2022/2003(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Notes that the development of a Union framework for co-management is possible, but currently absent, under the current Common Fisheries Policy;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Advocates t~~hat the new CFP incorpor~~o ensure thate co- management~~, which i~~ is properly included, in future revisions of the CFP, as defined by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) as the resource management process in which the government shares its authority with users, each party being given specific responsibilities and rights with regard to information and decision-making; points out that such an inclusion must respect the principle of subsidiarity ensuring that it does not hinder all the different co- management models that are already in place and ensure that concerned stakeholders, such as fishers, authorities and scientific community are well consulted and involved in the decision making process;

Amendment 103 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Advocates that the new~~Recommends that any potential future reform of the CFP incorporates co- management, which is defined by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) ~~as the resource management process in which the government shares its authority with users, each party being given specific~~“a partnership arrangement in which the community of local resource users (fishers) and government, with support and assistance as needed from other stakeholders (boat owners, fish traders, fish processors, boat builders, business people, etc.) and external agents (non-governmental organisation, academic and research institutions), share the responsibilit~~ies~~y and ~~rights with regard to information and decision-making~~authority for the management of the fishery";

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Expects that the Commission in its upcoming communication on an Action plan to conserve fisheries resources and protect marine ecosystems and the report on the functioning of the common fisheries policy to come forward with initiatives on how to further encourage and facilitate co-management of fisheries resources;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Calls on Member States to support the development of fisheries co- management systems through the immediate implementation of national and legal frameworks, building on best practices observed in other Member States and with the support of the European Commission;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15 b. Notes that the European Union is committed to protecting 30% of the Union’s sea area and strictly protecting 10% of the Union’s sea area; stresses that co-management models provide an opportunity for fishers and coastal communities to engage with and benefit from the design and management of Marine Protected Areas;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that global fisheries management is mainly based on a top- down state-centred approach, focused on industrial or large-scale fisheries, economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, and is guided by scientific research in marine biology; considers that this approach ~~would not be valid~~is not always appropriate for small- scale fisheries that need the involvement of the fishing community in fisheries management tools that also need to be based on environmental sustainability and guided by scientific research in marine biology, and that it has not been the best approach with regard to semi- industrial and industrial fisheries globally;

Amendment 108 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that global fisheries management is mainly based on a top- down state-centred approach, focused on ~~industrial or large-scale fisheries, economic efficiency~~large and shared fish stocks, socio economic factors, environmental sustainability, and is guided by scientific research in marine biology; considers that this approach would not always be valid for small- scale fisheries, particularly for those stocks not subject to TAC, that need the involvement of the fishing community in fisheries management tools, and that it has not been the best approach with regard to semi- industrial and industrial fisheries globally;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that globally, fisheries management is in many countries mainly based on a top- down state-centred approach, focused on ~~industrial or large-scale fisheries,~~ economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, and is guided by scientific research in marine biology; considers that ~~this~~such an approach ~~would not be valid for small- scale fisheries that need the involve~~does not fully cater for the specificities of regions, the wider community and different segments of the fishing ~~community in fisheries management tools, and that it has not been the best approach with regard to semi-industrial and industrial fisheries globally~~sector such as small-scale fisheries, semi-industrial and industrial fisheries that would greatly benefit from the involvement of the fishing community in fisheries management arrangements;

Amendment 11 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas there are numerous cases of successful implementation of fisheries co-management within Member States, including in Spain (Galicia, Catalonia and Andalusia), Portugal (Algarve and Peniche-Nazé), France, Sweden (Kosterhavets)2,2 the Netherlands3, Italy (Torre Guaceto) and Croatia (Telašćica and Lastovo)4; _________________ 2 https://oceans-and- fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/co- management-northern-bohuslan-fishers- and-conservationists-join-forces- sustainable-future-2022-03-01_en 3 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2 57943913_Co- management_An_alternative_to_enforcem ent 4 https://www.wwfmmi.org/?1715691/First- co-managed-fishery-area-adopted-by-law- in-Croatia

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that global fisheries management is mainly based on a top- down state-centred approach, focused on industrial or large-scale fisheries, economic efficiency, environmental sustainability, and is guided by scientific research in marine biology; considers that this approach would ~~not be valid~~be unhelpful, not to say harmful, for small- scale fisheries that need the bottom-up involvement of the fishing community in fisheries management tools, and that it has not been the best approach with regard to semi- industrial and industrial fisheries globally;

Amendment 111 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Stresses that the inclusion of scientific research in marine social science is critical in guiding the development of more inclusive and equitable fisheries management approaches and practices;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that the choice of instrument used in the management of fisheries resources is largely up to governments, although experience around the world shows that various forms of partnership between government, industry and fishers strengthen management and produce good results; points out that the 1987 report ‘Our Common Future’, commonly known as the Brundtland Report, already concluded that in order to achieve sustainable development and therefore also sustainable management of natural resources, communities should have greater access to and control over decisions affecting their resources, always in cooperation with the relevant administrations and organisations (World Commission on Environment and Development, 19879 ); highlights in this regard the importance of applying the principle of subsidiarity to ensure that decisions are taken at the correct administrative level ensuring proper involvement of concerned stakeholders; _________________ 9 https://www.un.org/es/ga/president/65/issu es/sustdev.shtml

Amendment 113 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that the choice of instrument used in the management of fisheries resources is largely up to governments, although experience around the world shows that various forms of partnership between government, industry and fishers strengthen management and produce good results; points out that the 1987 report ‘Our Common Future’, commonly known as the Brundtland Report, already concluded that in order to achieve sustainable development and therefore also sustainable management of natural resources, communities should have greater access to and ~~control over decision~~participation in the decision-making process affecting ~~their~~common resources, including increased responsibility, always in cooperation with the relevant administrations and organisations (World Commission on Environment and Development, 19879 ); _________________ 9 https://www.un.org/es/ga/president/65/issu es/sustdev.shtml

Amendment 114 #

Raffaele STANCANELLI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that the choice of instrument used in the management of fisheries resources is largely up to governments, although experience around the world shows that various forms of partnership between government, industry and fishers strengthen management and ~~produce good results~~bring social and economic benefits to the areas concerned; points out that the 1987 report ‘Our Common Future’, commonly known as the Brundtland Report, already concluded that in order to achieve sustainable development and therefore also sustainable management of natural resources, communities should have greater access to and control over decisions affecting their resources, always in cooperation with the relevant administrations and organisations (World Commission on Environment and Development, 19879)9; _________________ 9 https://www.un.org/es/ga/president/65/issu es/sustdev.shtml.

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Stresses the need for successful co- management systems to fully recognize and involve all relevant stakeholders, including appropriate administrative bodies, the scientific society as well as the industry, including Producer Organisations (POs) and where relevant, civil society and NGOs;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates that fisheries co- management already exists and has been successful in many of the known cases, and that there are legislative initiatives in this regard, both at local level, such as in Galicia, Catalonia and Andalusia in Spain, and at state level, such as in Portugal, Italy, Sweden, Croatia and the Netherlands; ~~stresses that the lack of standardisation of regulations at European level prevents this system from being applied in other regions and countries;~~

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates that fisheries co- management already exists and has been successful in many of the known cases, and that there are legislative initiatives in this regard, both at local level, such as in Galicia, Catalonia and Andalusia in Spain, and at state level, such as in Portugal, Italy, Sweden, Croatia and the Netherlands; ~~stresses that the lack of standardisation of regulations at European level prevents this system from being applied in other regions and countries;~~

Amendment 118 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates that fisheries co- management already exists and has been successful in many of the known cases, and that there are legislative initiatives in this regard, both at local level, such as in Galicia, Catalonia and Andalusia in Spain, and at state level, such as in France, Portugal, Italy, Sweden, Croatia and the Netherlands; stresses that the lack of standardisation of regulations at European level prevents this system from being applied in other regions and countries;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates that fisheries co- management already exists and has been successful in many of the known cases~~, and~~; notes that therse are ~~legislative initiatives in this regard~~based on different legal frameworks, both at local level, such as in Galicia, Catalonia and Andalusia in Spain, and at state level, such as in Portugal, Italy, France, Sweden, Croatia and the Netherlands; stresses that the lack of ~~standardisation of regulation~~experience and good examples at European level prevents this system from being applied in other regions and countries;

Amendment 12 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas there are also numerous success stories in ~~EU candidate~~third countries such as Türkiye5 (the EU SMAP III project, completed in 2009 in Gokova Bay, and the next project SAD-Rubicon6)~~; in third countries, such as~~, Senegal with co- management of octopus and green lobster fisheries7, and ~~in Asia, in countries such as~~ Bangladesh, Cambodia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka,8, etc.; _________________ 5 https://www.proquest.com/openview/797b e3d336f18ec8f2382df02a76e1e5/1?pq- origsite=gscholar&cbl=1736342 6 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2 79419535_Socio- economic_benefits_of_Gokova_SEPA_Tur key_Special_emphasize_to_small- scale_fisheries 7 https://www.fishforward.eu/wp- content/uploads/2018/01/WWF_Senegal_ ENSP.pdf 8 https://www.fao.org/3/cb3840en/cb3840en. pdf

Amendment 120 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. Highlights the need to also develop cross boarder co-management for certain regions; points out in this regards the example of the arrangement that was set up between France, the UK and the Channel Islands for management of fisheries in the region, which after Brexit has been more centralised; reiterates its call for the Partnership Council under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the UK to consider different arrangements for cooperation in the waters of the Crown Dependencies; highlights, in this regard, that previous arrangements under the Granville Bay Treaty could provide a basis for future adaptations of the rules by the Partnership Council;

Amendment 121 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. “Highlights the importance of the work of the Advisory Councils in the fisheries management decision-making process; Calls on the Commission and Member States to increase participation in ACs meetings and better communicate on the value of their advice; Considers that ACs role must be further developed to foster bottom-up approach.”

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18 b. Regrets that stakeholders are not involved in fisheries management with third countries, whether it is for quotas allocation, total allowable catch or technical measure; Insists that the Commission embraces its roles as the representative of the EU vis-a-vis third countries to propose different co- management models also in cross-border situations with thirds countries;

Amendment 123 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Emphasises that, with regard to the European Union, co-management – and similar concepts such as co-governance or participatory management – ~~has been briefly describ~~are mentioned in ~~the~~ preambles to various ~~regulations at European level, but it has not been properly developed in their articles, nor has it generated sufficient~~EU legal instruments, but that there are no developed provisions on the issue; notes the need for a greater debate to promote the specific ~~legislation~~measures needed for this fisheries management system, ~~which~~in order to profit from the benefit co-management already has provided i~~ts worth in~~ ndifferent regions and in different cases;

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Emphasises that, with regard to the European Union, co-management – and similar concepts such as co-governance or participatory management – has been briefly described in the preamble to various regulations at European level, but it has not been ~~properly~~ developed in their articles~~, nor has it generated sufficient debate to promote specific legislation for~~; welcomes a debate to promote this fisheries management system, which has proved its worth in different regions and in different cases;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Emphasises that, with regard to the European Union, co-management – and similar concepts such as co-governance or participatory management – has been briefly described in the preamble to various regulations at European level, but ~~it has not been properly developed~~ that, because of the fishing t~~heir articles, nor has it generated sufficient debate to promote specific~~raditions specific to each of the Member States, it is for them to enact legislation for regulations to promote this fisheries management system, which has proved its worth in different regions and in different cases;

Amendment 126 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Emphasises that the European Union could facilitate the implementation of co-management; emphasises that EU measures for co-management should focus on enabling initiatives at local, regional and national level, as well as the exchange of best practices;

Amendment 127 #

Niclas HERBST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the success of co- management is determined by the existence of a multidisciplinary committee with a minimum of stakeholders representing all interested parties in the management of a fishery, with the presence of social partners to ensure alignment with the global interests of society; underlines that drawing lessons and possibly building on the existing advisory councils is essential to implement co-management in the CFP;

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Stresses that the success of co- management is determined by ~~the existence of a multidisciplinary committee with a minimum~~ensuring a minimum level of participation of stakeholders representing all interested parties in the management of a fishery, ~~with~~including, where appropriate, the presence of social partners ~~to ensure alignment with the global interests of society~~; is also of the opinion that the Commission should develop tools for them to be more of a facilitator in the setting up of these management systems;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Stresses that the success of co- management is also determined by the design of participatory structures, where equity, representation and environmental concerns are prioritised and marginalised communities are included;

Amendment 13 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

E a. Considering the maritime dimension that the Outermost Regions attribute to the EU, with vast exclusive economic zones (EEZs), which represent more than half of the EU's EEZ1a; _________________ 1ahttps://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/PT/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:5202 2DC0198&from=PT (pág.16)

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that, in the light of the examples studied, ~~fishing~~ co-management ~~processes are~~of fisheries is more resilient and more adaptive ~~than~~ compared to many other fisheries management system and many examples have led to greater social cohesion, greater equity, improved stocks and improved profitability;

Amendment 131 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21 a. Stresses that co-management allows for a better consideration of knowledge and empirical data that fishermen gathers from their environment, and that in this respect, the development of participatory sciences must allow for transfer of this data and empirical knowledge to benefit the work of researchers; encourages the Commission to launch calls for tenders to improve the inclusion of this empirical knowledge in scientific work at all levels;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Points out that, at European level, co-management should start by improving dialogue between the Commission and the fisheries sector, for example by investing more in the Advisory Councils in order to make the scope for co-management that they provide at European level more effective;

Amendment 133 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to support small-scale fishers, small-scale producer organisations and co-operatives engaged in co-management processes as a priority, in order to create a level playing field in EU fisheries;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21 b. Insists on the need to fully implement the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, points out that this Convention creates the international obligation of involving the populations affected by the decisions to be taken in the decision-making process;

Amendment 135 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)

21 c. Stresses that the support of coastal fleets and the preservation of coastal ecosystems are among priorities of the Common Fisheries Policy; considers in this regard it necessary to have fisheries management as close to the local level as possible; notes that Article 5 of the Common Fisheries Policy, creating restrictions to the “Access to waters” principle is no longer sufficient to preserve these fleets, considers that co- management should be the norm for coastal zone fisheries management;

Amendment 136 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)

21 d. Encourages the Commission to propose a management plan based and developed on the principle of co- management for the Channel sea-east and for the southern part of the North sea;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas a general principle of fisheries co-management needs to be established at both European and national level;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

E b. Whereas almost 80% of the EU's biodiversity currently resides in its outermost regions and overseas countries and territories2a; _________________ 2a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2021-0277_PT.pdf

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

E c. Considering the specificities of the small-scale fishing sector in some European regions, especially in the Outermost, which uses selective fishing gear with less environmental impact; Considering, on the other hand, the importance of the sector, ensuring employment in coastal areas and guaranteeing a fair standard of living for local communities;3a _________________ 3a https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/PT/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:C:2018:05 8:FULL&from=DE (pág.58)

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas certain Member States and regions have a legal framework for co-management, however, to date, there is no legislation at European level governing the implementation of co-management mechanisms, even if in many of its Member States this system is being used to manage some of their fisheries, applying rules that fit in perfectly with the current Common Fisheries Policy;

Amendment 18 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas, to date, there ~~is no legislation~~are few instruments at European level ~~govern~~facilitating the implementation of co-management mechanisms, even if in many of its Member States this system is being used to manage some of their fisheries, applying rules that fit in perfectly with the current Common Fisheries Policy;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas, to date, there ~~is no legislation~~are few tools at European level ~~govern~~facilitating the implementation of co-management mechanisms, even if in many of its Member States this system is being used to manage some of their fisheries, applying rules that fit in perfectly with the current Common Fisheries Policy;

Amendment 2 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6

~~— having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 on the European Green Deal (COM(2019)0640),~~deleted

Amendment 20 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas traditional management has ~~not had the desired effects on~~had diverging success rates in the Union in relation to improving stocks and maintaining employment;

Amendment 21 #

G. whereas traditional management in some cases has not had the desired effects on improving stocks and maintaining employment;

Amendment 22 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas t~~raditional management has not had the desired effects on improving stocks and maintaining employment~~he impact of co- management systems on achieving the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy ought to be assessed;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas t~~raditional management~~he Common Fisheries Policy has not had the desired effects on improving stocks and maintaining employment;

Amendment 24 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas traditional management has ~~not had the desired effects on~~to some extent improv~~ing~~ed stock status and maintain~~ing~~ed employment;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas many of the policies implemented by the European Commission in recent years have failed to bring about the desired replenishment of stocks but have, on the contrary, resulted in further depletion, necessitating increased imports from third countries;

Amendment 26 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas fisheries management cannot be separated from other aspects associated with the marine environment and coastal populations, such as economic, cultural and social aspects, as set out in Article 2 of the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, and as referred to throughout Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, these being the three mainstays of the common fisheries policy;

Amendment 27 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas it is frequently difficult to obtain and collect data and information on marine environments and fisheries, and whereas the participation of the fisheries sector itself in this work ~~is important~~, on a proactive basis also, is vital for all public and private research bodies at national and European level, as laid down in Article 25 of ~~the Common Fisheries Policy in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013~~Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy; to this end, the importance of a bottom-up approach to fisheries management is underlined as regards both data collection and policy making;

Amendment 28 #

Raffaele STANCANELLI

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas it is difficult to obtain ~~and~~, collect and share data and information on marine environments and fisheries, and whereas the participation of the fisheries sector itself in this work, through the direct involvement of those engaged in this activity, is important for all public and private research bodies at European level, as laid down in Article 25 of ~~the Common Fisheries Policy in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013~~Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy;

Amendment 29 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~it is difficult to obtain and collect data and information on marine environments and fisheries, and whereas the participation of the fisheri~~fisheries sector stakeholders should be consulted to a greater extent by public and private research bodies at European level, as their involvement is es se~~ctor itself in this work is important for all public and private research bodies at European level~~ntial in order to collect data and information on marine environments and fisheries, as laid down in Article 25 of the Common Fisheries Policy in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013;

Amendment 3 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

— having regard to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) ‘Guidebook for evaluating fisheries co-management effectiveness’,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas, in all the cases of co- management mentioned above, the change in the role of fishers – from passive subjects who comply with the rules to protagonists in fisheries management – is fundamental to the success of the initiatives adopted, as they learn to understand the importance of the rules, to defend them and monitor compliance with them, and to manage their fishing methods in an ecosystem-based approach, understanding the importance of their fisheries in the ecosystems; in this regard, the role of fishers as 'guardians of the sea' is underlined through their contribution to targeted policy making, the reduction of marine litter and the collection of plastic at sea, for example;

Amendment 31 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas, in all the cases of co- management mentioned above, the change in the role of fishers – from passive subjects who comply with the rules to protagonists in fisheries management – is fundamental to the success of the initiatives adopted, as ~~they learn to understand the importance of the rules, to defend them and monitor compliance with them, and to manage their fishing methods in an ecosystem-based approach, understanding~~, in keeping with their traditional role as stewards of the oceans and their resources, they are better able to make the most of their experience and observations so as to decide on conservation rules and monitor compliance with them in order to limit the imp~~ortance~~act of their fish~~eries in the~~ing on ecosystems;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas, in all the cases of co- management mentioned above, the change in the role of fishers – from passive subjects who comply with the rules to protagonists in fisheries management that comply with the agreed rules – is fundamental to the success of the initiatives adopted, as they learn to understand the importance of the rules, to defend them and monitor compliance with them, and to manage their fishing methods in an ecosystem-based approach, understanding the importance of their fisheries in the ecosystems;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas, in all the cases of co- management mentioned above, the change in the role of fishers – from passive subjects who comply with the rules to protagonists in fisheries management – is fundamental to the success of the initiatives adopted, as they ~~learn to understand the importance~~will contribute to a better understanding of the ~~rules~~m, to defend them and monitor compliance with them, and to manage their fishing methods in an ecosystem-based approach, understanding the importance of their fisheries in the ecosystems;

Amendment 34 #

Raffaele STANCANELLI

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas small-scale artisanal fisheries play a vital role, being able to carry out constant monitoring of the marine environment and fish stocks and hence provide extremely useful and relevant data for decision-making purposes;

Amendment 35 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas scientific work, that produces regular and up-to-date data, is needed to advise on the measures to be taken to ensure responsible use of common resources, as laid down in Articles 26 and 27 of the Common Fisheries Policy in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas scientific work isand socio- economic impact studies are needed to advise on the measures to be taken to ensure responsible use of common resources, as laid down in Articles 26 and 27 of the Common Fisheries Policy in Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013;

Amendment 37 #

Niclas HERBST

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

L a. whereas in 2017, it was estimated that at least 9 million people are engaged in marine recreational fishing activities in Europe, and that the marine recreational fisheries sector supported almost 100 000 FTE jobs, with a total annual economic impact amounting to 10.5 billion euro; whereas recreational fishers are users of the sea and its resources; whereas the recreational fisheries sector provides economic opportunities for coastal communities;

Amendment 38 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the White Paper on the Governance of the European Union esta~~blishes~~ted that Policies should no longer be decided at the top, that the legitimacy of the EU ~~now~~would lies with the participation of its citizens and that the system of functioning of the Union needs to be made more transparent since participation depends on people being able to take part in public debate; for this to happen, the general public needs to be more actively informed about European issues; whereas the White Paper also proposes the involvement of local-government associations in policy development and greater flexibility in the implementation of certain Community policies with a strong territorial impact; whereas the reformed Common Fisheries Policy introduced the concept of regionalisation and expanded the range of Advisory Council to consult stakeholders;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the White Paper on the Governance of the European Union establishes that Policies should no longer be decided at the top, that the legitimacy of the EU now lies with the participation of its citizens through a bottom-up approach and that the system of functioning of the Union needs to be made more transparent since participation depends on people being able to understand and take part in public debate; for this to happen, the general public needs to be more actively and continuously informed about European issues on an institutional basis; whereas the White Paper also proposes the involvement of local-government associations in policy development and greater flexibility in the implementation of certain Community policies with a strong social, economic and territorial impact;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas objective 14.b of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) calls for parties to provide ‘access of small-scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets’;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)

M a. whereas Producers Organisations play a pivotal role in meeting the CFP key objectives in term of food security, MSY, quota management, marketing and technical conservation measures; whereas, furthermore, they provide with a good example of co-management in EU fisheries by setting up management measures through fishers' joint resolutions, organise fishing activities in coherence with market requirements and collaborate with multiple stakeholders to implement co-management at local level;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M b (new)

M b. whereas "cofradias" are longstanding organisations in some Member States representing producers and their societal role in sustaining coastal communities is fundamental, although, unfortunately, they are not recognised yet as entities eligible to get EMFAF support;

Amendment 42 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas co-management, being a participatory and co-responsibility model, is more transparent, proactive and equally democratic, and helps to generate educational synergies regarding the management of common resources and a culture of responsibility, establishing networks of trust and contributing to reducing conflict and overcoming reticence in order to implement innovations in fisheries management;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

O a. whereas Fishers Organisations such as cofradias or prud’homies de pêcheurs, could have an important role to play in development and implementation of co-management systems;

Amendment 44 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

O a. whereas the lack of women’s representation and inclusion in fisheries management hinders sustainability and development;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Draws attention to the fact that fisheries co-management systems both embraces the sharing criteria of the Common Fisheries Policy, (CFP) ,integrating collective knowledge and encompassing any actor benefiting from a collective resource and the management principles of the CFP, contributing to the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 2 and 3 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013;

Amendment 46 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that in all cases of co- management there is a clear potential for improvement in the sustainability of resources at environmental level, maintaining the economic and social benefits of the activity, as social and economic actors are directly involved in decision-making in co- management; notes that such co- governance systems have been found to be more resilient to shocks such as COVID and to reduce conflicts and improve fluidity in decision-making on fisheries management, fostering democratisation, transparency, trust and compliance with regulations;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that in ~~all~~most of the cases of co- management there is a clear improvement in the sustainability of resources at environmental level, maintaining the economic and social benefits of the activity, as social and economic actors are directly involved in decision-making in co- management; notes that such co- governance systems have been found to be more resilient to shocks such as COVID and to reduce conflicts and improve fluidity in decision-making on fisheries management, fostering democratisation, transparency, trust and compliance with regulations;

Amendment 48 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that co-management has been proven to favour consensual decision- making between the administration, the sector and research bodies, which always act in accordance with the principles of the Common Fisheries Policy and other relevant regulations, applying the precautionary approach in all cases to ensure that resources are exploited in a manner that is fully sustainable on the basis of the maximum sustainable yield of the target species; underlines that this type of management and decision making has been an important factor for deploying successful conservation measures, such as MPAs and OECMs among others;

Amendment 49 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that co-management has been proven to favour consensual decision- making between the administration, the sector and research bodies, which always act in accordance with the principles of the Common Fisheries Policy and other relevant regulations~~, applying the precautionary approach in all cases to ensure that resources are exploited in a manner that is fully sustainable on the basis of the maximum sustainable yield of the target species~~;

Amendment 5 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, states in recital 14 that ‘it is important for the management of the CFP to be guided by principles of good governance’. Those principles ~~include~~are further elaborated in the Regulation and especially in Article 3 highlighting decision-making based on best available scientific advice, especially pointing out the roles of Advisory Council broad stakeholder involvement and a long-term perspective’1 ; _________________ 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32013 R1380

Amendment 50 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that co-management has been proven to favour consensual decision- making between the administration, ~~the sector~~relevant stakeholders and research bodies~~, which~~ that shall always act in accordance with the principles of the Common Fisheries Policy and other relevant regulations, applying the precautionary approach in all cases to ensure that resources are exploited in a manner that is fully sustainable on the basis of the maximum sustainable yield of the target species;

Amendment 51 #

Niclas HERBST

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Underlines that the recreational fisheries sector should also be included in co-management systems, encompassing users as well as economic actors contributing to generating socio-economic benefits for communities; notes that implementing co-management in the Common Fisheries Policy is also an opportunity for a better recognition and management of recreational fisheries in this policy;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises the fact that co- management systems can function at ~~the~~different levels of ~~fisherie~~government, as well as in cross border situations and covering different geographical areas, taking into account the environment in which they operate, thus applying a holistic approach; notes in this regard that co-management arrangements also could provide mechanisms for quota-swap arrangements;

Amendment 53 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises the fact that co- management systems function at the level of fisheries, taking into account the environment in which they operate~~, thus applying a holistic approach~~;

Amendment 54 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes that there is a continuum of possible co-management arrangements covering various partnership arrangements and degrees of power- sharing;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that, as research bodies are directly involved in co-management systems, improved scientific data collection is ensured; it should be noted that this system makes it possible to generate data and knowledge that cannot otherwise be obtained given the close relationship between all the parties involved (administration, industry and researchers – the so-called triple helix), thus developing the capacity of all of them to use this information to generate rapid and effective responses to any issues that may affect fisheries; notes in this regard the importance that EU-funds can play in financing research and data gathering and that Member States have to ensure inclusion of funding possibilities in their national implementation of EU-funds;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that, as research bodies are directly involved in co-management systems, improved scientific data collection is ensured; it should be noted that this system makes it possible to generate data and knowledge that can~~not~~ otherwise be difficult to obtained, given the close relationship between all the parties involved (administration, industry and researchers – the so-called triple helix), thus developing the capacity of all of them to use this information to generate rapid and effective responses to any issues that may affect fisheries;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Stresses that the fundamental role of "cofradias" in fisheries management should be recognised and strengthened, including through EMFAF support;

Amendment 58 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Stresses that Producers Organisations and "cofradias" should be utilized as key drivers of co-management.

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises the fact that co- management contributes to the elimination of IUU fishing practices, as industry and administrations are involved and it is easier to identify malpractices and to combat them; including having appropriate and effective control measures and practices in place;

Amendment 6 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, states in recital 14 that ‘it is important for the management of the CFP to be guided by principles of good governance’. Those principles include decision-making based on best available scientific advice, broad stakeholder involvement and a long-term perspective’1, fishers being the principal stakeholders; _________________ 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32013 R1380

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises the fact that co- management contributes to the elimination of IUU fishing practices, as industry and administrations are involved and it is easier to identify and understand malpractices and to combat them;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that the European Union is committed to protecting at least 30% of the EU’s marine area by 2030, and strictly protecting 10% of the EU’s marine areas; Notes that co-management approaches present an opportunity to develop an ecosystem-based approach to marine protection and marine spatial planning in consultation with coastal communities;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Defends the importance of the Outermost Regions both in the fight against illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and in the fight against ocean pollution due to their dispersion and privileged location in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, being necessary to provide them with greater capacity for enforcement and monitoring programs;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Stresses that co-management models can play a key role in the implementation of Article 17 of the CFP, where Member States must use transparent and objective criteria, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature when allocating the fishing opportunities available to them; whereas those criteria may include the impact of fishing on the environment, the history of compliance, the contribution to the local economy and historical catch levels;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Acknowledges that co- management can be a useful tool to improve the collection of environmental data and ensuring that management measures are adapted to the specificities of individual fisheries leading to greater acceptance and compliance by fishers; stresses the need to use this to improve the availability of data and measures to minimise the impacts of bycatch on sensitive species;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7 d. Notes that third-country nationals employed in EU fisheries are often excluded from decision making processes; stresses that co-management approaches can help include these often marginalised voices with important consequences for working conditions and labour rights;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Draws attention to the fact that there is no unified assessment of the instances where co-management has been implemented in the EU and elsewhere in the world that identifies the system's main drivers; calls on the Commission to assess the examples of fisheries co-management in the above countries and to give backing to phasing it in within other fisheries and in the regional fisheries bodies in which it participates;

Amendment 67 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses that the lack of specific Community legislation for the implementation of fisheries co- management systems hinders their use in the management of fisheries in the Member States, as this depends solely and exclusively on the specific commitment of the competent authorities;deleted

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses that the lack of specific ~~Community legislation for the~~EU mechanisms for facilitating implementation of fisheries co- management systems h~~inders their use in the~~as been highlighted as a hinder for some Member States to use this way of management of fisheries ~~in the Member States~~, as this depends solely and exclusively on the specific commitment of the competent authorities; highlights the importance of exchange of best practices between Member States and involved stakeholders as an important step to expand the use of co-management systems;

Amendment 69 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses that the lack of specific Community legislation for the implementation of fisheries co- management systems hinders their use in the management of fisheries in the Member States, as this depends solely and exclusively on the specific commitment of the competent authorities; to this end, the EU could play a useful coordinating role for the sharing of best practices;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. Whereas co-management can only function if the principle of subsidiarity is respected; whereas the European Union could play a facilitating role to make co- management possible;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses that the lack of specific ~~Community legislation~~EU instruments for the implementation of fisheries co- management systems could in some cases hinders their use in the management of fisheries in the Member States, as this depends solely and exclusively on the specific commitment of the competent authorities;

Amendment 71 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that this lack of Community legislation makes it difficult to implement models legally, despite the interest that the sector and administrations may show in applying them in a given area, and that opportunities are missed to implement co- management projects in more areas;deleted

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses th~~at this lack of Community legisl~~e lack of proper tools such as fora for exchange on and develop of co-management models and regulatory measures facilitating its implementation makes it more difficult to implement ~~models legally~~the proper models in different Member States, despite the interest that the sector and administrations may show in applying them in a given area, and that opportunities are missed to implement co-management projects in more areas;

Amendment 73 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that ~~this lack of Community legislation makes it difficult to implement models legally, despite~~any EU instruments should be aimed at facilitating the implementation of co-management models, to meet the interest that the sector and administrations may show in applying them in a given area~~, and that opportunities are missed to implement co-management projects in more areas~~;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission ~~for a regulatory framework on fisheries co- management, which is directly applicab~~to assess how co-management in fisheries could be encouraged and facilitated, including through regulatory initiatives, building on already existing successful examples in ~~the~~ Member States; and 3rd countries;

Amendment 75 #

Annalisa TARDINO, Rosanna CONTE, Valentino GRANT, Massimo CASANOVA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission for ~~a regulatory framework on~~non- binding fisheries co- management~~, which is directly applicable in the~~ measures, taking into account the specific characteristics of the fisheries sector in each Member States;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission for a non- binding regulatory framework on fisheries co- management, which is directly applicable in the Member States;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission ~~for a regulatory framework on~~to assess how fisheries co- management~~, which is directly applicable in the Member States~~ can be better facilitated, taking into account the principle of subsidiarity;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Asks the Commission ~~for a regulatory framework~~to make recommendations to Member States on fisheries co- management~~, which is directly applicable in the Member States~~;

Amendment 79 #

France JAMET, Massimo CASANOVA, Valentino GRANT, Rosanna CONTE, Annalisa TARDINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Points out that if a European regulatory framework for shared fisheries management is to be introduced, it should promote better management of fishing quotas between the Outermost Regions and their Member States, taking into account the specificities of each of these regions;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the European Green Pact and the 2030 Biodiversity Strategy include specific commitments and actions, among which is the establishment of a wider network of protected areas on land and at sea across the EU, with the expansion of Natura 2000 areas, and that the proposed EU Nature Restoration Act proposes to apply legally binding targets for nature restoration to all Member States for at least 20% of the EU’s land and marine areas by 2030, ultimately covering all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050;deleted

Amendment 80 #

10 b. Underlines, taking into account the importance of the fisheries sector in the Outermost Regions, the importance of urging the Member States to provide timely information on the evolution of quota consumption so that these regions can keep the sector informed and better manage their fleet;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Urges the European Commission to take into account the Member States with Outermost Regions in the definition of the annual admissible totals, in particular in species that are of crucial importance for each of these regions;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Stresses that there is, moreover, a need in the current co-management sys~~Calls on Member Statems ~~for concrete legislative measures~~to clarify their legislative framework in order to pave the way for ~~the~~ setting up of co- management committees and to speed up the process of implementing measures, as the legislative framework is currently unclear in most regions, which means that the requisite timeframe for their creation and implementation is in the, providing short-, medium- and long -term~~, whereas~~ solutions ~~are needed in the short to medium term~~;

Amendment 83 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that there is, moreover, a need in thsome current co-management systems for concrete legislative measures to pave the way for the setting up of co- management committees and to speed up the process of implementing measures, as the legislative framework is currently unclear in most regions, which means that the requisite timeframe for their creation and implementation is in the long term, whereas solutions are needed in the short to medium term;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that there is, moreover, a need in ~~the current~~order to ensure better co- management systems ~~for concrete~~to have clear legislative measures ~~to pave the way for~~facilitating all the specific aspects for well functioning co- management, such as the setting up of co- management committees and to speed up the process of implementing measures, as concerns that the legislative framework i~~s currently unclear in most regions~~n some regions is not currently sufficiently clear, which means that the requisite timeframe for their creation and implementation is in the long term, whereas solutions are needed in the short to medium term;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that there iscould be, moreover, a need in the current co- management systems for concrete ~~legislative~~ measures to pave the way for the setting up of co- management committees and to speed up the process of implementing measures, as the legislative framework is currently unclear in most regions, which means that the requisite timeframe for their creation and implementation is in the long term, whereas solutions are needed in the short to medium term;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Points out that, in the absence of a clear legal framework, successful co- management of fisheries projects is difficult as it involves medium- and long- term processes and a committed leadership, which is why European support for this system is essential;deleted

Amendment 87 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Points out that~~, in the absence of a clear legal framework,~~ successful co- management of fisheries projects ~~is difficult as it involv~~requires medium- and long- term processes and a committed leadership, which is why European support for this system is essential;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Points out that~~, in~~ the absence of a clear l~~egal framework,~~ong term tools and frameworks might jeopardize successful co- management of fisheries projects ~~is difficult~~, as it involves medium- and long- term processes and a committed leadership, which is why European support for this system is essential;

Amendment 89 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Highlights the specific role of Advisory Councils in ensuring stakeholder involvement in the EU- decision making process; encourages the Commission to further engage with the Advisory Councils and to ensure proper feedback in relation to their recommendations; asks the Commission to consider an annual report on how Advisory Councils recommendations have been taken into account;

Amendment 9 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the European Green ~~Pact~~Deal and the 2030 Biodiversity Strategy include specific commitments and actions, among which is the establishment of a wider network of protected areas on land and at sea across the EU, with the expansion of Natura 2000 areas, and that the proposed EU Nature Restoration Act proposes to apply legally binding targets for nature restoration to all Member States for at least 20% of the EU’s land and marine areas by 2030, ultimately covering all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050;

Amendment 90 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Pierre KARLESKIND, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA, Catherine CHABAUD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Draws attention to the fact that there is no unified assessment of the cases where co-management has been implemented in the EU and in the world, which identifies the main drivers of this system; calls on the Commission to assess the examples of fisheries co-management in the above countries and to support their progressive implementation in other fisheries and in the regional fisheries bodies in which it participates;deleted

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Draws attention to the fact that there is no unified assessment of the cases where co-management has been implemented in the EU and in the world, which identifies the main drivers of this system; calls on the Commission to assess the examples of fisheries co-management in the ~~above countries and~~Union in order to identify best practices, especially on how to effectively involve stakeholders concerned in the decision making process, in order to support ~~their~~ progressive implementation ~~in other fisherie~~of this man~~d in the regional fisheries bodies in which it participate~~agement method in other areas;

Amendment 92 #