This document is the fourth deliverable in work package six (WP6) of the DiscardLess project, which aims to contribute to the gradual elimination of the discards in the European fisheries, in agreement with the reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) of the EU and the implementation of the landing obligation (LO). The LO states that all regulated species shall be landed. This implies developing alternative solutions at land to manage and make best use of Unavoidable Unwanted Catches (UUC). However, the CFP also states that these solutions shall avoid incentivising the targeting of fishing on these UUC. On the other hand, the handling of UUC onboard will increase onboard handling, which is already time consuming and demanding for the crew. This will increase costs. Shortage of storage capacity because of the space needed for UUC onboard may also contribute to reducing income, therefore viable solutions for UUC management are needed to minimise the impact of the LO on the industry. The suggested uses of unavoidable unwanted catches reported in deliverable D6.2. need thus to be economically attractive for the processors and for the fishers and at the same time must avoid creating incentives to the fisheries. The present deliverable 6.4 looks into some of the initiatives that have actually already taken place using the UUC as raw-material. To get an overview of the amount of UUC landed and of what would be viable options for the processing industry, and to collect data needed for the cost-benefit analyses of the options, many interviews were performed in the three countries of Denmark, France and Spain. The overall conclusion of all the interviews is that no product is currently made from a single source of UUC, but the landed UUC are integrated in the raw-material stream of the processing industries, especially fish meal and fish oil industries. Box 1: Report Highlights There is a broad range of possibilities to valorise UUC fish and fish compounds, however, not all the solutions are able to cope with the huge variability of the expected UUC landings. The LO states that only UUC above Minimum Conservation Reference Size (MCRS) can be used for human consumption. There is a need for designing new fish products that avoid incentivising the catching of undersized fish, and, at the same time, avoid affecting negatively the existing markets. A more in-depth analysis of the economic feasibility of some of the valorisation options for different UUC fractions in different scenarios (D6.2) has been performed. For the Bay of Biscay case study (BoB-CS), some fish species as mackerel, horse mackerel and blue whiting have important volumes of discards due to their low commercial value. They are thus considered as UUC for which better commercialization and consumption could be enhanced by developing new seafood products or concepts. Also, in the Bay of Biscay, there is an important amount of hake under MCRS that can’t be used in direct human consumption but can be very valuable for the production of food ingredients such as flavouring agents. Finally, the production of fishmeal and fish oil used for animal feed, mainly for aquaculture, is the most common use of fish by-products and is a straightforward option for the treatment of UUC when there is an available facility nearby. The feasibility study indicates that the proposed solutions are economically feasible within the scope of the study even at low price. The North Sea case study describes the activities taking place in the Danish port of Hanstholm, with a case study on the fishery targeted at plaice. Several interviews with relevant buyers of the UUC were conducted and their evaluation is presented. Box 2: The methods/approaches followed The expected amount of potential UUC in the different CS were quantified based on current discards data, and the most favourable valorisation options were selected based on their economic feasibility. For various solutions the economic analysis was performed through calculation of the Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR), Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Return Rate (IRR), etc. Due to the important variation of the amount of UUC foreseen, several scenarios were evaluated. Furthermore, the calculation of UUC price range was performed to reach a “non incentivising” scenario. The North Sea case study is based on personal interviews with relevant persons from the processing and final product links in the value chain. Box 3: How these results can be used and by who? The results from the economic evaluation of different valorisation option can be used by: Research centres to contrast different solutions and compare with its own Fishermen organization willing to evaluate the value of their UUC Local companies: fish processing industries, “waste” managers looking for improving their fish by products or the UUC Investor willing to start a new business Local administration bodies to develop integrated valorisation plans for discards Policy makers to promote the implementation of selected strategies In general, the economic feasibility of a technically viable solution is of great interest for any actor of the chain looking for a solution to minimize the economic impact of the LO application. Box 4: Policy Recommendations Due to economic viability of the proposed valorisation schemas for UUC can be proposed for the definition of best available techniques. Changes in the CFP regarding proper on board handling and storage of UUC can help obtain more value from these fractions.