ELM control may be essential to develop ITER scenarios with a reasonable lifetime of divertor components, whilst ELM pacing may be essential to develop stationary ITER scenarios with a tungsten divertor. Resonant magnetic perturbations (RMPs) have mitigated ELMs in high collisionality plasmas in JET. The efficacy of RMPs in mitigating the ELMs is found to depend on plasma shaping, with the change in magnetic boundary achieved when non-axisymmetric fields are applied facilitating access to small ELM regimes. The understanding of ELM pacing by vertical kicks or pellets has also been improved in a range of pedestal conditions in JET (Tped = 0.7-1.3keV) encompassing the ITER-expected domain (¯N = 1.4-2.4, H98(y,2) = 0.8-1.2, fGW » 0.7). ELM triggering is reliable provided the perturbation is above a threshold which depends on pedestal parameters. ELM triggering is achieved even in the first 10% of the natural ELM cycle suggesting no inherent maximum frequency. At high normalised pressure, the peeling-ballooning modes are stabilised as predicted by ELITE, necessitating a larger perturbation from either kicks or pellets in order to trigger ELMs. Both kicks and pellets have been used to pace ELMs for tungsten flushing. This has allowed stationary plasma conditions with low gas injection in plasmas where the natural ELM frequency is such that it would normally preclude stationary conditions.