Executive Summary Sheet (Max 2 pages)

Impact assessment on European fishery statistics

A. Need for action

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?

European fishery statistics have been produced since the 1950s to provide an independent, high quality source on fish catches, landings, fleet and aquaculture data in EU and EFTA countries. They are currently covered by five legal acts dating back to the 2000s. The Common fisheries policy has been evolving and several other data sources have become available. Because of this, the added value of European fishery statistics with regard to supporting the policy-making and monitoring of the Common fisheries policy has decreased. In addition, the European fishery statistics legislation is inflexible, data needs go unfulfilled, and due to a complex data structure aquaculture statistics suffer from data being confidential and thus publicly unusable. There are also overlaps and discrepancies with data flows from EU Member States to the European Commission and to international organisations. All this has led to a situation where the place of European fishery statistics in the EU and global fisheries data landscape is unclear.

What should be achieved?

The initiative aims at renewed legislation to ensure the added value of European fishery statistics by

·increasing their relevance, 

·meeting user needs better and more flexibly,

·resolving data confidentiality issues,

·addressing quality issues in the source data,

·reducing gaps, overlaps and discrepancies in the EU and global system of fisheries data, and

·clarifying the place of European fishery statistics in the global fisheries data landscape.

What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)? 

EU action in fishery statistics, i.e. collecting, harmonising and publishing fisheries data based on common regulations, facilitates the collection of data at the same level of detail in all Member States. It imposes the application of common standards, definitions and methodologies which, in addition to producing comparable results at the service of analysis needs for the Common fisheries policy and other EU policies, improve efficiency, timeliness and reliability, or in short, increase data quality. A common fisheries policy must be accompanied by comparable, harmonised and high-quality statistics which can only be ensured by action at EU level.

B. Solutions

What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option? If not, why?

To achieve the objectives, the following four options were considered:

1.Baseline scenario – continuation of the current European fishery statistics;

2.Discontinuation of European fishery statistics

3.New streamlined legal framework for European fishery statistics;

4.New legal basis for aquaculture and compilation of other fishery statistics from EU level administrative sources.

In light of the impact assessment, the results of the consultation activities, and discussions with stakeholders, the preferred option is clearly option 3: a new streamlined legal framework for European fishery statistics.

What are different stakeholders’ views? Who supports which option?

The preferred option is supported by the main data users: European Commission services, OECD, FAO, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, several Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, a large majority of the national statistical authorities responsible for fisheries statistics in the European statistical system, and a majority of the respondents to the consultation activities.

C. Impacts of the preferred option

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?

European fishery statistics would become more relevant as the new legal framework would be updated to reflect current and future user needs. They would become more effective as the existing benefits, e.g. being a one-stop shop for high-quality, comparable fishery statistics with long time series accessible to all, would remain, while providing a simpler and more streamlined legal framework that can better integrate and serve new user needs. Reducing double reporting through aligning definitions and reorganising data flows would also reduce discrepancies between different data sources and therefore increase the reliability, accuracy and international comparability of European fishery statistics.

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?

The main direct costs for stakeholders relate to adapting the statistical and technical systems in the European statistical system. The adaptation costs are expected to be marginal. In the mid to long term, the new legal basis for European fishery statistics is expected to lead to a slightly lower burden and to cost savings in the region of 1.2 million € annually due to a more efficient data use and simplified data flows.

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?

Most companies in the fishery sector are small and medium-sized companies. The impact of this initiative is however marginal as these companies already need to provide the data for management purposes and most of the statistics are planned to be drawn from these existing datasets. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 

The cost savings referred to above would materialise in the national statistical authorities as it is planned that part of the European fishery statistics will be compiled directly from EU level administrative data for the Common fisheries policy, and that multiple data flows would be simplified into a single one encompassing EU-level and international needs.

Will there be other significant impacts? 

Fishery statistics can have indirect impacts on areas such as policy management and the conservation of marine resources by enabling better evidence-based policy design, implementation and monitoring based on high-quality data comparable across countries. But these impacts are hard to foresee and to measure. The direct impacts of statistical legislation are low.

Proportionality? 

The preferred option provides all the elements to achieve the objectives and does not go beyond what is necessary to solve the problem.

D. Follow-up

When will the policy be reviewed?

Annual compliance assessments, continuous exchanges with stakeholders and monitoring of the key performance indicators will serve to review the policy.