Search

Blue foods, sourced in aquatic environments, are important for the economies, livelihoods, nutritional security and cultures of people in many nations. They are often nutrient rich1, generate lower emissions and impacts on land and water than many terrestrial meats2, and contribute to the health3, wellbeing and livelihoods of many rural communities4. The Blue Food Assessment recently evaluated nutritional, environmental, economic and justice dimensions of blue foods globally. Here we integrate these findings and translate them into four policy objectives to help realize the contributions that blue foods can make to national food systems around the world: ensuring supplies of critical nutrients, providing healthy alternatives to terrestrial meat, reducing dietary environmental footprints and safeguarding blue food contributions to nutrition, just economies and livelihoods under a changing climate. To account for how context-specific environmental, socio-economic and cultural aspects affect this contribution, we assess the relevance of each policy objective for individual countries, and examine associated co-benefits and trade-offs at national and international scales. We find that in many African and South American nations, facilitating consumption of culturally relevant blue food, especially among nutritionally vulnerable population segments, could address vitamin B12 and omega-3 deficiencies. Meanwhile, in many global North nations, cardiovascular disease rates and large greenhouse gas footprints from ruminant meat intake could be lowered through moderate consumption of seafood with low environmental impact. The analytical framework we provide also identifies countries with high future risk, for whom climate adaptation of blue food systems will be particularly important. Overall the framework helps decision makers to assess the blue food policy objectives most relevant to their geographies, and to compare and contrast the benefits and trade-offs associated with pur

Climate change is causing fish stocks to shift, upending the social-ecological systems that rely on the historic distributions of these stocks and creating or exacerbating fisheries conflicts. The movements of internationally shared stocks between Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) or between EEZs and the high seas are especially concerning because they bring into play a variety of geopolitical factors and equity issues surrounding missing or conflicting regulations of jurisdictional boundary zones. Though many studies have explored the responses to and repercussions of shifting stocks on fisheries management, there is a dearth of interdisciplinary case studies that provide insight into the complexity of conflict formation in shifting transboundary fisheries, and that highlight the initial response stages where inclusion of proactive and cooperative measures can greatly improve a system's resilience to conflict. Our study helps to fill this gap by drawing on the knowledge of a diverse group of experts to analyze four case studies where transboundary stock shifts, geopolitical or governance tensions, and uncertainty regarding the future of the marine environment collide. Through synthesis of case study findings, we create a causal model of fishery conflict, within which we highlight factors that may heighten or mitigate the risk of conflict over shifting resources such as complex histories of power imbalance, unequal access to resources, or a lack of consistent and transparent data collection. Cooperation and equitable decision-making processes are recognized as vital components of internationally shared stock management which can promote lasting, effective, and conflict-resilient fisheries.

Ocean activities are rapidly expanding as Blue Economy discussions gain traction, creating new potential synergies and conflicts between sectors. To better manage ocean sectors and their development, we need to understand how they interact and the respective outcomes of these interactions. To provide a first comprehensive picture of the situation, we review 3187 articles to map and analyze interactions between economically important ocean sectors and find 93 unique direct and 61 indirect interactions, often mediated via the ocean ecosystem. Analysis of interaction outcomes reveals that some sectors coexist synergistically (e.g. renewable energy, tourism), but many interactions are antagonistic, and negative effects on other sectors are often incurred via degradation of marine ecosystems. The analysis also shows that ocean ecosystems are fundamental for supporting many ocean sectors, yet 13 out of 14 ocean sectors have interactions resulting in unidirectional negative ecosystem impact. Fishing, drilling, and shipping are hubs in the network of ocean sector interactions, and are involved in many of the antagonistic interactions. Antagonistic interactions signal trade-offs between sectors. Qualitative analysis of the literature shows that these tradeoffs relate to the cumulative nature of many ecosystem impacts incurred by some sectors, and the differential power of ocean sectors to exert their rights or demands in the development of the ocean domain. There are also often time lags in how impacts manifest. The ocean governance landscape is not currently well-equipped to deal with the full range of trade-offs, and opportunities, likely to arise in the pursuit of a Blue Economy in a rapidly changing ocean context. Based on our analysis, we therefore propose a set principles that can begin to guide strategic decision-making, by identifying both tradeoffs and opportunities for sustainable and equitable development of ocean sectors.

Humanity has never benefited more from the ocean as a source of food, livelihoods, and well-being, yet on a global scale this has been accompanied by trajectories of degradation and persistent inequity. Awareness of this has spurred policymakers to develop an expanding network of ocean governance instruments, catalyzed civil society pressure on the public and private sector, and motivated engagement by the general public as consumers and constituents. Among local communities, diverse examples of stewardship have rested on the foundation of care, knowledge and agency. But does an analog for stewardship exist in the context of globally active multinational corporations? Here, we consider the seafood industry and its efforts to navigate this new reality through private governance. We examine paradigmatic events in the history of the sustainable seafood movement, from seafood boycotts in the 1970s through to the emergence of certification measures, benchmarks, and diverse voluntary environmental programs. We note four dimensions of stewardship in which efforts by actors within the seafood industry have aligned with theoretical concepts of stewardship, which we describe as (1) moving beyond compliance, (2) taking a systems perspective, (3) living with uncertainty, and (4) understanding humans as embedded elements of the biosphere. In conclusion, we identify emerging stewardship challenges for the seafood industry and suggest the urgent need to embrace a broader notion of ocean stewardship that extends beyond seafood.

Maintaining healthy, productive ecosystems in the face of pervasive and accelerating human impacts including climate change requires globally coordinated and sustained observations of marine biodiversity. Global coordination is predicated on an understanding of the scope and capacity of existing monitoring programs, and the extent to which they use standardized, interoperable practices for data management. Global coordination also requires identification of gaps in spatial and ecosystem coverage, and how these gaps correspond to management priorities and information needs. We undertook such an assessment by conducting an audit and gap analysis from global databases and structured surveys of experts. Of 371 survey respondents, 203 active, long-term (>5 years) observing programs systematically sampled marine life. These programs spanned about 7% of the ocean surface area, mostly concentrated in coastal regions of the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia. Seagrasses, mangroves, hard corals, and macroalgae were sampled in 6% of the entire global coastal zone. Two-thirds of all observing programs offered accessible data, but methods and conditions for access were highly variable. Our assessment indicates that the global observing system is largely uncoordinated which results in a failure to deliver critical information required for informed decision-making such as, status and trends, for the conservation and sustainability of marine ecosystems and provision of ecosystem services. Based on our study, we suggest four key steps that can increase the sustainability, connectivity and spatial coverage of biological Essential Ocean Variables in the global ocean: (1) sustaining existing observing programs and encouraging coordination among these; (2) continuing to strive for data strategies that follow FAIR principles (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable); (3) utilizing existing ocean observing platforms and enhancing support to expand observing along coast

The paper Blue Food policy objectives: an analysis of opportunities and trade-offs integrates the findings of an initiative to assess the multiple roles of blue foods in food systems worldwide (https://www.bluefood.earth/) and translates them into four policy objectives aimed at realizing the contributions of aquatic foods to more nutritious, just, resilient and environmentally sustainable food systems. This dataset contains the variables used to assess conditions (at the level of nations) when blue food policy objectives are likely to be relevant. The R code used for Boolean analysis is available here: https://github.com/emmywas/BFA_Policy_analysis

The exploitation status of marine fisheries stocks worldwide is of critical importance for food security, ecosystem conservation, and fishery sustainability. Applying a suite of data-limited methods to global catch data, combined through an ensemble modeling approach, we provide quantitative estimates of exploitation status for 785 fish stocks. Fifty-six percent (439 stocks) are below BMSY and of these, 261 are estimated to be below 80% of the BMSY level. While the 178 stocks above 80% of BMSY are conventionally considered "fully exploited," stocks staying at this level for many years, forego substantial yield. Our results enable managers to consider more detailed information than simply a categorization of stocks as "fully" or "over" exploited. Our approach is reproducible, allows consistent application to a broad range of stocks, and can be easily updated as new data become available. Applied on an ongoing basis, this approach can provide critical, more detailed information for resource management for more exploited fish stocks than currently available.