Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report presents the findings of the STECF Expert Working Group 23-15: Implementation of the Technical Measures Regulation, from the meeting held from 22nd to 26th January 2024 at JRC Ispra. EWG 23-15 have documented that the foundational building blocks of a bio-economic impact assessment of technical measures are present in the EU. However, it will take 2 – 5 years to fully operationalise the process of providing robust and transparent advice for these needs. ToR 1 (Section 3) underscored the significant interest and depth of research within the realm of integrated ecological and economic fisheries models, notably in bio-economic modelling. These models represent valuable tools for evaluating the impacts of technical measures. Despite the availability of tools and data, albeit to varying extents across different sea regions, there lacks a dedicated framework to meet this specific advisory requirement. Consequently, the primary obstacle to operationalizing such advisory products lies in the scarcity of time and qualified personnel for conducting data analysis, stock assessment, and bio-economic modelling. Furthermore, there is a shortage of experts proficient in multidisciplinary approaches, particularly in participatory management, which hinders effective communication among diverse stakeholders. EWG 23-15 have identified possible candidate models (ToR 3, Section 5), data sources (ToR 2, Section 4) and frameworks, which could support such a process (ToR 3, Section 5). However, this resource (data, time and expertise) hungry process would benefit from long-term investment in research and a dedicated Expert Working Group, as well as transitional support for fisheries to improve engagement and likelihood of success. EWG 23-15 notes that the success of this process will be defined by the inclusion of human dimension to ensure the model captures realistic fleet behaviour, relevant to advice needs, and captures the drivers of patterns and their resulting impacts on the ecological, economic and social dimension of the system (ToR 4, Section 6). Finally, EWG 23-15 highlights that to successfully assess transitional needs future work should not only focus on modelling but also on the human dimension which will require training programs, technical support for fisheries transition, and effective change management strategies in fisheries governance.