JRC Technical Report

Transcription

1 I JRC Technical Report Evaluation of DCF data calls and variables managed by JRC in preparation of the new Data Collection Multiannual Programme (DC- MAP) May 2013

2 European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen Contact information Address: TP 051, Ispra (VA), Italy Tel.: Fax: Legal tice Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. This report does not necessarily reflect the view of the European Commission and in no way anticipates the Commission s future policy in this area. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to numbers or these calls may be billed. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server JRC 8325 European Union, 2013 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged Printed in Italy

3 Introduction In the context of the revision of Data Collection Framework and the preparation of the Data Collection Multiannual Programme (DC MAP) under the new Common Fishery Policy, DG MARE requested JRC to perform an analysis of the variables in the current DCF, and in particular: to determine which data was called under the different MARE/JRC DCF data calls since the DCF has been in place, and which was used by the relevant STECF Expert Working Groups during their subsequent meetings. The final aim of this exercise is to support DG MARE in identifying which DCF variables need to be kept in the DC- MAP, which have to be deleted and which new variables have to be included. The request was formulated to JRC and in parallel to ICES after the STECF meeting DC MAP part 1 in March 2013 in Ispra (EWG1302), with the view of providing input to the following STECF meeting DC MAP part 2, to be held in June 2013 in Varese (EWG1305). In addition, JRC was requested to issue an opinion in relation to the possibility of merging data calls under a fixed and single deadline. The two tasks have been carried out between April and May The present note gives a summary of the main outcomes of this exercise. This is a technical document for the purpose of expert consultation which in no way anticipates Commission's future policy in this area. Feasibility of merging data calls deadlines The option of merging data calls issued by DG MARE/JRC into a single data call with a fixed deadline was formulated by some MS during the Evaluation of the Data Collection Framework carried out by MRAG for DG MARE (December 2012). The underlying idea is that by merging data calls deadlines the burden for the MS in processing and providing the data would be reduced. In commenting the draft MRAG report JRC already expressed some reservations on this option. Although the Commission and end users have a general right to request data under the DCF for diversified and ad hoc scientific assessments purposes, in recent years the data call issues by JRC on behalf of DG MARE have been limited to the following five subjects: Economic data for the assessment of the performance EU fishing fleet sector Economic data for the assessment of the performance of the EU aquaculture sector Economic data for the assessment of the performance of the EU seafood processing sector Biologic data on effort and catches Biologic data on effort and catches in the Mediterranean and Black Sea 1

4 The timing of data calls which have been established over the last 10 years of implementation of DCF and previously of the DCR are arising from a compromise between, on one side, the timing for the availability of data with the MS and, on the other side, the need for scientific advice by STECF/DG MARE. The objective is to provide to STECF the most updated data as early as possible in order to perform the scientific assessment requested by DG MARE. Following the request by DG MARE to explore the issue more in detail, we have reviewed the content of 2012 and 2011 DCF National Programs and the timing of last four years data calls and related STECF meetings. The first part of the analysis (Annex I) provides information about when data becomes available with the MS and the second part (Annex II) an indication of when the data was called and used to produce the scientific advice by STECF. Looking at these two aspects the following findings can be drawn: data calls have stabilised into routine data streams taking place more or less at predefined periods of the year; the opening of the data calls is as early as possible and differentiated to take advantage of the most recent data; the deadlines for economic data calls are at one calendar month from the formal letter by DG MARE, for s, the closing is as late as possible to increase chances of getting more data before the meetings; moving the aquaculture and processing data calls forward to the beginning of the year would mean losing one year of data while postponing the fleet economic one would mean having the report heavily delayed at the second half of the year; the effort data call is normally launched at the beginning of March to use data which according to National Programs is available, in the worst case, with a delay of seventeen months; in the case of Med/BS data call there is a common opening in April with differentiated deadlines; the 3 deadlines have the following rationale: the first, in June, is to get Med fisheries and effort data from previous year, the second, in September, is to get Black Sea data, including the summer surveys, of the current year, to produce catch advice for the next year, and the third in December is to get the Med surveys to help produce short term forecast and catch advice for management. The last deadline for the Med/BS data call has been so far problematic for Italy and Spain. Generally it would not be advisable to merge the 3 calls in one since, unless the call is at the very end of the year. With a single deadline at the end of the year the data would be called for the previous year and this would limit the possibilities of providing catch advice. Although data calls are kept open well in advance of the deadline the uploading of data in most cases takes place few days before or after the deadline. The conclusion from the points above is that, given the different needs and availability of data, it is not considered feasible to merge the data calls into one deadline. In addition there is the risk that by concentrating all data calls in a single period, MS would have an overload of work in a shorter time and more difficulties in responding to the data call. 2

5 Harmonisation of content of the data calls In addition to the issue of deadlines, the possibility of harmonising the content of data calls was examined. Transversal variables are currently requested both under the economic and biologic data calls. These variables are essential for integrating the economic data in bio- economic modeling and to produce economic indicators of performance by unit of effort. The existing templates for the transmission of data and the structure of the biologic and economic databases held at JRC have been analyzed to explore inconsistencies which would hinder merging biologic and economic data sets (see Annex III for details). The main findings from this analysis are that: the biologic and economic data calls have different end users and target two distinct levels of coverage on the fishing activity; there are some discrepancies in defining the dimensions (i.e. for length classes and gear); the metrics used to quantify effort are different. For the biological data, the effort measure which is common to all subsets is kw*days at sea, whilst from the economic data there are two common effort variable, days at sea and fishing days. All the other variables are dependent either on the gear or the management plan, depending on if they come from the economic data sets or from the biologic datasets, respectively. There is little potential at the moment to merge the economic data with the effort data at the aggregated level available at JRC. A first step in improving this situation would be to harmonize the tables and codes used to define fleet segments in the two data calls. Furthermore as emerged recently in the calculation of economic indicators by unit of effort it will be necessary to expand the level of segmentation at which transversal data is requested in the economic data calls. Another harmonisation to be considered is between the effort and Med and BS data calls. Although the two data calls are issued with different timing and in respect of distinct assessments meetings by STECF, they cover the same variables and both serve the same final goal of performing stock assessments and fisheries and management plans evaluation. In the past two years the harmonization of the effort and the Med and BS data calls has made good progress and following JRC initiatives many variables are now identical and have common regional data codes. Further improvement is needed to get the Mediterranean and Black Sea data earlier during the year; so far there is an unacceptable delay which results often in fish and fisheries assessments by the end or after the annual management periods. Assessment of variables in the current DCF In order to perform the second task of assessing the use of the DCF variables in JRC managed data calls, the variables listed in the Decision 2010/93/EU have been organized by main heading and group (see annex IV). The classification follows closely the references to modules and annexes of the decision. 3

6 For each variable the text of Decision has been examined to extract information on the foreseen coverage in terms of species, gears or fleet segment and on the aggregation level or segmentation. The structuring of variables according to these criteria represents a possible starting point for the consideration of variables in the Master Reference Register and could help defining a model for data storage and transmission through UML (Unified Modeling Language) or ERD (Entity Relationship Diagram). Ideally the Master Reference Register, foreseen under the DC MAP, should provide in addition to a list of variables and definitions, indication on the minimum level of aggregation for which data has to be collected and made available at the MS level, the periodicity of the collection, and the kind of coverage in terms of stocks, gear and areas. It is important to note that the segmentation of variables in the DCF decision is applicable at the level of the collection of data at the MS level. Once collected and stored at this level data can be re- aggregated in many possible ways. With this in mind, the present analysis of JRC data calls has to be considered an attempt to infer the usefulness of variables based on the level of aggregation and coverage at which data has been requested and used so far in STECF report. This approach cannot be exhaustive in evaluating all possibilities of using the more disaggregated data available with the MS. In the economic data calls the structure of JRC data requested reflects closely the level of segmentation foreseen in the DCF. In the case of transversal variables data are requested at fleet segment in economic data calls, and at métier level in the effort and Med/BS data calls. In addition, a special effort template in the s is requesting data at higher geographical disaggregation by geographical rectangle. The need of extending the request of some transversal data under the economic data call also by métier has emerged recently in relation to the calculation of economic indicators by unit of effort (see above harmonization). The biologic variables requested under the Effort and Med/BS data are disaggregated by métier level. These data calls are requesting some additional segmentations and variables which are not explicitly mentioned in the DCF (i.e. special condition and if the fishing area is falling inside or outside the EU EEZ). So far MS are providing without major problems this data however the revision of the DCF could be a good opportunity to formalize also this practice. Annex IV indicates for each variable if it has been called under the effort and Med/BS and economic data calls, the level of segmentation at which the variable has been called and if it has been used in STECF reports. Based on the usage of the variables in STEC reports and the difficulties experiences in collecting and assembling the data, proposals for changes are formulated. Beside the synthetic indication of the type of change (change, keep, delete, new), a description of the change (i.e. in definition, methodology, coverage, segmentation) and its rationale are also included. Overall 132 variables have been considered in this review. In 35 cases the proposal is to modify the variable, in 17 to add a new one, in 1 to delete it and in 14 cases there is no proposal formulated since the variable is not covered by JRC data calls. The major changes which have been identified are related to: the harmonisation of segmentation with new Regulation for the collection of production data and extension of coverage to freshwater for aquaculture variables ; 4

7 the expansion of stock coverage for some biologic variables (i.e. including additional stocks in the DCF); the harmonisation of processing industry variables with EUROSTAT Structural Business Statistics; the inclusion of some biologic variables which are regularly requested under effort data calls but not explicitly foreseen in DCF; the change in methodology for some fleet economic variables. The proposed changes of harmonisation with EUROSTAT statistics and the expansion of stock coverage are quite generic and will need more elaboration of the details. The coverage in terms of stock for biologic variables is an important aspect which has resources implications and will have to be considered in the definition of the Master Reference Register and during its regular maintenance. One criterion which may be worth considering for this purpose is the preservation of a core of stocks for which long time series from past data calls have been established. Figures in annex V provides as first input to the discussion an indication for each combination of species and fishing area the number of years (from 1 to 9) for which consistent data is available from the effort and Med/BS data calls managed by JRC. Additional layers which may be added for this evaluation of stocks coverage are the classification in Annex VI of the DCF Decision (2010/93/EU) and the list of stocks subject to quota regulations. 5

8 Annex I Data availability according to DCF National Programs (2011, 2012) NP_Year MS III B Eco fleet III F 1 Capacity III F 2 Effort III F 3 Landings IV A aquaculture IV B processing industry 2012 Germany about 14 months - about 15 about 15 months 12 months months months 2012 Ireland about 15 months - about 15 about 15 months about 15 months about 15 months months 2012 Spain The results are fed into a database 6 months 6 months 6 months The results are fed into a database The results are available on the website of the National Statistics Institute (INE) of Spain 2012 France ATL and MED: 12/13 months Other regions: 14/15 months 2012 UK 12/13 months - data are collected via an ongoing process during each year. As such data are 1-13/14 months (estimates based on raw data available sooner) 13/14 months (estimates based on raw data available sooner) 12/13 months 14/15 months 2012 Lithuania 12 month 12 months 12 month available t applied 12 month according to the EU Fisheries Control Regulation 2012 Malta 13/14 months - 5 months 5 months 13/14 months 13/14 months 2012 Netherland 10 months 10 months 10 months 10 months 18 months (except 18/24 months for shellfish) 2012 Poland 10 months - 4 months 4 months 10 months 10 months 2012 Sweden 12/13 months - 12 months 12 months data will be stored in databases 21/22 months data are collected via an ongoing process during each year. As such data are extracted for 12 months Financial variables: 14/15 months number of enterprises and

9 Annex I Data availability according to DCF National Programs (2011, 2012) extracted for end- users as and when needed end- users as and when needed employment: end of the reference year 2011 Belgium 9/10 months - 9/10 months 9/10 months 9/10 months 6/7 months 2011 Bulgaria 16 months - 17 months 17 months 20 months 21 months 2011 Cyprus Within 12 months - Within 12 months Within 12 months Within 12 months Within 12 months 2011 Denmark 12 months - 4 month 4 month 12 months 18 months 2011 Estonia Minimum 12 months - 12 months 2 months 10 months Minimum 12 months 2011 Finland Minimum 12 months - 5/6 months 5/8 months Minimum 12 months Minimum 12 months 2011 Italy 9 months - 6 months 6 months at the conclusion 12 months of the National programme 2011 Latvia 13/16 months - Coastal and Coastal and presentation 13/16 months Baltic Sea region vessels: 2 months; High- Sea vessels: Minimum 12 months Baltic Sea region vessels: 2 months; High- Sea vessels:? 2011 Romania 5 months - 5 months 5 months 5 months 5 months 2012 Portugal Minimum 12 months - 12/13 months 12/13 months Minimum 12 months Minimum 12 months maximum 15 months - 17 months 17 months 20 months 24 months 2

10 Annex II Schedule of data calls and STECF meetings ( ) Data call Year Official letter DG MARE Deadline EWG meetings MED/BS /04/ /06/2013 EWG /07/2013 (MED1) 09/04/ /09/2013 EWG /09/2013 (BS) 09/04/ /12/2013 EWG /12/2013 (MED2) 12/04/ /06/2012 EWG /07/2012 (MED1) 12/04/ /09/2012 EWG /10/2012 (BS), 12/04/ /12/2012 EWG /12/2012 (MED2) 03/08/ /09/2011 EWG /09/2011 (MED1) 03/08/ /09/2011 EWG /10/2011 (BS) 03/08/ /12/2011 EWG /12/2011 (MED2) 29/04/ /05/2010 SGMED /05/2010 (MED1) 29/04/ /09/2010 SGRST /10/2010 (BS) 29/04/ /11/2010 SGMED103 13/12/2010 (MED2) AER FLEET /01/ /03/2013 EWG /04/2013, EWG /06/ /02/ /03/2012 EWG /03/2012, EWG /06/ /02/ /03/2011 EWG /05/ /01/ /02/2010 SGECA /03/2010 EFFORT /02/ /05/2013 EWG /06/2013, EWG /10/ /03/ /05/2012 EWG /06/2012, EWG /09/ /02/ /05/2011 EWG /06/ /04/ /05/2010 SGMOS /06/2010 AQUACULTURE /05/ /06/2013 EWG /09/ /05/ /06/2012 EWG /09/ /05/ /06/2011 EWG /10/2011 PROCESSING /09/ /10/2013 EWG /10/ /07/ /08/2011 OWP1201 v /08/ /09/2010 SGECA /10/2010 Jan Feb March Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct v Dec 1

11 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s This exercise presents an insight view on the procedure to merge data coming from Economic and Effort data calls with the final goal to create a unique dataset to be used for Bio- economic modeling by applying the methodology used during the workshop Workshop on Bio- economic Modeling (WKBEM) with R/FLR/FLBEIA. This first step of the analysis only focus on the data structures, dimensions and metrics and the way they can be organized for future merging. For each reference table and for shared dimensions between both data calls the relationship was identified and a unique relation table was created. It was also performed an evaluation of the variables of effort in order to identify the coherence of the measures being used. Which Data Sets? a. Biological Data: Effort Catch b. Economic Data Transversal data sets Capacity Landings Effort Economic data sets Variable Costs Fixed costs How much the level of coverage amongst data sets is overlapping? Biologic data call: not clear what this is. Black Sea & med data call? Or effort data call? You should list at the start of report the JRC/MARE data calls and then stick to the same names in the report. Covers the activity of the fishing vessels holding at least one fishing authorization to operate under an effort regime/management plan. Effort regimes covered are: Long term plan for cod stocks [R (EC) 1342/2008]. Recovery plan for Southern hake and rway lobster stocks in the Cantabrian Sea and Western Iberian Peninsula [R (EC) 2166/2005]. Multi- annual plan of Western Channel sole stock [R (EC) 509/2007]. Multi- annual plan for the cod stocks in the Baltic Sea [R (EC) 1098/2007]. Multi- annual plan for the sustainable exploitation of the stock of sole in the Bay of Biscay [R (EC) 388/2006]. R(EC) 2347/2002 establishing specific access requirements and associated conditions applicable to fishing for deep sea stocks. R(EC) 1954/2003 on the management of the fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas and resources so called Western Waters regime. 1

12 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s for the EU fishing fleet: covers activity of the entire European active fishing fleet. Active concept under DCF means a vessel with at least on fishing day during the year of reference. Which are the dimensions describing the data: The dimensions of each data set: Data call Effort data call Data Set Transversal data Economic data Effort Catch Dimension Capacity Landings Effort Income Costs Year Quarter Country Gear Vessel length Mesh size range Area Fishery Specon Species Granularity of each common dimension: Data Call Biological data call Effort Catch Transversal data Economic data Capacity Landings Effort Income Costs Year Country MS and MS/region Data call codes MS ISO3 code Gear gear based codes Data call codes gear/group of gears based codes Vessel length Area Species Length cutoff at (8, 10, 15 meters) depending on region. Data Call codes Ices/Cecaf level 3+reference to Data call codes FAO 3_Alfa (subset) Some species are coerced to genre aggregation gear/group of gears based codes (50% concept) gear/group of gears based codes (50% concept) Length cutoff at (6,10,12,18,24) meters depending on region. DCF codes Aggregation of FAO Areas DCF codes FAO level 3/4 FAO 3_Alfa FAO level 3/4 Aggregation of FAO Areas DCF codes 2

13 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Relation between reference tables. i. Country Economic database Effort/ Med database Code Country Code Country/region BEL Belgium BEL Belgium BGR Bulgaria BUL Bulgaria CYP Cyprus CYP Cyprus DEU Germany GER Germany DNK Denmark DEN Denmark ESP Spain SPC Spain (Canaries island) ESP Spain SPN Spain (mainland) ESP Spain ESP Spain (med DB) EST Estonia EST Estonia FIN Finland FIN Finland FRA France FRA France GBR United Kingdom ENG United Kingdom (England and Wales) GBR United Kingdom GBC United Kingdom (Alderny/Sark/Herm) GBR United Kingdom GBG United Kingdom (Guernsey) GBR United Kingdom GBJ United Kingdom (Jersey) GBR United Kingdom IOM United Kingdom (Isle of Man) GBR United Kingdom NIR United Kingdom (rthern Island) GBR United Kingdom SCO Scotland IRL Ireland IRL Ireland ITA Italy ITA Italy LTU Lithuania LIT Lithuania LVA Latvia LAT Latvia MLT Malta MLT Malta NLD Netherlands NED Netherlands POL Poland POL Poland PRT Portugal POR Portugal (mainland) PRT Portugal PTA Portugal (Azores) PRT Portugal PTM Portugal (Madeira) ROU Romania ROM Romania SVN Slovenia SVN Slovenia SWE Sweden SWE Sweden GRC Greece GRC Greece ii. Gear Effort/ Med database Economic database Code Gear Code Gear GILL Driftnets or gillnets DFN Drift and/or fixed netters TRAMMEL Trammel nets DFN Drift and/or fixed netters DREDGE Dredges DRB Dredgers 3

14 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Effort/ Med database Economic database Code Gear Code Gear DEM_SEINE Demersal seines DTS Demersal trawlers and/or demersal seiners OTTER Bottom trawls DTS Demersal trawlers and/or demersal seiners POTS Pots and traps FPO Vessels using pots and/or traps LONGLINE Drifting or set longlines HOK Vessels using hooks PEL_SEINE Pelagic seines PS Purse seiners BEAM Beam trawls TBB Beam trawlers PEL_TRAWL Pelagic trawls TM Pelagic trawlers - - PG Passive Gears - - INACTIVE n active vessels - - MGO Vessel using other active gears - - MGP Vessels using polyvalent active gears only - - PG Passive Gears - - PGO Vessels using other passive gears - - PGP Vessels using polyvalent passive gears only - - PMP Vessels using active and passive gears MIS German gear - - NONE N/A - - iii. Vessel length Effort/Med database Code min_len max_len desc Code NONE 0 0 All ne O10T15M All VL1018 O15M All VL12XX U10M 0 10 All VL0010 O10T12M Baltic Sea VL1012 O12T18M Baltic Sea VL1218 O18T24M Baltic Sea VL1824 O24T40M Baltic Sea VL2440 O40M Baltic Sea VL40XX O8T10M 8 10 Baltic Sea VL0010 U8M 0 8 Baltic Sea VL0010 0m- 6m 0 6 Mediterranean VL0006 0m- 12m 0 12 Mediterranean VL0012 6m- 12m 6 12 Mediterranean VL m- 18m Mediterranean VL m- 24m Mediterranean VL m- 24m Mediterranean VL m- 40m Mediterranean VL2440 over 40m Mediterranean VL40XX O10M Finnish VL1040 Economic database 4

15 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Effort/Med database Economic database Code min_len max_len desc Code NULL 0 0 Spain Data ne Effort/Med database iv. Area Economic database code FAO_3_4 Area Supra Region 5 EU 27.5 rth Atlantic AREA rth Atlantic AREA27 1 COAST 27.1 rth Atlantic AREA27 1 RFMO 27.1.A rth Sea AREA27 10 EU A rth Atlantic AREA27 10 RFMO B rth Atlantic AREA A rth Atlantic AREA27 14B COAST B rth Atlantic AREA27 14B RFMO B rth Atlantic AREA27 2 COAST 27.2.A rth Sea AREA27 2 EU 27.2 rth Atlantic AREA27 2 RFMO 27.2.B rth Sea AREA C.22 Baltic AREA rth Atlantic AREA B.23 Baltic AREA D.24 Baltic AREA D.25 Baltic AREA D Baltic AREA D.26 Baltic AREA D.27 Baltic AREA D.28 Baltic AREA D.28 Baltic AREA27 28E E rth Atlantic AREA D.29 Baltic AREA D Baltic AREA D.30 Baltic AREA D.31 Baltic AREA D.32 Baltic AREA COAST Others OFR EU Others OFR COAST Others OFR EU Others OFR RFMO Others OFR COAST Others OFR RFMO Others OFR COAST Others OFR EU Others OFR 5

16 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Effort/Med database Economic database code FAO_3_4 Area Supra Region RFMO Others OFR 3AN 27.3.A rth Sea AREA27 3AS 27.3.A rth Sea AREA27 4A 27.4.A rth Sea AREA27 5A 27.5.A rth Atlantic AREA27 5B COAST 27.5.B rth Atlantic AREA27 5B EU 27.5.B rth Atlantic AREA27 5B RFMO 27.5.B rth Atlantic AREA27 6A 27.6.A rth Atlantic AREA27 6B EU 27.6.B rth Atlantic AREA27 6B RFMO 27.6.B rth Atlantic AREA27 7A 27.7.A rth Atlantic AREA27 7B 27.7.B rth Atlantic AREA27 7C EU 27.7.C rth Atlantic AREA27 7C RFMO 27.7.C rth Atlantic AREA27 7D 27.7.D rth Sea AREA27 7E 27.7.H rth Atlantic AREA27 7F 27.7.F rth Atlantic AREA27 7G 27.7.G rth Atlantic AREA27 7H 27.7.E rth Atlantic AREA27 7J EU 27.7.J rth Atlantic AREA27 7J RFMO 27.7.J rth Atlantic AREA27 7K EU 27.7.K rth Atlantic AREA27 7K RFMO K rth Atlantic AREA27 8A 27.8.A rth Atlantic AREA27 8B 27.8.C rth Atlantic AREA27 8C 27.8.C rth Atlantic AREA27 8D EU 27.8.D rth Atlantic AREA27 8D RFMO 27.8.D rth Atlantic AREA27 8E EU 27.8.E rth Atlantic AREA27 8E RFMO 27.8.E rth Atlantic AREA27 9A 27.9.A rth Atlantic AREA27 9B EU B rth Atlantic AREA27 9B RFMO B rth Atlantic AREA27 BSA BSA rth Atlantic AREA D Baltic AREA27-1 ne ne - - NONE ne D Baltic AREA Others OFR 12 RFMO rth Atlantic AREA27 7J 27.7.J rth Atlantic AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA37 6

17 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Effort/Med database Economic database code FAO_3_4 Area Supra Region Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA Mediterranean & Black sea AREA37 7

18 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Effort variables: days at sea fishing days kwfish days gtfish days Nr.trips Soaking time 8 Nr.Nets /length Nr. Pots /tra ps Nr. Hooks/lines Nr. Fish operations kwday s at sea Economic data Effort Active gears x Dredger s&trawl s x x x x x x Seiners x x x x x Passive gears x Hooks&L ines x x x x x x Nets x x x x x x gtdays at sea Traps x x x x x x Biologic data effort Baltic Sea Cod plan x x x x Western Channel Sole x x x x Southern HKE&NEP x x x x Long term plan Cod x x x rth sea plaice & sole x x x Sole Bay of Biscay x x x Deep sea x x x Western Waters x x x Mediterranean Sea x x x Black sea x x x Shaded areas identify the effort variables coming from the economic data sets on a fleet segment level (50% criteria). Nr. Vessel s

19 Annex III Feasibility of merging data sets coming from the Effort and s Final Considerations: Biologic data call covers a subset of data received by the economic data call. For some specific fisheries, the level of coverage may be the same. This is the case of some demersal fisheries, if the vessels engaged operates in only one supra region and if those vessels are classified within a fleet segment with clear gear identification instead of being identified under a group of gears. There are three subsets of data showing enough level of consistency to be merged or at least further analyzed. Those are the subset of effort data for Baltic Sea cod plan, Western Channel Sole and Southern HKE&NEP. Main problems identified that hamper an integral merging exercise are: The two data call targets two distinct levels of coverage in terms of fleet segmentation and reference population of the fishing activity (Effort<Eco). Given the higher level of detail in the effort dataset, the relation between dimensions is on most of the cases one to many. However some exceptions were found e.g. for vessel length categories, given the length in several situation is not correspondent. Also for the fishing gears, some problems arose because on the economic data call some fishing gears may be grouped under vary broadly gears groups (e.g Polyvalent Active gears, polyvalent passive gears, ) The metrics used to quantify effort, are in almost cases diverse. For the biological data, the effort measure which is common to all subsets is kw days at sea, whilst from the economic data there are two common effort variable, days at sea and fishing days. All the other variables are dependent either on the gear or in the management plan, depending on if they come from the economic data sets or from the biologic datasets, respectively. On the possible extent and specifically in what concern the reference tables, databases should be further harmonized. Why the need to have different code systems for countries and for areas? Even if some adjustments would be needed to handle some issues of further detail, to have the same basis classification would enhance and benefit very much the coherence amongst databases. Some reflection on the economic data call formats for the next year might be relevant in order to be thought how to accommodate the datasets for bio- economic modeling. It s important to retain that the effort variables may be requested in accordance with several levels of aggregation - on a fleet segment level, on a fishing technique level and on a métier level, so as by different levels of area definition; and that both Supra region and Fleet segment can be requested on a unique dataset together with the effort information on a métier bases which would allow a straightforward way to merge biologic and economic data. 9

20 Biological - Discards - Number of discards by length (Number) Sub region or fishing ground Level 3; and Baltic Sea, Mediterranean and Black sea Level 6, Metier, Length class Population of major Metiers (90% criteria), All gears, G2 species Species, country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Sub-area, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation, length class Change Expand coverage: all species caught, not only G1 and G2 Biological - Discards - Weight of discards by length (Tonnes) Sub region or fishing ground Level 3; and Baltic Sea, Mediterranean and Black sea Level 6, Metier, Length class Population of major Metiers (90% criteria), All gears, G2 species Species, country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Sub-area, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation, length class Change Expand coverage: all species caught, not only G1 and G2 Page 1

21 Biological - Landings - Number of landed by length (Number) Sub region or fishing ground Level 3; and Baltic Sea, Mediterranean and Black sea Level 6, Metier, Length class Population of major Metiers (90% criteria), All gears, G2 species Species, country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Sub-area, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation, length class Change Expand coverage: all species caught, not only G1 and G2 Biological - Landings - Weight of landings by length (Tonnes) Sub region or fishing ground Level 3; and Baltic Sea, Mediterranean and Black sea Level 6, Metier, Length class Population of major Metiers (90% criteria), All gears, G2 species Species, country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Sub-area, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation, length class Change Expand coverage: all species caught, not only G1 and G2 Page 2

22 Economic - aquaculture - Capital costs - Financial costs, net (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change Variables are currently collected, just needs to be listed in order to harmonize it with EUROSTAT; The variable should be disaggregated to financial costs and financial income Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Economic - aquaculture - Debt - Debt (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change The name should be changed in order to harmonize definition with EUROSTAT Change name to liabilities Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Page 3

23 Economic - aquaculture - Extraordinary costs - Extraordinary costs, net (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change Variables are currently collected, just needs to be listed in order to harmonize it with EUROSTAT The variable should be disaggregated to extraordinary costs and extraordinary income Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Economic - aquaculture - Income - Subsidies (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change The name should be changed in order to harmonize definition with EUROSTAT The name should be changed to "operating subsidies" Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Page 4

24 Economic - aquaculture - Income - Turnover (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change The name should be changed to "value of production" Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Economic - aquaculture - Personnel costs - Wages and salaries (Euro) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change The name should be changed in order to harmonize definition with EUROSTAT The name should be changed to "personnel costs" Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Page 5

25 Economic - aquaculture - Volume of Sales - Volume of Sales (Tonnes) Farming technique/main species Enterprises with main activity in NACE 05.2, Marine aquaculture Country, farming technique/main species, year Change The name should be changed in order to harmonize definition with EUROSTAT data collection for aquaculture The name should be changed to "volume of production" Segmentation for aquaculture could be updated in order to introduce other relevant production techniques and harmonize DCF segmentation with EUROSTAT; coverage needs to be expanded to freshwater in order to provide contextual indicators for the monitoring Economic - fisheries - Capital costs - Annual depreciation (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change The proposed methodology is the mostly used. Need to delete reference to ESA in the Annex VI Change methodology: depreciation should be calculated using the degressive depreciation scheme based on capital values estimated using current values (11-12 STECF 11-19) Page 6

26 Economic - fisheries - Capital value - Value of physical capital: depreciated replacement value (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Replace by value of physical capital - current value Economic - fisheries - Capital value - Value of quota and other fishing rights (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Harmonisation/re-definition needed Economic - fisheries - Effort - Energy consumption (Litres) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Expand segmentation to include all gear types; harmonise as most MS already provide the variable for all fleet segments Page 7

27 Economic - fisheries - Employment - Engaged crew (Number) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Age class information would allow at minimum additional costs to carry out labor and social analyses and impact assessment; see priority on employment under Europe 2020 Add classification of employment by age classes/gender Economic - fisheries - Employment - FTE harmonised (Number) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Age class information would allow at minimum additional costs to carry out labor and social analyses and impact assessment; see priority on employment under Europe 2020 Add classification of employment by age classes/gender Page 8

28 Economic - fisheries - Employment - FTE National (Number) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Age class information would allow at minimum additional costs to carry out labor and social analyses and impact assessment; see priority on employment under Europe 2020 Add classification of employment by age classes/gender Economic - fisheries - Financial position - Debt/asset ratio (%) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Replace by two separate variables: dept/liabilities and total value of assets Economic - fisheries - Personnel costs - Imputed value of unpaid labour (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Harmonize definition with EUROSTAT Change into unpaid labour of the crew (11-12 STECF 11-19). According to the agreement during PGECON the variable name should be changed to personnel costs (crew), group name should be changed to the Labour costs in order to harmonize definition with EUROS Page 9

29 Economic - fisheries - Personnel costs - Wages and salaries of crew (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Harmonize definition with EUROSTAT Change into paid labour of the crew (11-12 STECF 11-19). According to the agreement during PGECON the variable name should be changed to personnel costs (crew), group name should be changed to the Labour costs in order to harmonize definition with EUROSTA Economic - processing - Capital costs - Financial costs, net (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS The variable should be disaggregated to financial costs and financial income; Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Page 10

30 Economic - processing - Debt - Debt (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Change name to liabilities Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Economic - processing - Energy costs - Energy costs (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Page 11

31 Economic - processing - Extraordinary costs - Extraordinary costs, net (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS The variable should be disaggregated to extraordinary costs and extraordinary income; harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Economic - processing - Income - Other income (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Page 12

32 Economic - processing - Income - Subsidies (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS The name should be changed to "operating subsidies" Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Economic - processing - Other operational costs - Other operational costs (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Page 13

33 Economic - processing - Personnel costs - Imputed value of unpaid labour (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Economic - processing - Personnel costs - Wages and salaries of staff (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change The name should be changed to "personnel costs" Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Page 14

34 Economic - processing - Raw material costs - Purchase of fish and other raw material for production (Euro) Enterprises with main activity in NACE 15.2 Country, year Change t in line with EUROSTAT SBS Harmonisation/re-definition needed Segmentation of fish processing industry by size category of enterprises might be introduced in the new DCMAP; ENFF and EFF defines different co-funding rate per size category. Most of MS are currently using segmentation by size category. Transversal - Effort - Fishing days (Day) A1,A2,A3,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2,C3 Active vessels, All gears Country, year fleet segment, sub region (C1) Change Too complex May be redefined as: Fishing days = days at sea with fishing operation Page 15

35 Transversal - Effort - GT * fishing days (GT Day) A1,A2,A3,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2,C3 Active vessels, For dredges and trawls only Country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Sub-area, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation (Effort, MED&BS); country, year fleet segment, sub region (C1) (economic) Change Expand coverage to all gears Transversal - Effort - Number of trips (Number) A1,A2,A3,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2,C3 Active vessels, All gears Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Change Expand coverage to all gears Transversal - Landings - Live weight of landings totals and per species (Tonnes) A1, species Active vessels, All gears Country, year, quarter, ICES subdivision and rectangle with zonal EU attachment or GFCM Subarea, vessel length, gear, mesh size, metier, special management derogation, country, year fleet segment, sub region (C1) (economic) Change It is not clear if is related to live or processed weight Needs clarification Page 16

36 Economic - fisheries - Capital value - Value of physical capital: depreciated historical value (Euro) C3 Fishing fleet, Main gear groups Country, year fleet segment, supra region (C3) Delete t needed/used; replacement values is used instead Biological - Biological parameters - Fecundity at age (Number) Fishing stock distribution, Sex, Age class Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Biological - Biological parameters - Fecundity at length (cm;mm) Fishing stock distribution, Sex, Length class Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Page 17

37 Biological - Biological parameters - Growth parameter a () Fishing stock distribution Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Biological - Biological parameters - Growth parameter b () Fishing stock distribution Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Biological - Biological parameters - Growth parameter K () Fishing stock distribution Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Page 18

38 Biological - Biological parameters - Growth parameter L_INF (cm;mm) Fishing stock distribution Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Biological - Biological parameters - Growth parameter t0 (year) Fishing stock distribution Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Biological - Biological parameters - Maturity at Length (cm;mm) Fishing stock distribution, Sex, Length class Fishing stock G1, G2 Despite not being systematically called information needs to kept at national labs Page 19