The interest in fishing‐induced life‐history evolution has been growing in the last decade, in part because of the increasing number of studies suggesting evolutionary changes in life‐history traits, and the potential ecological and economic consequences these changes may have. Among the traits that could evolve in response to fishing, growth has lately received attention. However, critical reading of the literature on growth evolution in fish reveals conceptual confusion about the nature of ‘growth’ itself as an evolving trait, and about the different ways fishing can affect growth and size‐at‐age of fish, both on ecological and on evolutionary time‐scales. It is important to separate the advantages of being big and the costs of growing to a large size, particularly when studying life‐history evolution. In this review, we explore the selection pressures on growth and the resultant evolution of growth from a mechanistic viewpoint. We define important concepts and outline the processes that must be accounted for before observed phenotypic changes can be ascribed to growth evolution. When listing traits that could be traded‐off with growth rate, we group the mechanisms into those affecting resource acquisition and those governing resource allocation. We summarize potential effects of fishing on traits related to growth and discuss methods for detecting evolution of growth. We also challenge the prevailing expectation that fishing‐induced evolution should always lead to slower growth.

Managing fisheries resources to maintain healthy ecosystems is one of the main goals of the ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF). While a number of international treaties call for the implementation of EAF, there are still gaps in the underlying methodology. One aspect that has received substantial scientific attention recently is fisheries-induced evolution (FIE). Increasing evidence indicates that intensive fishing has the potential to exert strong directional selection on life-history traits, behaviour, physiology, and morphology of exploited fish. Of particular concern is that reversing evolutionary responses to fishing can be much more difficult than reversing demographic or phenotypically plastic responses. Furthermore, like climate change, multiple agents cause FIE, with effects accumulating over time. Consequently, FIE may alter the utility derived from fish stocks, which in turn can modify the monetary value living aquatic resources provide to society. Quantifying and predicting the evolutionary effects of fishing is therefore important for both ecological and economic reasons. An important reason this is not happening is the lack of an appropriate assessment framework. We therefore describe the evolutionary impact assessment (EvoIA) as a structured approach for assessing the evolutionary consequences of fishing and evaluating the predicted evolutionary outcomes of alternative management options. EvoIA can contribute to EAF by clarifying how evolution may alter stock properties and ecological relations, support the precautionary approach to fisheries management by addressing a previously overlooked source of uncertainty and risk, and thus contribute to sustainable fisheries.