The Planning Group on Economic Issues met in Salerno, from 16th to 19th April 2012. The terms of reference for the meeting are given in section 2.1. 27 experts from 16 Member States attended the meeting. PGECON is an operative meeting with a general aim to compare different approaches and to share different experiences. Participation is open to national experts involved in the implementation of the economic modules of the DCF. Attendance to the PGECON is expected to give useful inputs in improving the national sampling schemes. The main conclusions and recommendations from the meeting are given in the section n.12. The meeting dealt with a broad range of issues considered relevant for the improvement of the collection of economic data and for the evolution of the DCF. A key topic for the meeting was the discussion on the revision of the data collection framework. This discussion considered both the general principles of the new Data Collection Multiannual Program (DCMAP) as well as the technical and operative issues of the new framework. PGECON discussed that for the economic modules of the DCF, a certain degree of flexibility would be advisable. This will allow to adjust the data requirements in terms of level of aggregation and to include additional variables if a specific scientific or political need emerges or to exclude variables when they turn out not to be needed. However, this flexibility should not exclude the necessity to also have stability in terms of the core of the economic data requirements. PGECON also addressed the issue of the level of aggregation of economic data. The present DCF requires the collection of economic data by fleet segment, by year and by supra-region. However, there seems to be several scientific fields where the availability of economic data at higher temporal, regional or activity-related level could be necessary. It was concluded that DCF fleet economic data should not be collected at less aggregated levels as it is not feasible to collect data at a level of resolution that fulfils all potential requirements. Rather these data should be disaggregated on the basis of other information (transversal variables) which is available at the required resolution. PGECON compared the methodologies used by the Member States attending the meeting in calculating the ecosystem indicator on “fuel efficiency of fish capture” and the variable “direct subsidies”. The aim of this comparative exercise was to attempt the definition of a standard methodology to calculate the ecosystem indicator and the direct subsidies. The Workshop on calculating capital value using PIM and definition of DCF variables, (13th - 17th June 2011) clarified some fundamental concepts related to the PIM methodology for the estimation of capital value and capital cost and illustrated some practical implementation of the approach. As a follow up of this workshop, PGECON carried out a comparison of the average prices per capacity unit and corresponding assumptions applied by the Member States attending the meeting. Another important topic for the meeting was the exercise aimed at comparing the quality indicators achieved by MS, in order to share experiences and to improve the surveys implemented at national level.