8 pages, 3 figures, 3 tables, supporting information http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.06.015Most countries have the goal to manage their fisheries to achieve a combination of biological, economic, social, and political objectives [1] and [2]. This is also the case for the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). According to Article 2 of the CFP [3]: “The CFP shall ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable in the long-term and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies”. [...]Peer Reviewe

Energy prices increased sharply because of the military invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February 2022, heavily impacting global economies. In 2022, the EU fishing sector paid on average about EUR 0.93 per liter of fuel; at the peak of the crisis in June, it paid EUR 1.2 per liter, around three times the normal average price. High fuel prices jeopardize the viability of the fishing sector, which is largely fuel-intensive and particularly vulnerable to fuel price increases. The European Commission responded with emergency measures, adopting a Temporary Framework for State aid rules and activating the crisis mechanism foreseen under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF). This communication aims to examine the economic impact of the high fuel prices and the financial support available to the EU fishing sector to assess the short-term and long-term sustainability of the EU fishing sector.

The COVID-19 outbreak and subsequent public health interventions have depressed demand and disrupted supply chains for many fishing businesses. This paper provides an analysis of the COVID-19 impacts on the profitability of the EU fishing fleets. Nowcasting techniques were used to estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economic performance for the EU fishing fleet in 2020 and 2021. Our results show that the economic impact of COVID-19 on this sector was smaller than initially expected and overall profits remained positive. This was in part due to low fuel prices that reduced operating costs of fishing, and the early response from governments to support the sector. The results vary by fishing fleet, revealing that small-scale fleets and the fleets in the Mediterranean and Black seas have been more impacted than large-scale fleets and the fleets in the Northeast Atlantic.

Stunning of farmed fish prior to slaughter is increasingly recognized as a key animal welfare priority, yet uptake remains limited in the EU aquaculture sector. While the effects of different stunning methods on fish welfare are the subject of significant recent research, the effect on aquaculture businesses remains unclear. Therefore, this study assesses the economic feasibility of implementing electrical stunning for four species where it is not currently routine: carp, trout, seabass, and seabream. Using a granular cost model across 17 country–species–system combinations, and cost data from 2018 to 2020, the impact of introducing in-water and dry electrical stunning systems under various cost pass-through and sensitivity scenarios is evaluated. Results show that while stunning increases the production costs, under realistic assumptions, 16 out of 17 segments remain profitable, with the one unprofitable segment already being unprofitable under business-as-usual conditions. Three trout systems even experience cost savings due to reduced labor requirements. Sensitivity analyses confirm the robustness of these findings across plausible increases in operating costs and financing assumptions. Even under a 0% cost pass-through, 16 segments still remain profitable. These results provide timely, policy-relevant evidence to support species-specific welfare legislation, while identifying segments that may require targeted support for compliance.