‘Europeche welcomes this initiative as European seas stand at a critical crossroads,’ said Daniel Voces, Managing Director of Europeche. ‘While the demand for marine space from energy, minerals, transport, tourism, and conservation grows rapidly, fishing is the only shrinking blue economy sector. Despite the enormous value in producing low carbon, healthy and sustainable food, fishing is increasingly pushed aside by spatial planning that lacks effective safeguards.’

Voces highlighted the alarming outlook for fisheries, noting, ‘In the UK, projections estimate that nearly 50% of the UK’s EEZ could be fishing-free by 2050. All indicates that with similar trends can happen across European sea basins.’ While Europeche recognised the need for effective marine protected areas and net-zero targets, the projected scale of future spatial demands is unprecedented—and poses serious risks to the viability of the fishing sector. This spatial squeeze increases operational costs, raises safety concerns, drives up fuel use and emissions. ‘Ironically, this reverses the progress our fleet has made—already reducing emissions by 52% since 1990.’

Unlike farmers, fishers do not hold property rights over their productive areas, leaving them vulnerable to continuous displacement and loss of access. Exclusion from traditional fishing grounds is very real and results in severe displacement of fishing effort, causing over-concentration in smaller areas. Such overcrowding leads to gear conflicts, difficulties in catch composition and increased pressure on local fish populations. Small-scale fleets with limited operational ranges face even greater impacts, with limited or none alternatives available. ‘The motto ‘fish somewhere else’ simply denies the problem,’ Voces emphasized.

Europêche’s call to EU policymakers

Europeche urges policymakers to take this Dialogue as a crucial opportunity to modernise and rebalance the MSP Directive. Key demands include:

• Treating fishreries and food sovereignty as a priority and overriding public interest, similar to renewable energy under the Nature Restoration Law.
• Ensuring mandatory early and meaningful participation of fishing stakeholders in all planning and decision-making processes.
• Applying equal environmental scrutiny across all blue economy sectors through an ecosystem-based approach.
• Integrate robust assessments of displacement, cumulative impacts and trade-offs.
• Protecting traditional fishing grounds with robust impact assessments and safeguards.
• Applying area closures and potential fisheries exclusions on a case-by-case basis
• Introducing gear-based buffer zones around offshore wind farms and marine protected areas to reduce socio-economic impacts on fisheries.
• Promoting genuine co-existence and co-location of offshore wind, conservation and fishing by aligning regulations, removing barriers, advancing blue skills development and fostering technology collaboration.
• Designing concrete mitigation measures and financial support tools to help fishers adapt to unavoidable displacements.
• Strengthening cross-border cooperation and sea basin approach.
• Prioritising less space-intensive technologies, such as tidal and wave energy, which offer lower environmental impacts and greater compatibility with fisheries.

‘Fishing is not an obstacle to the EU’s strategic goals—it is an ally,’ Voces stressed. ‘We must replace today’s trajectory of exclusion with a new model of positive coexistence.’

Next steps

As announced in the EU Ocean Pact, the Commission plans to revise the existing MSP Directive by 2027 and leverages the ocean’s potential for Europe’s resilience, food sovereignty, energy supply, security and competitiveness. It will also reinforce cooperation with international initiatives, notably through increased cross-sectoral coordination and through a better organised sea basin approach. The Commission also intends to simplify procedures and reduce administrative burdens.

Press Contact:

Rosalie Tukker, Senior Policy Advisor of Europêche | Email: rosalie.tukker@europeche.org │ Phone: +32 489 26 81 07

EP Press Release – Maritime Spatial Planning

The proposed amendment clarifies the conditions under which non-EU countries may be identified as allowing unsustainable fishing practices on shared fish stocks. Under this revision, the EU will have the authority to impose restrictive measures on offending countries, including the possibility of import bans, in a fair and non-discriminatory manner.

According to Europêche, this proposal comes at a crucial time, as EU fishing interests have increasingly been undermined by aggressive actions from certain non-EU nations. Notably, Norway’s unilateral and unlawful actions, such as excessive mackerel quotas and cod quota grabs, have frustrated the European fishing sector and are at the heart of the problem of overfishing in the North East Atlantic.

Daniel Voces, Managing Director of Europêche, expressed strong support for the proposal, stating: “This is a much-needed response to the long-standing frustrations of the European fishing sector. For years, EU fishers have been subjected to unfair and unsustainable practices by non-EU countries, particularly Norway, which has repeatedly disregarded European fishing rights. The EU needs stronger, clearer tools to enforce responsible fishing practices and protect our industry. We welcome this step taken by the Commission, which gives the EU the ‘teeth’ to stand up for the sustainable management of our shared resources.”

Europêche urges swift approval and implementation of the revised regulation to address ongoing concerns and prevent further damage to fish stocks of common interest.

Press contacts:

Rosalie Tukker, Senior Policy Advisor of Europêche: +32 497 67 03 92 rosalie.tukker@europeche.org

EP Press Release – Unsustainable Fishing non-EU countries

The fishing sector represented by Europêche recalls that the mandate given by the UN to BBNJ negotiators is clear: this process and its result should “not undermine” existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies. Therefore, the BBNJ process is banned from amending the existing regime on fisheries for the high seas established by the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),^[1] which is robust and coherent. However, the BBNJ’s negotiations have become a huge risk to the current fisheries governance system for the reasons explained below.

One of the main controversies is very much a matter of interpretation. For some, “not undermine” means full respect of competences, while for others it enables to take actions beyond the decisions adopted by the legal instruments, frameworks and relevant bodies such as Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and take control over the marine resources therein, when deemed necessary by BBNJ Parties and experts. Such ambiguity can only be clarified with the explicit language deserved to avoid misinterpretations or even worst, the creation of a hierarchically superior authority over those fisheries management tools and relevant bodies.

According to Europêche, fisheries knowledge and expertise have been left out since the beginning of the negotiations. This has led to the biased perception that a strong and urgent intervention on fisheries is required through the establishment of a comprehensive new regime of a global network of MPAs in the high seas, as well as the implementation of environmental impact assessment guidelines that could be enforced on fishing vessels. On the contrary, fisheries in the high seas is strictly regulated through a wide range of instruments and relevant bodies, including through numerous RFMOs, the UN Fish Stock Agreement and the FAO Port State Measures Agreement.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) tried to fill this lack of expertise within the BBNJ negotiations through an information package[2]. While this document provides an initial tool to better inform negotiators on fisheries-related matters, only a stronger involvement of fisheries experts within the BBNJ process can lead to a truly comprehensive, evidence-based and transformative High Seas Treaty that does not undermine the powers and mandate of existing management tools.

Javier Garat, President of Europêche, declared: “No regulatory gaps have been identified for fisheries. Fisheries management is a living discipline in continuous improvement, where conservation and sustainable use are at its core. There could be implementation gaps whose attention and solution can be fully addressed thanks to the effective regulation of fishing activities in the high seas.” He concluded: “We are the most regulated activity in the High Seas. The BBNJ process needs to become the expected milestone in filling gaps in other areas of the use of the oceans, without affecting the solid evolution of fisheries management tools and their effectiveness.”

Europêche therefore calls for:

• A stronger involvement of fisheries experts as well as a better consultation between BBNJ delegations and national representatives of Fisheries Agencies and Ministries of Fisheries in the context of the BBNJ negotiating process and future proceedings.
• The exclusion of fisheries from the BBNJ Agreement, as fishing activities in the high seas shall continue to be managed at the regional level in relation with the species of common interest for the contracting Parties of a given legal instrument, framework or relevant body.
• A BBNJ Agreement that effectively cooperates with RFMOs in a manner that does not undermine their scope, mandate and competences. As a result, the following shall apply:

1. MPAs identified and designated in the context of the BBNJ Agreement that overlap with the coverage of an RFMO shall not regulate fishing activities.
2. Environmental impact assessments shall not be required for vessels falling under the remit of RFMOs management measures.
3. RFMOs and members thereof shall always be consulted when any BBNJ body seeks to adopt any action in the area of competence of such an RFMO.
4. Once an RFMO has been created and it has adopted the corresponding management measures for the management of certain area in the high seas, any regulation adopted under BBNJ shall cease to be in effect.

[1] See articles 118 and 119 which provide that subregional or regional fisheries organizations (RFOs) shall be competent to manage fisheries in the high seas, and are tasked  to maintain or restore the resources harvested to produce their maximum sustainable yield (MSY) level as qualified by environmental and economic factors, taking into consideration the effects on the species associated with or dependent upon harvested species, with a view of maintaining or restoring such species above levels at which their reproduction can be severely damaged (ecosystem approach).

[2] https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/CC1345EN/

Press contacts:

Daniel Voces, Managing Director of Europêche: +32 2 230 48 48 daniel.voces@europeche.org

EP Press Release – BBNJ

The EU Taxonomy aims to become a tool for companies and investors to help identifying those projects and economic activities that have a substantial positive impact on the climate and the environment. In 2020, the European Commission set up expert groups to produce criteria to categorise environmentally sustainable economic activities for each sector. However, the expert group for fisheries did not include any fishing industry stakeholder, only NGO representatives. As a result, the group produced unrealistic recommendations to the European Commission who is now working on a new bill.

Javier Garat, President of Europêche, declared: “This unbalanced situation has led to significant gaps in the platform’s knowledge and expertise about the fisheries realities. Likewise, this serious deficiency in the composition of the platform puts into question the legitimacy and validity of the work delivered by the expert group for fisheries”. Mr Garat continues: “We note with concern that the European Commission has ignored our call to re-open the expert group’ member list to industry representatives (i.e., fishing vessel owners, producer organisations, trade unions, specialised financial services, fish processing companies and retailers)[1]. Regrettably, the debates and discussions held within the Platform are not disclosed nor publicly available”.

The sector reiterates that the European Commission must consult relevant EU Advisory councils[2] specialised in fisheries, before submitting any “expert” outcome to the scrutiny of the public or as a recommendation to the European Commission.

Esben Sverdrup-Jensen, President of EAPO, commented: “European fishers are global leaders in sustainability, and we are more than interested in documenting and proving this fact. But the effect of this lack of expertise can be read throughout the sections in the report and annex concerning fishing with unworkable criteria and unachievable targets that go way beyond existing EU legislation, internationally agreed standards and the fishery reality. These include 100% observers on board, no-take zones, no discards and rejection by definition of bottom trawling as a sustainable activity. As a result, the vast majority of the EU fishing industry will not be able to reach alignment with the criteria, especially small-scale artisanal vessels”.

Europêche and EAPO unanimously concluded: “It is rather strange that the NGOs participating in the expert group (and the European Commission at this stage) are reluctant to reform the current CFP basic regulation[3] while, in the taxonomy, NGOs propose the introduction of completely new standards based on cherry-picking science. To the point that some of the studies referenced as scientific basis are, in reality, reports conducted by the very same NGOs participating in the expert group (e.g., Birdlife, Bycatch Mitigation FACT-SHEETS 2014). Isn’t it biased that a member of the platform is quoting its own study to underpin the recommended policy criteria? Isn’t this a conflict of interests? We can only conclude that the proposed criteria appear is a “wish list” of NGO claims that tried without success to insert them in other EU legislative acts (e.g., fisheries control regulation, multiannual management plans) and now, once again, within the framework of the taxonomy without any real debate”.

Lastly, Europêche and EAPO question the auditability of the proposed criteria. Particularly given the fact that the bodies providing scientific advice to the EU do not provide the level of detail for the information required under the screening criteria.

While appreciating the timely updates on the state of play of taxonomy by DG MARE, the industry fails to understand how and why the Directorate on financial affairs (DG FISMA) did not request any stakeholder representation from the fisheries value chain at any point.

[1] Europêche response to the European call for feedback by the Platform on Sustainable Finance on the draft report on preliminary recommendations for technical screening criteria for the EU taxonomy EP(21)33

[2] https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/fisheries/scientific-input/advisory-councils_en

[3] https://www.birdlife.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-02_CFP-joint-NGO-PR.pdf

Press contacts:

Daniel Voces, Managing Director of Europêche: +32 2 230 48 48 daniel.voces@europeche.org

Paul Thomas, Policy Officer of EAPO: +32 470 41 78 38 paul.thomas@eapo.com 

EP and EAPO Press Release – EU taxonomy for fisheries

Sea fishing is a remote profession and therefore deprived from immediate medical assistance at a level shore-based people can rely on. In relation with the relevant safety challenges performing their work at sea, it’s important that fishers on board fishing vessels are qualified and fit for their duties. This reality is well recognised by international and European legislation[1] which require fishers to hold a valid medical certificate issued in accordance with their provisions.

In practice, however, despite the obligation for fishers to hold a medical certificate, there are no specific international guidelines for the medical examination of fishers, in stark contrast with merchant seafarers.

“In the making of international medical guidelines for the examination of seafarers, fishers were shockingly excluded. While certain countries apply guidelines for seafarers to fishers, those guidelines haven’t been designed with that goal in mind, and they don’t completely fit specificities of sea fishing”, said Ment van der Zwan, Europêche Spokesperson in European social dialogue.

European social partners, the ETF and Europêche, have been working together with the International Maritime Health Association (IMHA) on closing this gap in international occupational health and have now published guidelines for fishers and their specific working environment.

“In such a physically-demanding job, the existence of specific guidelines for medical examination of workers is a must. We hope that these new guidelines will be used as a tool by doctors performing medical examinations to have a clear understanding of the unique aspects of fishing, as their professional judgement is critical to the health and safety of fishers. Competent authorities should also harmonise the criteria used for the medical checks of fishers and thereafter mutually recognise certificates of medical fitness. The increasing internationalisation of fishing makes such harmonisation even more important.” underlined Juan Manuel Trujillo, ETF Fisheries Section Chair.

The ETF and Europêche will continue to promote the harmonisation of standards for the medical examinations of fishers at European and International level. Using harmonised approaches and carrying out systematic monitoring programs will be vital in improving fishers’ health and safety.

[1] ILO Work in Fishing Convention C188, the EU Council Directive 2017/159 and STCW-F.

Guidelines on medical examinations of fishers

Press contacts:

Rosalie Tukker: Policy Advisor of Europêche, rosalie.tukker@europeche.org

Andrea Albertazzi: Fisheries Policy Officer of ETF, a.albertazzi@etf-europe.org

EP and ETF Press Release – Medical Guidelines

Download Doc

Download Doc