Overseas
Maritime spatial planning in the European Union is back at the center of the political agenda, with a message that sounds like a clear warning for the fisheries sector: the current framework is not delivering concrete results for fishing activities. This is the key takeaway from the report approved by the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries, which effectively opens a broader political reflection on how one of the Union’s most strategic assets is being managed today.
The issue is not new, but it has now become more visible than ever. European seas are increasingly contested spaces, where multiple activities—ranging from fisheries and aquaculture to maritime transport, offshore renewable energy, defense, and subsea infrastructure—overlap. This growing competition is generating mounting pressure on marine ecosystems and intensifying conflicts among operators. In such a context, maritime spatial planning was expected to provide balance. According to Members of the European Parliament, however, that balance has not been achieved.
The report highlights that the current regulatory framework, despite its ambitious goals, has not significantly improved predictability for fishing activities nor reduced conflicts between different uses of the sea. A major factor is the strong disparity among Member States: in some cases, plans are legally binding, while in others they are not, and implementation varies widely across maritime regions. The result is a fragmented system that struggles to ensure stable operating conditions for fisheries businesses.
The most critical point concerns the positioning of fisheries and aquaculture within strategic decision-making. The report clearly indicates that these sectors are often disadvantaged compared to others considered more economically relevant, particularly offshore energy. This is not framed as an ideological opposition, but rather as an issue of balance. The expansion of infrastructure such as offshore wind farms, combined with the growth of marine protected areas and other exclusive-use zones, is progressively reducing the space available for fishing.
MEPs emphasize that this process often occurs without fully integrating the needs of the fisheries sector into planning decisions. As a result, they call for a shift in approach: new installations, including energy projects, should be located in areas less suitable for fishing, avoiding further pressure on a sector already under strain.
Beyond spatial allocation, the issue of representation emerges strongly. Although consultation processes have been strengthened in recent years, the report reflects a shared perception that coastal communities and fishers—especially small-scale operators—still have limited influence over final decisions. The problem is not the lack of consultation platforms, but their actual impact on outcomes.
For this reason, the document calls for a redesign of participatory mechanisms, making them more effective and less formal. Involving those who work at sea is not only a matter of fairness but also an operational necessity. Without their direct input, there is a risk of creating plans that are theoretically coherent but difficult to implement in practice.
Another key element is coordination. The report stresses the need to strengthen dialogue between different EU policies affecting maritime space, particularly between the Common Fisheries Policy and environmental regulations. At the same time, it highlights the importance of greater coherence among Member States and across administrative levels, in order to avoid overlaps and misalignments that further complicate the regulatory landscape.
In this context, MEPs also make a significant political statement: they call for fisheries and aquaculture to be recognized as strategic sectors of public interest. This definition goes beyond purely economic considerations, acknowledging their role in food security, employment, and the social stability of coastal areas. If translated into concrete measures, such recognition could have a profound impact on future planning decisions.
The report will now be submitted to a plenary vote in the European Parliament. However, beyond the institutional process, the message is already clear: the current management of maritime space is no longer sustainable for all its users.
For the fisheries sector, the issue is not merely technical or regulatory—it is about long-term perspective. Without a real rebalancing of priorities and a concrete integration of fisheries into decision-making processes, there is a growing risk of a gradual erosion of operational space. And with it, the loss of an economic, cultural, and productive heritage that remains a fundamental component of Europe’s maritime identity.
