Suchergebnisse

A Landing Obligation (LO), or a requirement to land all catches of certain fish species, was introduced as part of the EU's new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) in 2014. This DiscardLess policy brief focuses on initial experiences with LO implementation in the Baltic and Pelagic fisheries. It summarises the discard plans in these fisheries, presents stakeholder experiences from interviews, meeting attendance and literature review and highlights emerging issues relevant to all fisheries where the LO is being implemented. Background and main elements of the landing obligation. In March 2007, the Commission published a communication recognising the serious problem of discarding in European fisheries. A public consultation was held and discarding was subsequently highlighted in the Commission's Green Paper on CFP reform. While a discard ban received significant support, industry recommended instead that discard reduction should be planned, on a fisheries basis, through creating incentives to enhance selectivity. An incident involving a UK trawler in Norwegian waters in 2008 generated public pressure to end discarding, which increased from August 2010 in response to a UK celebrity chef's public campaign known as "Hugh's Fish Fight". In 2011 the Commission included an obligation to land catches of regulated species in its CFP reform proposal. The adopted CFP included a LO, which applied for Baltic and pelagic fisheries from January 2015. The main elements of the LO are as follows: Scope: The LO applies to all catches of species which are subjected to Total Allowable Catch (TAC) limits or, in the Mediterranean, to a minimum landing size (MLS). Species that are not subject to TACs or MLS can still be discarded. Minimum conservation reference size (MCRS): The LO requires that fish under the MCRS are landed but prohibits their use for direct human consumption. Catches of all fish, including fish below the MCRS must be recorded and counted against quotas. Exemptions: The LO does not apply to species and fisheries with ...

Source at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1238588 ; The introduction of the Landing Obligation (LO) is one of the most significant reform elements in the 2013 Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). In order to assess how the LO performs as a policy instrument, it is essential to understand the background, objectives and motivation that led to the policy being adopted. With these objectives in mind, a desk-study was first carried out to review relevant policy statements, regulatory documents and academic literature. Secondly, since the EU discard policy was driven by NGOs campaigns and public support, a subsequent analysis was performed based on interviews of key environmental NGOs on their perception of the LO, its objectives, goals and state of its implementation (from legislation to control and enforcement). This study of the views of environmental NGOs complements the perspectives of other stakeholders as captured in workpackage 4 (i.e. the "fishermen' story", the "scientists' story" and the "managers' story"), as well as work realised in workpackage 2 to monitor the changes of stakeholder perceptions in relation to the LO during its progressive application to European fisheries.

This report contains an evaluation of the governance structures of the EU long-distance fishing fleet in the six case studies of the FarFish project. These case studies include two high seas fisheries and four fisheries that are based on Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs) between the EU and coastal states. All of these fisheries are important for the fishing fleets of multiple EU countries or respond to the priorities of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The report focuses on different aspects of both the structural and actor conditions, in particular focusing on monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) of the EU external fishing fleet. For each of the four SFPAs, we present the requirements set within the SFPAs, the legal framework and systems for MCS in the coastal state and their capacity. For the high seas cases, we present the governing framework of the area where such is in place and the practice of managing the EU fleet. For all cases, challenges of and measures to mitigate by-catch and discard issues and IUU fishing are presented. Lastly, we summaries the main findings regarding both achievements and identified challenges for the six case studies. This report is based on available data and synthesizes already existing information. It will function as a primer for further studies in the FarFish project of the governance structure of the EU fisheries outside Europe.

In many countries, policies regarding reduction of unwanted catch and discards are crafted in response to concerns regarding accountability, conservation, and waste as well as scientific needs to fully account for all sources of fishing mortality. It is important to note, however, that unwanted catch is minimal and most, or all, of the catch has value in some fisheries. Utilisation rates are very high, and discarding is generally not of concern in such fisheries which occur primarily, but not entirely, in developing countries. Where unwanted catch and discards are a concern, legislation may be prescriptive, as can be seen in the EU Landing Obligation (LO), and programmes established in e.g. Norway, Iceland, Argentina, Chile and New Zealand. Elsewhere, legislative language is intended to minimize unwanted catch but allows for some flexibility in developing strategies and solutions, as in the USA. The effectiveness of these approaches depends on many factors and all require effective cross-sectoral collaboration. Also essential is a comprehensive monitoring and control system which insures regulatory compliance and collection of adequate data to address scientific and management information needs. In this chapter, we evaluate the effectiveness of discard and unwanted catch reduction approaches under diverse legislative systems in different parts of the world, with reference to emerging practices under the LO. We consider the importance of finding the balance between top-down and bottom-up processes and look carefully at different governance/regulatory frameworks (e.g. input controls, output controls, quota management and transferability, cooperative/collaborative management), factors which encourage or discourage innovation and collaborative problem solving, monitoring and accountability. This is accomplished through case studies from selected fisheries around the world. ; publishedVersion

In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) has been requested by the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to conduct final food/feed and environmental risk assessments for all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorized in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency and NFSA requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary.

In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) has been requested by the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to conduct final food/feed and environmental risk assessments for all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorized in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency and NFSA requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary.

Source at https://vkm.no/ ; In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) has been requested by the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to conduct final food/feed and environmental risk assessments for all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorized in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency and NFSA requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary. ; I forbindelse med forberedelse til implementering av EU-forordning 1829/2003 i norsk rett, er Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet (VKM) bedt av Miljødirektoratet (tidligere Direktoratet for naturforvalting (DN)) og Mattilsynet om å utarbeide endelige helse- og miljørisikovurderinger av alle genmodifiserte organismer (GMOer) og avledete produkter som inneholder eller består av GMOer som er godkjent under forordning 1829/2003 eller direktiv 2001/18, og som er godkjent for ett eller flere bruksområder som omfattes av genteknologiloven. Miljødirektoratet og Mattilsynet har bedt VKM om endelige risikovurderinger for de EU-godkjente søknader hvor VKM ikke har avgitt endelige risikovurderinger. I tillegg er VKM bedt om å vurdere hvorvidt det er nødvendig med oppdatering eller annen endring av de endelige helse- og miljørisikovurderingene som VKM tidligere har levert.

Source at https://vkm.no/ ; In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) has requested the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to give final opinions on all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorised in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC within the Authority's sectoral responsibility. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority has therefore, by letter dated 13 February 2013 (ref. 2012/150202), requested the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) to carry out scientific risk assessments of 39 GMOs and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorised in the European Union. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary. ; I forbindelse med forberedelse til implementering av EU-forordning 1829/2003 i norsk rett har Miljødirektoratet (tidligere Direktoratet for Naturforvalting) bedt Mattilsynet om vurderinger av allegenmodifiserte organismer (GMOer) og avledete produkter som inneholder eller består av GMOer som er godkjent under forordning 1829/2003 eller direktiv 2001/18, og som er godkjent for ett eller flere bruksområder som omfattes av genteknologiloven. På den bakgrunnen har Mattilsynet, i brev av 13. februar 2013 (ref. 2012/150202), bedt Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet (VKM) om å utarbeide endelige vitenskapelige risikovurderinger av 39 GMOer og avledete produkter som inneholder eller består av genmodifiserte organismer, innen Mattilsynets sektoransvar. VKM er bedt om endelige risikovurderinger for de EU-godkjente søknader hvor VKM ikke har avgitt endelig risikovurdering. I tillegg er VKM bedt om å vurdere hvorvidt det er nødvendig med oppdatering eller annen endring av de endelige risikovurderingene som VKM tidligere har levert.

In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) has requested the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to give final opinions on all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorised in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC within the Authority's sectoral responsibility. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority has therefore, by letter dated 13 February 2013 (ref. 2012/150202), requested the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) to carry out scientific risk assessments of 39 GMOs and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorised in the European Union. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary.

This report synthesises the main findings from the value chain- and governance analysis in FarFish, and point at some potential policy changes that could improve governance of the SFPAs and the high seas fisheries of the European external fishing fleet. This is the final deliverable from work package 3 (WP3) of the FarFish project, containing lessons learned and policy recommendations based on the work conducted in T3.1 Evaluation of governance structures and T3.2 Value chain analysis. The overall objective of FarFish is to improve knowledge on and management of EU fisheries outside Europe, while contributing to sustainability and long-term profitability. To this end, WP3 has conducted value chain analysis and evaluations of the governance structure of the EU external fishing fleet in the selected case studies. The studies have provided insights to how these fisheries are managed and conducted, and how the fisheries are utilized and are contributing to the seafood supply, including to the European market and partner countries. This report synthesises the main findings from these studies. Based on the lessons learned as well as interaction with other areas within the project, we discuss recommendations for potential policy changes that could improve governance of the SFPAs and European high seas fisheries. The fisheries and value chains analysed are highly professional and are based on the different companies' commercial considerations. The recommendations to improve the performance of these companies or to achieve wider socio-economic goals are therefore directed at the potential for changes and improvements by way of regulations. The suggestions would in most cases require further elaboration and discussions, hence the term potential.

In preparation for a legal implementation of EU-regulation 1829/2003, the Norwegian Environment Agency (former Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management) has requested the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) to give final opinions on all genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorized in the European Union under Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003/EC within the Authority's sectoral responsibility. The Norwegian Food Safety Authority has therefore, by letter dated 13 February 2013 (ref. 2012/150202), requested the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) to carry out scientific risk assessments of 39 GMOs and products containing or consisting of GMOs that are authorized in the European Union. The request covers scope(s) relevant to the Gene Technology Act. The request does not cover GMOs that VKM already has conducted its final risk assessments on. However, the Agency requests VKM to consider whether updates or other changes to earlier submitted assessments are necessary. The insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize Bt11 x GA21 (Unique Identifier SYN-BTØ11-1 x MON ØØØ21-9 ) from Syngenta Seeds is approved under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 for food and feed uses, import and processing since 28 July 2010 (Commission Decision 2010/4263/EC). Genetically modified maize Bt11 x GA21 has previously been risk assessed by the VKM Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), commissioned by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority and the Norwegian Environment Agency related to the EFSAs public hearing of the application EFSA/GMO/UK/2007/49 in 2008 (VKM 2009a). In addition, Bt11 and GA21 has been evaluated by the VKM GMO Panel as single events and as a component of several stacked GM maize events (VKM 2005a,b, 2007, 2008, 2009b,c,d, 2010, 2012a,b).