Sustainable fisheries are essential but not enough to ensure well‐being for the world’s fishers

Abstract

Effective fisheries management is necessary for the long‐term sustainability of fisheries and the economic benefits that they provide, but focusing only on ecological sustainability risks disregarding ultimate goals related to well‐being that must be achieved through broader social policy. An analysis of global landings data shows that average fishing wages in 36%–67% of countries, home to 69%–95% of fishers worldwide, are likely below their nationally determined minimum living wage (which accounts for costs of food, shelter, clothing, health and education). Furthermore, even if all fisheries in every country were perfectly managed to achieve their Maximum Sustainable Yield, a common sustainability target, average incomes of fishers in up to 49 countries—70% of fishers worldwide—would still not meet minimum living wages. Access to decent work and livelihoods are fundamental human rights, including for all fisherfolk around the world, and strategies to support their well‐being must therefore integrate a much wider set of perspectives, disciplines and institutions. Key first steps for fisheries researchers are to more fully recognize and estimate fisheries benefits to households—including income from women and/or alternative employment, unreported landings, or shadow values of subsistence catch—and to help identify and learn from economic equity outcomes in rebuilt fisheries around the world.

Estimating economic losses to small‐scale fishers from shark conservation: A hedonic price analysis

“…Our findings also contribute to broader debates regarding reconciling biodiversity conservation with social justice and human rights (Newing & Perram, 2019;Shoreman-Ouimet & Kopnina, 2015); and in particular the need to ensure the costs of conservation are equitably distributed, and that conservation interventions "do no harm" (Balmford & Whitten, 2003;Bennett et al, 2019;Giron-Nava et al, 2021;Griffiths, Bull, Baker, & Milner-Gulland, 2019). In small-scale fisheries, one option for simultaneously delivering conservation and social welfare outcomes could be through compensation or payment for ecosystem service schemes, which incentivize fishers to reduce capture of the most threatened species while maintaining their material well-being (Bladon, Short, Mohammed, & Milner-Gulland, 2016;Booth, Arlidge, & Squires, 2021;Wosnick, Da Costa De Lima Wosiak, & Machado Filho, 2020).…”

Overfishing Increases the Carbon Footprint of Seafood Production From Small-Scale Fisheries

“…MSY is the theoretical level of extraction equal to the rate of added population growth over an indefinite period of timethe highest level at which it is possible to extract fish from a population while still maintaining that stock's standing biomass. By fishing a stock at MSY, the biological stability, economic value, and contribution to fishers' livelihoods (derived from that stock) are more likely to be preserved in the long-term (Giron-Nava et al, 2021). Meanwhile, fishing a stock at levels above MSY is considered "overfishing," which, if allowed to persist, will eventually diminish or crash that population (e.g., New England Cod; Pershing et al, 2015).…”

Gender Analyses on the Vulnerability Types Suffered by Poor and Older Freshwater Fisheries Community Members in Peninsular Malaysia

“…Therefore, the community may slip into poverty. Moreover, women in fisheries community received income far below the poverty level (Giron-Nava et al, 2021;Yahaya, 2001). Solaymani and Kari (2014) also noted that fishermen in Malaysian fisheries communities, as in other developing countries, often just barely miss the poverty line.…”