Impact assessments in the EU – results from the SOCIOEC
project
Ralf Döring, Leyre Goti, Sarah Simons
1Thünen-Institute
of Sea Fisheries, Hamburg, Germany · Tel: +49 (0)40 38905-231 · Email: leyre.goti@ti.bund.de · www.ti.bund.de
Background
SOCIOEC: More precise objectives and improved stakeholder involvement
Problem
The EU requires Impact Assessment
(IA) of all new management
meausures in the Fisheries Policy , but
they include little or no social and
economic aspects
So what?
•
•
Fishers can suffer economic losses,
their interests are often
underepresented and they have no
incentives to implement the
management measures and to
cooperate with the management
authorities
Compliance with the management
measures is low, and undesired
consequences for the fish stocks
and coastal communities are not
uncommon
Aim of the project
•
•
IA of measures of the revised CFP
Methodological improvement of IA
•
•
•
•
•
•
Overarching objective agreed by stakeholders: Gradually eliminate discards
Stakeholder want to be more involved in the policy making process (e.g. via the Advisory Councils)
Problem Landing obligation: Regional groups not really involved the Advisory Councils in the
development of the discard plans
Example for IA: Landing Obligation
Landing obligation introduced in the new basic regulation of the CFP, first discard plans since Jan. 2016
Analysis of stakeholder involvement and incentive structure in development of the discard plans in four
countries fishers see LO as not implementable and stakeholder were not really involved
That may influence negatively the LO as avoiding participation in design phase causes time losses in
implementation
De Vos, B., Döring, R., Goti, L. et.al. 2016 New modes of fisheries governance: Implementation of the landing obligation in four European countries. Marine Policy 64: 1-8
•
•
•
•
SOCIOEC: Possible impacts of the LO on the North Sea Saithe Fishery
Saithe fishery is an important demersal fishery in the North Sea
under a long term management plan
First fishery under the landing obligation (1.1.2016), already very low
by-catch and discard rates but cod possible choke species
Application of the Fishrent-Model including an improved biological
assessment tool: economic model with improved biological part
Possible Conclusion: Fishery management needs adjustments e.g.
avoiding areas with high discards and/or flexibility in quota
distribution (exchange of quota between Member States)  LO
positive for stock
and fleet
Zellwandaufbau:
Cellulose; Hemicellulose; Lignin
http://www.ceres.net/aboutus/AboutUs-Biofuels-Carbo.html (17.09.2013)
Simons, S., Döring, R. & Temming, A. Modelling fishers’ response to discard prevention strategies: the case of the North Sea saithe fishery, ICES Journal of Marine Science Vol. 72(5):1530-1544
Example for IA: Lessons from the Fehmarn small scale fisheries case study
Governance
Conclusion
•
Objectives
•
•
Media research
Social impact
Semi-structured interviews
•
Incentives
Economic impact
Focus groups
Herkunft Hafen
Status quo
Umsatz
Umsatz mit
Schützgebiet
Verlorene
Umsatz
% Verlust
Burgstaaken
249992 €
121883 €
128109 €
51%
Heiligenhafen
375753 €
215794 €
159959 €
43%
Total
625744 €
337676 €
288068 €
46%
Impact assessments are able to
improve policy making
Improved stakeholder
involvement in development of
measures a way to improve
compliance
Results of IA on landing
obligation show necessity for
flexibility in quota distribution
(exchange of quota between
MS)
IA for small scale fisheries
needs more time as data must
often be generated by
interviews and focus groups as
suitable economic data is not
always available
The research leading to these results has received
funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 289192.