From conflicts to co-benefits: integrating energy transition and sustainable fisheries

The European marine space is experiencing claims from different users. Bottom trawling faces restriction under the Biodiversity Strategy 2030; offshore wind expansion displaces fishing grounds under the REPowerEU plan; and the sector must decarbonise under the Green Deal, all while stocks may redistribute under climate change. These policies, individually rational, generate spatial trade-offs when implemented simultaneously, yet current assessment frameworks evaluate them in isolation.

Drawing on a decade of development of the DISPLACE individual-based spatial bio-economic model and its application across five European case studies (Baltic Sea, North Sea, Kattegat, Adriatic, Ionian Sea), we present an integrated framework to quantify these trade-offs. We demonstrate three key findings:

First, not all bottom trawling is equal; gear-specific seabed impact assessments (Eigaard et al. 2017; Rijnsdorp et al. 2020) show that differentiated restrictions outperform blanket closures in both ecological and economic terms.

Second, stock recovery is the most effective decarbonisation lever; rebuilding stocks may reduce fuel use intensity more than technological innovation alone (Bastardie et al. 2022), creating a virtuous cycle between biodiversity and climate objectives.

Third, spatial displacement from offshore wind and MPAs produces heterogeneous impacts; vessel-level modelling reveals that aggregate fleet indicators mask significant distributional effects, with small-scale coastal vessels disproportionately affected (Nielsen et al. 2026).

We argue that resolving the “spatial squeeze” requires moving from sequential to simultaneous policy assessment, in which climate, biodiversity, and energy objectives are evaluated within a single spatially explicit bio-economic framework. We propose operational pathways for implementing this approach within the ICES advisory process and the STECF evaluation framework, drawing on lessons from the SEAwise project and recent STECF evaluations of spatial management measures.

Details in:

Bastardie, F., Salvany, L., Cooper, A. M., & Carvalho, N. (2024). A roadmap to reduce the risk of overexploiting EU marine living resources in a changing ocean. Frontiers in Marine Science, 11, 1352500. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2024.1352500

Bastardie, F., Hornborg, S., Ziegler, F., Gislason, H., & Eigaard, O. R. (2022). Reducing the Fuel Use Intensity of Fisheries: Through Efficient Fishing Techniques and Recovered Fish Stocks. Frontiers in Marine Science, 9, 817335. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.817335

Bastardie, F., Feary, D. A., Brunel, T., Kell, L. T., Döring, R., Metz, S., Eigaard, O. R., Basurko, O. C., Bartolino, V., Bentley, J., Berges, B., Bossier, S., Brooks, M. E., Caballero, A., Citores, L., Daskalov, G., Depestele, J., Gabiña, G., Aranda, M., . . . Van Vlasselaer, J. (2022). Ten lessons on the resilience of the EU common fisheries policy towards climate change and fuel efficiency – A call for adaptive, flexible and well-informed fisheries management. Frontiers in Marine Science, 9, 947150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.947150

Bastardie, F., Astarloa, A., Binch, L., Bitetto, I., Damalas, D., Depestele, J., Hernvann, P. Y., Lehuta, S., Letschert, J., Maina, I., Mahévas, S., Papantoniou, G., Püts, M., Romagnoni, G., Spedicato, M. T., Sys, K., Tsikopoulou, I., Van Hoey, G., Zupa, W., . . . Rindorf, A. (2025). Anticipating how spatial fishing restrictions in EU waters perform to protect marine species, habitats, and dependent fisheries. Frontiers in Marine Science, 12, 1629180. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2025.1629180

Eigaard, O. R., Bastardie, F., Hinzen, N. T., Buhl-Mortensen, L., Mortensen, P. B., Catarino, R., Dinesen, G. E., Egekvist, J., Fock, H., Geitner, K., Gerritsen, H., González, M. M., Jonsson, P., Kavadas, S., Laffargue, P., Lundy, M., Gonzalez-Mirelis, G., Nielsen, J. R., Papadopoulou, N., … Rijnsdorp, A. D. (2017). The footprint of bottom trawling in European waters: distribution, intensity, and seabed integrity. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 74(3), 847-865.

Nielsen, J. R., Olsen, J., Nielsen, A., Bastardie, F., & Egekvist, J. (2026). Retrospective analyses of offshore wind farm impacts on fisheries and benthic habitat interactions. Frontiers in Marine Science, 13, 1748431. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2026.1748431

Rijnsdorp, A. D., Hiddink, J. G., Van Denderen, P. D., Hintzen, N. T., Eigaard, O. R., Valanko, S., Bastardie, F., Bolam, S. G., Boulcott, P., Egekvist, J., Garcia, C., Van Hoey, G., Jonsson, P., Laffargue, P., Nielsen, J. R., Piet, G. J., Sköld, M., & Van Kooten, T. (2020). Different bottom trawl fisheries have a differential impact on the status of the North Sea seafloor habitats. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 77(5), 1772-1786. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa050

Working with DISPLACE toward identifying Carbon Free Transition Pathways from fuel‑intensive fleets to low-carbon Danish Fleets

See the slideshow presenting the project here. We will soon incorporate scenario results into fisheries management plans for policymakers.

Preliminary outcomes now allow us to simulate the (2025) fishing activities of Danish vessels over 12 meters in length as they seek a good catch around Denmark on different resources. The following short animation presents the kind of first results we will get out of this simulation:

Disclaimer: This animation is a rough simulation provided for illustrative purposes and does not represent the vessels’ past activities.

How individual fishermen´s micro-decision-making affects the overall performance of fisheries

Fishermen´s micro-decision-making is challenged by fishery management and marine spatial plans and affects the overall performance of fisheries. Because of individual decisions and tactics for fishing (e.g. selection of gears, place and time) influence catching power, the fishermen have an individual footprint on the harvested stocks and benthic communities.

Also, fishermen have different objectives and strategies influencing economic and impact performance of the fishery for several stocks and ecosystem components and in different areas (e.g. here for carbon footprints, or here for impacts on seafloor). By regulating catch quotas, the deployed effort and potential fishing grounds, both fisheries management, and marine spatial plans can result in unintended consequences and incentives affecting the overall economic and energy performance of the fisheries at stake, which may further undermine the ecosystem approach to fisheries.

We intend to support the fishery sector and the policymakers with a benchmark tool for efficiently evaluating alternative scenarios in individual decision making, by designing decision trees to model when, where, how, and for how long they go fishing.

Continue reading “How individual fishermen´s micro-decision-making affects the overall performance of fisheries”