EU Pulse fishing ban does not limit future innovation

EU Pulse fishing ban does not limit future innovation

The following piece is the English version of the NRC Opinie (opinon) article by Hanna Schebesta, Marloes Kraan and Simon Bush

The Court of Justice of the European Union rejected the Dutch government's request to overturn the EU ban on pulse fishing two weeks ago. The ban means all pulse fishing must cease by the summer, with significant economic consequences for the Dutch fleet. For many the court decision is seen as a means of stifling sustainable innovation, both in the fisheries sector and other sectors. We argue that the case has in fact made the process of innovation clearer – in terms of the weight given to science, and the scope of decision making by the European Parliament, Council of Ministers and Commission.

The Dutch government argued to the Court that the ban on pulse fishing was not based on the best available scientific advice and undermined innovation. Referring to the 2018 advice of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, available to the European Parliament when they passed the legislation banning pulse fishing, the Dutch government claimed there was no conclusive evidence that the pulse had a negative impact on the marine environment.

The Court responded that while the science recognized advantages of pulse trawling over conventional beam trawling, not all risks associated with the gear had been identified. The court also ruled that European legislature has wide discretionary power under the common fishery policy. In other words, it does not have to base its measures on scientific advice alone. In addition, the court argued that it can only pass judgement on whether manifest errors of assessment were made by the European lawmakers, which it ruled was not the case.

The Court has not said that pulse is unsustainable. It has emphasized that the scientific assessment available was not complete. It has also not said that innovation like pulse is not possible in the future. It emphasized that the legislation banning the pulse was a justifiable political decision taken by the European Parliament and the Council.

Despite the Court’s decision, the legal framework provides research derogations to enable innovation, including the pulse. The legislation stipulates that Member States can follow a regional approach to allow the use of innovative gear – including the electric pulse trawl - through so-called joint recommendations - if it is proven that their use does not lead to significant negative impacts on sensitive habitats and non-target species.

The importance of adopting a collaborative ‘regional approach’ to innovation with neighboring countries is a key lesson for the Netherlands. The Dutch solo strategy, built on a temporary derogation from the existing ban and a series of bilateral agreements with the commission to pilot the pulse trawl, was as such on trial. The lack of cooperation with other Member States, coupled with an excessive number of permits issued under the derogation, ultimately undermined the political capital of the Netherlands to make the pulse a success in the EU.

The European Court’s ruling signals an end to the pulse trawl. But this end may not be in vain. The pulse has delivered two important lessons that can pave the way for future innovation. First, while science remains central to the process of innovation, it will not alone deliver political and social acceptance of new innovation in the fisheries sector. Second, member states have to pay clear attention to regional cooperation. In short, going it alone will not get you home.

The European fisheries sector needs the confidence to continue innovating in order to deliver the goals of the common fisheries policy. Direct and continued action and support needs to be delivered by the EU and Dutch government alike to ensure that the failure of the pulse trawl does mean the failure of the sector to deliver more environmentally and economically sustainable fishing techniques. Providing this support would mean that the pulse is not an end but beginning to much needed sustainable revitalization of the European fisheries.