This is the question that matters most to many of us, and it deserves a considered answer. But the short answer is no, we would not lose control of our fishing grounds.
The longer answer is fairly complex, but it breaks down into three parts: allocation of fishing quotas, how we manage them, and ownership of fishing companies.
Let's start at the beginning: the purpose of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy is to protect fish stocks and ensure sustainable fishing, so that one country can't overfish a stock that another country also depends on.
This is done by seeking scientific advice on sustainable catch levels, setting total allowable catches (quotas) for each stock on that basis, and then allocating those quotas among member states. That allocation is based on a fixed share determined at accession by historical fishing patterns ("relative stability").
Scientific advice and quota setting
If we joined the EU, our share (percentage) of commercially fished stocks in the North Atlantic would be negotiated and locked in. That share is enshrined under the principle of relative stability, which has been in place unchanged since 1983. For localised stocks, the share would be virtually uncontestable. Our long and consistent fishing history would work strongly in our favour.
Formally, the authority to set total allowable catches would move to the EU Council of Ministers, based on advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). But for stocks that remain almost entirely within Icelandic jurisdiction — such as cod, haddock, and redfish — Icelandic scientists would be the leading experts within ICES, and the Marine and Freshwater Research Institute's advice would in practice carry the most weight. That said, the final word on each year's total quotas would admittedly no longer rest entirely in our hands, under current rules.
It is also important to distinguish between two categories of stocks. No EU member state has a historical catch record in localised stocks in Icelandic waters that comes close to ours, so Iceland's share would be essentially undisputed. The picture is different for shared pelagic stocks — mackerel, blue whiting, and Atlanto-Scandian herring — that migrate across multiple countries' zones. There, negotiation and political compromise would matter a great deal. Inside the EU, we'd have a seat at the table when the bloc forms its negotiating position vis-à-vis other countries (such as Norway and the UK), rather than facing the EU as an external party.
The Common Fisheries Policy contains a principle of equal access for EU vessels to member states' waters beyond 12 nautical miles. In practice, however, this matters little when no other EU member state holds quota in the fish stocks of the area in question — and that applies to most demersal stocks in Icelandic waters. (See also Would foreign trawlers get to fish in our waters?)
How we manage our own quotas
Once each year's total allowable catches have been set on the basis of scientific advice, each EU member state has full authority over how it allocates and manages its own fishing quotas.
Our individual transferable quota (ITQ) system, which allows fishing rights to be bought and sold, does not conflict with the Common Fisheries Policy and should in principle be able to continue. Several EU member states in fact use similar market-based systems. We would therefore retain full control over how our quotas are distributed among vessels and fishing companies.
Ownership of fishing companies
Iceland has laws prohibiting foreign ownership in the fishing industry, under an exemption secured when the EEA Agreement was originally negotiated. That exemption would need to be maintained if we joined the EU. Permanent exemptions from the internal market are admittedly politically difficult in accession negotiations and require strong justification — but the unique role of fisheries in Iceland's economy strengthens the country's bargaining position on this point.
Under the current quota system, Icelandic fishing companies hold quota shares that they effectively treat as their own property, even though "marine stocks in Icelandic waters are the common property of the Icelandic nation" according to law. Foreign ownership of these companies would mean indirect foreign control over the right to exploit the resource.
Today, fishing companies pay resource fees to the state for access to marine stocks. If the government were to move to auctioning fishing rights on the open market in the future, the public would receive the full return on its marine resources regardless of the nationality of company shareholders.
A possible special arrangement?
In accession negotiations, we would seek to have Icelandic waters designated as a special fisheries management zone for localised stocks, where Iceland would have sole authority over quota allocation. It cannot be ruled out in advance that such an arrangement could be reached.
In short: We wouldn't "lose" our fishing grounds. We'd continue to catch a similar share of fish stocks in Icelandic waters as we always have. Total quotas for localised stocks would largely be set on the basis of advice from the Marine and Freshwater Research Institute and ICES. For shared pelagic stocks, Iceland would participate in the EU's internal negotiations on quota allocation. A key objective in accession talks would be to retain the EEA exemption on foreign ownership of fishing companies.
Sources and further reading:
- EU Regulation 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. The core EU rules on fish stock conservation, quota allocation, and the relative stability principle.
- Act on Fisheries Management No. 116/2006 (the legal basis for Iceland's individual transferable quota system).
- Marine and Freshwater Research Institute, State of Marine Stocks and Catch Advice (annual publication on the status of Icelandic fish stocks and catch advice).
- ICES — International Council for the Exploration of the Sea: the scientific body providing catch advice for the North Atlantic, including Icelandic waters.
- EEA Agreement, Annex XII (free movement of capital). Contains the Icelandic exemption on foreign investment in the fishing industry under Act No. 34/1991.
- Institute of International Affairs, University of Iceland: Review of Iceland's EU Accession Negotiations (2014). Detailed analysis of the fisheries chapter, straddling stocks, and how Iceland's system interfaces with EU regulations.
- European Commission: Northern Agreements — overview of multilateral Coastal States agreements on shared pelagic stocks (mackerel, blue whiting, Atlanto-Scandian herring) between the EU, Iceland, Norway, the UK, and the Faroe Islands.
- European Parliament: Rights-Based Fisheries Management in Iceland (2012). Study by the Committee on Fisheries examining Iceland's ITQ system and its compatibility with the Common Fisheries Policy.