The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness.

The recent context of global food emergency and ecological crisis has increased the relevance of people's struggle for food sovereignty (FSv), which promotes the transformation of the dominant food system and claims 'the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems'. Revisiting two Spanish and Catalan articles developing FSv indicators, this article aims at discussing the need and utility of developing FSv indicators at different territorial levels. Confronting these two territorial scales, the paper also identifies common steps that can facilitate other future processes of building FSv indicators. As a conclusion, the paper suggests that these processes of building indicators can contribute to providing political direction at different geographical scales for the implementation of the FSv proposal. At the same time, they favor the movement's self-reflexivity in its practices while supporting the collective shaping of future actions.

No abstract

Is there a limit to the amount of fish that can be taken from the sea? This question echoes the concern of the broader environmental movement in asking: are there ‘limits to growth’? If the answer is ‘yes’, then what must be done to remain within sustainable limits? Fifty years after the publication of the landmark report Limits to Growth, new theories about limits highlight the importance of collective self-limitation, also in the context of fisheries management, in place of external, top-down determination and imposition of limits. This paper considers the shift in fisheries governance from regulating and establishing Maximum Sustainable Yields to collectively co-managing territories and ecosystems as symptomatic of a general turn from externally-imposed to self-imposed limitations. We show how perceptions and practices of limits are changing based on an ethnographic study of six small-scale fisheries co-management plans located off the Catalan coast in the Northwestern Mediterranean. The study evidences the challenges fishers face in attempting to define the limits of their agency to manage external forces that are often beyond their control. It concludes by arguing for the adoption of an ethos of collective self-limitation in fisheries governance to protect and benefit local communities and their environments.