EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 5.6.2026

SWD(2026) 145 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Accompanying the document

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

Sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2027

{COM(2026) 271 final}

This staff working document accompanies the Communication Sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2027. It looks in greater depth at:

1.the state of fish stocks;

2.the balance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities;

3.the socio-economic performance of EU fishing fleets;

4.progress in implementing the landing obligation;

5.the work of advisory councils and their role in EU decision-making;

6.action taken under the EU’s international ocean governance agenda.

Following dialogue in the wake of the publication of the fisheries and oceans package 1 the Commission decided to launch an evaluation of the Regulation on the common fisheries policy (‘CFP Regulation’) 2 . The evaluation will build on the fisheries and oceans package and subsequent dialogue. It will take stock of how the CFP Regulation has performed, its instruments and measures and how it has addressed the objectives of ensuring environmentally and economically sustainable fisheries.

1.The state of fish stocks

Monitoring the results of the common fisheries policy progress report

Each year, the Commission calls on the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) to assess the progress made in achieving the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) exploitation rate in line with the objectives of the CFP. Article 50 of the CFP Regulation states that:

The Commission shall report annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress on achieving maximum sustainable yield and on the situation of fish stocks, as early as possible following the adoption of the yearly Council Regulation fixing the fishing opportunities available in Union waters and, in certain non-Union waters, to Union vessels.

The current and historic fishing mortality rates (FY, F in each year) relative to the fishing mortality rate that would produce the highest long-term yield (FMSY) are calculated by three scientific bodies: the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), STECF and the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM). These rates were then compiled and tabulated by the STECF in its 81st Plenary Report (STECF-26-01) 3 . The corresponding biomass value, BMSY, is the average biomass of fish in the sea that would be expected if a stock is fished at FMSY for an extended period. Both the F/FMSY rates and the biomass values are calculated using reported catches and scientific survey data. Misreporting of catches results in errors in both parameters, with errors being greater for biomass values 4 .

As applied by the STECF, historic and current fishing mortality values is expressed as a ratio of the FMSY value for each stock. By doing so, this makes it possible to compare all stocks at the same scale with a fishing mortality ratio equal to 1 for all stocks fished at FMSY.

Therefore, this section focuses on the fishing mortality ratio indicator and the biomass 5 indicator. More information on other indicators, such as safe biological limits, can be found in the STECF 26-01 ad hoc report Monitoring the Performance of the Common Fisheries Policy 6 .

Regarding progress made in the achievement of FMSY in line with the CFP, the latest results indicate a reduction in overall fishing mortality and a general increase in stock biomass in the North-East Atlantic 7 (both EU and non-EU waters) over the period 2003-2023. Among the stocks which were fully assessed, the proportion of overexploited stocks (i.e. F> FMSY) decreased from around 67% (2003-2008) to 20% in 2023 and fishing mortality rates decreased from 51% above FMSY target levels to 41% below FMSY target levels.

The situation with regard to stocks in the Mediterranean and Black Seas improved considerably in the period 2020-2022. While the annual fishing mortality estimates were almost double the FMSY target level in 2007, they have since fallen significantly and were 6% below FMSY target level in 2022.

1.1 Trends in fishing pressure (F/FMSY ratio)

Figure 1 below presents the trends in F/FMSY over the time period 2003-2024 for the North-East Atlantic (in EU and non-EU waters) and 2003-2023 for the Mediterranean and Black Seas.

Figure 1: Trends in fishing pressure in the North-East Atlantic (NEA) in 2003-2024 and in the Mediterranean and Black Seas (MED&BS) in 2003-2023. Three model-based indicators (F/FMSY) are presented: red line representing 60 stocks with appropriate information in NEA EU waters; green line representing 20 stocks also located in the NEA but in non-EU waters; and black line representing 67 stocks in the MED&BS.

1.1.1 Stocks of EU interest in the North-East Atlantic, the North Sea and adjacent waters, including the Baltic Sea.

In 2003, most stocks (67.5%) were overfished in these regions, and the average (median) fishing mortality was 51% above MSY. Since 2023, the situation has improved thanks to action to restrict fishing effort, to improve monitoring and to set total allowable catches (TACs) in line with scientific advice. By 2024, the average rate of fishing was within the sustainable rate and only 31% of stocks were fished above FMSY.

Overall, fish stock biomass increased by some 37% over the period 2003-2022. It should be noted that the individual trajectories modelled by the state-space model for this indicator no longer equate to absolute biomass, but to biomass standardised by the average biomass over the available period 8 . This is the reason for the reduction in the confidence interval compared to B/B2003 published in previous years.

Figure 2: Overall development of fishing mortality and biomass in the North-East Atlantic. Top panel: number of stocks fished in excess of FMSY (black) or fished at or under FMSY (grey). Middle panel: average F/FMSY trend based on 60 stocks. Bottom panel: trend in spawning stock biomass relative to 2003. Dark grey and light grey areas show the 50% and 95% confidence intervals of the average, based on the 60 assessed stocks.

There are differences in trends between areas. Fishing mortality fell fastest in the Bay of Biscay and in widely distributed stocks. However, widely distributed stocks saw an increase in fishing mortality between 2022 and 2023. Those same stocks also recovered fastest (Figure 3). In the Baltic Sea, where unfavourable environmental conditions 9 have weakened the stocks’ resilience to fishing, no significant recovery has been observed, and some fish stocks have even deteriorated further. In the North Sea, primary production 10 was reported to have decreased by around one quarter, possibly affecting the rebuilding of fish stocks.

Figure 3: Upper trends in the average (median) F/FMSY (top panel) and biomass (B/B2003) (bottom panel) over the period 2003-2024 in each of the North Atlantic sea areas.

1.1.2 Stocks in the Mediterranean and Black Seas

Between 2003 and 2015 the number of available stock assessments increased from 44 to 68. In 2022, 66 stock assessments were available. This number dropped to 60 in 2023 and to 16 in 2024 due to the GFCM’s 3-year advice cycle. In the meantime, data quality has increased significantly. The additional stocks, many of which had lower fishing mortality rate estimates, led to changes in overall perceptions of stock status. The new estimates showed F/FMSY peaked at close to 2.0 in 2007, gradually declining from this point onwards, and at a faster rate in 2020-2022 (Figure 4). The F/FMSY value for 2023 was estimated at 0.92 which is the lowest ever.

There are different patterns in F/FMSY in each region (Figure 5), with an irregular trend in the Black Sea and central Mediterranean. Over the period 2003-2023 F/FMSY is trending downwards with a more gradual reduction in the western Mediterranean.

Stock biomass has increased gradually in the western Mediterranean, hand in hand with a decrease in fishing mortality. For the central and eastern Mediterranean, it is unclear at present whether the changes in biomass and fishing mortality are related or if biomass simply responds slower than fishing mortality.

Figure 4: Overall trend in fishing mortality and biomass in the Mediterranean basin. Top panel: average F/FMSY trend. Bottom panel: trend in spawning stock biomass relative to 2003. Dark grey and light grey areas show the 50% and 95% confidence intervals of the average, based on 68 assessed stocks in 2003.

Figure 5: Trends in the average (median) F/FMSY (top panel) and biomass (B/B2003) (bottom panel) over time in each of the Mediterranean Sea areas.

2.Reporting on the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities

In line with Article 22(4) of the CFP Regulation, the Commission must report annually to the European Parliament and the Council on the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities 11 .

Coastal Member States report annually on potential imbalances, following the Commission guidelines 12 . For the fleet segments for which overcapacity has been identified, they are required to submit an action plan with adjustment targets, tools and a clear implementation timeframe, in line with Article 22 of the CFP Regulation.

A detailed analysis of the biological sustainability, economic parameters, vessel usage and national fleet reports is provided below. The Annex shows the fleets where there is an imbalance between fisheries resources and the fleet’s fishing capacity. It also shows where inadequate monitoring and data collection prevented conclusive results from being obtained.

2.1Member States’ annual reports and action plans and the STECF’s assessment

All 22 coastal Member States submitted their 2025 reports to the Commission 13 . The STECF examined these reports comprehensively, together with the available information on the sustainability of fisheries resources, economic parameters and vessel activity. The STECF then issued a report 14 , in line with the Commission guidelines, providing details and their analysis.

An overview of the indicators calculated for each fleet segment is provided in the Annex. It also indicates the Member States that have submitted action plans and the fleet segments identified by Member States as having overcapacity. The calculation of the indicators and the corresponding thresholds signalling potential overcapacity presented here are described in full detail in the Commission guidelines and the STECF report.

Information is provided for each fleet segment separately. A fleet segment is a group of vessels of a defined length (e.g. 6-12 metres), operating in a set area (e.g. the North-East Atlantic) and using the same principal type of gear (e.g. beam trawl). In the Annex, the area code NAO means North Atlantic Ocean, including the North Sea, Celtic Sea and Baltic Sea, MBS means the Mediterranean and Black Seas, and OFR means other fishing regions. Gear codes are as set out in Annex XI to the applicable Commission Implementing Regulation 15 .

Two biological indicators (stocks at risk (SAR) and sustainable harvest indicator (SHI)) have been set. The SAR is a measure of whether a fleet segment catches significant quantities of stocks that are at high biological risk after being depleted to a low level. In the Annex, a SAR in red means that at least 10% of the catches of the segment are taken from a stock at high biological risk.

The SHI measures whether a fleet depends on stocks that are overfished with respect to the MSY (see Annex) for a significant part of its income. A SHI in red means that a fleet segment relies, on average, on stocks that are fished above MSY for its income.

The following three economic indicators are used.

1.If the return on investment is less than zero and less than the best available long-term risk-free interest rate, this is flagged in red to indicate long-term economic inefficiency. If data on intangible costs (e.g. quota leasing) are not available, return on fixed and tangible assets can be used instead.

2.If the current revenue is less than break-even revenue, this is flagged in red to indicate a short-term economic inefficiency.

3.Vessel-use indicators are flagged in red if more than 20% of the fleet segment recurrently demonstrates less than 70% of its potential workable activity, which could indicate an imbalance in capacity. Other reasons could also affect this parameter, such as unexpected events and emergencies.

In many cases, biological information (such as the state of the exploited resource) or economic information was not available for certain fleet segments, preventing the calculation of biological or economic indicators. These are listed in Table 1.

Table 1: There were no fleet segments where a lack of biological or economic information prevented the calculation of biological or economic indicators and where more than 50 vessels were affected by a lack of data reporting

2.2The EU fishing fleet’s capacity

The number, gross tonnage and power of vessels in the EU fleet have all followed a downward trend in recent years (latest data from 2025) (Figures 6 and 7). In December 2025, the EU fleet register (which includes the outermost regions) listed 68 910 vessels corresponding to 1 223 500 gross tonnage (GT) and 5 008 627 kilowatts (kW) of installed power 16 .

Figure 6: Tonnage capacity trend (GT) of the EU fishing fleet between 2014 and 2026

Figure 7: Capacity trend (kW) of the EU fishing fleet between 2014 and 2026

A study 17 was initiated in January 2018 to assess the engine power verification systems implemented in 15 main coastal Member States, completed in June 2019. The results of the physical verifications carried out during the study revealed that for the majority of verified vessels, across coastal Member States, areas and vessel types, the measured engine power exceeded the vessel’s licensed and certified engine power, and for a significant number of inspected vessels, there were secondary indications of non-compliance with engine power restrictions. These findings indicated a systematic lack of a culture of compliance at operator level across the fishing sector with regard to engine power limitations and raised serious concerns about the state of implementation and effectiveness of Member States’ engine power certification and verification procedures. The study also indicated that there were significant differences between coastal Member States in terms of the progress and quality of implementation of the sampling plan to verify engine power and the systems in place to certify and physically verify engine power effectively. In addition, the study indicated that existing certification systems do not always generate reliable engine power figures for registration purposes and that certification does not guarantee that certified engine power will not be exceeded.

In October 2019, the Commission initiated a series of informal discussions with several Member States to address issues related to their engine power verification and certification systems. While progress has already been made by the Member States concerned, the Commission will continue monitoring the implementation of engine power certification and verification procedures in Member States, as improvements of both the certification and verification system are considered necessary to increase the accuracy of registered engine power.

To support Member States in this process, the Commission set up a Technical Working Group in September 2022, composed of EU Member States’ experts and supported by an external expert in the field of engine power, to follow-up on the conclusions of the study, with the primary objective of developing common harmonised guidance for the monitoring, certification and verification of engine power of EU catching vessels in line with the provisions of the Control Regulation. These guidance documents were prepared between September 2022 and 2024, and the final guidance documents were endorsed by the Expert Group on Fisheries Control in March 2025.

In December 2024, all coastal Member State fleets were under their respective capacity ceilings (Figure 8). However, it has come to the Commission’s attention that engine power-related compliance issues are increasingly becoming subject to complaints. This raises concerns about the accuracy and reliability of the engine power values as reported by the coastal Member State and reflected in the Union fleet register.

Figure 8: Effective capacity as a percentage of the capacity ceiling by Member State in December 2025: mainland fleets only

The fleet in the outermost regions has seen a reduction in the number of vessels and gross tonnage capacity (Figures 9 and 10). Between December 2023 and December 2024, the number of vessels decreased by 17 to a total of 3720. Fleet capacity in GT decreased by 590 GT to 51 901 GT. Fleet capacity in kW increased marginally by 937 kW to 376 463 kW.

Figure 9: Vessel tonnage vs its capacity ceiling in the EU outermost regions (2024)

Figure 10: Vessel power vs its capacity ceiling in the EU outermost regions (2025)

2.3Main conclusions by coastal Member State 18

Each year, the STECF issues advice on the balance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities for the different fleet segments and on the quality of the coastal Member States’ assessments provided in their national fleet reports and, where relevant, action plans. Therefore, the STECF conclusions sometimes differ from those of the coastal Member States, as summarised below, based on the indicators calculated by STECF. In the summaries which follow, the Commission has drawn conclusions for 2024 and inferences from the STECF calculations.

Belgium had 1 fleet segment with red biological indicators and another 2 segments (totalling 43 vessels) with red economic indicators, which points to an imbalance. Belgium has not submitted an action plan.

Bulgaria had 6 fleet segments with at least one red economic indicator and 8 segments with red biological indicators. Bulgaria’s action plan is largely a statement of intent and does not give enough information about specific actions to balance fleet capacity with fishing opportunities.

Cyprus had 3 fleet segments with red economic indicators and 1 segment with a red biological indicator. Cyprus submitted an action plan in 2023 concerning overcapacity in one of these fleet segments. However, the timeframe for the planned permanent cessation scheme has changed and the STECF Expert Working Group is unable to determine the effect of the scheme on fleet balance.

Germany had 5 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 12 with at least one red economic indicator. Germany’s action plan focuses on the small-scale coastal fleet in the Baltic and shrimp vessels in the North Sea.

Denmark had 17 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 22 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Its fleet report includes an action plan with a clear timeframe targeted at specific imbalanced fleet segments.

Spain had 33 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 18 fleet segments with at least one red economic indicator. Spain submitted an updated action plan for the period 2025-2028 aimed at aligning fleet capacity with available fishing opportunities, improving the biological sustainability of vulnerable stocks, and enhancing the economic viability of segments with low-profitability.

Estonia had 4 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 1 segment with three red economic indicators. Estonia has not submitted an action plan and considers all segments to be in balance. It deems its fisheries management system (based on individual transferable quotas and individual transferable effort) to be effective in maintaining a structural balance between fishing capacity and opportunities.

Finland had 5 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 3 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Finland has not submitted an action plan, despite the indications of overcapacity. Finland has not fixed objectives for achieving capacity reductions.

France had 24 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 14 fleet segments with at least one red economic indicator. France submitted an updated action plan. The plan contains a wide range of general as well as more specific measures for imbalanced fleet segments.

Greece had 5 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator. There were 6 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Greece has not yet presented an action plan despite the indications and acknowledgement of overcapacity.

Croatia had 20 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 14 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Croatia is continuing to implement its action plan to tackle overcapacity through temporary and permanent cessation complemented by supplementary measures. Moreover, it withdrew 56 vessels from specific segments in 2024. Croatia has also initiated a scheme to withdraw authorisation for selected gear types.

Ireland had 10 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 10 segments with at least one red economic indicator. 4 segments had no available economic indicator. Ireland has not presented an action plan and does not consider any of its fleet segments to have a structural imbalance despite the indications of overcapacity.

Italy had 19 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 14 fleet segments with at least one red economic indicator. Italy’s action plan is a continuation of measures established prior to and during 2024 and aims to tackle the overcapacity in its fleet. Italy’s action plan presents different measures to reduce fishing effort, e.g. continuing previous measures and permanently ceasing activities.

Latvia had 4 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 1 fleet segment with at least one red economic indicator. Latvia has not submitted a new action plan following the end of its current action plans in 2020 and 2023 respectively.

Lithuania had 6 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 1 fleet segment with at least one red economic indicator. Lithuania has submitted an action plan – a continuation of its previous action plan from 2024 – targeting a single fleet segment operating in the Baltic Sea which relies on small pelagic species, mainly sprat and herring.

Malta had 6 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 9 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Malta has added new measures to its action plan which is still largely a statement of intent to improve monitoring activities.

The Netherlands had 4 segments with red biological indicators and 9 segments with red economic indicators. Despite the indications of overcapacity, the Netherlands did not submit an action plan.

Poland had 7 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 5 fleet segments with at least one red economic indicator. Poland submitted a revised action plan building on the framework established in its 2022 plan, which set out the targets and the tools for achieving a sustainable balance between fishing capacity and available fishing opportunities.

Portugal had 9 fleet segments with at least one red biological indicator and 11 segments with at least one red economic indicator. Portugal extended its action plan from 2022 to run through 2025. It is uncertain if the measures outlined in the action plan can address the identified imbalances.

Romania had 3 fleet segments with one red technical indicator and 1 fleet segment with one red biological indicator. Romania submitted an action plan which seems to be a continuation of the action plan from 2023. It is hoped that a new law will address imbalances by revoking fishing licences from vessels inactive for over one year.

Slovenia had no fleet segments with a red biological indicator and no fleet segments with a red economic indicator.

Sweden had 20 segments with a red biological indicator and 5 segments with a red economic indicator. Sweden has not submitted an action plan as it considers all its segments in balance.

The number of Member States with segments with no biological or economic indicators has increased from 9 to 14, with Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Spain, Estonia, France, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Netherland, Poland, Portugal and Romania all reporting segments with no indicators.

Data collection needs to improve in order to comply with Article 22 of the CFP Regulation. The Commission has therefore asked Member States to submit further details on their fishing fleets in order to build a clear picture of the situation in their fleets. In particular, this is intended to further the work on energy transition and tackle the health and safety concerns highlighted in the fisheries and oceans package 19 , while stressing the need to improve data collection.

2.4Financial support from the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) for the structural adaptation of fishing fleets

Certain segments of the fishing fleet are subject to overcapacity, resulting in the overexploitation of marine biological resources. If there is structural overcapacity, the profitability of the fleet is low because too many vessels are chasing too few fish. To avoid this situation, it is necessary to structurally adapt the fishing fleets concerned.

The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund 20 (EMFAF) can grant, under very specific conditions, financial compensation to fishers if they permanently cease fishing activities. The fishing capacity eliminated thanks to this support is then permanently removed from the fleet. Permanent cessation can happen through the scrapping of a fishing vessel or through its decommissioning and retrofitting for activities other than commercial fishing. However, any conversion to recreational fishing must not lead to increased pressure on the marine ecosystem.

Member States are in the process of implementing their EMFAF programmes for 2021-2027. These programmes are multiannual strategic roadmaps for public investment, underpinned by an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. They set out tailor-made actions which are co-financed by the Member States and the EU, in order to respond to the specific challenges linked to the common EU priorities for marine biodiversity, maritime policy and sustainable fisheries and aquaculture. These programmes take into account the balance between fleet fishing capacity and available fishing opportunities, as reported on annually by coastal Member States in line with Article 22(2) of the CFP Regulation.

2.5Conclusion

In 2025, all coastal Member States complied with the obligation to report on the capacity and balance of their fleet segments with fishing opportunities. However, some Member States will need to adjust their reporting to better comply with the Commission’s guidelines and tackle discrepancies between their national reports and the STECF’s advice. 13 Member States submitted new or revised action plans encompassing many different measures to tackle overcapacity. However, more needs to be done to make the action plans more specific, time-bound and objective-driven.

The overall capacity of the EU mainland fleet (i.e. excluding the outermost regions) has remained relatively stable. Only minor changes were observed compared to the previous year, namely -0.95%, -1.8% and -1.06% in the number of vessels, tonnage and power, respectively.

Nevertheless, a greater focus is needed on the fleets of some coastal Member States, especially in the Mediterranean and Black Seas, where capacity is very close to the ceilings. Capacity measures can be particularly important for countries and regions where conservation and management measures are not (yet) effective enough to regulate input and output measures, such as effort limits or TACs.

3.Socio-economic performance: EU trends and results by fleet category

According to the latest available STECF annual economic report for 2025 21 , there were 53 300 active vessels employing more than 155 200 people in 2023. The EU fishing fleet landed about 3.39 million tonnes, with a value of approximately EUR 6.13 billion in 2023. Fishing vessels consumed around 1.56 billion litres of fuel, resulting in average landings of around 2.2 kg of fish per litre of fuel consumed.

On that basis, the EU fleet remained profitable overall in 2023, although only by a small margin. The figures on the performance of the EU fleet, while lower than in 2022, were still positive in 2023, with an overall gross profit of EUR 0.99 billion and an operating profit of EUR 222 million.

Recent trends in the performance of the EU fleet have mainly been driven by the following four factors:

·a decrease in fuel prices in 2023 compared to 2022: Previously, a sharp increase in fuel costs following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 had led to higher operating costs and lower profitability;

·inflation: as a result of inflation, operating costs were higher throughout the fishing sector;

·a decrease in landings of 2.6% by weight and 13.4% by value in 2023 compared with 2022: this decrease was largely due to lower average first-sale prices, although for some key commercial species prices remained stable or even rose;

·continued progress in the sustainable management of fish stocks: more fisheries were exploited within safe biological limits, supporting the long-term resilience of the sector.

Estimates by the STECF Expert Working Group suggest that fleets should see an improvement in their economic performance in 2024 and 2025. While value added is projected to increase by 1% in 2024 and by 5% in 2025 (compared with 2023), gross profit is expected to rise by 12% in 2024 and by 26% in 2025. However, the economic performance of the EU fleet as a whole is projected to significantly decline in 2026, driven by rising fuel costs, affecting fuel intensive gear in particular.

Recent trends in economic performance

According to the latest data, the economic performance of the EU fishing fleet is on a downward trend. In 2023, the most recent year for which full data is available, revenue fell by around 10% while operating costs – notably fuel (which peaked in 2022) and wages – remained elevated. As a result, the sector is still struggling, with gross profit decreasing by about 45% and operating profit falling to EUR 222 million. This illustrates the sector’s sensitivity to increases in energy and labour costs and reveals that economic performance, which peaked in 2016, is continuing to decline.

At the same time, consumer behaviour has also shifted. According to the European Market Observatory for Fisheries and Aquaculture Products 22 , seafood price inflation in 2023 contributed to a reduction in EU household consumption of fresh seafood, despite the total amount spent on seafood increasing. These market changes have amplified the economic pressure on fishing businesses.

The fishing sector provided direct employment to 155 203 people – of which 119 479 received a formal salary, while the rest were often implicitly remunerated through profits (e.g. vessel owners) – equating to about 74 000 full-time jobs. Employment has thus fallen substantially over the last ten years. The countries with the largest numbers of fishers were Spain, Italy, Greece and France. The reason for this distinction is because the statistics used for this economic analysis follow this breakdown, excluding these areas.

The average annual gross salary per FTE was EUR 33 190 in 2023, representing a 7% decline compared with 2022. Average wages varied between countries and vessel sizes, with larger trawlers generally recording higher earnings.

Each full-time fisher generated around EUR 43 300 of value added in 2023. Value added is the wealth created by the sector, calculated as the difference between revenue from sales on the one hand, and operating costs such as fuel, ice, labour and repairs, on the other hand.

Value added per full-time employee generated in 2023 was 8% lower than in 2022, reflecting higher labour costs and lower output. Nevertheless, it remained 35% higher than in 2013. This illustrates that, despite lower income as a whole in the sector in 2023, the reduction in the number of vessels and fishers meant that each remaining vessel and fisher was generating more value added on average.

Fishing and fuel: becoming more efficient

In 2023, EU fishing vessels spent a total of some 5.25 million days at sea, representing an increase of 3.4% compared with 2022. They consumed around 1.56 billion litres of fuel, equating to 29 370 litres per vessel per year. Since 2013, fuel consumption per vessel has fallen by about 15%, while fishing time per vessel has risen by 26%. This reflects improvements in technology and fishing practices, including the use of more efficient engines, hull designs, navigation systems and fishing gear.

On average, vessels now use around 460 litres of fuel to land one tonne of fish or, put differently, land 2.17 kg of fish for each litre of fuel used. Larger trawlers account for about 69% of total fuel use and contribute roughly 64% to the value of landings, meaning that efficiency gains in this segment are having a substantial impact on the fleet as a whole.

Fuel prices, which peaked at EUR 1.15 in 2022, fell in 2023, averaging EUR 0.97 per litre. As a result, average fuel costs per fishing day declined by 22% in 2023. Overall, lower fuel use brings down operating expenses and contributes to greater energy efficiency, while also supporting the sector’s socio-economic resilience and reducing its environmental impact.

Economic performance by fleet category and fishing region

Broadly speaking, EU vessels can be broken down into four types.

Small-scale coastal vessels (SSCF), which are under 12 metres in length and use passive gear such as nets or traps, account for around 77% of the fleet and around 8% of total fuel consumption. They contribute around 22% of total economic output and 17% of the value of landings and mainly target local species in coastal waters. These vessels are generally less capital-intensive and often operate part-time. Their operating costs are lower than those of larger vessels and they are also able to influence production prices to a larger extent. The small-scale coastal fleet is inherently linked to coastal communities, providing employment opportunities and contributing to local economies. These fishers have cultural and social ties to their communities, passing traditional fishing knowledge down through the generations.

Small towing-gear vessels (L12AG), which are under 12 metres in length and use trawls, dredges or similar gear to actively target fish, account for around 6% of the fleet and 2% of total fuel consumption, and contributes 3-4% of total economic output. Unlike passive-gear vessels, they actively move nets or lines through the water to catch fish. Their contribution to the sector is relatively small and varies between Member States.

Large-scale vessels (LSF), over 12 metres in length and including trawlers, seiners and longliners, account for 17% of the fleet but generate around 63% of value added and 65% of the value of landings. They primarily target high-value species and are responsible for most of the sector’s output. This segment was particularly affected by rising costs in 2022-23. In 2023, gross profit in the sector declined by 21% and the value of landings by 9%. Large-scale vessels also consume the most fuel (69%), making them especially vulnerable to fluctuations in fuel prices.

The distant-water fleet (DWF) comprises around 239 vessels, mainly sailing under the Spanish flag, which fish in non-EU waters under international agreements. Although this sector represents only 0.5% of the fleet, it accounts for 21% of total fuel consumption and contributes 16% to the value of landings and 11% of value added. Productivity is high, averaging EUR 55 000 of value added per worker. In 2023 the sector generated around EUR 353 million in value added and EUR 151 million in gross profit, though both were lower than in 2022 (by 16% and 13%, respectively). The distant-water fleet is important as it targets high-value species such as tuna.

Fishing activity takes place in very different environments across Europe. The North Sea and Eastern Arctic, where mostly Danish and Dutch fishing vessels operate, recorded 741 000 tonnes of landings in 2023 (-1% compared with 2022), worth EUR 948 million (-12% compared with 2022). Key species fished include shrimp, herring and mackerel. Fuel costs in this fishing region fell sharply – although not to the levels recorded before the COVID-19 pandemic – which helped to ease costs. Nevertheless, total landings were well below historic levels, down 36% on 2013, partly due to quota restrictions and the effects of Brexit.

The fleet operating in the Baltic Sea landed 439 000 tonnes (–6% compared with 2022) worth EUR 198 million (+13%). The landing value increased due to higher prices (especially for small pelagic species). Gross value added was EUR 118 million (+33%), while gross profit amounted to EUR 50.7 million (+79%). Despite an improved outlook, concerns remain. Several Baltic cod and herring stocks are severely depleted, with some no longer targeted and appearing only as by-catch. The European Commission has identified a need for urgent management and ecosystem restoration measures in this region 23 .

The North-Western waters are fishing areas around the UK and Ireland. The EU fleet (mainly vessels from France, Ireland and Spain) has seen a rebound, with landings totalling 777 800 tonnes (+15%), worth EUR 1.14 billion (+1%) – the highest landing volume since 2013. Gross value added was estimated at EUR 595.7 million, representing an increase of 3.5% compared to the previous year. The fleet achieved a gross profit of EUR 179.3 million, an increase of 51% compared with 2022.

The South-Western waters comprise the Atlantic fishing zone from Brittany in the north to the Strait of Gibraltar in the south together with the outermost regions of Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Vessels active in this region primarily sail under the Spanish, French and Portuguese flags. In 2023 landings fell in volume (-6%) and value (-8%) compared with 2022. Revenue was EUR 1.3 billion and gross value added was EUR 689 million. Gross profit was EUR 123 million. The main species fished include sardine, hake and tropical tunas. Some 32 430 people were employed in this fishing zone (18 600 FTE). Spain and Portugal account for the majority (around 99%) of vessels. Labour represented 41% of costs. Fleets operated with a gross profit, however major investments (capital costs) resulted in a negative net profit in 2023.

The Mediterranean fleet accounts for around 58% of all EU vessels (mostly small vessels). In 2023, landings of 308 700 tonnes were recorded (–7%), worth EUR 1.46 billion (–9%). Key species fished include octopus, hake, sardine, bluefin tuna and swordfish. The fleet employed around 58 000 persons (35 256 FTE), accounting for 47% of all employment in the EU fishing sector. Despite the decrease in landings, the Mediterranean fleet’s gross value added was EUR 900 million (–8% compared with 2022), while gross profit was EUR 301 million (– 19%). The Mediterranean fleet had been improving since 2020, although this trend began to reverse in 2023. Purse seiners (tuna) and trawlers account for most of the fleet. Small-scale coastal vessels make up half of all jobs and 31% of revenue (a slight increase on the previous year).

In the Black Sea, vessels from only two EU Member States operate (Romania and Bulgaria). In 2023, the fleet landed 9 961 tonnes worth EUR 9.8 million. Bulgaria accounted for 6 665 tonnes (worth EUR 6.24 million) and Romania 3 295 tonnes (worth EUR 3.55 million). Small-scale vessels (91% of fleet) accounted for 61% of fishing effort, but only 21% of landings by weight. Most large vessels operated at a profit, while part-time fishing vessels often operated at a loss. The primary species caught are whelk (gastropod), sprat, turbot, and horse mackerel.

Fishing activity also takes place in Union waters far away from the European continent. The EU has nine outermost regions (OMR) with an active fleet, namely Guadeloupe, Saint-Martin, Martinique, French Guiana, Mayotte and La Réunion (France), the Azores and Madeira (Portugal), and the Canary Islands (Spain). In 2023, the OMR fleet caught 31 597 tonnes worth EUR 149.4 million. The French OMRs (mainly French Guiana and territories in the Indian Ocean) accounted for 44% of the landing value (EUR 65.5 million), the Portuguese OMRs (Azores/Madeira) for 38% (EUR 57.3 million), and the Spanish OMR (the Canary Islands) for 18% (EUR 26.5 million). Overall, gross value-added totalled EUR 103.4 million. All OMR fleets operated at a profit, with the exception of the Canary Islands’ fleet, which operated at a slight loss.

Another small distant-water fleet fishes in the Northwest Atlantic area. This area comprises the exclusive economic zones of the coastal states and high seas fisheries regulated by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO). In 2023, some 24 vessels – mostly sailing under the Spanish and Portuguese flags – caught 33 500 tonnes worth EUR 87.4 million. In 2023, the economic performance of the fleet deteriorated considerably compared with 2022 in terms of revenue, value added and gross profit.

EU vessels also actively operate in areas under the jurisdiction of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), which include all Atlantic waters and adjacent seas. Excluding the Mediterranean and the outermost regions, the EU fleet operating under the ICCAT Convention comprised 202 vessels in 2023. Together they landed 156 706 tonnes of tuna and shark (notably blue shark, skipjack tuna, yellowfin tuna and albacore) worth EUR 311 million. The landing volume was down 11% and the landing value down 27% compared with 2022. Likewise, the economic performance of the fleet deteriorated considerably. Revenue was EUR 328 million (–20% on 2022), value added was EUR 133 million (–23%) and gross profit was EUR 33 million (–46%). Losses were caused by smaller catches of high-value tropical tunas and weaker prices. Prices will need to pick up considerably for profitability to be restored in this distant-water fleet.

Vessels belonging to four Member States (mainly Spain and France, but also Portugal and Italy) operated in waters regulated by the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC). The IOTC is the organisation responsible for managing fisheries targeting tuna and tuna-like species in the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas. Approximately 36 vessels caught mainly skipjack, yellowfin and bigeye tuna. The economic performance of this fleet in 2023 was mixed. Profitability indicators, such as gross profit, matched or exceeded 2022 levels. However, revenue and value added dropped significantly due to lower energy and labour costs. Value added totalled EUR 198 million and gross profit was around EUR 129 million, indicating a small change but a generally stable trend over the past two years.

Above mentioned industrial tuna fleets (purse seiners, longliners and poles and lines) operating in the ICCAT, IOTC areas, as well as a small number of Spanish industrial tuna purse seiners operating in WCPFC area, share their activities between the high seas, non SFPA EEZ (Angola, Guinea, Kenya) and SFPAs (either tuna or mixed species SFPAs), respectively Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, São Tomé and Príncipe, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles, and Kiribati.

In the mixed SFPA, Four distant-water segments are constituted by demersal trawlers for shrimps, cephalopods, demersal (Spanish) and pelagic freezer vessels operating in waters within the area of competence of the Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF), in the north the Greenland SFPA offers fishing opportunities for Cod, prawns, red fish, halibut. In 2023, the fleet landed around 35 000 tonnes valued worth EUR 86 million. 93% of vessels fishing in these waters sailed under the Spanish flag (37 of 40). The main non-tuna species were Atlantic horse mackerel (13 500 tonnes, EUR 19 million) and pink shrimp (2 400 tonnes, EUR 14 million). The fleet specially targets western African stocks, however profitability was mixed. Two of the segments (Spanish trawlers and Italian vessels) achieved a high value per tonne which was able to offset the lower catch volumes.

Finally, some EU vessels operate in waters regulated by the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC). While the total catch recorded by that fleet was approximately 10.5 million tonnes, an analysis of the fleet’s performance and activity could not be carried out due to data availability issues.

National fisheries profiles and social indicators

The latest STECF report on social data in fisheries 24 contains important information related to national fisheries profiles and the development of additional social indicators. STECF Expert Working Groups (24-05, 23-17, 22-14, 20-14 and 19-03) have developed a range of tools and data frameworks under the EU fisheries social dimension toolbox, which have since made it possible to publish the first annual social report (ASOR).

National fisheries profiles collate quantitative and qualitative social data for each Member State. They provide historical background and specific contextual information, and emphasise the most salient social, institutional and legal aspects related to fisheries in each country. As such, they are a key tool to understand the wider social context of fisheries. To date, 17 national fisheries profiles (BE, BG, CY, DK, DE, EE, ES, FR, HR, IE, IT, NL, PT, SE, SI, EL, DE, LV) have been produced and 8 have been peer-reviewed and published. Additionally, a template for fisheries community profiles has been developed to be used by national institutes to provide detailed case studies of specific harbours and complement national aggregate data analysed in the national fisheries profiles.

Regarding social indicators, the STECF has proposed a list of 38 new social indicators, including 12 that would be immediately collectable by national authorities. The STECF produced its first dedicated social report in spring 2026 that analyses existing social data (employment, income) collected through the EU multiannual programme for data collection (EU MAP) along with a set of more qualitative data (national fisheries profiles) 25 .

4.Implementation of the landing obligation

The landing obligation has been in place since 2015 and fully applicable since 2019. Reporting is based on information sent by Member States, advisory councils and other relevant sources to the Commission. Reports on implementing the landing obligation were first produced in 2015. Since 2016, this reporting has been included in the Commission’s annual communication on the CFP. This staff working document covers implementation of the landing obligation in 2025.

Since 2021, the Commission has no longer been under a legal obligation to annually report on the implementation of the landing obligation. However, as the landing obligation is key to the CFP objectives, the Commission decided to continue annual reporting.

For 2025, reporting on the landing obligation was based on: (i) progress with EMFAF measures addressing the landing obligation; (ii) discussions in the advisory councils; (iii) control, including annual reporting by the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA); and (iv) the study supporting the evaluation of the landing obligation published in June 2025 26 .

4.1Implementation of measures at sea basin level

Delegated regulations specifying details for implementing the landing obligation

To ensure the successful and feasible implementation of the landing obligation, Member States may develop joint recommendations in consultation with the advisory councils. They may agree to submit these recommendations to the Commission with specific implementation provisions which the Commission may adopt by means of delegated acts. Before adopting the delegated acts, the Commission must submit the joint recommendations to the STECF for assessment as the specific implementation provisions should take into account the best available scientific advice and include that advice as the basis for exemptions to the landing obligation.

Such delegated acts provide some flexibility where unwanted catches are very difficult to avoid or lead to disproportional costs, or where species have a high survivability rate. Exemptions from the landing obligation are set out in Article 15(4) of the CFP Regulation 27 . In addition to the exemptions for prohibited species and predator-damaged fish, the landing obligation does not apply to the following cases:

-High survivability cases, for which scientific evidence demonstrates high survival rates of discarded species.

-Up to 5% of the total annual catches (de minimis), either because scientific evidence demonstrates that increases in selectivity are very difficult to achieve or to avoid disproportionate costs for handling and sorting unwanted catches. These exemptions were put in place by the co-legislators to tackle the specific problems of (mostly) mixed fisheries 28 in achieving the objectives of the CFP Regulation and to avoid the phenomenon of choke species.

The Western Waters 29 , the North Sea 30 , the Baltic 31 and the western Mediterranean 32 multiannual plans allow for delegated regulations to be adopted specifying details for implementing the landing obligation for species subject to catch limits and, in the Mediterranean, also species subject to minimum conservation reference sizes, and covering the de minimis and high survivability exemptions and technical measures aimed at increasing gear selectivity, reducing unwanted catches and eliminating discards. The landing obligation has been fully applicable since 2019 and multiannual plans have been adopted for most waters. This represents a shift from granting exemptions to the landing obligation under the CFP via temporary discard plans 33 to a more stable approach with multiannual plans as a legal basis.

In 2025, the following delegated regulations specifying details for implementing the landing obligation were in place:

1) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1388 of 11 March 2024 correcting Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2623 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2019/472 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying details of the landing obligation for certain fisheries in Western Waters for the period 2024-2027 ;

2)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2459 of 22 August 2023 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2018/973 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying details of the landing obligation for certain fisheries in the North Sea for the period 2024-2027;

3)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/2992 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2462 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying details of the landing obligation for certain demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea;

4)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2462 of 22 August 2023 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying details of the landing obligation for certain demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea;

5)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2918 of 22 August 2023 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the establishment of a de minimis exemption to the landing obligation for certain demersal fisheries in the Adriatic and south-eastern Mediterranean Sea;

6)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2460 of 22 August 2023 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the establishment of a de minimis exemption to the landing obligation for certain small pelagic fisheries in the Mediterranean Sea;

7)Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/306 of 18 December 2017 laying down specifications for the implementation of the landing obligation as regards cod and plaice in Baltic Sea fisheries;

8) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1296 of 28 February 2024 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning an exemption from the application of the landing obligation as regards salmon in the Baltic Sea for the period 2024-2026 .

Quota management

In previous years, Member States reported that the most important management measures to help prevent choke situations 34 and successfully implement the landing obligation were quota swaps, inter-species and inter-annual flexibilities provided for by CFP Regulation. These tools remain important but no significant trend can be detected in quota swapping between Member States. This is confirmed by the Commission’s QUOTA database (Figures 11, 12, 13). To increase transparency and facilitate swapping, the Commission publishes the quota swaps list every year on a public website 35 . Figures for the current year are updated weekly.

Figure 11: Volume of quota swaps ‘in’ (t)

Figure 12: Volume of quota swaps ‘in’ by Member State (t)

Figure 13: Number of quota swaps ‘in’ by Member State

4.2Control and enforcement by Member States

As reported in previous years, the main risks of non-compliance associated with the landing obligation during fishing activities at sea are the illegal and undocumented discarding of catches. There are incentives for illegal and undocumented discarding 36  which need to be tackled through the adoption of ‘control’ 37 and ‘enforcement’ 38 measures by Member States.

However, Member States mainly use traditional control tools, such as inspections at sea, landing inspections, data analysis and aerial surveillance. These tools on their own are not sufficiently effective for ensuring control and enforcement of the landing obligation during fishing activities at sea. For example, inspections at sea only provide a snapshot at the time of monitoring and do not cover fishing activity before or after an inspection. Illegal and undocumented discarding may not be detected during inspections at sea as operators are unlikely to contravene the landing obligation in the presence of officials. Landing inspections do not monitor illegal discards during fishing activities at sea and aerial surveillance does not always provide sufficient evidence of compliance or non-compliance 39 . Data analysis may indicate a lack of discard reporting but does not confirm it at individual vessel level. The lack of effective control measures adopted by Member States to date, means that illegal behaviour, in the context of the main risks associated with the landing obligation, is very difficult to detect and confirm. In turn, this means that sanctions are seldom applied for illegal and undocumented discarding. These control and enforcement shortcomings undermine the ‘development of a culture of compliance’ as required under EU rules 40  and also have serious ramifications in terms of the ability of Member States to ensure that catches falling under the de minimis exemption do not exceed the permitted amounts 41 .

The inadequacy of these conventional control methods has been highlighted in several reports, including ten audit reports by the Commission 42 and several evaluation reports by the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA). EFCA’s 2026 report Overview of the EFCA activities to support the implementation of the landing obligation in 2025 43 , highlighted the limitations of inspections as a means of controlling the landing obligation, stating:

The low number reflects the difficulty of detecting these types of suspected infringements with the landing obligation and the associated misreporting, with the available control tools. Illegal discarding practices are almost undetectable throughout the short period when an inspector is on board of a fishing vessel, and the limitations of existing control tools in providing an effective enforcement of the LO rules are the main drivers.

The Commission audit reports have also highlighted how Member States have failed to adopt the necessary measures to ensure control and enforcement of the landing obligation, in contravention of the Control Regulation, the CFP Regulation and the IUU Regulation, pointing to prolific illegal and undocumented discarding of catches. EFCA’s reports indicate widespread discard in several fisheries. Subsequent studies have confirmed that discard rates have not changed since the introduction of the landing obligation. Legally, however, it is difficult to investigate and sanction because of the lack of evidence, and equally difficult to identify the individual vessels/operators responsible for discards. According to EFCA, remote electronic monitoring (REM) tools are very well suited to controls 44  of catch registration and illegal discard at sea. This has also been confirmed by several trials conducted by Member States and by third countries around the world, which have pointed out that these modern control technologies are scalable and effective measures for controlling discard during fishing activities at sea. In the absence of such control tools, enforcement action by Member States has been limited.

In order to facilitate the effective control and enforcement the landing obligation, the European Parliament and the Council adopted new EU rules 45 which require EU vessels of 18 metres or more in length or more that pose a potential risk of non-compliance to install on-board REM systems, including closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, by 10  January 2028. While it is anticipated that this will amount to a relatively small share of the total EU fleet, the proportion of the landings thus covered is expected to be much larger. However, the new rules do not require the use of on-board CCTV on board fishing vessels of less than 18 metres in length overall and/or on those perceived to pose a low risk of non-compliance. It should be borne in mind that under EU rules, Member States are responsible for adopting the necessary measures to ensure control and enforcement of all activities, carried out within the scope of the CFP, regardless of vessel size. They must do so on a risk-based approach, which entails that Member States have considerable discretion in when controlling other fleet segments. Member States have primarily responsibility for implementing these rules. 

Improper implementation of the landing obligation poses a significant risk to achieving the objectives of the CFP and undermines the accuracy of catch data (landings, unwanted catch, and discards) and reporting. Data and accurate reporting are crucial for the quality of scientific advice and therefore for achieving the maximum sustainable yield.

European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) last haul inspections

EFCA last haul verifications 47 have enabled the implementation of the landing obligation to be monitored to a certain degree in relation to illegal discards or to the recording of legal discards covered by exemptions. While such verification during sea inspections is not effective in detecting possible infringements related to illegal discards – since fishers are unlikely to discard fish subject to the landing obligation in the presence of inspectors – they are instrumental for monitoring the implementation of the landing obligation. Moreover, this verification may also help to raise awareness among fishers regarding the provisions of the landing obligation and associated reporting requirements.

The need for alternative control tools such as the REM as an effective operational solution for monitoring compliance with the landing obligation and identifying illegal practice was emphasised in 2023. During the course of the year, the EFCA REM Working Group discussed topics such as data protection issues, tender and procurement, the installation of REM systems, and the development of operational guidelines for implementing REM in NAFO fisheries. EFCA will continue to assist Member States in preparing for implementation of REM and in identifying the best possible strategies for monitoring the landing obligation.

4.3. Study supporting the evaluation of the landing obligation

In 2024, the Commission launched an independent study to support the evaluation of the landing obligation. CINEA (the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency) was contracted to carry out the study which was concluded in April 2025.

The objective of the study was to gather evidence for an assessment on how the landing obligation is performing, how it works in practice, and why it performs the way it does. The results of the study were then fed into the full evaluation of the CFP Regulation.

CINEA’s study revealed that, overall, the landing obligation had not contributed to the objective to gradually eliminate discards and that no relevant change in fishing behaviour or catch composition had been observed since its entry into force. The main factors identified by the study which were potentially limiting the implementation of the landing obligation were (i) the high number of exemptions and insufficient data on discards covered by those exemptions, (ii) the lack of incentives for fishers to comply, (iii) the lack of control and ineffective monitoring and enforcement tools, and (iv) the low uptake and buy-in at industry level.

5.The work and role of advisory councils in 2025

5.1Advisory councils’ recommendations in 2025 and how these were taken on board

In 2025, the advisory councils (ACs) submitted 135 recommendations to the Commission, up from the 93 submitted in 2024. As in previous years, they covered a broad range of subjects (Figure 16), which indicates the extent to which the large number of files has an impact on fisheries and aquaculture.

Recommendations were evenly spread across the different ACs although most were received from the Long-Distance Advisory Council (LDAC) and the Mediterranean Advisory Council (MEDAC). The number of joint recommendations / joint opinions increased considerably in 2025. As in previous years, joint recommendations were also submitted to the Commission by the Member States who consulted the ACs.

Figure 16: Number of recommendations received by the Commission on various topics

As described below, these recommendations were essential in shaping policy. The Commission took the recommendations on board to a large extent.

1)Recommendations on the Mediterranean and Black Seas

In 2025, the Commission received recommendations from the Mediterranean Advisory Council (MEDAC) on topics such as fishing opportunities, implementation of the EU Western Mediterranean multiannual plan, implementation of the multiannual plans of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), on invasive species (particularly focusing on blue crab) and on stakeholder engagement in GFCM and STECF processes. It also received contributions on the evaluation of the CFP, on the future MFF, on the Ocean Pact 48 , on EU fisheries external action, on energy transition as well as contributions to EU proposals to the GFCM and ICCAT.

In EU proposals for GFCM recommendations and resolutions, the Commission incorporated parts of the MEDAC recommendations on establishing the long-term phase of several multiannual plans in the Alboran Sea, the Strait of Sicily, the Ionian Sea and the Levant Sea, on measures relating to small pelagic and demersal species in the Adriatic, and on strengthening IMO number standards. It also submitted relevant information concerning non-indigenous species for the GFCM research programmes and pilots. Furthermore, the Commission promoted in all GFCM proposals the need for a regional level playing field, as called for by MEDAC.

In preparing the annual fishing opportunities proposal for the Mediterranean and Black Seas, the Commission took into account parts of MEDAC recommendations, including aspects related to the implementation of the compensation mechanism under the Western Mediterranean multiannual plan and establishing fishing effort at the level of geographical subareas.

The Commission also received in 2025 recommendations from the Black Sea Advisory Council (BlSAC) on topics such as fishing gear selectivity for demersal and benthic species in the Black Sea, sea space use and reconciliation between traditional and emerging activities, the circular economy in the fishing sector, energy transition and decarbonisation of fishing activities in the Black Sea, fisheries cooperation in the Black Sea, eutrophication and the impact of freshwater inflow on fisheries, stock management of Rapana Venosa in the Black Sea, allocated zones for aquaculture, and the development of bivalve fishing in the Black Sea. The Commission incorporated parts of these recommendations into the proposals for GFCM recommendations.

2)Recommendations on the North-East Atlantic and North Sea – shared fish stock management

In 2021, the North-Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC), the North Sea Advisory Council (NSAC) and the Pelagic Advisory Council (PELAC) decided to set up an inter-AC forum to deal with the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. The Commission has been meeting with this forum’s members regularly since 2022 to discuss the agenda items of the Specialised Committee on Fisheries (SCF) under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement and debrief on annual consultation outcomes. For the SCF in particular, these regular meetings have helped prepare stakeholder involvement on a number of important files to be discussed with the UK.

In addition, the NSAC’s advice on Northern shelf cod was followed up by stakeholder engagement activities and discussions with scientists and managers and was ultimately reflected in the final set of measures accompanying the 2026 fishing opportunities.

The NWWAC recommendation on the seabass tool was followed up by specific discussions between the Commission and the focus group on how to improve the current tool. This helped inform the EU position when drafting joint terms of reference for ICES, agreed by the EU-UK SCF.

Other NWWAC recommendations provided feedback on technical measures for Celtic Sea cod. This feedback was taken into consideration in the discussions with the UK, which reached an agreement in December 2025 on a number of remedial measures in the Celtic Sea and the Irish Sea. The Commission will continue to engage with the NWWAC on this topic.

The NWWAC recommendations on the management of skates and rays were used in the annual negotiations with the UK for 2026, which eventually led to an agreement with the UK on splitting three species from the group TAC.

3)Recommendations on South-Western Waters

The South-Western Waters Advisory Council adopted a recommendation on the limitation of variations in fishing opportunities for certain stocks between years. The stocks concerned were shared stocks managed by the EU and EU-only stocks.

4)Recommendations on the Baltic Sea

The Commission proposal on fishing opportunities for 2026 took into account the Baltic Sea Advisory Council’s (BSAC) recommendations, including its recommendations agreed by majority for plaice, Riga herring and salmon in the main basin and in the Gulf of Finland. The BSAC also adopted recommendations notably on the implementation of an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. It also provided input on the functioning of advisory councils. Moreover, good and regular cooperation with BaltFish (the Member State Regional Group for the Baltic) continued.

5)Recommendations on aquaculture

The Aquaculture Advisory Council (AAC) submitted 21 recommendations on aquaculture in 2025, demonstrating support for the development of sustainable aquaculture and for the implementation of the strategic guidelines on aquaculture, notably in relation to environmental sustainability, animal welfare and health, innovation and best practices. The AAC also contributed to the mid-term assessment of the guidelines, highlighting the need for it to better disseminate information on existing tools and resources to its members. In response, the AAC launched a series of webinars on animal health and welfare in September 2025. Biannual bilateral meetings with the Commission to better align the work of the AAC with the strategic guidelines were also established. Moreover, the AAC provided input on the EU-wide communication campaign on aquaculture, launched on 25 March 2025.

6)Recommendation related to fisheries and aquaculture market

In 2025, the market advisory council (MAC) adopted 18 advice documents on a broad range of topics related to EU fisheries and aquaculture market policy, three of which were submitted jointly with other advisory councils. The most important advice concerned the evaluation of the CFP Regulation and the Commission’s 2040 vision for fisheries, aquaculture and their market. On trade and market access, the MAC provided recommendations on sustainability criteria for autonomous tariff quotas, on the EU strategy for fisheries external action, and on the urgent need for effective enforcement of import control rules across Member States. Further advice concerned the functioning of producer organisations under the CMO, IUU fishing in the outermost regions (jointly issued with the advisory committee for the outermost regions (CC RUP)), traceability and lot marking, the FAO Sub-Committee on Fish Trade, and the STECF economic reports on the fishing fleet and the aquaculture sector (the latter jointly issued with the AAC). Advice was also issued on broader topics including packaging waste, animal transport welfare, labelling, and the use of meat-related terminology.

7)Recommendations on energy transition of the EU fisheries and aquaculture sector 49

In 2023, the Commission discussed the energy transition with ACs. The Commission received several recommendations on energy transition from a number of ACs. In June 2023, following Communication 2023/100 on the energy transition in EU fisheries and aquaculture, the Commission launched the Energy Transition Partnership (ETP) in EU fisheries and aquaculture, starting in a collaborative manner with a wide range of workshops and setting up ten segment groups intended to foster close dialogue to collect input for a future roadmap. The ETP now brings together over 600 stakeholders from a variety of sectors and has become a collaborative platform for sharing research, studies, and technical and financial insights. Moreover, it is recognised as a hub for innovative projects and best practices. The ten working groups within the ETP have delivered initial sectoral joint considerations and recommendations which will be essential in shaping the Commission’s future roadmap for energy transition with a view to achieving climate neutrality by 2050. Work within the ETP was delivered through workshops, working groups and meetings with a wide range of stakeholders, including different fisheries and aquaculture segments, processing, ports, shipbuilding, research and NGOs. A dedicated meeting with ACs was also held. Further workshops and events are planned for 2026.

5.2Conclusion

As reported in previous years, the ACs are the Commission stakeholders’ forum and a vital part of policymaking under the CFP. Their recommendations are of the utmost importance to the Commission as they enable EU and national policymakers to draw on local knowledge and experience. They also build collaboration and trust between all those involved.

Advice by ACs is an important input to policymaking and the development and implementation of measures, even though not every recommendation leads to a change in legislation. Conservation measures need to be adopted taking into account the available scientific, technical and economic advice. This advice includes reports drawn up by the STECF and other scientific advisory bodies, recommendations from advisory councils and joint recommendations from Member States under Article 18 of the CFP Regulation. Some recommendations may have already been addressed through EU legislation or initiatives; others may have been considered but are not yet visible in legislation.

AC recommendations may lead to different outcomes, such as contributing to research and policy documents or to scientific advisory bodies’ terms of reference. They may also trigger the launch of a study on a specific issue. Above all, AC recommendations make it possible to discuss and get a better understanding of the issues at stake and involve stakeholders in policymaking. Dialogue with stakeholders is enshrined in the CFP Regulation, as part of the principles of good governance under Article 3. It has proven to be essential to achieving the objectives of the CFP. Considering the diverse nature of EU waters and the increased regionalisation of the CFP, ACs enable the CFP to draw on the knowledge and experience of all stakeholders. Involving stakeholders, in particular ACs, at all stages – from conception to implementation of the measures – is provided for as a guideline for the CFP under Article 3.

6.International ocean governance

The EU has committed to taking an even more active role in international ocean governance and in implementing the UN 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 ‘life below water’ by:

1.strengthening the international ocean governance framework at global, regional and bilateral levels;

2.making ocean sustainability a reality by 2030 by taking a coordinated and complementary approach to common challenges and cumulative impacts;

3.making the ocean a safe and secure space as competition in international waters and challenges to the rules-based multilateral order are growing;

4.building up international ocean knowledge for evidence-based decision-making that results in action to protect and sustainably manage the ocean.

In 2022, a Joint Communication on international ocean governance 50 was adopted, focusing on a safe, secure, clean and sustainably managed ocean. It contributes to the EU’s implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in particular SDG 14 ‘life below water’ 51 . The EU’s strong commitment to protecting all matters related to the oceans was reaffirmed through the European Ocean Pact, a communication adopted on 5 June 2025 and presented at the third UN Ocean Conference in June 2025.

The Commission represents the EU in international negotiations on issues falling under the CFP at multilateral, regional and bilateral levels.

The EU ratified the agreement on the biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction 52 , which entered into force in January 2026. The agreement will allow marine protected areas to be designated, help set global guidelines and standards for conducting environmental impact assessments and encourage mutual support between different international frameworks and bodies with ocean-related competence.

In 2025, the EU continued to lead efforts to push for the entry into force of the agreement on fisheries subsidies (Phase I) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreed in June 2022. The EU submitted its acceptance of the agreement on 7 June 2023. The agreement entered into force on 15 September 2025, with two-thirds of WTO Members submitting their instruments of acceptance. The EU also actively participated in consultations with the new Chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules and has been engaged in the process to restart negotiations on additional provisions (phase II). The EU remains committed to reaching a comprehensive deal that is both balanced and meaningful.

Following the 2023 European Citizens’ Initiative, the Commission made further progress with the impact assessment on the appropriateness of a trade ban on detached shark fins and potential alternative measures, with the support of an external study finalised in March 2026.

The Commission further expanded its cooperation with the FAO to support developing countries, targeting various fields which help to improve food security and nutrition, and deliver on the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in particular SDG 14. Among other things, the EU supported the FAO in assisting developing countries in the fight against IUU fishing and in ensuring the effective implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement as well as other fisheries agreements and tools, which are crucial to ensuring the sustainability of fish stocks and the contribution of fisheries to sustainable food systems. The FAO is also the implementing agency of important EU development cooperation programmes aimed at enhancing the productivity and competitiveness of fisheries and aquaculture value chains in developing countries, while ensuring that economic improvements go hand in hand with environmental sustainability and social inclusiveness. The EU has also been calling for the test phase to begin for the International Platform for Ocean Sustainability in order to improve the science-policy interface.

At regional level, the Commission always takes advantage of its participation in relevant organisations to promote the EU biodiversity strategy and the objectives and principles of the CFP. The Commission’s messages focus on the sustainability of stocks, the promotion of science and science-based management decisions, the eradication of IUU fishing and the creation of a level-playing field.

In practical terms, the Commission’s work within RFMOs in 2025 led to the adoption of management measures to reduce total fishing mortality for southern shortfin mako shark and manage bluefin tuna sustainably in the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). and in the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), the adoption of sustainable catch limits for skipjack tuna and bigeye tuna in the IOTC, the strengthening of mitigation measures for deep water sharks in the Southern Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement (SIOFA) and for seabirds in the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC).

The EU continued to promote a culture of compliance within RFMOs by tabling proposals to improve monitoring and control, and to combat IUU fishing by taking an active role in the compliance committees of RFMOs. In addition, the EU promoted in all RFMOs a simplification agenda to streamline and clarify existing reporting obligations and remove obsolete provisions.

In line with the EU biodiversity strategy and implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission agreed to report to the CBD the vulnerable marine ecosystems areas of the North-East Atlantic which were closed to bottom fisheries as other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). OECMs are geographically defined areas – other than protected areas – which are governed in ways that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the conservation of biodiversity.

RFMOs are, however, multilateral international organisations where decisions are usually taken by consensus. Final outcomes very often reflect a compromise, and individual members as the EU have limited leverage to obtain certain outcomes. This was apparent, for example, at the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources where the proposals from the EU and its Member States to create two new marine protected areas did not find the necessary consensus despite the efforts made. The same is also true of the Commission’s continued efforts to push for the two Atlantic regional fisheries bodies (CECAF and WECAFC) to be upgraded to fully fledged RFMOs and to secure EU membership to the Bering Sea Convention. Unfortunately, no tangible progress was achieved in 2025 on either point due to a lack of consensus.

Nevertheless, in 2025, the Commission was instrumental in developing the framework for the North Pacific Fisheries Commission (NPFC), the ‘youngest’ RFMO. This involved adopting new conservation and management measures and/or the strengthening of existing measures, including the regional transhipment observer programme, and adopting stricter measures for certain pelagic stocks (i.e. Chub mackerel and Pacific saury) with more robust management in order to ensure their recovery.

In 2025, progress was also made in implementing into EU law RFMO conservation and management measures and decisions. The Commission adopted a proposal amending seven RFMO Regulations (applicable to ICCAT, SPRFMO, NAFO, IATTC, WCPFC and IOTC) which is currently in the final stages of the approval process. In addition, the Commission adopted three delegated acts. Two of those acts related to ICCAT and amended the rules concerning ICCAT and bluefin tuna by introducing revised measures reducing the number of fish aggregating devices per vessel and technical amendments to the bluefin tuna catch documentation programme. The other delegated act amended the IOTC transhipment declaration document.

The revision of the EU fisheries control system was successfully concluded at the end of 2023 53 . The amendments to the IUU Regulation, adopted as part of this revision, introduced legal provisions requiring the use of CATCH, an IT system implementing the EU catch certification scheme. EU importers and Member State authorities have been required to use CATCH since 10 January 2026. CATCH is an EU-wide real-time IT system allowing all information, data and documents to be centrally managed. The aim is to improve the effectiveness of the EU catch certification scheme and enable electronic submission of catch certificates and documents accompanying the fishery products imported into the EU. This will harmonise the implementation of the scheme and enhance import controls across the EU.

The amendments to the IUU Regulation also made changes to the content of the catch certificate and accompanying documents. The aim is to improve traceability and controls of fishery products destined for the EU market by collecting additional information necessary to correctly identify fishery products, related fishing activities and trade flows. The requirement to issue a processing statement was also extended to improve traceability of all consignments entering the EU. The Commission also strengthened guidance and cooperation with Member States on checks and verifications of fishery products imported into the EU.

Although the use of CATCH will be mandatory only for EU operators and Member State authorities, it will also be possible for non-EU-country operators and authorities to use the system directly to create, validate and transfer catch certificates and related documents.

Moreover, the Commission continued to interact with and support a number of non-EU countries in the fight against IUU fishing through the system of dedicated dialogues, enabling those countries to fundamentally reform their fisheries control systems and meet their international obligations as flag, coastal, port and market States. Not all non-EU countries showed willingness to address the shortcomings identified or to introduce reforms which led to additional countries being pre-identified or identified as non-cooperating countries in the fight against IUU fishing. At the end of 2024, there were eight pre-identified (Senegal was added in May 2024) and five identified non-EU countries closed to EU fishery products (Cameroon and Trinidad and Tobago were added in February and November 2023 respectively) 54 .

The EU also provided support to Africa and the Indo-Pacific region to strengthen ocean governance, including the conservation and sustainable management of fisheries, intended, among other things, to build countries’ capacity to combat IUU fishing. In particular, the EU committed: EUR 35 million to Pacific ACP States under the Pacific-European Union Marine Partnership (PEUMP), EUR 28 million to the Indian Ocean region under the ECOFISH programme, EUR 16.5 million to West African nations under the Improved regional fisheries governance in western Africa project, EUR 20 million to the second Pacific-European Union Marine Partnership, EUR 58 million to the Sustainable Western Indian Ocean Regional Programme (SWIOP), EUR 42 million to the Central Africa Regional Ocean Programme (ODEBAC), EUR 59 million to the West Africa Sustainable Ocean Programme (WASOP), and EUR 11 million to the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME).

Sustainable fisheries partnership agreements (SFPAs) continued to promote the sustainability of the ocean, a regulated framework for the EU long-distance fishing fleet and the sustainable development of third-country fisheries resources. Moreover, SFPAs helped the Commission maintain political dialogue on fisheries policies with those third countries, in accordance with CFP principles and commitments under other EU policies.

Preparatory work continued in 2025 to deliver on the objective of Commissioner Kadis’ mission letter to work on a new generation of SFPAs, ensuring they are in line with the EU’s wider regional strategies and priorities, most notably for Africa and the Indo-Pacific region, and promote a coherent approach for sustainable fisheries in all multilateral fora and bilateral dialogues. A call for evidence to shape the broader EU strategy on fisheries external action was opened between 9 July and 15 September 2025.

At the end of 2025, there were 12 SFPAs in force. A new protocol with Côte d’Ivoire was signed on 6 June 2025 and entered into provisional application on that date (the previous protocol expired on 31 July 2024). A new protocol with São Tomé and Príncipe was signed on 6 October 2025 (the previous protocol expired on 18 December 2024). A new protocol with the Cook Islands was signed on 9 December 2025 (the previous protocol expired on 13 December 2024). Negotiations on a new protocol with the Seychelles took place throughout 2025 and were successfully concluded at the beginning of 2026.

Preparatory work for future negotiations regarding protocols expiring in 2026 and 2027 was started bearing in mind the effects of interruption of fishing activities. The results of an ex ante and ex post evaluation of the SFPA with Gabon (due to expire on 28 June 2026) were published and a mandate to negotiate a new protocol with Gabon was adopted on 8 September 2025. Authorities on the Gabonese side are still awaiting a negotiation mandate. The Commission received the mandate to open negotiations of a new protocol to the SFPA with Mauritania on 20 January 2026 and negotiations are ongoing. The Commission received the mandate to open negotiations of a new protocol to the SFPA with Mauritius on 30 March 2026 and hold the first round of negotiations on 23-24 April 2026. An ex-ante and ex-post evaluation for Madagascar has been launched.

Following Judgment of the Court of 4 October 2024 in Joined cases C-778/21 P and C-798/21 P, preparations for negotiation of a new SFPA with Morocco advanced well, with Council authorising the opening of negotiations with Morocco on 20 January 2026 for the agreement and its implementing protocol with Morocco and SWD (ex-ante and ex-post evaluation).

Joint committee meetings were held with partner countries throughout the year to monitor the implementation of the protocols, in particular regarding the implementation of the sectoral support envelope granted through the protocols. These meetings are essential for ensuring SFPAs are appropriately governed and to review catches made by EU vessels and related payments. In 2025, joint committee meetings were held with Madagascar on 9-10 January, with Mauritius on 21-22 January, with Kiribati on 11-12 March, with Guinea-Bissau on 26-28 March; with The Gambia on 15-16 May, with São Tomé and Príncipe on 4 June, with the Seychelles (bilateral and regarding the Seychelles’ access to waters belonging to Mayotte) on 25-26 June, with Cabo Verde on 21-22 October, with Côte d’Ivoire on 10-11 November, with Greenland on 19-20 May and 19-20 November, and with Mauritania on 17 November. Overall, these agreements have contributed to economic activity and job creation in the EU and the partner countries. SFPAs have also been contributing positively to the development of the fisheries sectors, coastal communities and sustainable fisheries management.

A significant part of the total EU budget for SFPAs was devoted to projects funded under sectoral support, relating mostly to scientific research, control and surveillance capacity, small port infrastructure, and support to small-scale fishers. Those projects also contributed to eliminating IUU fishing and providing good framework conditions for local fishers, which leads to better food security. The financed projects included projects for supplying fishing equipment to small-scale fishers (including localisation and safety kits), improving capacity for sanitary control in ports, landing facilities with storage and ice facilities, financing the acquisition of patrol boats and their maintenance, and training fisheries inspectors and observers.

In addition to the SFPAs, the EU stepped up its oversight of authorising EU fishing fleet activity in non-EU waters and of third country vessels’ activity in EU waters, through the application of Regulation (EU) 2017/2403 on the sustainable management of external fishing fleets (SMEFF).

Annex 1 Summary of indicators calculated for each fleet segment (situation in December 2024)

The area code NAO means North Atlantic Ocean, including the North Sea, Celtic Sea and Baltic Sea. MBS means the Mediterranean and Black Seas, and OFR means other fishing regions. Gear codes are as set out in Annex XI to the Commission Implementing Regulation 55 .

(1)

  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_828

(2)

 Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 61).

(3)

  https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/d/stecf/stecf_26-01_adhoc .

(4)

Patterson, K. R. 1998. Assessing fish stocks when catches are misreported: model, simulation tests, and application to cod, haddock, and whiting in the ICES area, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 55: 878-891.

(5)

 Quantity of adult fish in a stock that can reproduce.

(6)

  https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/d/stecf/stecf_26-01_adhoc

(7)

In this section, ‘North-East Atlantic’ refers to stocks in area 27 of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), and ‘Mediterranean and Black Seas’ refers to stocks in FAO area 37.

(8)

See Gras et al., 2026 for additional details.

(9)

For more information on key signals within the Baltic Sea environment and ecosystem, see https://www.ices.dk/advice/ESD/Pages/Baltic_Sea_landing.aspx

(10)

The productivity of phytoplankton and algae that serves as food for zooplankton and then eventually the commercial fish stocks and other ecosystem components.

(11)

See: https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reports/balance .

(12)

Guidelines for the analysis of the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities according to Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council on the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2014) 545 final).

(13)

Reports and action plans: https://ec.europa.eu/oceans-and-fisheries/fisheries/rules/fishing-fleet-capacities_en .

(14)

STECF, Assessment of balance indicators for key fleet segments and review of national reports on Member States efforts to achieve balance between fleet capacity and fishing opportunities (STECF-25-12), Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2025.

(15)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 112, 30.4.2011, p. 1).

(16)

EU fleet register. Data extracted in March 2025 and includes data as at 31 December 2024.

(17)

Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (European Commission), Roos Diesel Analysis B.V., Study on engine power verification by Member States, final report, ISBN 978-92-76-08327-6, DOI 10.2771/945320, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2019.

(18)

Red or green indicators are references to the Annex and mean that the indicators as assessed in STECF-23-13 possibly indicate an imbalance (red) or no imbalance (green). A further explanation is given in the STECF report. If Member States have not submitted an action plan, this means they consider their fleets to be in balance.

(19)

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Energy Transition of the EU Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector (COM(2023) 100 final).

(20)

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

(21)

 STECF 25-07, Economic and Social analyses - European Commission (europa.eu) .

(22)

  The EU Fish Market 2024

(23)

  https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-fish-populations-show-signs-recovery-more-efforts-needed-key-species-struggle-2025-06-06_en

(24)

  https://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/d/stecf/stecf_24-05_social-data-in-fisheries

(25)

Annual report on social data in EU fisheries. STECF EWG 25-13

(26)

European Commission: European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency, Study supporting the evaluation of the landing obligation – Common fisheries policy – Final report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2926/5282226

(27)

Additionally, Article 15(2) of the CFP Regulation empowers the Commission to adopt delegated acts for the purpose of implementing international obligations into EU law, including exemptions to the landing obligation.

(28)

 ‘Mixed fisheries’ means fisheries in which more than one species is present and where different species are likely to be caught in the same fishing operation, Article 4(1)(36) of the CFP Regulation.

(29)

 Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2019/472 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for stocks fished in the Western Waters and adjacent waters, and for fisheries exploiting those stocks, amending Regulations (EU) 2016/1139 and (EU) 2018/973, and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007 and (EC) No 1300/2008 (OJ L 83, 25.3.2019, p. 1).

(30)

 Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2018/973 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2018 establishing a multiannual plan for demersal stocks in the North Sea and the fisheries exploiting those stocks, specifying details of the implementation of the landing obligation in the North Sea and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 676/2007 and (EC) No 1342/2008 (OJ L 179, 16.7.2018, p. 1).

(31)

 Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 establishing a multiannual plan for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat in the Baltic Sea and the fisheries exploiting those stocks, amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1098/2007 (OJ L 191, 15.7.2016, p. 1).

(32)

 Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1022 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 establishing a multiannual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 (OJ L 172, 26.6.2019, p. 1).

(33)

Article 15(6) of the CFP Regulation.

(34)

‘A species for which the available quota is exhausted (long) before the quotas are exhausted of (some of) the other species that are caught together in a (mixed) fishery’ (Zimmermann et al. 2015).

(35)

 After notifying the Commission, Member States may exchange all or part of the fishing opportunities allocated to them (Article 16(8) of the CFP Regulation). The quota swaps are published every year by the Commission at Fishing quotas - European Commission .

(36)

The main risks include illegal and undocumented discarding to avoid ʻchokeʼ situations, maximise profit (ʻhigh-gradingʼ) and reduce the costs associated with the handling and storage of low-value catches.

(37)

‘control’ means monitoring and surveillance; (Article 4(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009).

(38)

‘enforcement’ means any actions taken to ensure compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy; (Article 4(26) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009.

(39)

This is compounded by the significant number and complexity of the de minimis and high survivability exemptions. Aerial surveillance cannot reliably identify species, size and condition, so it cannot confirm non-compliance; it is also greatly impaired by poor weather and bad visibility (including periods of darkness).

(40)

Control and enforcement of the CFP shall in particular be based on and shall include the following: […] (g) the development of a culture of compliance and cooperation among all operators and fishermen. (Article 36(2)(g). (Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(41)

Member States shall ensure that catches falling under the de minimis exemption referred to in point (c) of Article 15(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 do not exceed the percentage of the exemption established in the relevant Union measure. (Article 49b of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009).

(42)

Audits were conducted in BE (1), DK (1), FR (1), LT (1), IE (1), ES (2), NL (2) and UK (1) from 2017 to 2022.

(43)

Ref. Ares(2026)3169157.

(44)

Several Member States have agreed to participate in an EFCA-coordinated REM pilot project to learn best practice on REM controls (one or two vessels per Member State). Denmark uses REM in the nephrops fleet operating in the Kattegat and the Netherlands is conducting a fully documented fisheries scheme on a few vessels in the North Sea. Neither project is being used for control and enforcement purposes.

(45)

 Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2023/2842 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 November 2023 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, and amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1967/2006 and (EC) No 1005/2008 and Regulations (EU) 2016/1139, (EU) 2017/2403 and (EU) 2019/473 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards fisheries control (OJ L, 2023/2842, 20.12.2023, ELI:  http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2842/oj)  

(46)

Serious shortcomings concerning weighing and catch recording remain in NL, FR, DK, DE, PT, SE, PL, FI and EE.

(47)

Last haul: verification of the catch composition of the last haul during sea inspections.

(48)

  The European Ocean Pact

(49)

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, On the Energy Transition of the EU Fisheries and Aquaculture sector (COM(2023) 100 final).

(50)

Joint Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Setting the course for a sustainable blue planet - Joint Communication on the EU’s International Ocean Governance agenda, (JOIN(2022) 28 final).

(51)

  https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/oceans/

(52)

United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea implementing agreement on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.

(53)

  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202302842

(54)

  https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-11/illegal-fishing-overview-of-existing-procedures-third-countries_en.pdf .

(55)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 112, 30.4.2011, p. 1).