Where and how to prioritize fishery reform?

Author(s): Österblom, H., Jouffray, J-B., Spijkers, J.
In: PNAS 2016 : 1605723113v1-201605723
Year: 2016
Type: Journal / article
Theme affiliation: Marine
Full reference: Österblom, H., Jouffray, J-B., Spijkers, J. 2016. Where and how to prioritize fishery reform? PNAS 2016 : 1605723113v1-201605723


Fishery reform in North America and Europe has substantially improved the prospects for recovery of ecosystems affected by overfishing. Costello et al. (1) draw from lessons learnt and suggest, in their view, commonsense approaches for improved resource management, including fishing to maximize long-term catch and rights-based fishery management approaches that optimize economic values. They identify global prospects by 2050 and highlight 10 countries that constitute “the most compelling and urgent cases for fishery
reform.” This important study has value to both scientist and decision makers, but its long-term and global perspective raises several questions in relation to where
and how to prioritize future reform. We argue that the global scale has inherent dynamics
that are not captured by simply aggregating national statistics. While international agreements are emerging to advance compliance and conservation (2, 3), globalization
is also rapidly changing fisheries by concentrating production toward large and vertically integrated transnational corporations.

Stockholm Resilience Centre is a collaboration between Stockholm University and the Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Stockholm Resilience Centre
Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B
Phone: +46 8 674 70 70

Organisation number: 202100-3062
VAT No: SE202100306201