COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EVALUATION to the Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and Cabo Verde Accompanying the document Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of the negotiations on behalf of the European Union for the conclusion of an Implementing Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cabo Verde
Date: 2023-11-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Cabo Verde, European Commission, fishing agreement, fishing rights, negotiation of an agreement (EU), powers of the institutions (EU), protocol to an agreement, ratification of an agreement, sea fishing, sustainable fisheries

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 13.11.2023  SWD(2023) 349 final  CORRIGENDUM This document replaces SWD(2023)349 final of 13.11.2023 after complementary information regarding the ex-ante evaluation chapter  The text shall read as follows:  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EVALUATION  to the Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and Cabo Verde Accompanying the document Recommendation for a Council Decision  authorising the opening of the negotiations on behalf of the European Union for the conclusion of an Implementing Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Cabo Verde          {COM(2023) 697 final} - {SWD(2023) 350 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

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

Purpose of the evaluation ........................................................................................................... 1 

Scope of the evaluation ............................................................................................................... 2 

Methodology of the evaluation .................................................................................................. 2 

2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? ....................................... 4 

2.1 

Description of the intervention and its objectives .......................................................... 4 

2.1.1 

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) .............................................. 4 

2.1.2 

Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the EU and the Republic of Cabo Verde . 6 

2.2   Point(s) of comparison ........................................................................................................ 8 

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD? ....................... 11 

Current state of play.................................................................................................................. 11 

4. 

EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) ....................................................................... 15 

4.1.  TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INTERVENTION SUCCESSFUL AND WHY? ................... 15 

4.2.  HOW DID THE EU INTERVENTION MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND TO WHOM? ............. 16 

4.3.  IS THE INTERVENTION STILL RELEVANT?.......................................................................... 17 

5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? ................................................. 18 

5.1.  CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 18 

5.2.  LESSONS LEARNED ...................................................................................................................... 19 

6. 

EX-ANTE EVALUATION ANALYSIS FOR A POTENTIAL NEW PROTOCOL ......................... 19 

ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 27 

1. 

LEAD DG, DECIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES ............................................................. 27 

2.  ORGANISATION AND TIMING ................................................................................................... 27 

3. 

4. 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE BETTER REGULATION GUIDELINES ........................................... 27 

EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY ...................................................................................... 28 

ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED ................................................... 29 

ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX AND, WHERE RELEVANT, DETAILS ON ANSWERS 

TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS (BY CRITERION) ............................................................. 31 

Effectiveness – The extent to which the objectives of the Implementing Protocol to the 
Agreement were achieved ................................................................................................... 31 

Efficiency – The extent to which the desired effects are achieved at a reasonable cost 37 

Economy – the extent to which resources are available in due time, in appropriate 
quantity and quality at the best price ................................................................................ 38 

Relevance – the extent to which the objectives of the Protocol match current needs and 
problems ............................................................................................................................... 39 

 
 
 
 
Consistency - The extent to which the Agreement and its Protocol do not contradict 
and is coherent other interventions with similar objectives ............................................ 41 

The EU added value – The extent to which the intervention brings EU added value ... 42 

Acceptability – The extent to which stakeholders accept the policy in general and the 
particular instrument proposed or employed ................................................................... 43 

ANNEX IV. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS ........................................................................... 46 

ANNEX V. STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION - SYNOPSIS REPORT ............................................. 49 

 
 
 
 
 
Glossary  

Term or acronym 

Definition 

SFPAs 

EU 

CFP 

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements 

European Union 

Common Fisheries Policy 

IUU fishing 

Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing. 

JSC 

JSM 

VMS 

ERS 

FMC 

RFMOs 

MCS 

EEZ 

CECAF 

ICCAT  

ACP 

FAO 

WB 

GNB 

Joint Scientific Committees  

Joint Scientific Meetings  

Vessel Monitoring System 

Electronic Reporting System  

Fisheries Monitoring Centre 

Regional Fisheries Management Organisations 

Monitoring, Control and Surveillance  

Exclusive Economic Zone  

Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic  

International Commission for the Conservation of 
Atlantic Tunas 

Africa, Caribbean and Pacific 

Food and Agriculture Organisation 

World Bank 

Gross National Benefit 

 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose of the evaluation  

In the framework of the external dimension of the EU's Common Fishery Policy (CFP)1, 
implements  Sustainable  Fisheries  Partnership 
the  Commission  negotiates  and 
Agreements  (SFPAs)  with  third  countries.  SFPAs  allow  the  EU  fleet  to  fish  surplus 
resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the partner country. In exchange, the 
EU provides the partner country with financial compensation for access to its waters and 
financial assistance for the implementation of the national strategy for fisheries and the 
blue  economy.  The  EU  public  contribution  is  complemented  by  fees  payable  by  EU-
vessel owners for fishing authorisations issued under the Protocol. 

According  to  Article  3(1)(d)  and  (e)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European 
Union, the EU has exclusive powers on the conservation of marine biological resources 
under  the  CFP  and  the  common  commercial  policy.  The  European  Commission  is 
therefore responsible for the negotiation and implementation of the SFPAs.  

According  to  Article  31(10)  of  the  CFP  Basic  Regulation,  the  European  Commission 
shall also arrange for ex-ante and ex-post evaluations of each implementing protocol to a 
SFPA,  before  it  submits  to  the  Council  of  the  EU  a  recommendation  to  authorise  the 
opening  of  negotiations  for  a  successor  protocol.  These  evaluations  aim  to  inform 
decision  makers  before  adopting  a  Council  Decision  authorising  the  opening  of 
negotiations on behalf of the EU.  

This obligation is complemented by Article 34 of the Financial Regulation2, according to 
which Commission Services have to undertake both ex-ante and ex-post evaluations for 
all programmes and activities which entail significant spending. 

Importantly, under Article 31(5) of the CFP Basic Regulation, Union vessels cannot fish 
if  there  is  no  protocol  implementing  an  SFPA  between  the  EU  and  a  third  country.  In 
order  for  Union  vessels  to  continue  fishing  under  an  SFPA  after  an  implementing 
protocol expires, a successor protocol must be negotiated.  

The evaluation of the implementation of the Protocol to the Fisheries Agreement between 
the EU and Cabo Verde, which is expiring on 19 May 2024, aims to measure the level of 
achievement  of the objectives set  by the CFP for this Sustainable  Fisheries Partnership 

1   Regulation  (EU)  1380/2013  of  11  December  2013  on  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (OJ  L354, 

28.12.2013, p. 22) 

2   Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 
on  the  financial  rules  applicable  to  the  general  budget  of  the  Union,  amending  Regulations  (EU) 
No 1296/2013,  (EU)  No 1301/2013,  (EU)  No 1303/2013,  (EU)  No 1304/2013,  (EU)  No 1309/2013, 
(EU)  No 1316/2013,  (EU)  No 223/2014,  (EU)  No 283/2014,  and  Decision  No 541/2014/EU  and 
repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1). 

1 

 
 
 
Agreement.  The  results  of  the  evaluation  can  also  inform  the  formulation  of 
recommendations: 

-  for  future  negotiations  on  a  possible  new  protocol  to  the  Fisheries  Partnership 
Agreement, 

- to improve the provisions in this possible future protocol, or their implementation. 

Scope of the evaluation  

This  Staff  Working  Document  (SWD)  makes  an  ex-ante  and  an  ex-post  evaluation 
covering  the  application  of  the  current  implementing  Protocol  (hereinafter,  the 
implementing  Protocol)  of  the  Fisheries  Partnership  Agreement  concluded  between  the 
EU and the Republic of Cabo Verde (hereinafter, the Agreement). These evaluations are 
primarily informed by an evaluation study3 conducted by an independent consultant. 

The  ex-post  evaluation  covers  most  of  the  period  of  application  of  the  implementing 
Protocol  of  the  Agreement,  starting  from  the  May  2019  to  May  2023.  It  provides  an 
overall  assessment  of  the  implementing  Protocol,  drawing  conclusions  in  terms  of  its 
effectiveness,  efficiency,  relevance,  coherence,  acceptance  and  EU  added  value  of  the 
EU intervention.  

The  ex-ante  evaluation  analyses  the  relevant  objectives  for  the  Agreement  and  its 
implementing protocol, considering the current and future needs for this intervention.  It 
considers the lessons learned from previous implementing protocols and the results of the 
ex-post evaluation of the current implementing Protocol.  

Finally, the ex-ante evaluation considers and draws conclusions on the possible impacts 
of the following three policy scenarios: 

•  A renegotiation of the implementing Protocol for the Agreement;  

•  A negotiation of an improved implementing protocol for the Agreement;  

•  No negotiation of a successor implementing protocol for the Agreement.  

Methodology of the evaluation  

The  results  of  this  SWD  are  mainly  informed  by  an  evaluation  study  conducted  by  an 
independent  consultant.  This  evaluation  study  took  place  from  February  to  April  2023 
under  the  guidance  of  an  interservice  group  established  by  different  services  of  the 
European  Commission  and  within  the  framework  of  the  terms  of  reference  of  specific 

3    Vincent DEFAUX and others, Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre 
de l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de 
Cabo  Verde.  June  2023.    https://op.europa.eu/fr/publication-detail/-/publication/95eab735-0b2f-11ee-
b12e-01aa75ed71a1  

2 

 
 
 
contract  number  4  under 
the  framework  contract  MARE/2021/OP/00014.  The 
methodology  of  this  evaluation  study  consisted  of  three  main  components:  analysis  of 
available information, consultations, and preparation of an evaluation report. 

The detailed evaluation questions corresponding to the evaluation criteria can be found in 
Annex 3 and are further addressed in section 4. These translate the evaluation criteria into 
questions about the EU intervention: 

•  Describing the sources that were consulted to answer the evaluation questions; 
• 

Indicating the success criteria (i.e. points of comparison) to enable the judgment 
on whether the intervention was successful;  

•  Defining  the  indicator(s)  and  what  the  indicator(s)  will  measure  (either 

quantitatively or qualitatively). 

On  the  analysis  of  available  information,  DG  MARE  provided  all  relevant  internal 
documents  and  databases  to  the  independent  consultant.  Other  external  documentation 
was  also  used,  such  as  regulatory  texts  and  reports  from  relevant  scientific  working 
groups.  

On  the  consultation  phase,  the  independent  consultant  had  the  occasion  to  collect   
stakeholders’  positions  in  the  EU  and  Cabo  Verde.  EU  stakeholders  were  consulted 
between  March  and  May  2023.  Cabo  Verde  stakeholders  were  consulted  during  the 
consultant’s field mission to Cabo Verde on March 2023.  

The evaluation study was submitted to the European Commission in  May 2023 and the 
overall level and quality of findings gathered is robust. Nevertheless, the following SWD, 
and  the  evaluation  study  on  which  it  is  based,  consider  all  information  available  as  of 
May  2023.  It  does  not  consider  information  beyond  this  date  because  the  evaluation 
needs  to  be  finalized  indicatevely  one  year  before  the  expiry  date  of  the  implementing 
Protocol. This is the time necessary to obtain a mandate for negotiation and subsequently 
carry out the negotiation of the successor protocol, thus avoiding interruptions between 
the  two  implementing  Protocols  and  ensuring  continuity  in  the  implementation  of  the 
Agreement. 

Detailed information on the methodology, including how the supporting evaluation study 
was conducted can be found in Annex II.  

4   Multiple framework service contract in cascade for Better Regulation related activities on Sustainable 

Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) 

3 

 
 
 
2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? 

2.1   Description of the intervention and its objectives 

2.1.1  Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) 

The CFP provides part of the legal  framework for fisheries legislation, both  within and 
outside  EU  waters.  The  first  fisheries  agreements  between  the  EU  and  third  countries 
date  back  to  the  late  1980s  and  are  enshrined  in  the  CFP.  In  accordance  with  UN 
Sustainable  Development  Goal  14  (life  below  water),  the  SFPAs  should  contribute 
towards  resource  conservation  and  environmental  sustainability  of  the  exploitation  of 
living marine resources of a coastal partner State. The SFPAs should also contribute to 
efficient data collection; monitoring, control and surveillance measures;  and the respect 
for democratic principles and human rights.  

The SFPAs establish a legal, environmental, economic and social governance framework 
for fishing activities carried out by Union fishing vessels in third country waters. Under 
the  framework  of  the  SFPAs,  Union  vessels  may  only  catch  surplus  of  the  allowable 
catch, as referred to in Article 62(2) and (3) of the United Nations Convention of the Law 
of  the  Sea  (UNCLOS)5.  This  surplus  must  be  identified,  in  a  clear  and  transparent 
manner, on the basis of the best available scientific advice. In addition, in order to ensure 
the  sustainable  exploitation  of  surpluses  of  marine  biological  resources,  the  EU  must 
endeavour to ensure that the SFPAs are mutually beneficial to the Union and to the third 
country  concerned,  including  its  local  population  and  fishing  industry.  In  the  case  of 
SFPAs  related  to  fisheries  targeting  the  tuna  and  associated  species,  it  is  worth  noting 
that  those  species  are  managed  by  the  Regional  Fisheries  Management  Organisation 
(RFMO).  In  the  case  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  the  competent  RFMO  is  the  International 
Commission  for  the  Conservation  of  Atlantic  Tunas  (ICCAT).  Due  to  their  highly 
migratory nature, the concept of access to the ‘surplus’ of a fish stock present only in the 
Cabo  Verde  EEZ  does  not  apply  to  these  resources.  Management  and  conservation 
measures have been put in place, such as regional observer programmes, particularly by 
ICCAT to manage yellowfin tuna and bigeye tuna fishing, and sharks targeted by the EU 
tuna fleet, among others. 

In  terms  of  financial  compensation,  the  EU  provides  a  partner  country  with  financial 
compensation for access to its waters and its fishery resources and financial assistance to 
implement a national strategy for fisheries and the blue economy. The EU contribution is 
complemented by fees payable by EU vessel owners. 

5 https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
Importantly,  SFPAs  are  exclusive  and  rendered  operational  only  through  their 
implementing  Protocols.  In  order  for  Union  vessels  to  continue  fishing  under  an  SFPA 
after an implementing protocol expires, a successor protocol must be negotiated.  

The implementation of an SFPA and its implementing protocol is monitored by a Joint 
Committee  composed  of  representatives  from  both  parties,  as  well  as  a  Joint  Scientific 
Committee composed of scientists from both parties.  

In  July  2011,  the  Commission  adopted  a  Communication  on  the  external  dimension  of 
the  CFP6  and  proposed  several  actions  to  reform  SFPAs.  The  Council  adopted 
Conclusions  regarding  the  External  Dimension  of  the  CFP  on  19  March  20127  and  the 
European Parliament expressed its views in a report adopted in November 20128.  

General and specific objectives of Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements 

The  overarching  objective  of  the  external  dimension  of  the  CFP  is  to  promote  high 
standards  in  terms  of  fisheries  management  at  the  international  and  regional  levels  as 
well as under bilateral agreements, with the aim to ensure a level playing field.  
General and specific objectives of SFPAs are the following5: 

• To contribute towards resource conservation and environmental sustainability through 
rational  and  sustainable  exploitation  of  living  marine  resources  of  the  coastal  state,  in 
particular by: 

- 

-  directing fisheries exclusively at surplus resources and preventing the overfishing of 
stocks, on the basis of the best  scientific advice and  reinforced transparency on the 
global fishing efforts in third countries' waters  
following  the  same  principle  and  promoting  the  same  standards  for  fisheries 
management as applied in EU waters 
improving the scientific and technical evaluation of the fisheries concerned (notably 
by improving data collection and transparency on fishing efforts) 
ensuring compliance and combating IUU fishing 

- 

- 

• To contribute to continuing the activity of the Union fleets and the employment linked 
to the fleets operating within SFPAs by: 

- 

- 

seeking appropriate share of the surplus resources, fully commensurate with the EU 
fleets interests 
ensuring  that  the  level  of  fees  payable  by  Union  ship-owners  for  their  fishing 
activities  is  fair,  non-discriminatory  and  commensurate  to  the  benefits  provided 
through the access  conditions, while avoiding any discriminatory treatment  towards 
EU vessels and promoting a level playing field among the different fleets 

6   Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  parliament,  the  Council,  the  Economic  and 
Social Committee and the Committee of the regions on the External Dimension of the Common Fisheries 
Policy, COM(2011)424 final, of 13.7.2011. 

7  Council 
(http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/agricult/129052.pdf) 

external  dimension  of 

conclusions  on 

the 

the  CFP,  19.03.2012,  7086/12 

8 European Parliament’s report on the External Dimension of the Common Fisheries Policy, of 22.11.2012. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
- 
- 

- 

ensuring supply for the EU and for the markets of certain developing countries 
encouraging  the  creation  of  a  secure  environment  that  is  favourable  to  private 
investment and economic activities 
taking into account the specific interests of the Union's outermost regions located in 
the vicinity 

• To support the development of a sustainable fisheries sector in partner countries by: 

- 

contributing  to  the  capacity  building  in  the  third  countries  (notably  by  improving 
fisheries legal framework, control and surveillance and science) 

-  defining annual and multiannual objectives to be achieved with the aim of developing 

- 

sustainable fishing activities 
assessment  of  the  results  obtained  in  terms  of  impacts,  and  also  on  budgetary  and 
financial requirements 

-  promoting 

the  employment  of 

infrastructures  and 
local  seamen, 
encouraging landings, supporting the third country in developing local fisheries and 
processing industry 

improving 

2.1.2  Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the EU and the Republic 

of Cabo Verde 

The Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the EU and the Republic of  Cabo Verde, 
and its implementing Protocol, provide fishing opportunities for Union fishing vessels in 
Cabo  Verde’s  waters  and  provides  significant  sectoral  support  for  the  sustainable 
development of the national fisheries sectors.  

It establishes itsprinciples on the economic, financial, technical and scientific cooperation 
in  the  fisheries  sector  with  a  view  to  promoting  responsible  fishing  in  Cabo  Verde’s 
waters to ensure the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources and 
develop the Cabo Verde fisheries sector.  

The first fisheries agreement between the EU and Cabo Verde dates back from 1990. The 
current  Agreement9,  a  5  years  agreement  renewable  for  additional  periods  of  5  years, 
entered into force10 on 30 March 2007. The previous implementing Protocol with Cabo 
Verde expired on 22 December 2018. 

Under  the  current  implementing  Protocol  of  5  years  (from  20  May  2019  to  19  May 
2024), EU fleet is allowed to fish tuna in Cabo Verde’s waters with a reference tonnage 
of 8.000 tonnes per year. Access is given to 28 purse seiners, 27 surface longliners and 
14 Pole and line vessels. In addition to the fees paid by EU fleet, the EU pays a financial 
contribution  of  400  000  EUR  per  year  for  access,  plus  an  annual  specific  amount  of 
350 000  EUR  for  the  support  and  implementation  of  Cabo  Verde  sectoral  fisheries 
policy. The Partnership with the EU is also contributing to strengthening the fight against 
Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported fishing (IUU). 

9   OJ L 414, 30.12.2006, p. 1–2. 
10   OJ L 107, 25.4.2007, p. 7. 

6 

 
 
 
The  Agreement  has  overall  a  significant  impact  on  the  economy  of  the  country.  The 
development  of  infrastructure  at  the  port  of  Mindelo  in  Cabo  Verde  appears  to  have 
favoured landings of tuna of EU origin and of the four Atlantic African coastal countries 
with tuna canneries used by the EU purse seine fleet to land their catches. Cabo Verde 
has overtaken Côte d'Ivoire since 2020 in terms of quantity of whole frozen tuna landed 
(the other two countries are Ghana and Senegal).  

To  improve  the  attractiveness  and  efficiency  of  the  port  of  Mindelo,  Cabo  Verde,  in 
partnership  with  the  EU,  is  in  the  advanced  design  phase  of  a  large-scale  project:  the 
‘Mindelo Blue Port’ Initiative, with possible support from the European Investment Bank 
(EIB). This potential intervention is estimated at EUR 71 million in loans from the EU 
and other potential financial partners, and an EU grant estimated at between EUR 20 and 
EUR 25 million.  

Important to note that Cabo Verde benefits from a 'temporary derogation' from the rules 
on preferential origin for limited volumes of prepared or preserved tuna fillets and loins, 
and  prepared  or  preserved  mackerel  fillets  and  horse  mackerel  of  non-EU  origin  (total 
limit set at 5 500 t in 2023, including 2 500 t for tuna-based products in 2023). 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2   Point(s) of comparison  

In  the  case  of  Cabo  Verde,  the  current  Protocol  has  been  implemented  without 
interruptions since the date of its signature on 20 May 2019. 

The  benchmark  used  for  this  evaluation  is  the  situation  at  beginning  of  the  current 
protocol,  namely  the  situation  at  the  starting  date  of  its  provisional  application  (i.e.  20 
May 2019).  

In  this  context,  the  points  of  comparison  considered  for  the  ex-post  and  ex-ante 
evaluation of the current implementing Protocol are the following:  

-  The  reference  situation  at  the  start  of  the  current  implementing  Protocol  (20  May 

2019). 

-  The situation as of May 2023, i.e. after four years of implementation of the Protocol. 

These points of comparison were used,  alongside the general and specific objectives of 
SFPAs,  to  identify  certain  indicators  when  assessing  the  implementation  of  the  current 
implementing Protocol. Importantly, given the nature of these objectives, it is not always 
possible to provide a quantitative indicator for this analysis.  

The SFPAs’ general objectives are the following:  

(1) To  contribute  towards  resource  conservation  and  environmental  sustainability 
through  rational  and  sustainable  exploitation  of  living  marine  resources  of  the 
partner country. 

(2) To contribute to continuing the fishing activity of the EU long distance fleet and 
the  employment  linked  to  the  fleet  operating  within  the  Agreement  and  its 
Protocol. 

(3) To support the development of a sustainable fisheries sector in partner countries 
(through the governance framework that the Agreement creates and also through 
the  sectoral  support;  cooperation  on  blue  economy,  to  the  small  scale  and 
artisanal  fisheries,  to  job  direct  and  indirect  creation,  development  of  the  local 
and  national  sectoral  policies,  etc.)  and  analysis  of  geographic,  social, 
environmental and economic impacts. 

In  terms  of  the  access  component,  the  relevant  specific  objectives  under  general 
objectives  (1)  and  (2),  the  following  success  criteria  and  indicators  will  be  used  for 
evaluating the implementation of this Protocol, vis-à-vis the points of comparison: 

Specific objectives 
1.1  To  what  extent  fisheries 
addressed 
activities 
surplus 
exclusively 
resources  and  prevent 
the 
overfishing  of  stocks,  on  the 

at 

Success criteria 
The EU fishing opportunities 
are within the limits 
established or recommended 
by the relevant RFMO/RFO 
and the Scientific Joint 

Indicators 

State of the stocks targeted 
under the Protocol and their 
monitoring/management 
(scientific advice analysis by 
the joint scientific committee 

8 

 
 
 
 
and 

basis  of  the  best  scientific 
advice 
improved 
the  global 
transparency  on 
fishing  efforts  in  the  waters 
included 
current 
Protocol. 

the 

in 

1.2  To  what  extent 
the 
implementation  has  followed 
the 
and 
same  principles 
promoted  the  same  standards 
for  fisheries  management  as 
applied in EU waters. 

2.1  To  seek  appropriate  share 
of  the  surplus  resources,  fully 
commensurate  with  the  EU 
their 
interests 
fleets 
sub-regional 
and 
regional 
fishing strategy. 

and 

for 

their 

2.2 To ensure that the level of 
fees  payable  by  Union  ship-
fishing 
owners 
and 
is 
activities 
proportional  considering  the 
revenues  and  costs,  non-
discriminatory and promotes a 
level  playing  field  among  the 
different fleets. 

fair 

Committee. 

the 
implementation  of 
The 
Protocol takes into account the 
management 
strategies  and 
recommendations proposed by 
the  relevant  RFMO/RFO,  the 
Scientific 
Joint  Committee 
and Cabo Verde. 
The  EU  fleet  operating  under 
implementing  Protocol 
the 
follow the same principles and 
standards  as  vessels  operating 
in EU waters, according to the 
additional 
any 
CFP, 
standards  required  by  Cabo 
Verde. 
Fishing  opportunities  covered 
by  the  Protocol  correspond  to 
the  needs  of  the  EU  fleet  and  
are acceptable  considering  the 
activities of fleets active in the 
same  waters  at  national,  sub 
regional and regional level. 

and 

The  Protocol  offers  similar 
conditions 
to  other  foreign 
fleets  operating  in  the  fishing 
zones  and  management  areas 
of the Agreement. 
The  cost  benefit 
is 
acceptable  and  reasonable  for 
the  EU  ship  owners  and  for 
Cabo Verde. 

ratio 

meetings, RFMO/RFO and 
national scientific institutes).  

Utilisation rate of fishing 
opportunities, including the 
evolution of EU vessels, 
licences and catches under the 
Protocol. 

of 

Compliance 
fisheries 
measures 
management 
applicable in the framework of 
the Protocol, in the EU and in 
Cabo Verde. 

fishing 

rate  of 

Utilisation 
opportunities 
Evolution  of  the  number  of 
EU vessels in the region 
Contribution  to  the  supply  of 
the  EU  market  and  EU 
processing sector (volume and 
value)  and 
local 
to 
processing sector.  
Level  of  fees  and  technical 
conditions  applied 
third 
countries  fleets  in  the  fishing 
zones  and  management  areas 
of the Agreement.  
Proportion between fees, costs 
and  benefits  for  the  EU  ship 
owners and for Cabo Verde. 

the 

to 

In terms  of assessing  the implementation  of the  technical conditions established under 
the current Protocol, all the general objectives are relevant. Based on the relevant specific 
objectives  under  these  general  objectives,  the  following  success  criteria  and  indicators 
will  be  used  for  evaluating  the  implementation  of  this  Protocol,  vis-à-vis  the  points  of 
comparison: 

9 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Success criteria 
EU fishing activities follow a 
scientific data collection 
framework. This information 
is transmitted to the relevant 
RFMO/RFO and national 
research institutes.  

EU scientists and scientists 
from Cabo Verde actively 
participate in Joint Scientific 
Committee meetings and 
RFMO/RFO scientific 
committees. 

The activity of the EU fleet is 
properly monitored (VMS, 
AIS, etc.); reporting, 
monitoring and control takes 
place as stipulated in the 
Protocol and as legislation 
requires.  

The Agreement offers a 
reasonable framework to 
foster landings and thus 
supplying local markets and 
trade with third countries. The 
Agreement fosters trade on 
fisheries cooperation between 
the EU and Cabo Verde 
and/or third countries.  

EU vessels recruit part of their 
staff locally: they benefit from 
good working conditions and 
appropriate training, 
equivalent to ILO standards.  

Indicators 
Compliance with scientific data 
collection obligations (e.g. 
logbook and scientific 
observers) under the Protocol.  

Regular collection and analysis 
of relevant data in Joint 
Scientific Committee and 
relevant RFMO/RFO, and 
implementation of their 
recommendations.   

Compliance with reporting 
obligations (e.g. logbook, VMS, 
observers) under the Protocol.  

Level of implementation of the 
monitoring, surveillance and 
control (MCS) provisions under 
the Protocol. 
Level of contribution to the 
supply of the EU market 
(volume and value), including 
for the processing sector. 

Compliance with landing 
obligation in local market, and 
level of landing in local market 
versus neighbouring countries 
markets. 
Respect of the minimum 
number of local seamen 
embarked. 
Employment created directly 
and indirectly in the EU and in 
Cabo Verde or in the region/sub 
region. 

Specific objectives 

1.3 To what extent the 
scientific and technical 
evaluation of the fisheries 
concerned have improved? 

1.4 To ensure compliance 
and control of EU-fleet 
activities. 

2.3 To ensure supply for the 
EU and for the markets of 
Cabo Verde and third 
countries. 

3.4 To promote employment 
of local seamen, improving 
infrastructures and 
encouraging landings, 
supporting the third country 
in developing local fisheries 
and processing industry EU 
and for the markets of certain 
developing countries. To 
create employment directly 
and indirectly. 

In terms of the  sectoral  support component, the relevant  general  objective (3) and its 
specific  objectives,  the  following  success  criteria  and  indicators  will  be  used  for 
evaluating the implementation of this Protocol, vis-à-vis the points of comparison: 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Specific objectives 
3.1 To contribute to 
capacity building and 
social, environmental 
and economic 
development in Cabo 
Verde. 

3.2 defining annual 
and multiannual 
objectives to be 
achieved with the aim 
of developing 
sustainable fishing 
activities 

Success criteria 

Indicators 

The sectoral support contributes to 
capacity building and social, 
environmental and economic 
development in Cabo Verde. 

In particular, the sectoral support 
contributes to adequate training, 
equipment and infrastructures namely 
in the areas of science and control, 
monitoring and surveillance. 
Utilisation of the sectoral support has 
been duly reported in accordance with 
the Protocol.  

Multiannual programming has been 
jointly established in accordance with 
the national fisheries and aquaculture 
and with the Protocol. 

Improvement of level of 
capacity (social, 
environmental, and economic) 
through sectoral support of the 
implementing Protocol 

the 

Percentage 
EU 
of 
contribution  to  the  different 
policy areas in Cabo Verde, in 
accordance  with  the  national 
fisheries strategy. 

Comprehensiveness  and  level 
of  detail  of 
sectoral 
support reporting  

the 

The indicators mentioned to assess the access, sectoral support and technical components 
of the current implementing Protocol will be referenced throughout the next section, and 
often vis-à-vis the points of comparison. The full table, including how the Protocol with 
Cabo Verde addresses the abovementioned objectives, success criteria and indicators can 
be found in Annex III.  

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD? 

Current state of play  

As  regards  the  implementation  of  the  Protocol,  a  number  of  areas  are  identified  in  the 
evaluation: 

a.  Utilisation of fishing opportunities  

The utilisation of fishing opportunities for tuna purse seiners has been medium-high over 
the period 2019 - 2022. An average of 19 EU tuna purse seiners per year (66% out of 28 
foreseen  in  the  Protocol)  have  drawn  annual  fishing  authorisations.  For  surface 
longliners, an average of 11 small-scale longliners per year utilised fishing opportunities 
(40% out of the 27 foreseen in the Protocol). For pole and lines, an average of 6 small-
scale pole and lines per year utilised fishing opportunities (45% out of the 14 foreseen in 
the Protocol).  

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Vessel Category 

Fishing 
Licences 
provided  in  the  current 
Protocol 

Fishing  Authorisations 
obtained 

Percentage (%) of utilized 
fishing opportunities 

28 

14 

27 

69 

Tuna purse seiners 

Surface longliners 

Pole-and-liners 

TOTAL 

b.  Catches   

19 

6 

11 

36 

66% 

40% 

45% 

52% 

On average, EU tuna vessels caught 70% of the reference tonnage of 8000 tonnes agreed 
under  the  Protocol.  EU catches  varied  between  113%  of  the  reference  tonnage  in  2019 
and 69% in 2022, with, hence, one year during which total catches were higher than the 
reference  tonnage,  confirming  the  unpredictability  of  tuna  abundance  in  Cabo  Verde’s 
waters.  EU  purse  seine  catches  represented  74%  of  total  EU  catches.  For  EU  surface 
longliners, catch obtained in the waters of Cabo Verde represented 15% of the catches of 
this segment on average, and for EU Pole and lines catches represented 11% of total EU 
catches. 

Annual catches by EU vessels in the FPA fishing zone (tonnes) per calendar year under 
the 2019-2024 Protocol 

Category  
Freezer tuna seiners  7 187  3 789  3 305  2 296 
857  1 106 
422 
Surface longliners 
44 
1 062  1 058 
Pole-and-liners 
9 106  5 953  4 657  2 762 
Total 

2019  2020  2021  2022  Average 
4 144 
845 
630 
5 619 

996 
356 

c.  Scientific cooperation  

The scientific exchanges between the Parties have mainly taken place in the frame of the 
discussions  at  the  International  Commission  for  the  Conservation  of  Atlantic  Tuna 
(ICCAT),  to  which  both  the  EU  and  Cabo  Verde  are  active  members,  and  which  have 
provided  sufficient  scientific  base  for  the  management  decisions  taken  by  the  Joint 
Committee.  

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
d.  Technical measures 

Electronic transmission of data for all vessels 

The  implementing  Protocol  foresees  that  all  Union  vessels  holding  an  authorisation 
issued under this Protocol shall be equipped with an electronic system (‘ERS’) capable of 
recording and transmitting data on the vessel's fishing activity (‘ERS data’). To date, the 
ERS is operational and, though it has experienced minor operational problems, including 
temporary loss of internet connection, the overall implementation of the ERS is good.  

Embarkation of seamen 

EU vessels  are  required  to  take on board Caboverdian seamen during their activities in 
the area covered by the Protocol (at least 6 seamen for tuna seiners, at least two seamen 
for pole-and-line tuna vessels and at least 5 seamen for surface longliners). In practice, 
EU fishing vessels have complied with this clause.  

Scientific observers 

As  regards  the  observers’  embarkation,  such  provision  is  not  foreseen  in  the  current 
protocol and the rate of coverage of the operations of EU tuna vessels by observers, when 
active  in  Cabo  Verdean  waters,  is  for  the  moment  that  defined  by  ICCAT.  To  address 
this, Cabo Verde plans to set up a programme of (scientific) observers on EU and non-
EU foreign tuna vessels to gain a better understanding of their activities, in particular the 
state  of  certain  stocks  and  their  by-catches.  Collaboration  with  other  Atlantic  coastal 
states where tuna vessels are active or land, tranship or provision themselves is envisaged 
by the Cabo Verdean authorities for the deployment of these scientific observers. While 
it  was  planned  at  the  first  Joint  Committee  meeting11  that  such  a  programme  would  be 
implemented  under  the  current  Protocol,  the  Cabo  Verdean  authorities  are  instead 
planning to take the time to draw up a robust and properly funded programme so that it 
can be effectively implemented under any future Protocol. In addition, the School of the 
Sea  (EMAR)  in  Cabo  Verde  has  so  far  trained  12  scientific  observers  (situation  at  the 
beginning of February 2023).  

Some  producer  organisations  representing  EU  tuna  vessel  owners  active  in  the  Eastern 
Atlantic, including in Cabo Verde waters, indicated during the targeted consultation their 
willingness  to  support  the  Cabo  Verde  authorities  in  the  successful  implementation  of 
such a programme through direct contributions to specific training programmes. Spanish 
and  French  tuna  seiners  have  basin-wide  observer  programmes  which  are  implemented 
independently, under an observer mandate from coastal partner states, when accepted by 
these  states,  by  third  parties,  and  with  funding  from  shipping  companies  via  their 
producer organisations (e.g. the programme for French tuna seiners). 

11   Joint Committee meeting of 11-12 December 2019. 

13 

 
 
 
e.  Sectoral support 

The  multiannual  sectoral  programme  agreed  between  the  two  parties  at  the  Joint 
Committee12,  as  foreseen  by  the  implementing  Protocol,  foresaw  in  total  over  the  five 
years, a budget of EUR 1 750 000 EUR (i.e. EUR 350 000 per year). The main activities 
identified  in  the  programme  concerned  the  following  areas:  monitoring,  control  and 
surveillance,  scientific  research,  support 
to  coastal  communities,  strengthening 
international  cooperation  and  support  for  the  blue  economy  and  the  development  of 
aquaculture.  

In general, payments were made according to the calendar agreed by the two parties.  

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the implementation of the 2019  - 2024 
Sectoral Support activities over the 2020 - 2021 period due to the health measures put in 
place nationally and internationally to reduce the risks of the virus spreading. Although 
the evaluation study could not estimate with great accuracy the impact of the pandemic 
on the sectoral support activities, tranche 1 of the sectoral support was the one that was 
subject  to  the longer delays, however, as it  can  be seen in  the table below, the last 1,5 
year has been back on track.  

As a result, by the end of 2021 there were some delays in the level of implementation of 
the tasks programmed at the Joint Committee meeting in December 2019. However, the 
implementation of these tasks has accelerated ever since reaching by 2023 an acceptable 
level of execution, as verified following the monitoring of the implementation. Both the 
execution of the tasks and the ongoing monitoring continue at a good pace at the time of 
writing of this SWD.  

More  specifically,  by  the  end  of  October  2021,  11%  of  the  tasks  scheduled  at  the 
December 2019 Joint Commission meeting had been executed. A reprogramming of the 
activities financed by sectoral approach 2019 - 2024 tranche 1 was therefore carried out 
at the end of 2021 to improve the execution rate of this tranche. As measures to reduce 
the  spread  of  COVID  were  gradually  lifted  in  2022,  implementation  of  tranche  1 
activities was able to resume and be carried out more rapidly in that year. The box below 
shows financial execution levels at the beginning of January 2023. 

 Level of budget execution at the beginning of 2023:  

1)  EUR 700,000, or 40% of the maximum 1,750,000 euros provided for under Articles 4 
and 5 of the 2019 - 2024 Protocol, have been paid to the Cabo Verde Treasury.  

2)  The level of budget execution of tranche 1 of sectoral support (EUR 350,000) reached 
87% at the end of 2022 / beginning of January 2023. 

12   Joint Committee meeting of 11-12 December 2019. 

14 

 
 
 
The second tranche, paid at the end of December 2022, was expected to be largely and 
rapidly executed in 2023, and therefore closed at the end of 2023, according to the Joint 
Commitee. Both parties expect to be able to approve in the end of 2023 the payment of 
tranches 3 and 4 of the 5 allocated for the whole duration of the Protocol (data of the 
Joint Commission in February 2023). 

4.  EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) 

The 2019-2024 Protocol between the EU and Cabo Verde has broadly met the evaluation 
criteria  for  EU  interventions  of  effectiveness,  efficient,  economy  relevance,  coherence, 
acceptability  and  EU  added  value.  The  current  Protocol  can  be  described  as  a  win-win 
agreement  for  both  parties  in  that  it  addresses  most  of  the  identified  needs  of  different 
stakeholders, although areas of improvements were identified for the sectoral support. 

4.1.  To what extent was the intervention successful and why?  

Effectiveness13. The 2019-2024 Protocol has broadly met the evaluation criteria for EU 
intervention for effectiveness. It has indeed been generally good in its aim of contributing 
to  resource  conservation  and  environmental  sustainability 
through  rational  and 
sustainable  exploitation,  with  some  areas  for  improvement  regarding  the  fishing  of  the 
bigeye  tuna,  which  is  however  protected  by  monitoring  measures  introduced  by  the 
ICCAT  The  Protocol  has  been  also  good  in  terms  of  contributing  to  the  continued 
activity  of  the  EU  distant  water  fishing  fleet  and  employment  related  to  the  fleet 
operating  under  the  Agreement  and  its  Protocol.  However,  lack  of  live  bait  as  well  as 
some limitations regarding the obligation of onboarding Cabo Verdean fishers has led to 
a  sharp  fall  in  landings  from  EU  tuna  seiners  in  Mindelo.  The  Protocol  has  moreover 
been effective in encouraging cooperation between economic operators and good overall 
in terms of its objective of supporting the implementation of the national policy for the 
development  of  the  fisheries  sector.  Scientific  cooperation  (under  sectoral  support)  has 
generally been satisfying for Cabo Verde, even though it was slowed down because of 
the COVID-19 pandemic.  

13   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.1, p. 58-
66 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Efficiency and Economy14. The efficiency of the Protocol is diminished by the fact that 
EU vessels have only exploited part of the fishing opportunities. Nevertheless, the EU's 
investment in access generates a positive return on investment: each euro invested by the 
EU through the financial compensation has generated on average 13.4 euros of direct and 
indirect added value for the EU, and 6.92 euros for Cabo Verde over the period 2019  - 
2021. Regarding the efficiency of the sectoral support, the second tranche (out of five) of 
the funds was not paid out until the end of 2022, due to the delays in the sectoral support 
activities observed with the spreading of the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Coherence15.  The  Protocol  is  coherent  with  the  CFP.  It  is  also  generally  coherent  with 
other  protocols  implementing  (S)FPAs  in  West  Africa.  It  is  also  consistent  with  the 
objectives of ICCAT. Moreover, it contributes to achieving EU objectives at regional and 
sub-regional  level  and  to  other  EU  policies,  particularly  those  aimed  at  strengthening 
fisheries  governance.  The  Protocol  and  its  implementation  are  coherent  and  cooperate 
very  positively  with  other  EU  interventions  and  cooperation  programmes,  while  also 
being  aligned with the priorities identified by the Cabo  Verdean  authorities at  different 
geographical levels. 

4.2.  How did the EU intervention make a difference and to whom? 

EU added value16. EU involvement in the SFPA provides added value compared to what 
could be achieved by any other configuration of partnerships, between Cabo Verde, the 
EU  Member  States  and/or  individual  EU  shipowners.  The  fisheries  agreement  appears 
beneficial  for  the  EU,  but  also  for  the  partner  country,  by  encouraging  the  direct 
involvement  of  the  EU  in  the  monitoring  of  EU vessels  (all  flags  -  EU  Member  States 
combined),  in  the  EU's  contribution  to  the  implementation  of  Cabo  Verde's  sectoral 
policy, and by creating a platform for sectoral dialogue between the EU and Cabo Verde, 
the EU intervention brings added value compared to a  direct intervention by shipowners. 
The  EU  involvement  also  contributes  to  the  implementation  of  Cabo  Verde’s  Blue 
Economy  Development  Strategy,  directly  establishing  a  platform  for  sectoral  dialogue 
between the EU and the partner country.  

14   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.2-8.3, p. 
67-68- 

15    Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.5, p. 70-
71 

16   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.6, p. 72-
73 

16 

 
 
 
Acceptability17.  The  acceptability  of  the  Protocol  is  medium  due  to  interactions  in 
species  caught  by  both  EU  tuna  vessels  and  local  fishermen  and,  as  such,  the  negative 
perception  of  the  FPA  by  the  latter.  Its  implementation  is  acceptable  to  the  EU  -  the 
European  Commission  and  the  administrations  representing  the  main  Member  States 
with  fishing  vessels  active  in  the  Cabo  Verde  EEZ  -  and  to  the  Cabo  Verde 
administration.  Both  parties  envisage  improving  the  implementation  of  the  current 
Protocol in a possible future Protocol. Acceptability is lower for local and international 
civil society. This problem of acceptability in Cabo Verde is undoubtedly due primarily 
to  a  negative  perception  of  EU  fishing  activities,  as  a  result  of  the  still  inadequate 
dissemination  of  information  to  the  coastal  communities  of  Cabo  Verde  and  to 
populations in Cabo Verde, in the regional sea basin (West Africa) and in the EU. Civil 
society,  in  particular,  asks  for  a  higher  degree  of  visibility  and  transparency  of  the 
agreements signed between the EU and Cabo Verde.  

4.3. 

Is the intervention still relevant? 

Relevance18.  The  Protocol  is  found  to  be  relevant  to  the  needs  of  the  key  stakeholders 
concerned. For EU shipowners, the Protocol provides predictable access to a productive 
fishing area since the Protocol's fishing zones form part of the network of fishing zones 
for EU tuna vessels in the Atlantic, particularly in the sub-region including Mauritania, 
Senegal,  Cabo  Verde  and  the  Gambia,  among  others,  but  also  on  the  high  seas.  The 
Protocol  also  ensures  a  level-playing  field  among  all  operators,  since  it  establishes 
minimum  standards for the sustainable management  of fisheries resources and includes 
provisions prohibiting the granting of more favourable conditions to other foreign fleets. 
For Cabo Verde, it delivered national economic benefits from tuna resources present in 
national waters and it helped the country meet some of its ICCAT obligations, especially 
in  relation  to  the  implementation  of  the  observer  programme.  Socio-economic  benefits 
were  also  delivered  through  increased  participation  of  nationals  to  activities  of  EU 
vessels, employment in fisheries related industries, as well as through access and sectoral 
support  financial  components.  The  Protocol  will  continue  providing  to  Cabo  Verde 
financial security regarding the income accruing from the SFPA.   

Cabo  Verde  has  a  strong  interest  to  secure  landings  and  supply  for  its  own  economic 
needs, in particular regarding the supply of processing facilities in Mindelo (Sao Vicente 
Island). The fish processing sector is dominated by three fish processing companies and 2 
of  them  (Frescomar  and  Atunlo  of  Spanish  interests)  are  together  responsible  for  over 
80%  of  Cabo  Verde  exports  of  fishery  products.  These  main  processing  companies  are 

17   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.7, p. 74-
76 

18   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 8.4, p. 69 

17 

 
 
 
estimated to account for around 2,000 jobs, with around 75-80% of these jobs being held 
by  women.  Moreover,  Cabo  Verde  has  a  particular  interest  in  the  ‘Mindelo  Blue  Port’ 
Initiative which is in the advanced design phase, funded with loans and grants by the EU 
and  other  potential  financial  partners.  This  project  is  part  of  the  EU-ECOWAS 
programme to establish and utilize the Praia (Cabo Verde) – Dakar – Abidjan maritime 
corridor.   Finally, the Protocol also  helped to  maintain  Cabo Verde  as one of the main 
suppliers of processed tuna products to the EU market.  

5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED?  

5.1.  Conclusions 

Based on the evaluation, several conclusions can be drawn based on objective analysis of 
the  information  gathered.  Also,  specific  and  relevant  recommendations  for  future 
negotiations on the new protocol between the EU and Cabo Verde can be made.  

From all options considered, the renewal of the Protocol at the end of its implementation 
period (19 May 2024) clearly appears to be in the interest of both parties and as the most 
beneficial outcome. On the contrary, the option of not renewing the Protocol would not 
be beneficial19.  

With  regard  to  access  conditions,  for  the  future  Protocol  the  reference  tonnage  is 
recomended to be set taking into account the level of utilisation of fishing opportunities 
of the current implementing Protocol. 

As regards the technical conditions to be improved, the number of fishing opportunities 
per  fishing  category  should  take  into  account  their  utilisation  rates  over  the  last  five 
years.  The  two  parties  could  consider  a  more  flexible  embarkation  clause  for  Cabo 
Verdean  seamen  so  that  it  is  applied  in  full  by  EU  tuna  vessels  when  active  in  Cabo 
Verdean  waters.  With  regards  to  encouraging  the  landing  of  fishery  products  in  Cabo 
Verde,  incentive  measures  could  be  envisaged  that  would  be  appreciated  by  EU 
shipowners. 

With regard to the sectoral support component, a particular attention should be reserved 
to  scientific research.  In particular it is  recommended to  improve  knowledge of fishing 
activities targeting tuna, shark and swordfish in Cabo Verdean waters, in order to lead to 
possible  new  measures  aimed  at  minimising  interactions  with  national  fishermen 
targeting tuna. A particular focus should be reserved to activities for a better management 
- monitoring - control of sharks, and for reducing the risk of catches of threatened species 
in  Cabo  Verdean  waters.  Sectoral  support  or  other  interventions  by  the  EU  or  other 

19   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans 
le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Chapter 9.3.2, p.86 

18 

 
 
 
 
technical and financial partners could also help to strengthen and consolidate statistics in 
the fisheries sector on a long-term basis.  

5.2.  Lessons learned 

The two main lessons learned from this evaluation process are: 

To  improve  the  acceptability  of  the  Agreement,  it  is  necessary  to  strengthen  the 
communication  to  the  local  population  and  the  different  stakeholders  on  the  conditions 
set up by the Protocol for the fishing activities of the EU vessels. It is also necessary to 
increase  the  visibility  of  the  achievements  of  the  projects  implemented  thanks  to  the 
sectoral support.  Therefore, awareness-raising activities on the SFPA are recommended 
towards fishers and the Cabo Verdean population.  

relating 

Cabo  Verde  should  also  be  encouraged  by  the  EU  to  ratify  certain  international 
conventions 
(IMO) 
International  Convention  on  Standards  of  Training,  Certification  and  Watchkeeping  for 
Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F), as well as the International Labour Organisation's 
(ILO) C188 Convention on Work in Fishing). 

(International  Maritime  Organisation's 

fishing 

to 

6.  EX-ANTE EVALUATION ANALYSIS FOR A POTENTIAL NEW PROTOCOL 

6.1 Identification of Problems and Needs 

An SFPA offers both the EU and Cabo Verde the possibility to maintain a platform for 
sectoral  policy  dialogue  and  to  jointly  contribute  to  the  improvement  of  oceans 
governance, including the fight against IUU. 

Cabo Verde is an important partner in the regional management and governance of fish 
stocks,  as  the  country  is  a  longstanding  ICCAT  member  and  active  member  of  other 
regional  entities  in  the  Atlantic  region  such,  as  COMHAFAT.  The  SFPA  with  Cabo 
Verde  further  ensures  a  coherent  regional  approach,  on  the  one  hand  through  these 
regional organizations such as ICCAT, and on the other hand through the network (and 
its expansion) of consistent and fully transparent SFPAs in the West Africa region. Along 
with improving ocean governance and strengthening the international fight against IUU, 
the principle of non-discrimination between the EU fleet and foreign fleets (enshrined in 
the CFP) which is guaranteed by the existence of an SFPA, is also a positive element. 

Some  of  the  potential  benefits  for  Cabo  Verde  could  include  the  strengthening  of  the 
partnership  with  the  EU,  in  particular  in  ensuring  the  sustainable  utilisation  of  the 
fisheries  resources  by  strengthening  scientific  data  collection,  reinforcing  monitoring, 
control and surveillance measures including actions to fight against IUU.  

19 

 
 
 
 
Socio-economic benefits through increased participation of nationals to activities of EU 
vessels, employment in fisheries related industries, as well as through access and sectoral 
support  financial  components  are  also  to  be  considered.  An  SFPA  would  continue 
providing to Cabo Verde financial security regarding the income accruing from it.  

Moreover,  Cabo  Verde  could  benefit  from  securing  landings  and  supply  for  its  own 
economic  needs,  in  particular  regarding  the  supply  of  processing  facilities  in  Mindelo 
(Sao Vicente Island). 

As  far  as  EU  shipowners  are  concerned,  the  network  of  active  SFPAs  in  the  Atlantic 
Ocean  region,  which  Cabo  Verde  is  a  part  of,  contributes  to  legal  security  and  stable 
access rights to the EU vessels in the region. The SFPA also ensures a level-playing field 
among  all  operators,  since  it  establishes  minimum  standards  for  the  sustainable 
management  of  fisheries  resources  and  includes  provisions  prohibiting  the  granting  of 
more  favourable  conditions  to  other  foreign  fleets.  These  are  all  findings  that  are 
meticulously highlighted in the ex-post evaluation part of this document (see Chapter 4).  

International and national civil society organizations have an interest in the activities 
carried  out  under  the  sectoral  support  component  and  would  like  to  see  a  better 
implementation, as demonstrated in the relevant consultations carried out in the context 
of the evaluation conducted by the independent consultant20. 

6.2 EU added value 

Compared with direct fishing authorizations (outside of an SFPA context), an SFPA lays 
down a framework for all parties to enable and monitor - control the access of EU vessels 
to  fishery  resources  in  waters  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Cabo  Verde,  with  a  regular 
dialogue-monitoring platform provided by the Joint Committee.,  

The EU is  best-fit for guaranteeing  coherence of the agreements  with  its own CFP and 
other  agreements  with  regional  partner  countries,  as  well  as  with  standards  applied  by 
RFMOs . 

Through its implementation Protocol the FPA promotes the direct involvement of the EU 
in  the monitoring  of EU Member States' vessels.  It  also  allows the EU to contribute to 
establish a platform for sectoral dialogue between the EU and Cabo Verde (compared to 
interventions  by  EU  Member  States  only).  The  EU's  involvement  also  ensures 
consistency  between  the  fishing  opportunities  obtained  through  the  Protocol  and  those 
obtained under the fishing agreements concluded by the EU with neighbouring countries 
(Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia and Guinea-Bissau). 

20 Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans le 
domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo Verde, Annexe 8, p. 133 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
6.3 Policy and management objectives  

The  logic  of  the  SFPAs  intervention  and  its  objectives  (see  Chapter  2.1)  are  still 
applicable and coherent with the external dimention of the CFP. The findings of the ex-
post evaluation  (see Chapter 4.1 as well as Annex III),    show that  an SFPA with  Cabo 
Verde is fit for purpose to fulfil the above mentionedgeneral objectives.  

6.4 Policy options and associated risks 

Two options are to be considered: 

Option A – Negotiation of a new protocol (in the same terms as the current one or with 
possible improvements) 

Option B – Expiry of the current Protocol and non-negotiation of a new one 

•  Option A 

Option A.1 – New protocol with the same terms as the current one  

Despite the fact that the ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol showcased that this is 
fit for purpose, it also highlighted some important challenges (see Chapter 4.1, e.g. non 
exploitation of the entirety of the fishing opportunities granted under the Protocol, lack of 
live baits, clause regarding national seamen, delays in the implementation of the 
activities funded under the sectoral support component, low visibility of the Protocol and 
negative perception by local fishers and national/international civil society etc). 
Negotiating a new protocol with identical terms would not, therefore, yield the desirable 
results regarding the needed improvements.  

Option A.2 – New protocol with possible improvements  

As  the  SFPA  with  Cabo  Verde  is  generally  fit  for  purpose,  being  aligned  with  the 
objectives  and  the  criteria  described  above,  a  room  for  improvement  could  be  made  in 
order to allow for potential adjustments that would contribute to addressing the existing 
challenges.  For  exemple,  the  reference  tonnage  as  well  as  the  number  of  the  fishing 
opportunities  should  take  into  account  the  actual  utilization  rates.  Morover,  the  two 
parties  should  take  into  account  the  recent  decline  in  catches  by  tuna  vessels  in  the 
Eastern Atlantic, including  those of the EU,  as highlighted in  the ex-post evaluation  of 
the  implementing  Protocol21.  Nevertheless,  due  to  the  species’  high  migratory  nature, 
peak  catches  are  still  conceivable  in  the  future,  as  it  has  happened  in  the  period  2017-
2019.  

21 5 619 t on average between 2019 and 2022. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The ‘temporary derogation’ clause that Cabo Verde currently benefits from, facilitating 
landings at the Port of Mindelo, should also be assessed as a risk in case of non-renewal. 
Therefore, alternative measures to encourage landings at Cabo Verde (even in the event 
of non-renewal) should be considered so  as to prevent a loss of revenue for the partner 
country.  Any  envisaged  measures  should  be  applied  following  the  principle  of  non-
discrimination between the third-country fleets operating in Cabo Verde waters. 

With  regard  to  technical  measures,  the  ex-post  evaluation  shows  that  there  are  some 
obstacles in the implementation of the clause  providing for the embarkation of national 
seamen, restricting  EU vessels to  onboard  exclusively seamen of Cabo Verdean origin. 
These issues could be addressed by considering a more flexible clause compared to the 
one  currently  in  place,  possibly  requiring  a  minimum  number  of  ACP  seamen  and  not 
exclusively  of  Cabo  Verdean  origin.  This  would  be  in  line  with  provisions  of    other 
protocols  implementing  EU  tuna  fishing  agreements  negotiated  by  the  EU  with  other 
countries in the region, such as the one with Senegal. In this context, a preference clause 
for Cabo Verdean seamen could considered.  

Concerning  embarking  of  observers,  the  future  Protocol  should  continue  to  ensure  that 
national  observers  are  embarked  on  board  and  link  as  much  as  possible  with  existing 
observer regional initiatives to minimise EU fleet interaction with local fishers targeting 
tuna  stocks.  Cabo  Verdean  authorities  are  currently  planning  to  introduce  in  the  new 
Protocol an observers programme for all fleet (EU and other third countries) operating in 
their waters. Precise mapping of these ‘areas of interaction’ could therefore be the object 
of the upcoming negotiations.  

As far as sectoral support is concerned, the ex-post evaluation shows that some of the 
challenges in the implementation of the current Protocol include delays in the utilisation 
of funds of the sectoral component by the Cabo Verdean authorities, as well as the low 
visibility  of  the  Protocol  within  the  local  communities  and  national/international  civil 
society and, subsequently, negative perceptions. 

Future  financial  contributions,  should  continue  strengthening  the  monitoring  and 
surveillance  capabilities,  but  also  focus  on  additional  key  areas:  improvement  of 
scientific  capacities  with  a  view  of  better  understanding  the  fishing  activities  targeting 
tuna,  shark  and  sword  fish  in  Cabo  Verde  and  minimizing  the  interactions  with  local 
fishers;  consolidation  of  statistics  in  the  fisheries  sector  on  a  long-term  basis  and 
strengthening  dialogue  with  stakeholder  and  improving  the  visibility  and  image  of 
SFPAs.  Moreover,  cooperation  and  synergies  could  be  sought  inter  alia  with 
interventions from the EBI, the World Bank and other financial partners. 

A  new  protocol  could  also  include  incentives  to  encourage  the  landing  of  fishery 
products  in  Cabo  Verde,  which  would  be  appreciated  by  EU  fishing  vessel  owners. 
However,  these  measures  require  in-depth  analysis  by  the  various  public  services 
involved during the negotiation phase of a possible future protocol to ensure that they are 

22 

 
 
effective  and  enable  their  advantages,  disadvantages,  induced  effects  and  positive  and 
negative impacts to be clearly identified.  

Furthermore, a future Protocol shouldinclude provisions on personal data protection, by 
taking  into  account  both  the  EU22  and  Cabo  Verde23  legislative  frameworks  on  this 
matter.  

The abovementioned adaptations would have the following characteristics: 

Area of 
Improvement 

Intervention 
Strategy 

Access 
Component 

Technical 
Measures 

Sectoral 
Component 

Funding for 
accessing the Cabo 
Verdean fishing 
zone under the 
SFPA based on the 
utilization rate of 
fishing 
opportunities and 
the number of 
catches. 

Adapting the clause 
on seamen on EU 
vessels to include 
in general seamen 
of ACP origin. 

Strengthening 
scientific 
cooperation for 
Cabo Verdean 
scientific observers 
on EU vessels. 

Monitoring of 
sectoral support 
payments  

Raising awareness 
and disseminating 
information 
regarding a 
potential new 
protocol 

Instrument 

Financing 

Channel of 
Intervention 

Level of 
Intervention 

Direct payments 
to Cabo Verde 

Rates paid for the 
reference tonnage by 
the EU and the EU 
shipowners 

Modified 
provisions in a 
potential SFPA 

Negotiations with 
Cabo Verde 

Funding and 
training  

Direct cooperation 
with the Cabo 
Verdean authorities 

Scientific pool of 
observers in Cabo 
Verde 

Joint Committee 

Networking, 
funding of 
awareness 
campaigns 

Joint Committee’s 
regular meetings 

Direct support to 
Cabo Verdean 
authorities 

Joint Committee 

Contact with local 
fishers, 
national/international 
civil society 

22   Ref. Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 23, 2018 
on "the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by Union institutions, 
bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and to the free movement of such data. 

23  

law  no.  121/IX/2021  amending  the  general  legal  framework  on  protection  of  individuals'  personal 
data, approved by law no. 133/V/2001, of January 22, amended by law no. 41/VIII/2013, of September 
17. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Option B  

Without a new SFPA, the EU fleet will not be able to access the fishing zone covered by 
the current agreement, as long as the latter is not denounced, according to the exclusivity 
clause provided for in Article 6.1.  

During  this  "dormant"  FPA  period,  historically  active  EU  fleets  have  to  redirect  their 
activities  in  the  sub-region  to  other  accessible  fishing  zones  with  the  risk  of  an 
intensification of their activities in other fishing zones, such as Mauritania and Senegal, 
for the EU tuna seiners. 

In the unlikely case of effective denunciation of the FPA, the EU fishing fleet would be 
able  to  access  fishery  resources  in  the  fishing  zone  covered  by  the  current  FPA  on  the 
basis of the technical and financial conditions laid down by the partner country and under 
the SMEFF Regulation.  

Non-renewal of the Protocol would also have a negative impact on the EU-Cabo Verde 
cooperation in the field of the fight against IUU in the sub-region, given that the SFPA is 
integrating the good practices regarding fighting against IUU as these are provided for in 
the CFP. Consequently, the strategy of combatting IUU in the region could get weakened 
in case of a non-renewal.  

Regarding sectoral support, sectoral policies in Cabo Verde could still get support from 
other EU development and cooperation initiatives (such as the EU Fund for Sustainable 
Development),  however,  it  would  not  specifically  target  the  field  of  governance  of  the 
fisheries sector and that of fisheries research.  

6.4 Results and Impacts 

Based on the abovementioned analysis, Option A.2 (negotiations for a new Protocol with 
improvements) is the preferable one. Not negotiating a new protocol would deprive the 
EU of an instrument capable of meeting the needs of the various stakeholders as well as 
its own needs in terms of strengthening international ocean governance.  

The following table provides an overview of the comparison between the three envisaged 
options:  

Criterion 

Relevance 

Option A.1 

Option A.2 

Option B 

If no changes are made, the 
access  component  could 
turn  out  to  be  irrelevant,  as 
fishing  opportunities  would 
not  adapt 
the  actual 
to 
utilisation rates.  

Payment of sectoral support 
the 
could 
of 
absorbing 

not  match 
capacities 

A  new  Protocol  would 
respond  to  the  needs  of  an 
increased  value  for  money 
for  the  EU  contribution  for 
access,  by  adjusting 
the 
fishing  opportunities  to  the 
the 
utilisation 
previous period. 

rates  of 

The  payment  of  instalments 

Denunciation  of  SFPAs 
only  in  exceptional  cases  – 
Option  B  would  not  satisfy 
the  needs  of  the  different 
stakeholders,  especially  for 
the  EU  fleet  that  would  not 
be  able  to  fish  in  Cabo 
Verdean  water  due  to  the 
exclusivity clause 

24 

 
 
 
 
Cabo  Verde  if  the  observed 
delays  were  not  properly 
adressed. 

of  the  sectoral  component 
would  match  the  absorption 
the  partner 
capacities  of 
close 
country 
the 
monitoring 
implementation 
each 
tranche. 

with 

of 

of 

not 

Effectiveness  Technical  measures  would 
remain  the  same  and  some 
issues  would 
be 
addressed  (for  exemple  : 
lack  of  live  bait  for  EU 
vessels  would  persist,  the 
obligation 
onboard 
to 
exclusively  Cabo  Verdean 
seamen  would  still  be  a 
bottleneck  for  the  EU  fleet, 
etc.) 

Avoidance  of  fishing  of  the 
bigeye  tuna  would  not  be 
affected  given 
ICCAT’s 
conservation measures 

A new Protocol would set a 
clear  timeline  for  sectoral 
component  activities  which 
would be monitored. 

Possibility  of  onboarding 
seamen  coming  from  Cabo 
Verde  but  also  of  ACP 
origin.  

Targeted 
measures 
regarding  the  avoidance  of 
fishing of the bigeye tuna 

EU-Cabo Verde cooperation 
in the fisheries sector would 
not  be  possible  except  for 
the  general  framework  of 
the  cooperation  policy  of 
the EU. 

Economic  loss  for  the  EU 
since  the  waters  of  Cabo 
Verde  would  no  longer  be 
an  option  because  of  the 
exclusivity clause. 

Efficiency 

fishing 
Currently, 
opportunities 
not 
exploited  in  their  entirety 
with  an  extra  margin  for 
benefit for the EU.  

are 

It  cannot  be  evaluated  ex-
ante  as  it  depends  on  the 
negotiated 
financial 
amounts  and  on  the  catches 
by the EU fleet 

the 

However 
ratio 
cost/benefit  is  still  positive 
for the EU and Cabo Verde 
that  gain  around  13.4  and 
6.92  euros  respective  for 
each  euro  invested  by  the 
EU 

is 
The  current  Protocol 
aligned  with 
the  CFP 
objectives,  other  regional 
SFPAs and the objectives of 
the ICCAT 

Coherence 

Acceptability  The  current  Protocol 

is 
acceptable  by  the  EU  ship 
owners,  the  Cabo  Verdean 
authorities and the EU.  

However, low visibility and 
communication 
and 
inadequate  dissemination  of 
a 
information 

lead 

to 

However, 
envisaged 
the 
adaptations would adjust the 
cost for the EU to the actual 
utilisation  rates  observed  in 
the most recent periods 

implement 

A new protocol would allow 
to  better 
the 
objectives  of  the  CFP  and 
those  of 
the  cooperation 
policy,  given  that  it  would 
be  more  fit  for  purpose  to 
achieve 
the  general  and 
specific  objectives  of  the 
current FPA  

The  competent  authorities 
of  Cabo  Verde  and  the  EU 
shipowners 
the 
renewal of the Protocol.  

support 

Local  fishers  as  well  as 
national/international 
civil 
society  would  be  more 
the 
satisfied 

with 

25 

specific 

budgetary 
No 
commitment from the EU in 
this  case,  so  no  cost-benefit 
analysis.  Economic  loss  for 
national 
Cabo 
budget. 

Verde 

Without  a  Protocol,  the  EU 
will  have 
less  bilateral 
resources  to  implement  the 
sub-regional 
in 
the 
accordance 
principles of the CFP. 

strategy 
with 

principles 
general 
The 
cooperation 
the 
guiding 
however, 
will, 
policy 
continue to apply in the EU-
Cabo  Verde  cooperation 
framework 

The  EU  shipowners  could 
consider  non-acceptable  the 
absence  of  a  Protocol  while 
the  clause  of  exclusivity  of 
the SFPA applies.  

Cabo 

The 
authorities 
deprived  of  a 

would 

Verdean 
be 
strategic 

 
 
partnership with the EU and 
on  the  dependent  funding 
which  is  complementary  to 
other  interventions  funded 
by the EU.  

decrease in the acceptability 
of  the  Protocol  by  local 
and 
fishers 
national/international 
civil 
society.  

that  would 
increased 

transparency 
stem 
from 
visibility/communication 
(information  and  awareness 
campaigns)  of  a  potential 
new protocol. 

the 
Nevertheless, 
a  new 
acceptability  of 
by 
the  Cabo 
Protocol 
Verdean 
authorities  will 
depend  on  the  evolution  of 
the  negotiations,  on 
the 
participation  level  of  the 
stakeholders, 
the 
visibility/communication 
interventions  towards  local 
stakeholders,  as  well  as  on 
the  technical  conditions  of 
the Protocol. 

on 

6.6 Monitoring and Evaluation 

A new Protocol of implementation of the SFPA between the EU and Cabo Verde should 
be subject, during its implementation phase, to monitoring/evaluation through a technical 
dialogue between the authorities of Cabo Verde and the European Commission with the 
assistance, where appropriate, of the EU Delegation in Cabo Verde.   

This  technical  dialogue  will  favour  the  preparation  of  annual  meetings  of  the  Joint 
Committee established by the agreement that has the authority of making decisions about 
the implementation of of the Protocol.  

Following the requirements of the the CFP (Art. 31.10), the Protocol will be subject to an 
independent ex-post evaluation that needs to be carried out,   before the expiry date of the 
Protocol  in  order  to  allow  the  EU  institutions  and  the  partner  country  to  prepare  a 
potential  renewal  following  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure,  without  risking  the 
interruption of access opportunities.  

This  evaluation  should  make  use  of  objectively  verifiable  indicators  (quantitative  and 
qualitative)  including,  but  not  limited  to,  the  utilisation  of  fishing  opportunities,  the 
number of catches and the implementation of the sectoral support component.  

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
ANNEX I:   PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

1.  LEAD DG, DeCIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES 

Responsible DG: DG MARE – Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

2.  ORGANISATION AND TIMING 

Tasks 

Signature of the contract  

Kick-off meeting 

Report of the Kick-off meeting 

Submission of the inception report  

Comments to the inception report 

Time 

19 December 2022 

7 February 2023 

11 February 2023 

23 February 2023 

3 February 2021 

Meeting to discuss inception report 

n/a (exchanges by email) 

Submission of the draft final report 

Meeting to discuss draft final report  

Submission of the final report  

19 April 2023 

24 April 2023 

9 May 2023 

3.  EXCEPTIONS TO THE BETTER REGULATION GUIDELINES 

The legal and procedural requirements for the preparation of the renewal of fisheries protocols lead to a tight schedule, which prevents the holding of an 
open public consultation.  Moreover, the impact  of SFPA is  relatively limited, as they focus on  a small  number of stakeholders. For these reasons the 

27 

 
 
consultation of key stakeholders was carried out as referred in paragraph 2 of annex II. A synopsis report of such consultations is presented in annex V. 
The consultation strategy excludes open public consultations. 

4.  EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY 

The evaluation process and the final evaluation report was subject to a quality assessment by the Steering Committee. 

28 

 
 
 
ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED 

The  results  of  this  SWD  are  mainly  informed  by  an  evaluation  study  conducted  by  an  independent  consultant.  The  evaluation  work  was  carried  out 
between  February  2023  and  April  2023.  Conducted  under  the  guidance  of  an  interdepartmental  committee  set  up  by  the  European  Commission's  DG 
MARE,  the  method  used  can  be  broken  down  into  three  main  components:  analysis  of  available  information,  consultations  and  preparation  of  an 
evaluation study. 

1. Analysis of available information 

DG MARE shared several documents and databases with the consultant team. The main elements shared include: 

•  Data and information from the meetings of the four Joint Committee meetings held since the start of the Protocol (December 2019, October 2021 and 

November 2023) 

•  Reports from the various DG MARE technical missions to Cabo Verde 
• 

Information  exchanged  between  the  two  parties  in  relation  to  the  implementation  of  sectoral  support:  programming  and  monitoring  documents, 
implementation reports prepared by Cabo Verde, etc. 

•  Data on fishing authorisations and catches by EU vessels in the fishing zone concerned by the Protocol (extracted from DG MARE's aggregated catch 

database) 

•  DG MARE data on the payment of fees due by EU operators for the issue of fishing authorisations; 
•  Amounts paid from the EU budget under the financial contribution identified in the Protocol (DG MARE budget monitoring). 

The evaluation study also made use of other documentary sources, including the regulatory texts applicable in the context of the Agreement, the reports 
of the FAO-COPACE and ICES scientific working groups, and the reports of the FAO-COPACE and ICES scientific working groups. 

2. Consultations 

29 

 
The consultations24 carried out for the purposes of this evaluation study, by the independent consultants, included: 

-  Consultation of stakeholders in the EU: from the outset of the evaluation, EU stakeholders were identified and consulted on the basis of a strategy 
validated by DG MARE at the start of the evaluation. The consultation involved the Commission and EEAS services involved in relations with Cabo 
Verde, the flag Member States of EU vessels benefiting from  fishing  opportunities,  the professional  associations grouping  EU operators using the 
negotiated fishing opportunities and civil society. The consultation period ran from February 2023 to April 2023; 

-  Consultation of stakeholders in Cabo Verde: a mission was organised in Cabo Verde in consultation with the EU and Cavo Verde parties in March 
2023. During the mission, face-to-face discussion sessions were held with the various departments of the Ministry of Fisheries involved in monitoring 
the Agreement, the agencies of other Ministries also involved in monitoring the Agreement, and representatives of the private sector in the industrial 
and artisanal sectors. Representatives of the EUD in Cabo Verde were also consulted. 

3. Preparation of the evaluation study  

The preparation of the evaluation study took into account the guidelines and tools recommended by the EU in this area, as well as the methodological 
elements specific to the external dimension of the Common Fisheries Policy, such as those concerning the methods for evaluating the socio-economic 
impact of EU SFPAs. 

24    Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo 

Verde, Chapter 1.2, p. 4 

30 

 
 
 
ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX AND, WHERE RELEVANT, DETAILS ON ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS (BY CRITERION) 

Effectiveness – The extent to which the objectives of the Implementing Protocol to the Agreement were achieved 

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

Objective 1: To contribute towards resource conservation and environmental sustainability through rational and sustainable exploitation of living marine 
resources of Cabo Verde 

1.1 To what extent fisheries activities 
addressed exclusively at surplus 
resources and prevent the overfishing 
of stocks, on the basis of the best 
scientific advice and improved 
transparency on the global fishing 
efforts in the waters included in the 
current Protocol. 

Stocks targeted by the EU fleet are not 
overexploited at the regional level 
(highly migratory species- Tuna) or at 
national level, and the EU fishing 
capacity is within the limits established 
or recommended by the relevant RFMO 
or RFO.  

The Protocol takes into account the 
management strategies expressed by 
RFMOs and Cabo Verde.  

Cabo Verde takes part in the relevant 
RFMO/RFOs and provides data on 
activities carried out by vessels 
flagging its flag and by other foreign 
fleets operating in its waters. 

State of the stocks targeted under the 
Protocol (scientific advice analysis that 
Cabo Verde conducted, meetings, 
regional scientific reports and data,  
RFMO/RFO and national scientific 
institutes);  

All fleets catches and fishing effort in 
Cabo Verde and in the region; possible 
impact on the environment of all the 
fleets operating in these waters. All 
considering that the target is tuna like 
migratory species  

The main species targeted by the EU 
tuna fleet in the Cabo Verdean waters 
are not overexploited, the only 
exception being in terms of catches, the 
bigeye tuna which would be overfished 
but probably not subject to overfishing 
(50% of scientific probability). The 
species is, however, subject to 
management measures and specific 
monitoring by ICCAT and therefore by 
the Contracting Parties of ICCAT 
including the EU. The Protocol does 
not derogate from any of the 
management and conservation 
measures adopted within the 
multilateral framework of ICCAT and 
applicable to EU tuna fleets. 

31 

 
 
 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

1.2 To what extent the implementation 
has followed the same principle and 
promote the same standards for 
fisheries management as applied in EU 
waters. 

The EU and Cabo Verde adopt 
management measures to reduce by-
catches and discards and reduce the 
possible impacts on the ecosystem. 

State of the stocks taken as by-catch by 
EU vessels; management measures 
adopted at the regional, national or EU 
level or in the framework of the 
Protocol. Strategies aimed at 
conservation measures for protected 
species such as sharks 

1.3 To what extent the scientific and 
technical evaluation of the fisheries 
concerned have improved? 

Inclusion of data collection provisions 
in the Agreement and timely 
availability of relevant data at the 
management and scientific operators; 
amount and quality of data collected; 
number of reports to RFMO and 
scientific institutes; participation rate in 
RFMO/RFO scientific committees; 
results achieved with sectoral support; 
number of meeting between scientists 
and managers at country level. 

EU fishing activities are subject to an 
appropriate reporting obligation 
framework (logbook, VMS, observers 
etc.) in the Agreement and a scientific 
data collection framework (size 
composition of the catches, biological 
parameters etc.). This information is 
transmitted to the relevant RFMO and 
national research institutes. EU 
scientists and scientists from Cabo 
Verde actively participate in scientific 
meetings and RFMO/RFO scientific 
committees. Cooperation between 
scientific institutes is encouraged and 
supported where appropriate. Joint 
scientific analysis at regional level at 

32 

The EU and Cabo Verde under the 
Protocol apply management measures 
to reduce bycatch and discards, and 
potential impacts on the ecosystem by 
complying with internationally 
applicable measures (through ICCAT) 
and within the Protocol (prohibition of 
shark finning from the carcass onboard, 
for example, a prohibition stemming 
also from EU and Cabo Verde 
regulations) 

The scientific cooperation has generally 
met Cabo Verde's expectations but 
could be improved according to the 
national authorities. Nevertheless, it has 
been slowed down by the COVID-19 
pandemic as part of the activities 
planned in the sectoral support 
component. Cabo Verde, however, 
particularly desires that the scientific 
cooperation provides a better 
understanding of the tuna fishing 
activities with the assistance of 
domestic observers. 

The Cabo Verdean authorities are 
preparing for a future Protocol to 

 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

1.4 To ensure compliance and control 
of EU-fleet activities 

RFMO level are taken into account. 

The activity of the EU fleet is properly 
monitored (VMS, AIS, etc.); reporting, 
monitoring and control takes place as 
stipulated in the Protocol and as 
legislation requires. Moreover, there is 
adequate monitoring, reporting and 
control of all catches and catch 
composition, possible infractions are 
sanctioned; sectoral support is used to 
reinforce monitoring, control and 
surveillance (MCS). 

Level of implementation of the 
monitoring provisions in the Agreement 
and its Protocol; level of 
implementation of the monitoring, 
reporting and control provisions; results 
achieved with sectoral support in terms 
of MCS. 

develop a national observer programme 
in the sea basin scale in collaboration 
with other observer programs of 
neighbouring coastal States. 

EU vessels are monitored in accordance 
with the provisions of the Protocol and 
those of the Common Fisheries Policy, 
with the exception of the deployment of 
national observers However, the EU 
tuna vessels are monitored as part of 
the ICCAT observation programs, by 
Scientific Data Collection and by other 
observers programs in the region (e.g. 
EU pole-and-line tuna vessels with 
Senegalese observers). 

Objective 2: To contribute to continuing the fishing activity of the EU long distance fleet and the employment linked to the fleet operating within the 
Agreement and its Protocol 

2.1 To seek appropriate share of the 
surplus resources, fully commensurate 
with the EU fleets interests and their 
regional and sub-regional fishing 
strategy 

The Agreement and its Protocol 
provide  access to fishing zones that are 
important for the EU fleet. Species and 
quantities covered by the Protocol 
correspond to the fishing patterns of the 
EU fleet. The fishing opportunities 
allowed are acceptable considering the 
activities of all fleets active in the same 

Utilisation of fishing licences; catches 
in waters covered by the current 
Agreement and Protocol compared to 
overall catches at national, regional and 
sub-regional level if appropriate; 
employment (direct and indirect jobs); 
evolution of the number of EU vessels 
in the region; contribution to the supply 

The fishing zones mainly meet the 
needs of the EU tuna vessels. Species 
and quantities covered by the Protocol 
correspond to the fishing patterns of the 
EU fleet. 

33 

 
 
 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

waters at national, sub regional and 
regional level.  

of the EU market and EU processing 
sector (volume and value) and to the 
local processing sector.  

2.2 To ensure that the level of fees 
payable by Union ship-owners for their 
fishing activities is fair and 
proportional considering the revenues 
and costs, non-discriminatory and 
promotes a level playing field among 
the different fleets 

The Agreement and its Protocol offer 
similar conditions to all foreign fleets 
operating in the fishing zones and 
management areas in the current 
Protocol. 

The cost benefit ratio is acceptable and 
reasonable for the EU ship owners and 
for Cabo Verde. 

Level of fees and technical conditions 
applied to third countries fleets in the 
fishing zones and management areas in 
the current Protocol. Proportion 
between fees, (all) costs and (all) 
benefits for the EU ship owners and for 
Cabo Verde. 

2.3 To ensure supply for the EU and for 
the markets of Cabo Verde and third 
countries. 

The Agreement offers a reasonable 
framework to foster landings and thus 
supplying local markets and trade with 
third countries. The Agreement fosters 
trade on fisheries cooperation between 
the EU and Cabo Verde and/or third 
countries. 

Percentage of landings versus local and 
neighbouring countries market’s needs. 

Trade figures on fish (and composition) 
between the EU and Cabo Verde. 

Commercial balance and relation with 
Cabo Verde and neighbouring countries 
related to fish caught in Cabo Verdean 
waters 

34 

The Cabo Verdean authorities have 
informed the EU that the conditions of 
access, tracking, and surveillance 
applied to the different foreign fleets 
are identical - during the meetings of 
the Joint Committee.  

Information made available to the EU 
during JC meetings, and/or by the 
evaluator an/or the public, are not, 
however, exhaustive enough to 
accurately validate this confirmation. 

The Port of Mindelo is an important 
port for landing and transhipments for 
EU tuna vessels. Without specific 
incentive measures for landing and 
domestic market disposal, the current 
Protocol has, however, a modest 
leverage on landings and transhipments 
in Cabo Verde. 

 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

2.4 To encourage the creation of a 
secure environment that is favourable 
to private investment and economic 
activities contributing to the sustainable 
development of the country and 
reinforcing its cooperation with the EU. 

2.5 To take into account the specific 
interests of the  

−  Union's outermost regions 
located in the vicinity 

−  Union’s fleet.  

Part of the fish caught in the framework 
of the Agreement supplies local market 
and processing industry; the EU-fishing 
supports port- and ancillary activities 
and the economic and social 
development in the EU and in the area 
covered by the current Protocol. The 
agreement could have an important 
impact regionally There are synergies 
between the implementation of the 
Agreement and the economic and social 
development of the country. 

The Agreement covers the specific 
needs of the EU fleet based in 
outermost region and in the EU by 
ensuring the continuity of their fishing 
grounds 

Number of initiatives to ensure 
cooperation between economic 
operators of the EU and local. Benefits 
that such activities are brought to the 
EU, national and locally. Number of 
initiatives that have had a local, 
national and regional benefit. 

The EU fleet supports port and related 
activities in Mindelo. It also partly 
supports the development of the 
industrial sector under Spanish industry 
groups in Mindelo and also the one 
based in Galicia, Spain, which sources 
its fish products from tuna vessels 
active in the regional sea basin, 
including the waters of Cabo Verde 
covered by the Protocol. 

Number of vessels originating from the 
outermost region operating under the 
Agreement and percentage of catches 
comparted to total catches. The same 
for the EU vessels originating from 
other EU regions. 

The Protocol satisfactorily takes into 
account the needs of operators in the 
Canary Islands, including fishing 
opportunities that they can utilize. 

Objective  3:  To  support  the  development  of  a  sustainable  fisheries  sector  in  partner  countries  (through  the  governance  framework  that  the  Agreement 
creates and also through the sectoral support; cooperation on blue economy, to the small scale and artisanal fisheries, to job direct and indirect creation, 
development of the local and national sectoral policies, etc.) and analysis of geographic, social, environmental and economic impacts. 

3.1 To contribute to capacity building 
and social, environmental and 
economic development in Cabo Verde. 

The sectoral support and the economic 
activity that the implementation of the 
Agreement creates, contributes to the 
functioning of the fisheries sector, 

Results achieved with sectoral support 
and economic and social impact of the 
implementation of the current Protocol; 
% of the EU contribution to the 

The sectoral component supports the 
coastal communities. It provides for 
trainings, equipment, contributions to 

35 

 
 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

scientific activities and to monitoring. 

better governance, transparency and 
social and economic development of 
the area covered by the current 
Protocol. Moreover, it provides for 
adequate training, equipment and 
infrastructures namely in the areas of 
science and MCS. Utilisation of the 
sectoral support has been duly reported 
(detailed results on expected economic 
and social benefits in all geographic 
scope of the current Protocol). 

different strategies, policies and value 
of indicators for assessing the social 
and economic impact in the EU and in 
the areas covered by the current 
Protocol, budget of the national 
fisheries strategy; comprehensiveness 
and level of detail of the sectoral 
support reporting and cooperation on 
Blue Economy, small scale and 
artisanal fisheries, food security and 
policy areas. 

3.2 To promote employment of local 
seamen, improving infrastructures and 
encouraging landings, supporting the 
third country in developing local 
fisheries and processing industry EU 
and for the markets of certain 
developing countries. To create 
employment directly and indirectly. 

EU vessels recruit part of their staff 
locally: they benefit from good working 
conditions and appropriate training, 
equivalent to ILO standards. Part of the 
catches is landed and processed locally. 

Catches landed traded in the local and 
neighbouring markets. Successful trade 
flows generated. Identification of 
elements that facilitate the trade relation 
and the ones that discourages it.  

Some EU vessels, mainly the EU 
longliners, recruit part of their staff in 
Cabo Verde, but the clause regarding 
the embarkation of minimum of Cabo 
Verdean seamen is only partially 
respected by the EU fleet. When 
recruited, they benefit from good 
contract conditions according to the 
Cabo Verdean authorities. 

Respect of the minimum number of 
local seamen embarked; catches (value 
and volume) landed, namely in 
comparison with landing obligations, 
processed and marketed locally. 
Employment created directly and 
indirectly in the EU and in Cabo Verde 
or in the sub region/sub region. 

Percentage of supplies to the local and 
neighbouring markets. Percentage of 
the fish caught by the EU fleet that 
supplies these markets and comparison 
with other sources. 

36 

 
 
 
 
Efficiency – The extent to which the desired effects are achieved at a reasonable cost 

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

To what extent does the Protocol offer 
value-for-money to the EU? 

To what extent have the sectoral 
support and cooperation on blue 
economy actions, policy area, small 
scale and artisanal fisheries, food 
security, etc. agreed in the initial 
programming, been achieved at 
reasonable cost? 

The EU financial contribution for 
access is commensurate to all fishing 
opportunities offered by the current 
Protocol and per category. 

All activities included in the sectoral 
support have been properly used and 
benefited in environmental, social and 
economic terms in the EU and Cabo 
Verde. 

To what extent does the Protocol offer 
value-for-money to the EU ship-
owners? 

The EU shipowners' contribution is 
commensurate to effective catches and 
profits compared to total costs and 
benefits.  

Utilisation of the fishing opportunities 
and positive cost-benefit ratio per 
category and globally.  

The EU's financial contribution shall be 
proportionate to the possibilities of 
fishing 

Degree of completion of the initial 
programming; % of sectoral support 
activities and projects compared to 
overall EU contribution, to the national 
budget for fisheries, marine and 
maritime issues and to other donor 
contributions. Contribution to the 
sustainable development of the country. 

Volume of catches; evolution of first 
sale prices, operating and all costs and 
estimation of the profitability for each 
segment of the EU fleet, category, 
vessel, gear type and country (if 
applicable). 

The pandemic has slowed down 
sectoral support activities. However, it 
is difficult to estimate the full impact 
on the sectoral support activities at this 
stage sectorial. Nevertheless, there has 
been some impact on coastal 
communities. 

The cost-benefit ratio of the 2019-2023 
Protocol is positive. 

To what extent is the financial 
compensation for the fishing 
possibilities under the Agreement 
advantageous for the EU and for Cabo 

Cabo Verde benefits from a fair part of 
the added value of the catches and all 
financial compensation. This financial 
compensation is distributed 

Ratio overall EU contribution /added 
value generated by the activity of the 
EU fleet in the fishing zone. 

Cabo Verde benefits from a fair share 
of the added value of the catches and of 
the financial compensation. 

37 

 
 
Verde?  

geographically and socially fairly in 
Cabo Verde. 

Ratio of the benefits of all financial 
compensation to the concerned 
population proportional to the fishing 
activities. 

Ratio of the economic and social 
indicators. 

Economy – the extent to which resources are available in due time, in appropriate quantity and quality at the best price 

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

To what extent is all the EU 
contribution and specifically its sectoral 
support commensurate to the needs of 
Cabo Verde and absorption capacity? 

The total EU contribution is in line with 
national and local needs and absorption 
capacity. The total amount of sectoral 
support is used according to the 
foreseen calendar and adapted to the 
needs of the country. In case of 
modifications of the initial 
programming of the sectoral support, 
these have helped to better use of the 
financial support and contributed 
successfully to the sustainable 
development of the country. 

Consumption of the EU contribution 
for sectoral support and geographical 
distribution compared to the local and 
national needs in the related policy 
area. 

Geographical and social distribution, 
impacts and benefits of all financial 
compensation. 

Absorption capacity of the sectoral 
support; success stories; % of sectoral 
support compared to the national and 
local budget for fisheries and to other 
donor contributions. 

The EU's financial counterpart, in 
particular its sectoral support funds are 
proportionate to Cabo Verde's needs 
and to its capacity of absorption. 
Payments were made in a timely 
manner in accordance with Articles 4 
and 5 of the Protocol for sectoral 
support:  

Payments by results and level of use of 
funds by the third country partner, 
requirement for implementation reports, 
approval of reprogramming by the Joint 
Commission. 

38 

 
 
To what extent has the sectoral support 
payments been made in due time and 
according to article 4 and 5 of the 
Protocol? 

Contributions have been paid in due 
time and consistent with the Protocol, 
and so that they could be allocated to 
the national or local budget without 
delay fulfilling the engagements of the 
Protocol. 

Calendar of payments and considered 
allocations. 

Results of the budget and financial 
indicators and methods of control and 
audit. 

Achievement of the criteria, reports and 
procedures, budget, financial indicators 
and methods of control and audit. 

Achievements of annual and multi-year 
objectives 

The EU's financial contribution, and in 
particular its sectoral support funds is 
proportionate to Cabo Verde's needs 
and absorption capacity. Payments have 
been made on time in accordance with 
articles 4 and 5 of the sector support 
protocol:  

Payments by results and level of 
utilization of the funds made available 
to the third-party partner, requirement 
of implementation reports, approval of 
reprogramming by the Joint 
Commission.  

The slowdowns in payments are mainly 
due to the difficulty of implementing 
sectoral support activities during the 
COVID pandemic. 

Relevance – the extent to which the objectives of the Protocol match current needs and problems  

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

To what extent have the objectives set 
out in the Agreement and the Protocol 
still correspond to the needs of EU, 
member states, its ship-owners in the 

The  implementation  of  the  Agreement 
and  its  Protocol  are  in  line  with  the 
objectives 
and 
environmental sustainability; support to 
the  development  of  a  sustainable 

resource 

of 

Comparison between original 
Agreement’s objectives and national 
and local needs and those of the EU and 
its fleet improved with the 
implementation of the Agreement and 

The implementation of the Agreement 
and its Protocol is in accordance with 
the sustainability regarding resources 
and the environment objectives and the 
objective of the support to the 

39 

 
 
 
area covered by the current Protocol? 

Should there have been different 
objectives? 

fisheries  sector  at  national  and  local 
level;  facilitation  of  the  integration  of 
coastal  states  into  the  global  economy; 
improvement of scientific and technical 
knowledge,  support  to  the  economic 
exchanges,  strengthening  sustainable 
economic  and  social  development, 
effective  governance,  and  address 
correctly  the  national  and  local  needs 
and those of the EU and its fleet. 

the Protocol. 

development of a sustainable fisheries 
sector. 

How is the Agreement relevant to the 
policy objectives of RFMOs and to the 
EU's regional network of fisheries 
agreements? To what extent is relevant 
and creates an important impact? 

For highly migratory species, the 
Protocol contributes to achieving 
objectives set at RFMOs and other 
regional organisations25 including 
CECAF26 and to maintaining a 
network of SFPAs in the region on 
fisheries management and scientific 
issues. It creates synergies with the EU 
and neighbouring countries at RFMOs.  

Comparison between SFPA and these 
organisations objectives and how the 
implementation of the Protocol 
contributes to their objectives; 
consistency, coherence and cooperation 
with objectives of other fisheries 
Agreements in the region and the EU’s 
interest and objectives in such regional 
organisations. 

The Agreement and its Protocol are 
relevant for the policy objectives of the 
RFMOs and the EU's regional network 
of fisheries agreements. 

25 International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT),  The Ministerial Conference on fisheries cooperation among African States bordering the Atlantic Ocean 

(ATLAFCO/COMHAFAT) 

26 Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) 

40 

 
 
Consistency - The extent to which the Agreement and its Protocol do not contradict and is coherent other interventions with similar objectives 

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

How coherent is the Protocol with CFP 
in general and with its external 
dimension and the regional fisheries 
policy (RFMOs and other organisations 
including CECAF and network of 
SFPAs at national, sub regional and 
regional scale)? 

The Protocol is in line with the CFP in 
general, contribute to achieving EU 
objectives at regional level - including 
the creation of a regional network of 
SFPAs - is consistent with other SFPAs 
in the region and RFMOs and other 
Organisations objectives.  

Consistency with the CFP and its 
external dimension and the main 
strategies policy orientations at regional 
and sub regional level. 

To what extent is the Protocol and its 
implementation consistent and coherent 
and complements with the other EU 
policies, such as the Association 
Agreement, the EEAS, -INTPA, 
SANTE, TRADE and TAXUD policies 
and legislation?  

The Protocol makes a substantial 
contribution to other EU policies and 
conversely. The Protocol and its 
implementation are coherent and 
cooperate very positively with other EU 
interventions. 

In what ways are the Agreement and 
Protocol consistent with the national 
fisheries policy and other related 
policies and are well coordinated with 
regional fisheries policies and the 
Special Partnership? 

The Protocol contributes to achieving 
the priorities identified nationally, 
locally and regionally. Authorities, 
stakeholders and society are aware and 
informed on the contribution. 

The Protocol contributes to the 

Consistency with the national and 
regional Fisheries, marine and maritime 
policies and sectoral policies in the 
country. Benefits to the governance of 
the country and to the protection and 
sustainable management of natural 

41 

The Protocol is consistent with the 
CFP. In addition, it is generally 
consistent with other SFPA 
implementation protocols in the region. 
It is also consistent with the objectives 
of ICCAT. It also contributes to 
achieving the EU's objectives at 
regional  and sub-regional levels. 

The Protocol contributes to other EU 
policies. 

The protocol and its implementation are 
coherent and cooperate in a very 
positive way with other EU 
interventions. 

The protocol contributes to the 
achievement of the priorities identified 
by the Cabo Verdean authorities at 
different geographical scales. 

 
 
 
 
sustainable management of fisheries at 
local, national and regional level 

resources and to the society. 

The EU added value – The extent to which the intervention brings EU added value  

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

What is the additional value resulting 
from the EU intervention under the 
Protocol, compared to the absence of 
Agreement/Protocol? 

Financial contribution, in particular 
sectoral support, successfully used to 
support and develop the national and 
local fisheries sector. 

Data on the implementation within the 
current Protocol in economic, social 
and environmental terms compared to 
other agreements or with no agreement. 

To what extent would Member States 
have had the ability or possibility to put 
in place appropriate alternative 
measures? 

To what extent the overall benefits of 
the Agreement and Protocol have an 
added value for the EU? 

Evidence of the need and usefulness of 
the benefits arising from the 
Agreement, in particular in terms of 
good governance, natural resources 
conservation, sound implementation of 
sectoral policies, infrastructure, social 
services, the setting-up of businesses, 
vocational training, and of programmes 
aimed at developing and modernising 
the fisheries sector, to ensure that this 
distribution benefits the country, its 
natural resources and the population.  

The fishing species included in the 
agreement are the ones of interest for 
the EU fleet considering the species 
available and fishing possibilities for all 

42 

A fisheries agreement appears to be 
beneficial for the EU, but also for the 
partner country, by promoting the direct 
involvement of the EU in the 
monitoring of the EU vessels (all flags 
– EU Member States combined), in the 
context of the EU's contribution to the 
implementation of Cabo Verde’s 
sectoral policy and of creating a 
platform for sectoral dialogue between 
the EU and Cabo Verde (compared to 
state interventions by individual EU 
members). 

 
 
Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators 

Answer 

What is the additional value resulting 
from the EU intervention under the 
Agreement and the Protocol, compared 
to what could be achieved by the Union 
fleet outside the framework of the 
Agreement? 

fleets operating in the same area. 

The Agreement and its implementing 
Protocol provide substantial benefits to 
the EU and nationally and locally over 
private agreements. 

Uptake of licences, comparison of all 
costs and benefits of operating under 
this Agreement, other SFPAs and 
private agreements, degree of legal 
certainty provided by the Agreement 
and its legal framework 

EU intervention brings added value 
compared to direct interventions by EU 
shipowners. Granting of direct 
authorisation  

requires the denunciation of the current 
SFPA, which can only take place in an 
exceptional manner according to the 
terms of the SFPA. 

Acceptability – The extent to which stakeholders accept the policy in general and the particular instrument proposed or employed 

Questions 

Success criteria 

Suggested indicators and sources 

Answer 

To what extent are the EU ship-owners 
satisfied with the Protocol? 

The EU ship-owners are satisfied with 
the technical and financial conditions 
set up by the Protocol and support its 
renewal (with possible adaptations). 

Result of interviews of ship owners and 
fisheries associations 

The EU shipowners are generally 
satisfied with the Protocol and support 
its renewal. 

To what extent is the Protocol 
supported by the civil society in the EU 
and nationally and locally? 

Representatives of the civil society are 
satisfied with the environmental and 
social conditions set up by the FPA and 
its Protocol and support their renewal 
(with possible adaptations). 

Result of interviews of NGO 
representatives and other stakeholders, 
local population, fishing operators in 
the EU and in Cabo Verde, fisheries 
industry in the EU and 

Civil society understands the 
importance of the SFPA for Cabo 
Verde. It calls for better visibility - 
transparency in its implementation 
through the publication of progress 

43 

 
 
 
locally/nationally/regionally 

reports, and  

To what extent is the Protocol 
supported by the sector (ship owners 
and processors) in the EU and in the 
partner country, nationally and locally? 

The national and local ship-owners do 
not experience competition by the EU 
fleet and fish processors benefit from 
purchase opportunities generated by the 
Protocol and support its renewal 

Result of interviews of industry and 
NGOs representatives, content of 
articles, press, reported incidents 
between fleets. 

To what extent the administration, 
stakeholders and society are in general 
satisfied with the Protocol? 

National and national and 
administration, stakeholders and society 
in general Society are satisfied with the 
implementation of the Protocol's 
obligations and seek its renewal; they 
praise the benefits of the fisheries 
partnership. 

Level of compliance with the Protocol's 
obligations in terms of seamen 
embarked, landing obligation, 
observers, data reporting etc,  Impact of 
the Agreement’s implementation to 
national/local population in social and 
economic terms, communication 
activities and their impact, 
communication activities, press 
statements, content of articles, etc. 

44 

the use of awareness-raising activities 
aimed at coastal communities as 
enshrined in the current Protocol, and 
in a possible future Protocol. 

Coastal communities do not compete 
for fishing zones because the EU fleet 
has to operate far from the coast. 
However, rivalries regarding target 
species (tuna) are present. 

Local shipowners' associations and 
consulted coastal communities call for 
more transparency in tuna fishing 
activities, 

The EU fish processors, having replied 
to the consultation, are satisfied with 
the implementation of the Protocol, and 
support its renewal (with potential 
adaptations). 

The local and national third-country 
administration is satisfied with the 
implementation of the Protocol and 
supports its renewal by considering 
possible improvements, particularly in 
the monitoring – control of the shark 
management, and in mitigation 

 
 
measures regarding accidental catches 
of turtles and birds (especially for the 
longline fleet) and in the 
encouragement of landings. 

45 

 
 
 
ANNEX IV. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS  

The cost-benefit ratios relating to the value of access payments and catches are presented in the following table in this section. In total, it is estimated that 
Cabo Verde received an average of €148/tonne for tuna caught by EU operators in its waters, of which 57% was borne by EU shipowners. Including the 
sector support envelope, the average value of tuna caught in Cabo Verde waters was €213/tonne, 40% of which was borne by EU shipowners. 

The average price is higher than the average of EUR 110/tonne negotiated ex ante. This is because the average EU tuna catch (6,572 tonnes per year on 
average between 2019 and 2021) is (82%) lower than the reference tonnage (8,000 tonnes) used to set the level of EU access payments. 

The comparison between the access costs paid by the EU and the value of the catches obtained shows that Cabo Verde received on average between 2019 
and 20219 11% of the value of the catches in exchange for access payments, and 21% if the sectoral support envelope is included. By way of comparison, 
in the Indian Ocean (albeit a different ocean), these percentages are close to the reference access values (12%) agreed by the member states of SWIOFC - 
the Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission - in 2020 as part of the voluntary guidelines on minimum access conditions. 

Table: Average cost-benefit indicators in relation to the average price paid for each tonne caught by the EU tuna fleet in Cabo Verde waters over the period 2019 and 
2021 . 

EU access 
payments only 

Total EU payments 
(access + sectoral support) 

EU payments for access (kEUR) 

Planned EU payments for sectoral support (kEUR) 

554 

554 

Total EU payments (kEUR) 

Average access cost / value of catches (%) 

Average access cost per tonne caught (EUR/tonne) 

Access cost paid by the EU (EUR/tonne) 

Access cost paid by EU shipowners (EUR/tonne) 

418 

972 

11% 

148 

64 

84 

46 

418 

945 

1 917 

21% 

213 

207 

84 

 
 
 
Average % borne by EU shipowners 

EU access 
payments only 

Total EU payments 
(access + sectoral support) 

57% 

40% 

If  we  consider  the  cost-benefit  ratios  in  relation  to  gross  value  added,  the  main  conclusion  is  that  each  euro  invested  by  the  EU  in  the  access 
compensation payment supports the creation of 28.76 euros of value added, all entities taken together. For the EU, the GVA multiplier is positive, with 
each euro invested by the EU in compensation for access contributing to the creation of 13.36 euros of added value.  

For Cabo Verde, the leverage effect of the protocol is positive, with each euro invested by the EU in the payment of compensation for access contributing 
6.92  euros  of  added  value,  with  three  main  contributions:  i)  the  scale  of  access  rights  provided  for  by  the  protocol  and  the  effective  use  of  fishing 
opportunities by EU tuna vessels, ii) the use of part of the catches by the national fish processing sector and iii) the purchase of repair and maintenance 
services in the port of Mindelo. 

Table: Cost-benefit indicators in relation to the gross added value generated by the activities of EU tuna vessels in Cabo Verde waters over the period 2019 and 2021 
(annual average) 

GVA /  

Catches 

Compensatio
n 

Shipowners' 
fees 

Total 
payments 

All entities 

Direct GVA 

3 029 

Indirect GVA 

9 005 

Total GVA 

12 453 

The EU 

Direct GVA 

1 486 

Indirect GVA 

4 107 

7,24 

21,52 

28,76 

3,55 

9,81 

47 

21,72 

12,37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
GVA /  

Catches 

Compensatio
n 

Shipowners' 
fees 

Total 
payments 

Total GVA 

5 592 

13,36 

10,09 

5,75 

Cabo Verde 

Direct GVA 

721 

Other 
entities 

Indirect GVA 

2 175 

Total GVA 

3 315 

Direct GVA 

822 

Indirect GVA 

2 724 

Total GVA 

3 546 

1,72 

5,20 

6,92 

1,96 

6,51 

8,47 

5,23 

2,98 

6,40 

3,65 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX V. STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION - SYNOPSIS REPORT  

Main questionnaire sent to stakeholders 

•  What is your opinion on the current Protocol 2019 – 2024 implementing the fisheries agreement given the objectives of the Common Fisheries 

Policy?  

•  Are you generally satisfied with the level of information available on the implementation of the Protocol? If not, what do you think should be 

done (in a reasonable and feasible way)?  

•  Do you face difficulties in the implementation of the following monitoring measures attributed to Member States in the context of this agreement? 
• 
•  Do you have any other comments? 

In the event the Protocol is renewed in 2024, what changes should be made compared to the current Protocol?  

Background  

In  line  with  the  implementation  of  the  Commission  guidelines  and  the  better  regulation  ‘toolbox’,  a  consultation  strategy  has  been  elaborated  by  the 
contractor to support the preparation of the negotiations for the renewal of protocols to the fisheries partnership agreements (SFPAs). The strategy has 
had to define the best means of achieving relevant stakeholders both in the EU and in the partner country concerned.   

Objectives  

The aim of the consultation:   

1. To obtain stakeholders’ views on the implementation of the ongoing protocol, as well as on the possible renewal of the protocol, including the different 
options;   

2. To use the results of this consultation in the evaluation report. 

49 

 
 
 
 
Approach to consultation of stakeholders  

The  main  stakeholders  concerned  with  the  Protocol,  which  have  been  consulted,  are  as  follows:  1)  Member  States  flag  ships  beneficiaries;  2) 
representatives or associations of ship-owners in the beneficiaries of this Protocol; 3) non-governmental organisations (NGOs); 4) The partner country 
administrations; 5) the private sector and civil society. 

Results of the stakeholder consultation 

The views of the organizations are synthesized in the main text of the evaluation report, in particular in the ex-post evaluation chapters of the current 
protocol  and  ex  ante  of  a  possible  future  protocol.  The  detailed  answers  to  the  stakeholders’  consultation  and  the  list  of  stakeholders  consulted  are 
included in Annex 827 of the Evaluation’s report.  

27   Évaluation rétrospective et prospective du Protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche  entre l’Union européenne et la République de Cabo 

Verde, Annex 8, p. 133 

50