Lack of national political will is driving European seas to the brink

CCB • June 25, 2020

Today, the European Commission published a report assessing the progress with the implementation of the EU’s Marine Directive [1], adopted in 2008. The report comes out just as the European Environment Agency paints a dire picture of the state of European seas in its new Marine report. Marine life, from seabed to sea birds, is suffering: 79% of the EU’s coastal seabed is damaged by bottom-trawling, up to 53% of sharks, rays and skates are threatened by bycatch and marine mammals’ condition has been in sharp decline since 2009.

For 12 years, European countries have had the legal obligation to take all the necessary measures to achieve clean and healthy seas by 2020. It is clear however that EU countries will miss the deadline and fail to meet the legally binding objective. Yet, the Marine Directive is instrumental to achieving the EU’s conservation goals at sea, recently set in the EU Biodiversity Strategy under the wider strategy of the European Green Deal , as well as the EU’s global commitments under Sustainable Development Goal 14 ‘Life Below Water’. 

The Commission highlights a number of successes stemming from the Directive, which was at the forefront of the ocean plastic pollution battle, leading to the adoption of the Single-Use Plastics Directive. Many other threats, however, remain without ambitious plans for action by the Member States. The poor implementation of the Marine Directive also means that the Maritime Spatial Plans that countries are now finalising are built on a faulty environmental basis, and that blue growth remains essentially unbridled. 

“Ever since its adoption in 2012, blue NGOs have denounced the inherent incompatibility of Europe’s Blue Growth Strategy with the goals of protecting and restoring the marine natural world”, says Ann Dom, Deputy Director at Seas At Risk. “We are happy to see that the European Commission is also coming to the same realisation in today’s report.”

Seas At Risk, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic, OceanCare and Surfrider Foundation Europe urge Member States to take immediate measures to address some of the most imminent threats to marine ecosystems , including – but not limited to – stopping overfishing and destructive fishing practices, closing the plastic pollution tap, protecting 30% of EU seas in highly or fully protected areas, stopping the flow of industrial, agricultural and household contaminated waters into the sea, banning offshore oil and gas exploration and exploitation, reducing the speed of ships and ending container loss at sea. 

“EU seas are in a dire state, yet Member States keep tinkering around the edges of what is needed to make substantial progress”, says Alice Belin, senior marine policy officer at Seas At Risk. “With the 2020 deadline missed, we expect EU countries to adopt as soon as possible even more ambitious measures to make up for lost time. And if they are lacking inspiration, we encourage them to look at the NGO’s Blue Manifesto [2] the rescue plan to save the ocean by 2030.”   

While an analysis of the failures to meet the law’s objective is welcome, the organisations object to any changes to the law. All indications, including today’s report, point to the Member States’ lack of political commitment as well as cross-governmental and cross-country coordination as the key reasons for lack of progress. This will not be fixed by changing the legal text, but rather by stepping up implementation and taking legal action against non-compliant Member States.   

“Ground-breaking legislation, such as the Marine Directive, is used by the EU and its Member States to showcase the EU’s environmental credentials on the global stage” says ClientEarth’s Marine Habitats Lawyer, John Condon. “But when it comes to actually applying those laws to protect the environment, this report once again shows that EU countries are found wanting. Their legal obligation to achieve clean and healthy seas is not debatable. We urge the Commission to prepare legal action against countries who are failing to respect this important law.” 

“The lack of commitment by all Ministries, not only those in charge of protecting the sea, means that coasts and seas remain plagued by the harmful impacts of ever-growing maritime sectors and land-based plastic, agricultural, industrial and household pollution”, says Nils Höglund, Marine and Fisheries Policy Officer at Coalition Clean Baltic. “We need cross-governmental task forces put in place to have a fair chance at tackling all the cumulative pressures on our seas and ocean.”

“ The Marine Directive presents concrete opportunities to improve EU waters’ health by taking into consideration local and regional contexts. It provides Member States with an incentive and obligations to address a broad range of major ocean challenges, such as plastic, chemical pollution, climate change, etc. and we are extremely disappointed that so many countries have completely ignored it”, says Antidia Citores, Spokesperson at Surfrider Foundation Europe.

“Quieter oceans through banning oil and gas exploration, which involve the loudest noise generated activities by humans, and by reducing the speed of large shipping vessels are measures that also contribute to climate action. Such measures and their positive impact to reach set objectives are consistent with all agreed policies, so what are most governments waiting for?” says Nicolas Entrup, Co-Director International Relations at OceanCare.

Notes

Contacts

Alice Belin, Senior Marine Policy Officer at Seas At Risk, +32 470 04 82 97 abelin@seas-at-risk.org  

Bianca Vergnaud, Senior Communications Officer at ClientEarth, +32 471 88 70 95, bvergnaud@clientearth.org

 Nils Höglund, Fisheries Policy Officer at Coalition Clean Baltic, +46 70 867 92 49, nils.hoglund@ccb.se

Antidia Citores, Spokesperson at Surfrider Foundation Europe, +33632689036, acitores@surfrider.eu  

Nicolas Entrup, Co-Director International Relation at OceanCare, + 43 660 211 9963, nentrup@oceancare.org   

Tampering with EU Fisheries Policy would ‘open Pandora’s Box’, NGOs warn

By CCB • March 30, 2026
Brussels, 30 March 2026 - Today, Fisheries Ministers from EU Member States meet with the European Commission for the AGRIFISH Council. On this occasion, Oceana, BLOOM, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), Seas At Risk and WWF EU, handed a symbolic ''Pandora’s Box'' to the EU Commissioner Costas Kadis, sending a clear message as the European Commission prepares its 2026 evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The box represents the risks of revising EU’s main fishery policy framework: once opened, competing demands from Member States, industry, small-scale fishers, and coastal communities could quickly spiral into division, regulatory delays and uncertainties. This would put at risk the hard-won progress made in restoring Europe’s fish populations and improving the profitability of the fishing sector. NGOs urge decision makers to build on the progress made to date and to prioritise the full and timely implementation of the existing rules. Reopening the CFP and its related provisions would undermine ocean health and the long-term future of Europe’s fishing communities. '' Europe's fisheries policy is facing a credibility test. The law is already there. The tools to rebuild our seas already exist. What's missing is the political will to deliver. Overfishing should have ended by 2020 at the latest. Reopening the CFP would signal that missed deadlines carry no consequences, erode trust, revert the progress made, and put the future of our fisheries and coastal communities at stake ’’, said the NGO coalition. *** Oceana: Vera Coelho, Executive Director and Vice President in Europe BLOOM: Claire Nouvian, Founder and General Director ClientEarth: John Condon, Lead of Marine Ecosystems Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB): Ida Carlén, Co-Chair Environmental Justice Foundation: Steve Trent, CEO/Founder Seas At Risk: Dr Monica Verbeek, Executive Director WWF EU: Ester Asin, Director

CCB´s submission to the EU Call for Evidence on the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

By CCB • March 10, 2026
Uppsala, March 2026 - CCB has closely worked with the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) ever since its adoption and welcomed the opportunity to give feedback to this crucial directive for marine biodiversity and ocean health through the EU Call of Evidence . Evaluations conducted by the EU Commission previously found many positive effects for EU marine waters stemming from the directive, but also that the directive has some shortcomings. CCB however, maintains that the largest obstacle to fully implementing the directive and achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) is the lack of political will among Member States to do so. This forthcoming revision must therefore result in a framework directive that is more easily enforceable, measurable and implementable, accompanied by sufficient funding to carry out the measures. Furthermore, in order to achieve GES as fast as possible other key pieces of EU legislation must also support reaching it and focus on achieving the goals of the MSFD in their objectives. Seeing that European seas generally are in poor condition and under mounting pressure from human activities and that in the Baltic Sea the situation is especially dire there is an urgent need for truly ecosystem-based management of our seas and for reaching GES. The revised MSFD can help us achieve this, but only if it includes the points outlined below and the directive is fully and swiftly implemented: *** [Short version]*** Operationalise the overarching GES goal: EU sea areas were supposed to reach GES already in 2020, but due to low political ambition, sadly did not do so. Member States should therefore strive to reach GES as fast as possible now. Setting a new overall deadline for when to reach GES is not the answer on how to achieve this goal most efficiently, instead tools that address pressures and measure progress and ensure actual, timely implementation of ambitious measures must be included in the revised directive in order to operationalise achieving the overall GES goal. CCB therefore recommends making the existing and forthcoming threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria legally binding and part of the main directive. Improving regional coordination and implementation: To improve the coherence, coordination and effectiveness of MSFD implementation, assessment of GES, monitoring and the national PoMs the role of the Regional Seas Conventions (RSCs) must be clarified. CCB would welcome collating all the national PoMs into one regional PoM for the Baltic Sea, which should be aligned with, in addition to reaching the goals of the MSFD, with achieving the goals of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP). Land-sea interface: For the Baltic Sea to achieve GES it is key that land-based pressures, primarily nutrient runoff from agriculture causing severe eutrophication, is also addressed and that implementation of the MSFD goes hand in hand with the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The goals of the MSFD and achieving GES should also be included when implementing and shaping the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as well as any synergies with implementing the EU Zero Pollution Action Plan which are also important to identify and utilise. The Baltic Sea also has a too high prevalence and level of other pollutants and hazardous substances affecting marine life. Fisheries and aquaculture: As one of the main pressure factors on the marine environment in general, as well as in the Baltic Sea, fisheries and aquaculture and the effects they have on the marine ecosystem and its biodiversity must be addressed in order to achieve GES. This is especially crucial when considering the MSFD descriptor for Biodiversity (D1), Fish and Shellfish (D3), Food webs (D4) and the one for Seabed integrity (D6). Climate change: Climate change is also affecting the Baltic Sea faster than other marine regions and must be factored in when managing the sea area and its resources to ensure EBM and the full implementation of the MSFD and achieving GES. The effects of the climate crisis should be accounted for when setting pressure reduction targets and threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria, in a way that when an effect cannot be measured nor predicted the precautionary principle must be used. Revising Art. 14 of the MSFD: Article 14 in the MSFD outlines the acceptable exceptions when reaching GES is not possible. The article needs to be revised in the forthcoming revision, since it contains too many and too broad in scope possibilities for exemptions (e.g. in Art. 14(4)), which jeopardise the implementation and fulfilment of the directive as a whole. A possible way of modifying it would be to introduce an obligation for Member States to demonstrate that they have taken all measures within their control nationally and that they have tried to address the problem and advance solving it on a regional level through cooperating with other Member States, before they can apply for a possible exemption. Make the Programme of Measures contain ambitious & concrete measures: One of the cornerstones of the MSFD is the national PoMs that are published every six years and are precluded by an assessment of GES in national waters and a monitoring programme. Unfortunately, the current approach to PoMs where Member States freely can choose measures has led to an overall too low level of ambition in the PoMs, and to large differences within regions and between neighboring countries in terms of which measures are included. In order to fully implement the directive and to achieve GES it is of paramount importance that the national PoMs have a high level of ambition and contain concrete, implementable measures and that there is regional coordination. Easing the reporting burden: One of the results from the evaluation of the MSFD was that the current reporting burden is considered to be too high and a possible way to address this is to align the reporting obligations of the MSFD to more reassemble those of the WFD, that has a more simplified 6-year cycle compared to the MSFD. The implementation cycle however should not be revised or at least not in a way that delays reaching GES. Improve coherence with other legislation: To ensure that the revised MSFD is fully implemented it is essential that coherence with other relevant legislation is improved. The MSPD (foundation for the forthcoming Ocean Act) is also currently being revised and to reach the goals for both the directives achieving GES needs to be a cornerstone of the Ocean Act. This is the only way to deliver truly ecosystem-based management of our seas, and the revision of both directives should therefore be coordinated and focused on achieving GES. CCB looks forward to continuing to provide input to the revision process of the MSFD as well as working with the implementation of the MSFD, especially in the Baltic Sea. CCB expects that the revision will result in a more enforceable directive that leads to the fast implementation of ambitious measures to improve the state of the Baltic and European Sea areas and to the achievement of GES. The full text of the submission is available here . *** Links to supplemental documents supporting our positions: CCB’s submission to the Call for Evidence for the Ocean Act Guiding Recommendations for Source-to-Sea Restoration in Riverine, Coastal, and Marine Ecosystems (Coalition Clean Baltic, 2025) Position Paper on Marine Protected Areas (Coalition Clean Baltic 2024) Don’t sink the Common Fisheries Policy – fulfil its potential (joint NGO Briefing 2025) Blue Manifesto (joint NGO paper)