Fishing - pelagic quota cuts 2026: island communities impact assessment

Step Four - Assessment

Does your assessment identify any unique impacts on island communities? (Further detail in the Guidance):

• Demographic
• Economic
• Gaelic
• Social

Demographic: No evidence was presented during the 2017 consultation, review or subsequent stakeholder discussions to indicate unique demographic impacts. It is not anticipated that the policy will have any unique demographic effects specific to island communities.

Economic: The policy change will affect pelagic vessels based in Shetland in the same way as those based in Peterhead. While additional landings into Shetland, following on from the amended economic link licence activity increases activity at the island’s pelagic processing factory — improving local employment prospects — the anticipated impacts, both positive (for processors) and negative (for catching businesses), are expected to be broadly similar to those experienced in mainland communities.

Gaelic: Not applicable. No Gaelic-related impacts have been identified.

Social: The policy is not expected to have a unique social impact on island communities in terms of deprivation or social exclusion. Any changes in employment or economic activity would mirror those seen in other coastal communities.

Summary: Overall, the assessment does not identify any significantly different effects on island communities compared to other coastal areas. While Shetland experienced positive economic effects through increased processing activity, these were not considered unique relative to mainland communities.

Does your assessment identify any potential barriers or wider impacts?

No additional barriers have been identified beyond those already considered. However, as noted above, pelagic fishermen have raised concerns about the lower prices typically received when landing into Scottish ports compared to processors based outside Scotland. These factors could influence vessel profitability and operational flexibility and have been considered when assessing whether intervention is in the public interest.

Are there mitigations already in place for these impacts raised?

As noted above, the amended economic link licence conditions introduced in January 2023 were phased in for mackerel and herring to allow industry time to adjust. The phased targets were set at 30% in 2023, 40% in 2024, and 55% in 2025, with the full requirement applying from 2025 onwards. This phasing-in period was primarily to allow for a period of adjustment for Scottish pelagic processing facilities, given concerns about processing capacity. Although the required landing percentage for mackerel and herring increases to 70% in 2026 (for each stock), the absolute volume available to be landed will fall sharply due to the agreed 2026 quota reductions, meaning total throughput at Scottish processing factories is still expected to decline significantly compared to 2023–2025.

To provide flexibility, the policy retains the option of quota gifting as an alternative compliance route. This means that vessels which wish to continue landing abroad—whether for logistical reasons or to access higher market prices—can choose to transfer quota equivalent to 26% of the value of any shortfall in meeting the Scottish landings target. This mechanism ensures that vessels maintain compliance while preserving some operational choice, and it helps deliver economic benefit to Scotland through redistribution of quota to other parts of the fleet.

Is a Full Island Communities Impact Assessment required?

Are there mitigations in place for the impacts identified and noted above from stakeholders and community consultations? (If further ICIA action is not required, complete the section below and publish).

Yes. The economic link licence condition already contains an alternative compliance route (“quota gifting”), allowing vessels to comply without meeting the landings threshold by returning quota equivalent to 26% of the value of any shortfall. This provides operational flexibility for vessels that would otherwise face reduced flexibility or price impacts from landing requirements. In addition, the proposed 2026 change is intended as an emergency, time-limited measure, and the policy is to be evaluated before 2027, which mitigates the risk of longer term, unintended consequences.

Does the evidence show different circumstances or different expectations or needs, or different experiences or outcomes (such as levels of satisfaction, or different rates of participation)?

Engagement with industry, particularly the consultation, clearly shows that those associated with pelagic vessels which land large quantities of species abroad oppose the proposed changes – their views are consistent whether based on island or mainland communities. This ICIA and the one produced in 2022 set out how that the policy change affects Shetland-based pelagic vessels in the same way as mainland pelagic vessels, and that impacts are expected to be broadly similar across these communities.

There is broad support from other sections of the fishing industry, the processing sector and related industries for the proposed changes.

Are these different effects likely?

This policy change will have the greatest impact on the pelagic fleet landing mackerel and herring outside of Scotland and pelagic processors. The pelagic fleet are primarily registered in the Fraserburgh, Peterhead and Shetland districts as set out above. To a large degree, pelagic vessels impacted (and their representative bodies) have highlighted potential impacts on their businesses and their concerns over wider impact. We expect the impact on the pelagic fleet which lands abroad to be similar regardless of whether they are registered in Shetland, or the north east.

The same position is true for pelagic processors (which are based in Shetland, Fraserburgh and Peterhead) we would expect additional landings to these processors and the impacts to be similar regardless of location.

Are these effects significantly different?

No, whilst Shetland will be impacted to a greater extent (in relative terms of the number of vessels which land large volumes of pelagic stocks abroad), the impact on these businesses is consistent with equivalent businesses on the mainland.

Could the effect amount to a disadvantage for an island community compared to the mainland or between island groups?

As set out above we would not expect to see a significant disadvantage for Shetland based vessels relative to those in other communities which land large quantities of pelagic stocks abroad. We would expect to see benefits to the Shetland islands processing sector and port authority.

A full Islands Community Impact Assessment is NOT required

In preparing the ICIA, I have formed an opinion that our policy, strategy or service is NOT likely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities (including other island communities). The reason for this is detailed below.

Having considered the responses to the existing evidence base, discussions with stakeholders likely to be affected by the policy change and available data, there is no evidence to suggest that the policy change will have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities. Therefore, we do not consider that a full ICIA is required in relation to the emergency economic link amendment for 2026 as the policy change is unlikely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities in Scotland.

Screening ICIA completed by (name): Malcolm MacLeod

Position: Team Leader

ICIA authorised by (we recommend DD level): Malcolm Pentland

Position: Deputy Director, Marine Economy and Communities

Signature: Malcolm Pentland

Date: 17 December 2025