Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

Changedon the impact of the implementation of Directive 2014/89/EU, the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive 2014/89/EUDirective, on fisheries in selected fishing areas and sea basins

▸8 unchanged paragraphs

(2024/2126(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning (Maritime Spatial Planning Directive or MSP Directive),

– having regard to Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive),

– having regard to 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 (Common Fisheries Policy Regulation),

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1004,

– having regard to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive),

– having regard to Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (Birds Directive),

Added– having regard to the Commission report of 3 May 2022 outlining the progress made in implementing Directive 2014/89/EU establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning (COM(2022)0185),

Added– having regard to EU legislation on water quality and pollution control (the Water Framework Directive, Directive 2008/105/EC, Directive (EU) 2024/3019, Council Directive 91/676/EEC, Directive 2005/35/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006),

Added– having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 – Bringing nature back into our lives’ (COM(2020)0380) and to Parliament’s resolution of 9 June 2021 thereon,

Added– having regard to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries of 1995 of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in particular Article 10 thereof,

Added– having regard to the FAO Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 5 June 2025 entitled ‘The European Ocean Pact’ (COM(2025)0281),

– having regard to its resolution of 7 July 2021 on the impact on the fishing sector of offshore wind farms and other renewable energy systems,

Added– having regard to its resolution of 6 October 2022 entitled ‘Momentum for the ocean: strengthening ocean governance and biodiversity’,

– having regard to its resolution of 9 May 2023 on co-management of fisheries in the EU and the contribution of the fisheries sector for the implementation of management measures,

– having regard to its resolution of 18 January 2024 on the state of play in the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy and future perspectives,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 12 May 2021 entitled ‘Strategic guidelines for a more sustainable and competitive EU aquaculture for the period 2021 to 2030’ (COM(2021)0236),

Added– having regard to the Commission staff working document (SWD(2025)0003) accompanying the document entitled ‘Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the Commission’s assessment of the Member States’ programmes of measures as updated under Article 17 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC)’,

Added– having regard to Special report 25/2023 by the European Court of Auditors entitled ‘EU aquaculture policy – Stagnating production and unclear results despite increased EU funding’,

– having regard to the briefing entitled ‘Fisheries in maritime spatial planning’ published by its Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services in October 2025,

– having regard to the study entitled ‘Implementation of the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive: Impact on fisheries in selected fishing areas and sea basins’ published by its Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services in December 2025,

Added– having regard to the 2022 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework,

Added– having regard to the report of September 2019 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change entitled ‘Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate’,

– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure, as well as Article 1(1)(e) of, and Annex 3 to, the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 12 December 2002 on the procedure for granting authorisation to draw up own-initiative reports,

Changed– having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A100000/2025),(A10-0120/2026),

Change 1

ChangedA. whereas increased competition for access to maritime space from various activities and sectors, such as fisheries, aquaculture, maritime transport, shipping, offshore renewable energy, nature conservation, the conservation of marine cultural heritage, coastal tourism, recreational activities, operations to extract and dispose of sea floor sediments through dredging, the use of underwater cables and pipelines, or defence, is resulting in increased cumulative pressure on marine ecosystems and increased conflict over the use of maritime space;space, which is amplified by institutional and administrative fragmentation;

Change 2

RemovedB. whereas the EU’s Maritime Spatial Planning Directive establishes a common framework for the Member States to organise the use of their marine waters and aims to promote the sustainable development of the blue economy and to reduce conflict between sectors;

AddedB. whereas fisheries and aquaculture are strategic sectors for the security and sovereignty of the EU, particularly in terms of food security and maritime sovereignty, and contribute to the competitiveness and resilience of coastal communities; whereas EU fishery products are healthy and often locally sourced, offering one of the best profiles in terms of low greenhouse gas emissions per unit of edible animal protein; whereas the strategic value of these sectors should therefore be duly recognised in maritime spatial planning (MSP);

RemovedC. whereas the MSP Directive contributes to environmental protection by promoting the sustainable use of maritime space and provides that Member States must apply an ecosystem-based approach;

AddedC. whereas in 2022, the EU’s self-sufficiency in seafood declined to 37.5 % and around 80 % of seafood consumed in the EU was imported, which creates a structural dependence on outside sources and weakens the EU’s food sovereignty; whereas at the same time, the EU’s fishing fleet has experienced a significant reduction over the past decade, and is now more than 13 % smaller than in 2014; whereas this contraction, coupled with increasing competition for the use of maritime space, threatens the economic viability of the fisheries sector, generational renewal and the ability of the fleet to contribute to the EU’s food security; whereas ensuring sufficient, balanced and predictable access to maritime space is therefore essential for developing competitive EU fisheries, as recognised by the European Ocean Pact;

RemovedD. whereas the MSP Directive is closely linked to the implementation of other EU legislation and international legal instruments, such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation, the Habitats and Birds Directives, the Water Framework Directive, and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework;

AddedD. whereas a changing geopolitical context and growing tensions could lead to an increased military use of maritime space; whereas MSP must take into account defence and security-related activities and operations, such as the surveillance of exclusive economic zones, the protection of maritime trade, joint military exercises, the combating of illicit trafficking, mine clearance, the combating of piracy, and aerial and satellite surveillance, and their interactions with economic activities related to the sea and the marine environment;

RemovedE. whereas following the adoption of the MSP Directive, the 22 Member States with a coastline were required to appoint competent authorities by 2016 and to adopt national maritime spatial plans for their marine waters by 31 March 2021;

AddedE. whereas the European Court of Auditors, in its Special report 22/2023 entitled ‘Offshore renewable energy in the EU’, pointed to the risk of job losses in the fisheries sector; whereas the report pointed to a lack of quantification of the key economic effects on fisheries resulting from offshore renewable energy development and stated that the potential negative consequences of offshore renewable energy development on the fisheries sector should be better identified and addressed; whereas it also noted that an improved fish population on a larger scale is uncertain but some fish density increases in offshore renewable energy areas have been observed, indicating potential benefits for fishers and fisheries;

AddedF. whereas the EU has set a legally binding target to put in place effective and area-based restoration measures in at least 20 % of its sea area by 2030;

AddedG. whereas the EU has committed to protecting at least 30 %of its sea area by 2030;

AddedH. whereas the MSP Directive establishes a common framework for the Member States to organise the use of their marine waters and aims to promote the sustainable development and sustainable growth of the blue economy and to reduce conflict between sectors, while not in itself introducing new sector-specific obligations; whereas the directive tends to favour the expansion of capital-intensive and spatially exclusive economic activities, which could marginalise traditional, mobile and collective uses of the sea, in particular fishing;

AddedI. whereas the EU has provided a framework for MSP, including mechanisms for cross-border cooperation; whereas coastal Member States are responsible for adopting plans under the framework, including designing and determining the format and content of such plans, in line with their administrative tradition, and distributing maritime space to different activities and uses respectively;

AddedJ. whereas the MSP Directive contributes to environmental protection by promoting the sustainable use of maritime space and marine resources and requires Member States to apply an ecosystem-based approach; whereas it seeks to ensure an effective balance between environmental, social and economic objectives, without systematically subordinating traditional activities in relation to others;

AddedK. whereas the MSP Directive is closely linked to the implementation of other EU legislation, such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation, the Habitats Directive, the Birds Directive and the Water Framework Directive; whereas it is also linked to legally and non-legally binding policy commitments, such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework;

AddedL. whereas following the adoption of the MSP Directive, the 22 Member States with a coastline were required to appoint competent authorities by 2016 and to adopt national maritime spatial plans for their marine waters by 31 March 2021; whereas eight Member States did not comply with that deadline;

M. whereas 20 out of the 22 Member States with a coastline have adopted maritime spatial plans so far, and many are now in the process of revising them;

Change 3

ChangedG.N. whereas when developing maritime spatial plans, Member States must consider environmental, economic, social and safety aspects, land-sea interactions,interactions and cross-border cooperation, and must ensure the early, continuous and effective involvement of all relevant stakeholders;stakeholders, including fishers and shellfish gatherers and their representative organisations, and communities in the outermost regions, through a bottom-up approach and throughout the decision-making process, ensuring that this involvement is appropriate, meaningful and not limited to a merely consultative role;

Change 4

ChangedH.O. whereas the leveldegree of implementation of the MSP Directive varies considerably from one Member State to another, dueowing to differences in administrative and governance structuresstructures, ranging from localised to more centralised systems; whereas the effects of MSP vary greatly depending on the sea basins and territories concerned, with some coastal regions facing a higher concentration of spatial restrictions and competing uses, thereby exacerbating territorial imbalances within the EU;

Change 5

RemovedI. whereas the maritime spatial plans vary greatly in nature and content, as the MSP Directive is not binding and leaves Member States with considerable flexibility over its implementation;

AddedP. whereas Member States must coordinate their plans with other relevant Member States and cooperate with the authorities in non-EU countries in the marine region concerned; whereas given the differences between various marine regions or sub-regions and coastal zones, a one-size-fits-all approach is not seen as appropriate for such cooperation;

RemovedJ. whereas there is a strong need for maritime spatial planning (MSP) in areas with a high concentration of activity and limited maritime space, such as the Channel or the Baltic Sea;

AddedQ. whereas the maritime spatial plans vary greatly in nature and content, as the MSP Directive does not give detailed binding criteria for the plans and allows Member States considerable flexibility regarding the implementation and detailed design of the plans;

RemovedK. whereas the fisheries and aquaculture sectors are under pressure from emerging blue economy sectors, such as offshore renewable energy, and are affected by marine conservation measures;

AddedR. whereas there is a strong need for MSP in areas with a high concentration of activity and limited maritime space, such as the Channel, the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean Sea;

RemovedL. whereas the increasing loss of fishing grounds is leading to the displacement of fishing activities, increased fishing pressure and competition between fleets, and the disappearance of certain segments, particularly in small-scale fisheries;

AddedS. whereas MSP should contribute to the territorial cohesion of the EU, in accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; whereas fishing and aquaculture are not only economic activities but play a fundamental social role in providing livelihoods, maintaining employment and preserving the social and cultural fabric of coastal and island communities, particularly in peripheral and the outermost regions;

RemovedM. whereas maritime and coastal areas are suffering the consequences of climate change, pollution and marine litter, which also affect activities related to the sea, marine biodiversity and fishery resources;

AddedT. whereas the fisheries and aquaculture sectors are facing several challenges, such as pressure from the declining state of marine ecosystems and the uneven deployment of marine conservation measures and pressure from emerging blue economy sectors such as offshore renewable energy;

RemovedN. whereas maritime professionals, such as fishers, may face certain risks or dangers related to vessel safety or exposure to certain types of trafficking via maritime routes;

AddedU. whereas well-managed and effectively protected networks of ecologically connected marine protected areas are an essential tool for conserving marine biodiversity and can contribute to long-term gains through stock recovery, spillover to adjacent areas, and resilience for coastal economies, but their effectiveness and social acceptability depend on how they are designed, managed and coordinated with sustainable fishing activities, in particular through differentiated approaches based on scientific data and the participation of all stakeholders, including fishers and coastal communities;V. whereas offshore renewable energy will only be sustainable if it has no negative impact on the environment and on economic, social and territorial cohesion, especially in fisheries-dependent regions;