened  to  enable  a  robust  assessment  of  products’  sustainability.  This 
concerns in particular more detailed information on the catch area and fishing gear for fishery 
products as the current categories appear to be insufficient, and on the production system for 
aquaculture products.40 

For the purposes of Article 37 of the CMO Regulation, the Commission’s information system 
on  commercial  designations41  provides  web-based  and  responsive  access,  in  all  24  official 

37  The date of minimum durability corresponds to the ‘best before’ date or ‘best before end’ date referred to in 
Annex X to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 
2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. 

38  See Annex 2. 

39  Combined Nomenclature. 

40  STECF  report  on  criteria  and  indicators  to  incorporate  sustainability  aspects  for  seafood  products 

(STECF-20-05). 

41  Commercial designations of fishery and aquaculture products (europa.eu). 

12 

 
 
                                                 
languages  of  the  EU,  to  searchable  information  on  FAPs,  mainly  based  on  the  relationship 
between commercial designations and scientific names as specified by Member States in their 
national lists. This service remains active and periodically updated. 

The  indication  of  the  catch  or  production  area  in  accordance  with  Article  38  of  the  CMO 
Regulation  sparks  debate,  especially  when  supplemented  with  additional  voluntary 
information  on  the  origin.  In  2019,  the  Commission  ordered  a  behavioural  study42  to  better 
understand  to  which  extent  origin  claims  on  FAPs  meet  consumers’  needs.  The  study 
identified some shortcomings (lack of consistency, irrelevant or vague information, etc.) that 
make voluntary claims on origin rather confusing.   

2.3.3  Ecolabelling reporting 

Article  36  of  the  CMO  Regulation  required  the  Commission  to  submit  a  report  to  the 
European Parliament and the Council on options for an EU-wide eco-label scheme for FAPs. 
The Commission adopted the report in May 2016. 

The  report  highlighted  a  number  of  issues  linked  to  eco-labels.  First,  for  an  eco-label  to  be 
credible,  there  must  be  a  robust  certification  process.  Second,  the  perceived  proliferation  of 
eco-labels and the parallel use of other communication tools may lead to consumer confusion. 
Finally,  costs  linked  to  certification  may  be  substantial  for  producers  while  the  sale  of  eco-
labelled products may create new markets for products. 

On this basis, the Commission report set out two options for potential policy action: 

  setting up a self-standing EU-wide eco-label scheme for FAPs; or  

  setting minimum requirements for private eco-labels in terms of sustainability criteria 

and the underlying certification process. 

In  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council,  views  diverged  on  the  report,  and  more 
specifically the preferred way forward. Consequently, the co-legislators ultimately dismissed 
the two policy options. In the meantime, the second option has been addressed more broadly 
by the Commission’s proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition43. 

2.3.4  Additional voluntary information 

Article 39 of the CMO Regulation stipulates that the following information may be provided 
on a voluntary basis, in a clear, unambiguous and verifiable way: 

  date of catch/harvest; 
  date of landing or information on the port of landing; 
  more details on the fishing gear; 
 

the vessel’s flag state; 

42  Behavioural Study on origin claims on fishery and aquaculture products. 

43  Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 
2011/83/EU  as  regards  empowering  consumers  for  the  green  transition  through  better  protection  against 
unfair practices and better information (COM(2022) 143 final). 

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
  environmental information; 
  ethical/social information; 
  production techniques and practices; and 
  nutritional content (only for unprocessed single-ingredient food44). 

This list is open and does not explicitly prohibit other possibilities. 

The  Special  Eurobarometer  survey  on  EU  consumer  habits  regarding  FAPs45  shows  that 
consumers’  interest  in  voluntary  information  is  focused  on  the  date  of  catch  or  production 
(76% of respondents), far ahead of any other information such as environmental information 
(44%), information on the ship’s country, on fishers or on farmers (33% each), or the port of 
landing or ethical information (26 % each). 

However,  the  sector  considers  that  adding  more  dates  (catch,  landing)  may  become  very 
confusing  for  consumers.  Additionally,  quality  of  FAPs  is  guaranteed  by  freshness  criteria, 
which are not deemed as important for processed products. On indicating the landing port or 
the flag state of vessels, there are concerns about misunderstanding the information on origin. 

The Commission’s proposal for a directive on empowering consumers for the green transition 
through  better  protection  against  unfair  practices  and  better  information46  suggested  new 
requirements for the voluntary provision of environmental claims. 

2.4  Competition rules  

Contribution to achieving CFP objectives and exclusions from competition rules 

According to Article 41 of the CMO Regulation, POs may be excluded from the application 
of competition rules as specified in Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU 
(TFEU)  in  order  to  achieve  their  objectives,  on  condition  that  it  is  necessary  to  attain  the 
objectives set out in Article 39 TFEU and it does not imply any obligation to charge identical 
prices,  does  not  lead  to  the  partitioning  of  markets  in  any  form  within  the  EU,  does  not 
exclude competition and does not eliminate competition in respect of a substantial proportion 
of the products in question. This exclusion is an essential tool to allow some practices in the 
implementation of PMPs such as controlling the quantities put on the market by members to 
stabilise the markets and prices, comply with conservation obligations and avoid food waste.  

This exclusion from competition rules can only be implemented by entities that are entitled to 
do so under the CMO Regulation and have been recognised by Member States under Article 6 
that  Regulation.  Therefore,  non-recognised  collective  bodies  of  producers  (e.g. 
of 
cooperatives,  cofradías)  may not benefit from it. Checks of POs’ compliance carried out by 
the Commission have revealed that activities linked to producing, processing and marketing 
fishermen’s  landings  were  sometimes  managed  by/through  non-recognised  bodies.  In  these 
cases, Member States’ competent authorities have been asked to take necessary measures. 

44  The nutrition declaration is mandatory for all other categories than unprocessed single-ingredient food since 

December 2016, in accordance with the Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011. 

45  EU Consumer Habits Regarding Fishery and Aquaculture Products, 2021. 

46  Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 
2011/83/EU  as  regards  empowering  consumers  for  the  green  transition  through  better  protection  against 
unfair practices and better information (COM(2022) 143 final) 

14 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
Some  organisations  do  not  accept  this  limitation  and  plead  for  an  amendment  of  the  CMO 
Regulation  to  make  them  also  eligible  for  exclusion  from  competition  rules  and  access  to 
funding. However, POs fulfil clearly defined tasks that are instrumental in implementing the 
CFP. For this purpose, they must comply with a strict and common legal framework under the 
supervision of their national authorities.  

2.5  Market intelligence  

To help increase market transparency and efficiency, the  CMO Regulation provides that the 
Commission must gather and process economic information on the EU markets in FAPs and 
disseminate it to stakeholders and the general public (Article 42 of the CMO Regulation).  

To this end, the Commission has set up the European Market Observatory for Fisheries and 
Aquaculture Products (EUMOFA47). EUMOFA has been developed since 2010 in the form of 
a preparatory action. A dedicated website and database have been online since April 2013 and 
have been fully operational since the entry into force of the revised CMO.  

to  better  understand  market 

EUMOFA  provides  market  intelligence  to  operators  of  the  fishery  sector,  in  the  broadest 
sense, 
support 
public-policymaking  processes  and  implementation  by  public  authorities  and  stakeholders. 
Moreover,  it  aims  to  benefit  research  bodies,  stakeholders  and  the  general  public  by 
increasing access to market intelligence and data. 

trends.  EUMOFA  also  aims 

to 

This  observatory  is  particularly  relevant  as  there  is  no  alternative  at  EU  level  to  provide 
information on a complex and dynamic market that is characterised by a heavy dependence on 
imports  from  non-EU  countries  (the  self-sufficiency  rate  is  38.9%  and  only  11%  for  the  5 
most consumed species48) and significant trade within the EU (trade flows within the EU are 
greater  than  imports  from  non-EU  countries).  The  EU  supply  of  FAPs  for  human 
consumption, which includes both domestic production and imports, totals close to 13 million 
tonnes in live weight equivalent. People in the EU consume around 23 kg of FAPs per person 
a year49. 

EUMOFA can be considered as a reference observatory for food commodities. It is also the 
most comprehensive database on international trade flows of FAPs. The web-based platform 
provides daily economic data on all steps of the value chain. The observatory is also a centre 
of expertise that carries out market analyses and issues publications on a series of topics that 
are of interest to industry and institutional stakeholders. It also publishes analytical material to 
support policymaking. It played a key role in informing market stakeholders during the recent 
crises (COVID-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine) by providing visibility and clarification 
on market developments. 

Over the last year, EUMOFA has generated around 3 000 monthly visits50 to its website from 
more  than  140  countries.  The  number  of  publications  quoting  EUMOFA  is  increasing,  and 
these  publications  are  becoming  more  diverse  (e.g.  public  reports,  scientific  and  academic 

47  www.euomfa.eu 

48  Tuna, salmon, cod, Alaska pollock, and shrimps. 

49  Source: EUMOFA, The EU fish market, 2022. 

50  Unique visitors. 

15 

 
 
 
                                                 
publications,  specialised  press).  The  wide  dissemination  of  EUMOFA’s  expertise 
demonstrates that the observatory is reliable and well recognised.  

To  deliver  on  its  obligation  to  provide  market  intelligence,  the  Commission  carried  out 
regular Eurobarometer surveys on EU consumers’ habits regarding FAPs (in 2017, 2019 and 
2021)51. 

3  CONCLUSIONS 

The common market policy for FAPs, as laid down by the CMO Regulation, effectively helps 
achieve  the  CFP  objectives,  especially  in  terms  of  competitiveness,  market  stability, 
transparency and ensuring a diverse supply of seafood to consumers.  

Professional  organisations  –  in  particular  POs,  which  were  considered  key  actors  in 
implementing the CMO objectives from the outset – proved to be instrumental in improving 
market conditions for seafood supplies, thereby increasing producers’ income. With regard to 
the empowerment of POs under the CMO, the Commission performed a first comprehensive 
round  of  checks  on  the  conditions  for  recognition  to  ensure  compliance  and  operational 
capacities of POs. Such checks will be repeated. 

POs and national administrations have needed a couple of  years to adapt to operating under 
the  PMPs  because  of  their  innovative  character  and  mandatory  nature.  The  system  is  now 
generally considered fully operational and very relevant to delivering on the objectives of the 
CMO,  to  implement  the  CFP  on  the  ground  and  seize  market  opportunities.  Nevertheless, 
difficulties remain, in  particular regarding differential  treatment  by national  administrations, 
be  it  in  terms  of  financing,  administrative  support  or  eligibility  of  measures.  These  aspects 
may  constitute  a  barrier  for  POs  to  fully  deliver  on  their  missions  and  require  continued 
assistance  by  the  Commission.  The  support  for  setting  up  and  financing  TPOs  is  also 
considered as an aspect to be improved, which the Commission has already delivered on by 
providing guidance to Member States and POs. 

The  CMO  has  played  a  positive  role  in  increasing  competitiveness  by  providing  a  common 
legislative framework governed by the same marketing standards. However,  these standards 
are  not  sufficiently  promoting  sustainable  products.  As  announced  in  the  Farm  to  Fork 
strategy,  it  is  important  to  continue  work  on  the  sustainable  food  system  initiative  that  the 
Commission  plans  to  propose  in  2023  for  a  harmonised  EU  approach  to  sustainable  food 
production. 

Provisions  on  information  to  consumers  are  generally  considered  fit  for  purpose,  even  if 
certain shortcomings will continue to require some attention, such as differences in coverage 
and  compliance  for  some  outlets.  Labelling  will  remain  a  point  of  contention  in  the  supply 
chain as views and priorities are diverging. Nevertheless, more specific information would be 
needed to empower the consumer to form a fair idea of products’ sustainability.  

The possibility for POs to derogate from competition rules under the conditions of the CMO 
Regulation  appears  necessary  to  combine  profitability  with  POs’  obligation  to  achieve 
conservation  and  stock-management  objectives.  The  ability  for  POs  to  programme  the 

51  Eurobarometer surveys on EU consumer habits regarding fishery and aquaculture products. 

16 

 
 
 
                                                 
quantities  put  on  the  market  by  their  members  is  an  essential  tool  to  maintain  prices  at 
appropriate levels and avoid food waste.  

By  setting  up  a  European  market  observatory,  the  Commission  set  standards  in  respect  of 
market intelligence. Services delivered by EUMOFA served many purposes for stakeholders. 
They  were  highly  appreciated  in  times  of  crisis,  during  which  the  observatory  specifically 
helped inform policymaking and industry strategies. 

The  implementation  of  CMO  provisions  showed  that  there  must  be  trust  and  understanding 
between  authorities,  the  sector  and  civil  society.  Regular  exchanges  have  been  set  up,  in 
particular with the Market Advisory Council52, to better understand impacts of certain events 
on the market and the needs of the sector. This dialogue should be continued and strengthened 
to ease the implementation of the CMO. 

In conclusion, the CMO Regulation and the way it has been implemented since the reform can 
be considered overall as a success. The CMO transitioned from an intervention-based market 
policy  inherited  from  the  common  agricultural  policy  to  a  market-oriented  dynamic  policy 
driven  by  empowered  market  stakeholders.  This  transition  proved  relevant  to  ensure  long-
term sustainability and profitability of the sector  as part of a rigorous implementation of the 
CFP.  Areas  for  improvement  are  well  identified  and  the  Commission  will  address  them  by 
cooperating closely with stakeholders and national administrations to maximise the impact of 
existing market tools, ensure compliance and address shortcomings. 

52  Roles and achievements of Advisory Councils are described in the Staff Working Document accompanying 
the  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  -  The  common 
fisheries  policy  today  and  tomorrow:  a  Fisheries  and  Oceans  Pact  towards  sustainable,  science-based, 
innovative and inclusive fisheries management (SWD(2023)103, section 3.12). 

17 

 
 
 
                                                 
ANNEXES 

Annex 1 – Legal bases 

The  common  organisation  of  the  markets  (CMO)  reform  implied  a  drastic  simplification  of 
the legal framework. 

Until the end of 2013, the CMO was governed by: 

  Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000; 

  more than 20 Commission implementing regulations providing detailed rules; and 

  several Council regulations.   

In  January  2014,  the  new  CMO  Regulation  entered  into  force.  A  total  of  19  Commission 
Regulations were repealed53 and currently the CMO is governed by the following acts: 

  Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the 
common organisation  of the markets  in  fishery and aquaculture products  (the ‘CMO 
Regulation’); 

  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1418/2013 concerning production and 

marketing plans; 

  Commission implementing Regulation (EU) No 1419/2013 concerning the recognition 

of producer organisations and inter-branch organisations; 

  Commission Recommendation 2014/117/EU on the establishment and implementation 

of the Production and Marketing Plans; and 

 

three Council regulations on marketing standards (and one Commission implementing 
regulation) that remained in force:  

o  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2406/96  laying  down  common  marketing 

standards for certain fishery products; 

o  Commission  Regulation  (EEC)  No  3703/85  laying  down  detailed  rules  for 
applying the common marketing standards for certain fresh or chilled fish; 

o  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  1536/92  laying  down  common  marketing 

standards for preserved tuna and bonito; and 

o  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2136/89  laying  down  common  marketing 
standards for preserved sardines and trade descriptions for preserved sardines 
and sardine-type products. 

The  CMO  Regulation  was  amended  on  three  occasions;  most  recently  to  introduce  crisis 
measures to respond to the COVID-19 crisis: 

  Council Regulation (EU) No 1385/2013 of 17 December 2013; 

  Regulation  (EU)  2015/812  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of 

20 May 2015; and 

53  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1420/2013 of 17 December 2013. 

18 

 
 
                                                 
  Regulation (EU) 2020/560 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 

23 April 2020. 

19 

 
 
 
Annex 2 – Public consultation 

The  European  Commission  launched  a  targeted  consultation54  on  17 December 2021 
(deadline 14 March 2022) to  gather  experiences and comments  of  sector stakeholders55 
on the implementation of the CMO Regulation. 

  The Commission received around 125 replies to the CMO questionnaire.  

  The  market  tools  provided  by  the  CMO  Regulation  were  generally  considered 
relevant  and  proved  positive  in  their  ability  to  contribute  to  achieving  the  CFP 
objectives.  

 

In  particular,  the  key  role  devolved  to  producer  organisations  to  collectively 
manage  producers’  activities  is  a  major  achievement  of  the  reformed  market 
policy.  Producer  organisations’  production  and  market  plans  are  flexible  and 
effective  tools  to  deliver  on  the  market  objectives  of  the  CMO.  Stakeholders 
underlined that there is still room for improvement, for example on the financial 
support to these plans, which can vary substantially from one country to another, 
and on mechanisms that are not fully suitable for transnational organisations.  

  Consumer  information,  in  particular  labelling,  is  generally  considered  fit  for 
purpose,  although  in  some  cases,  a  plethora  of  eco-labels  and  too  specific 
information puts some limits on the legibility of claims.  

  The  contribution  of 

increasing 
transparency  and  improving  the  understanding  of  market  developments  is 
generally praised. 

the  market  observatory  (EUMOFA) 

to 

On  10 June 2022,  the  Commission  closed  this  consultation  process  with  a  stakeholder 
event  on  the  functioning  of  the  common  fisheries  policy  (CFP)  and  the  common 
organisation of the markets in Brussels (remote participation was possible).  

Discussions  and  interactions  between  stakeholders  took  place  in  two  thematic  plenary 
sessions with short presentations and panels of stakeholder representatives. The thematic 
sessions  covered  the  social,  economic  and  environmental  objectives  of  the  CFP  on  the 
one hand, and innovation, resilience and governance in the fisheries on the other. 

The outcomes of this consultation process formed an essential input to the report on the 
functioning of the CMO.  

54  https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/TargetedConsultation2022ReportCMO  

55  All sector stakeholders were invited to answer the questionnaire and particpate in the stakeholder event: the 
fishery  and  aquaculture  sector,  non-governmental  organisations,  and  academic,  scientific,  social  and 
economic partners. 

20