|
|
Bax, N. J., Miloslavich, P., Muller-Karger, F. E., Allain, V., Appeltans, W., Batten, S. D., et al. (2019). A Response to Scientific and Societal Needs for Marine Biological Observations. Front. Mar. Sci., 6.
Résumé: Development of global ocean observing capacity for the biological EOVs is on the cusp of a step-change. Current capacity to automate data collection and processing and to integrate the resulting data streams with complementary data, openly available as FAIR data, is certain to dramatically increase the amount and quality of information and knowledge available to scientists and decision makers into the future. There is little doubt that scientists will continue to expand their understanding of what lives in the ocean, where it lives and how it is changing. However, whether this expanding information stream will inform policy and management or be incorporated into indicators for national reporting is more uncertain. Coordinated data collection including open sharing of data will help produce the consistent evidence-based messages that are valued by managers. The GOOS Biology and Ecosystems Panel is working with other global initiatives to assist this coordination by defining and implementing Essential Ocean Variables. The biological EOVs have been defined, are being updated following community feedback, and their implementation is underway. In 2019, the coverage and precision of a global ocean observing system capable of addressing key questions for the next decade will be quantified, and its potential to support the goals of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development identified. Developing a global ocean observing system for biology and ecosystems requires parallel efforts in improving evidence-based monitoring of progress against international agreements and the open data, reporting and governance structures that would facilitate the uptake of improved information by decision makers.
|
|
|
|
Freon, P., Sueiro, J. C., Iriarte, F., Evar, O. F. M., Landa, Y., Mittaine, J. F., et al. (2014). Harvesting for food versus feed : a review of Peruvian fisheries in a global context. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 24(1), 381–398.
Résumé: Peru is the top exporter of fishmeal and fish oil (FMFO) worldwide and is responsible for half and a third of global production, respectively. Landings of “anchoveta” (Engraulis ringens) are used nearly exclusively for FMFO production, despite a proactive national food policy aimed at favoring the direct human consumption of this inexpensive species. It may be surprising that in a country where malnutrition and caloric deficit constitute major issues, a low-priced and highly nutritious fish such as anchovy does not have stronger domestic demand as a food fish. Here, we review and assess eight potential politico-socio-economic processes that can explain this situation. The main explanation are dietary habits, the preference for broiler and the higher profit from anchovy sold as feed fish compared to its use as a food fish due to historically high FMFO prices, boosted by an increasing demand for aquaculture in a context of finite forage and trash fish resources. In addition, the recent introduction of an individual quota system has shifted bargaining power from processors to fishers, thereby increasing competition for the raw material. This competition results in an increase in anchovy prices offered by the feed fish industry due to its onshore processing overcapacity, which is detrimental to the food fish industry. In the end, although the dominant use of anchovy for fish feed is largely explained by integrating these market mechanisms and other minor ones, this use raises other issues, such as rent redistribution through public policies, employment, equitability and utility (low social costs), and resource management (threats to ecosystems or global change). Different policy scenarios are proposed in relation to these issues.
|
|
|
|
Freon, P., Sueiro, J. C., Iriarte, F., Miro Evar, O. F., Landa, Y., Mittaine, J. - F., et al. (2013). Harvesting for food versus feed: a review of Peruvian fisheries in a global context. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, .
|
|
|
|
Pendleton, L. H., Ahmadia, G. N., Browman, H. I., Thurstan, R. H., Kaplan, D. M., & Bartolino, V. (2018). Debating the effectiveness of marine protected areas Introduction. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 75(3), 1156–1159.
Résumé: Increasing the size and number of marine protected areas (MPAs) is widely seen as a way to meet ambitious biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Yet, debate still exists on the effectiveness of MPAs in achieving ecological and societal objectives. Although the literature provides significant evidence of the ecological effects of MPAs within their boundaries, much remains to be learned about the ecological and social effects of MPAs on regional and seascape scales. Key to improving the effectiveness of MPAs, and ensuring that they achieve desired outcomes, will be better monitoring that includes ecological and social data collected inside and outside of MPAs. This can lead to more conclusive evidence about what is working, what is not, and why. Eight authors were asked to write about their experiences with MPA effectiveness. The authors were instructed to clearly define “effectiveness” and discuss the degree to which they felt MPAs had achieved or failed to be effective. Essays were exchanged among authors and each was invited to write a shorter “counterpoint.” The exercise shows that, while experiences are diverse, many authors found common ground regarding the role of MPAs in achieving conservation targets. This exchange of perspectives is intended to promote reflection, analysis, and dialogue as a means for improving MPA design, assessment, and integration with other conservation tools.
|
|
|
|
Seddon, N., Mace, G. M., Naeem, S., Tobias, J. A., Pigot, A. L., Cavanagh, R., et al. (2016). Biodiversity in the Anthropocene: prospects and policy. Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci., 283(1844), 20162094.
Résumé: Meeting the ever-increasing needs of the Earth's human population without excessively reducing biological diversity is one of the greatest challenges facing humanity, suggesting that newapproaches to biodiversity conservation are required. One idea rapidly gaining momentum-as well as opposition-is to incorporate the values of biodiversity into decision-making using economic methods. Here, we develop several lines of argument for how biodiversity might be valued, building on recent developments in natural science, economics and science-policy processes. Then we provide a synoptic guide to the papers in this special feature, summarizing recent research advances relevant to biodiversity valuation and management. Current evidence suggests that more biodiverse systems have greater stability and resilience, and that by maximizing key components of biodiversity we maximize an ecosystem's long-term value. Moreover, many services and values arising from biodiversity are interdependent, and often poorly captured by standard economic models. We conclude that economic valuation approaches to biodiversity conservation should (i) account for interdependency and (ii) complement rather than replace traditional approaches. To identify possible solutions, we present a framework for understanding the foundational role of hard-to-quantify ` biodiversity services' in sustaining the value of ecosystems to humanity, and then use this framework to highlight new directions for pure and applied research. In most cases, clarifying the links between biodiversity and ecosystem services, and developing effective policy and practice for managing biodiversity, will require a genuinely interdisciplinary approach.
|
|
