The paradox of sustainable tuna fisheries in the Western Indian Ocean: between visions of blue economy and realities of accumulation

Abstract

For many coastal nations in the Western Indian Ocean, and notably the islands of Madagascar, Mauritius, and Seychelles, the tuna fishery is considered one of the main pillars of economic development, providing jobs and substantial revenues while ensuring food security. However, the fishery is also an illustration of the paradox behind the idea of the blue economy, where economic growth and sustainable use of resources are promoted as jointly achievable. We show that a sustainability narrative, in which the idea of fishing within ecological limits is present within government policy, public discourse, and practices, is, however, in contradiction with the realities of accumulation and growth that prevail in the fishery. When measures towards ecological preservation are to be taken, geopolitics of access to the sea and tuna enter the stage and change the position and narrative of the same actors, governments, and industrial actors that promote sustainability. We emphasize the difficult and nearly impossible path of practicing sustainability in the current model of growth-driven tuna fisheries. We argue for the need to repoliticize the practice of sustainability through the questioning of what we see in tuna fisheries: a hegemonic narrative of sustainability and implicit growth, without positive socio-ecological transformations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

(Source: Analysis by the authors)

Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    At the 2019 IOTC meeting, the Maldives objected to the calculations by the Secretariat of the IOTC on the basis that the figure was cumulative of all its fleets while only vessels of less than 24 m were subject to the management measure and these were compliant (IOTC 2019d).

References

  1. Abolhassani A (2017) Tuna fisheries and geopolitical change: coastal and fishing country tensions resurface at the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Aust J Marit Ocean Aff 10:35–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2017.1367061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Acton L, Campbell LM, Cleary J, Gray NJ, Halpin PN (2019) What is the Sargasso Sea? The problem of fixing space in a fluid ocean. Political Geogr 68:86–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2018.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Adger WN, Benjaminsen T, Brown K, Svarstad H (2001) Advancing a political ecology of global environmental discourses. Dev Change 32:681–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Andriamahefazafy M, Kull CA (2019) Materializing the blue economy in African islands: tuna fisheries and the theory of access in the Western Indian Ocean. J Political Ecol 26(1):403–424. https://doi.org/10.2458/v26i1.23040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Andriamahefazafy M, Kull CA, Campling C (2019) Connected by sea, disconnected by tuna? Challenges to regionalism in the Southwest Indian Ocean. J Indian Ocean Reg. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2018.1561240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Asara V, Otero I, Demaria F, Crobera E (2015) Socially sustainable degrowth as a social–ecological transformation: repoliticizing sustainability. Sustain Sci 10:375–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0321-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bailey I, Caprotti F (2014) The green economy: functional domains and theoretical directions of enquiry. Environ Plan A 46:1797–1813. https://doi.org/10.1068/a130102p

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bailey M, Packer H, Schiller L, Tlusty M, Swartz W (2018) The role of corporate social responsibility in creating a Seussian world of seafood sustainability. Fish Fish 19:782–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Barclay K (2010) Impacts of tuna industries on coastal communities in Pacific Island countries. Mar Pol 34:406–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2009.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Beejadhur YA, Kelleher K, Kelly T, Howells MI, Alfstad T, Farrell S, Smith J, Neumann JE, Strzepek KM, Emanuel KA, Willwerth J (2017) The ocean economy in Mauritius: making it happen, making it last. World Bank Group, Washington DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/193931508851670744/The-Ocean-economy-in-Mauritius-making-it-happen-making-it-last

  11. Bennett NJ (2018) Navigating a just and inclusive path towards sustainable oceans. Mar Pol 97:139–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bennett NJ (2019) In political seas: engaging with political ecology in the ocean and coastal environment. Coast Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2019.1540905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bigger P, Neimark BD (2017) Weaponizing nature: the geopolitical ecology of the US Navy’s biofuel program. Political Geogr 60:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Boonstra WJ, Valman M, Björkvik E (2018) A sea of many colours—how relevant is Blue growth for capture fisheries in the Global North, and vice versa? Mar Policy 87:340–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Borland ME, Bailey M (2019) A tale of two standards: a case study of the Fair Trade USA certified Maluku handline yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) fishery. Mar Policy 100:353–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Breuil C, Grima D (2014) Baseline report Madagascar. SmartFish Programme of the Indian Ocean Commission, Fisheries Management FAO component, Ebene, Mauritius

  17. Bryant R (1998) Power, knowledge and political ecology in the third world: a review. Prog Hum Geogr 22:79–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913339802200104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Büscher B (2014) Collaborative event ethnography: between structural power and empirical nuance? Glob Environ Politics 14(3):132–138. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Campbell LM (2007) Local conservation practice and global discourse: a political ecology of Sea Turtle conservation. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 97:313–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2007.00538.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Campbell LM, Godfrey GM (2010) Geo-political genetics: claiming the commons through species mapping. Geoforum 41:897–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Campling L (2012) The Tuna ‘Commodity Frontier’—business strategies and environment in the industrial Tuna fisheries of the Western Indian Ocean. J Agrar Change 12:252–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00354.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Childs J (2018) Extraction in four dimensions: time, space and the emerging geo(-)politics of deep-sea mining. Geopolitics. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2018.1465041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. COFREPECHE, MRAG, POSEIDON, NFDS (2016) Ex post and ex ante evaluation of the protocol to the fisheries partnership agreement between the EU and the Republic of Mauritius. Framework contract MARE/2011/01—Lot 3, specific contract 16. Brussels. https://nfds.info/news/evaluation-of-the-fisheries-partnership-agreement-between-the-eu-and-mauritius/

  24. Commonwealth Secretariat (2015) Aternative future visions for the Seychelles blue economy. In: Secretariat TC (ed) Background document. The Commonwealth Secretariat, London

    Google Scholar 

  25. Corson C, Campbell LM, MacDonald KI (2014) Capturing the personal in politics: ethnographies of global environmental governance. Glob Environ Politics 14:21–40. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Davis DK (2016) The arid lands. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ertör I, Ortega-Cerdà M (2017) Unpacking the objectives and assumptions underpinning European aquaculture. Environ Politics 26:893–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1306908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Escobar A (1998) Whose knowledge, whose nature? Biodiversity, conservation, and the political ecology of social movements. J Political Ecol 5:53–82. https://doi.org/10.2458/v5i1.21397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. EU (European Union) (2007) Fisheries partnership agreement between the Republic of Madagascar and the European Community. Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  30. EU (European Union) (2012) Protocol agreed between the European Union and the Republic of Madagascar setting out fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for in the fisheries partnership agreement between the two parties currently in force. Off J L 361:0012–0042. http://data.europa.eu/eli/prot/2012/826/oj

  31. EU (European Union) (2014) Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for by the fisheries partnership agreement between the Republic of Madagascar and the European Community. Off J L 277:1–3. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2015/1893/oj

  32. EU (European Union) (2017) EU sustainable fisheries partnership agreements. Leaflet. Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/publications. Accessed Dec 2018

  33. Foley P (2012) The political economy of marine stewardship council certification: processors and access in Newfoundland and Labrador’s Inshore Shrimp Industry. J Agrar Change 12:436–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00344.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Forsyth T (2003) Critical political ecology: the politics of environmental science. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gagern A, van den Bergh J (2013) A critical review of fishing agreements with tropical developing countries. Mar Policy 38:375–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.06.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gegout C (2016) Unethical power Europe? Something fishy about EU trade and development policies. Third World Q 37:2192–2210. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1176855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. GoMa (Government of Madagascar) (2015) Blue Policy letter. “Lettre de politique bleue. Pour une économie bleue, valorisant le travail des pêcheurs et aquaculteurs, durabilisant la création de ses richesses, et prenant en compte le bien être écologique des ressources halieutiques.” Policy document of the Ministry of marine resources and fisheries

  38. GoMa (Government of Madagascar) (2017) Bulletin statistque thonier 2017 de l’Unité Statistique Thoniere d’Antsiranana. Consulted at the USTA in October 2018

  39. Gómez-Baggethun E, Naredo JM (2015) In search of lost time: the rise and fall of limits to growth in international sustainability policy. Sustain Sci 10:385–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0308-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. GoMu (Government of Mauritius) (2017) Compilation of tuna data gathered at the Ministry of Ocean Economy during fieldwork in April 2017

  41. GoS (Government of Seychelles) (2016) 2016 Fisheries statistical report. Seychelles Fishing Authority (SFA). Consulted at the SFA Library in Victoria, pp 6–8

  42. Hadjimichael M (2018) A call for a Blue degrowth: unravelling the European Union’s fisheries and maritime policies. Mar Policy 94:158–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hajer M (1995) The politics of environmental discourse. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  44. Havice E (2018) Unsettled sovereignty and the Sea: mobilities and more-than-territorial configurations of state power. Ann Am Assoc Geogr 108(5):1280–1297. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2018.1446820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. IORA (2015) Declaration of the Indian Ocean Rim Association on enhancing blue economy cooperation for sustainable development in the Indian Ocean. IORA, Mauritius

    Google Scholar 

  46. IOTC (1993) Agreement for the establishment of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Available on the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission Webpage

  47. IOTC (2013) Report of the sixteenth session of the IOTC Scientific Committee. IOTC-2013-SC16-RE, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2–6 December 2013. IOTC. https://www.iotc.org/documents/report-sixteenth-session-iotc-scientific-committee

  48. IOTC (2014) Report of the seventeenth session of the IOTC Scientific Committee. IOTC-2014-SC17-RE, Seychelles, 8–12 December 2014. IOTC. https://www.iotc.org/documents/report-17th-session-iotc-scientific-committee

  49. IOTC (2015a) Resolution 15/01 on the recording of catch and effort data by fishing vessels in the iotc area of competence. iotc–cmm–15-01_en. IOTC. https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1501-recording-catch-and-effort-data-fishing-vessels-iotc-area-competence

  50. IOTC (2015b) Report of the 18th session of the IOTC Scientific Committee. IOTC-2015-SC18-R, Bali, Indonesia, 23–27 November 2015. IOTC. https://iotc.org/documents/report-18th-session-iotc-scientific-committee

  51. IOTC (2016a) Resolution 16/01 On an interim plan for rebuilding the indian ocean yellowfin tuna stock in the iotc area of competence. iotc_cmm_16-01_en. IOTC. https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1601-interim-plan-rebuilding-indian-ocean-yellowfin-tuna-stock

  52. IOTC (2016b) Resolution 16/02 on harvest control rules for skipjack tuna in the iotc area of competence. iotc_cmm_16-02_en. IOTC. https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1602-harvest-control-rules-skipjack-tuna-iotc-area-competence

  53. IOTC (2017) Report of the 20th session of the IOTC Scientific Committee. IOTC-2017-SC20-RE, Seychelles, 30 November–4 December 2017. IOTC. https://iotc.org/documents/report-20th-session-iotc-scientific-committee

  54. IOTC (2018a) Resolution 18/08. Procedures on a fish aggregating devices (FADs) management plan, including a limitation on the number of FADs, more detailed specifications of catch reporting from FAD sets, and the development of improved FAD designs to reduce the incidence of entanglement of non-target species. iotc_cmm_13-08_en. IOTC. https://iotc.org/cmm/resolution-1308-procedures-fish-aggregating-devices-fads-management-plan-including-more-detailed

  55. IOTC (2018b) EU proposal for a resolution establishing a quota allocation system for the main targeted species in the Iotc area of competence. IOTC-2018-TCAC04-PropA Rev2. Submitted by the European Union. IOTC. https://iotc.org/documents/2018-establishing-quota-allocation-system-main-targeted-species-iotc-area-competence

  56. IOTC (2018c) On the allocation of fishing opportunities for IOTC species. In: IOTC-2018-S22-PropK Rev1. Proposition submitted by: Maldives, Australia, Indonesia, Kenya, Mozambique, Pakistan, Seychelles, Sri Lanka, And Tanzania. IOTC. https://www.iotc.org/sites/default/files/documents/2018/05/IOTC-2018-S22-PropK_Rev1E_-_Allocation_of_fishing_opportunities_0.pdf

  57. IOTC (2018d) Report of the 21st session of the IOTC Scientific Committee. IOTC-2018-SC21-RE. IOTC, Seychelles, 3–7 December 2018. IOTC. https://iotc.org/documents/SC/21/Report_E

  58. IOTC (2018e) Report of the 22nd session of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. IOTC-2018-S22-R. IOTC, 21–25 May 2018, Bangkok. https://iotc.org/documents/report-22nd-session-indian-ocean-tuna-commission

  59. IOTC (2019a) IOTC compliance report for Madagascar. Report produced on: 15/04/2019. IOTC-2019-CoC16-CR14. https://www.iotc.org/fr/IOTC-2019-CoC16-CR14

  60. IOTC (2019b) IOTC compliance report for: Mauritius. Report produced on: 15/04/2019. IOTC-2019-CoC16-CQ17. https://www.iotc.org/IOTC-2019-CoC16-CQ17-MUS

  61. IOTC (2019c) IOTC compliance report for: Seychelles. Report produced on: 15/04/2019. IOTC-2019-CoC16-CQ22. https://www.iotc.org/IOTC-2019-CoC16-CQ22-SYC

  62. IOTC (2019d) Report of the 23nd session of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. IOTC-2019-S23-Rev1 FINAL, Hyderabad, 17–21 June 2019. https://iotc.org/documents/Commission/23/Report

  63. Kallis G (2017) In defense of degrowth: Opinions and minifestos. Edited by Aaron Vansintjan, Open Commons

  64. Kirby DS, Visser C, Hanich Q (2014) Assessment of eco-labelling schemes for Pacific tuna fisheries. Mar Policy 43:132–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.05.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Kull CA, Arnauld de Sartre X, Castro-Larrañaga M (2015) The political ecology of ecosystem services. Geoforum 61(May):122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Le Manach F (2014) Past, present and future of publicly-funded European Union’s Fishing Access Agreements in Developing Countries. Ph.D. dissertation. Faculty of graduate and posdoctoral studies. University of British Columbia, Vancouver

  67. Le Manach F, Chaboud C, Copeland D, Cury P, Gascuel D, Kleisner KM, Standing A, Sumaila UE, Zeller D, Pauly D (2013) European Union’s public fishing access agreements in developing countries. PLoS One 8:e79899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079899

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Leach M, Fairhead J (2000) Challenging neo-malthusian deforestation analyses in West Africa’s dynamic forest landscapes. Popul Dev Rev 26:17–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2000.00017.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Lele S, Springate-Baginski O, Lakerveld R, Deb D, Dash P (2013) Ecosystem services: origins, contributions, pitfalls, and alternatives. Conserv Soc 11(4):343–358. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.125752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Macfadyen G, Rohmer B, Caillart B, Davies T, Marangoni C, Defaux V, Wilson A, Pearce J (2015) Evaluation of Union financial measures for the implementation of the common fisheries policy and in the area of the law of the sea 2007–2013. Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Policy, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourgh. https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d5c69773-de15-11e6-ad7c-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

  71. Mansfield B (2011) ‘Modern’ industrial fisheries and the crisis of overfishing. In: Peet R, Watts M (eds) Global political ecology. Routledge, London, pp 84–99

    Google Scholar 

  72. Marsac F, Fonteneau A, Michaud P (2014) L’or bleu des Seychelles: Histoire de la pêche industrielle au thon dans l’Océan Indien. Marseille: IRD. ISBN 978-2-7099-1759-9. http://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010061670

  73. Miller TR (2013) Constructing sustainability science: emerging perspectives and research trajectories. Sustain Sci 2013:279–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-012-0180-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Miller AMM, Bush SR (2015) Authority without credibility? Competition and conflict between ecolabels in tuna fisheries. J Clean Prod 107:137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.02.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Miller AMM, Bush SR, Zwieten PAV (2014) Sub-regionalisation of fisheries governance: the case of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean tuna fisheries. Marit Stud 13:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40152-014-0017-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Neumann RP (1998) Imposing wilderness. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  77. Obura D, Smits M, Chaudhry T, McPhillips J, Beal D, Astier C (2017) Reviving the western Indian ocean economy: actions for a sustainable future. WWF International, Gland. http://ocean.panda.org/. Accessed Nov 2019

  78. Pauly D (2018) A vision for marine fisheries in a global blue economy. Mar Policy 87:371–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.11.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Peet R, Watts MJ (1993) Introduction: development theory and environment in an age of market triumphalism. Econ Geogr 68(3):227–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. PEW (2016) Netting billions: a global valuation of tuna. A report from the PEW Charitable Trust. Available at https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2016/05/netting-billions-a-global-valuation-of-tuna. Accessed Nov 2019

  81. Ponte S (2012) The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and the making of a market for ‘Sustainable Fish’. J Agrar Change 12:300–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00345.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. POSEIDON M, NFDS, COFREPECHE (2014) Review of tuna fisheries in the western Indian Ocean. Framework contract MARE/2011/01—Lot 3, specific contract 7, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/docs/body/report-tuna-fisheries-western-indian-ocean_en.pdf

  83. Rangan H, Kull CA (2009) What makes ecology ‘political’? rethinking ‘scale’ in political ecology. Prog Hum Geogr 33:28–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508090215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Robbins P (2012) Political ecology, 2nd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  85. Sayre NF (2017) The Politics of Scale: a history of rangeland science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  86. Scales IR (2011) Lost in translation: conflicting views of deforestation, land use and identity in western Madagascar. Geogr J. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2011.00432.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Schutter M, Hicks CC (2019) Networking the blue economy in Seychelles: pioneers, resistance, and the power of influence. J Political Ecol 26:425–447. https://doi.org/10.2458/v26i1.23102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Seto et al (2019) A global analysis of allocation in transboundary tuna fisheries. Ambio (Manuscript in review)

  89. Silver JJ, Gray NJ, Campbell LM, Fairbanks LW, Gruby RL (2015) Blue economy and competing discourses in international oceans governance. J Environ Dev 24:135–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496515580797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Sinan H (2018) Colonialism and imperialism still strong in one of world’s largest tuna fisheries regions. Newsroom of the Indian Ocean Observatory. https://www.theioo.com/index.php/en/diplomacy/item/527-colonialism-and-imperialism-still-strong-in-one-of-world-s-largest-tuna-fisheries-regions. Accessed Dec 2018

  91. Sinan H, Bailey M (2019) Indian Ocean Tuna Commission: a commission at crossroads still looking for its identity. Ocean Coast. Management (Manuscript in review)

  92. St. Martin K (2005) Mapping economic diversity in the First World: the case of fisheries. Environ Plan A 37(6):959–979. https://doi.org/10.1068/a36296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Steinberg P, Peters K (2015) Wet ontologies, fluid spaces: giving depth to volume through oceanic thinking. Soc Space 33:247–264. https://doi.org/10.1068/d14148p

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. UNECA (2014) Unlocking the full potential of the blue economy: are African small island developing states ready to embrace opportunities? United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, Addis Ababa. http://repository.uneca.org/handle/10855/23170

  95. Vaccaro I, Beltran O, Paquet PA (2013) Political ecology and conservation policies: some theoretical genealogies. J Political Ecol 20:255–272. https://doi.org/10.2458/v20i1.21748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. van der Elst RP, Everett BI (2015)  Offshore fisheries of the Southwest Indian Ocean: their status and the impact on vulnerable species. Oceanographic Research Institute, Special publication, 10. https://www.wiomsa.org/publications/offshore-fisheries-of-the-southwest-indian-ocean-their-status-and-the-impact-on-vulnerable-species/

  97. World Bank (2017) The potential of the blue economy: increasing long-term benefits of the sustainable use of Marine resources for small Island Developing States and Coastal Least developed countries. UNDESA, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  98. WWF (2016) Action plan for the Indian Ocean purse seine tuna Fisheries Improvement Project (FIP). WWF, UK. https://www.wwf.org.uk/what-we-do/projects/indian-ocean-tuna-fishery-improvement-project. Accessed 10 June 2019

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to all the interviewees for sharing their perspectives with us. We would also like to thank Maria Hadjimichael and Irmak Ertör for comments on the earlier drafts of the article. Thanks also to the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. We acknowledge the Institute of Geography and Sustainability of the University of Lausanne as well as the International Pole and Line Foundation for having financially supported the fieldwork.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mialy Andriamahefazafy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Handled by Maria Hadjimichael, University of Cyprus, Cyprus.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andriamahefazafy, M., Bailey, M., Sinan, H. et al. The paradox of sustainable tuna fisheries in the Western Indian Ocean: between visions of blue economy and realities of accumulation. Sustain Sci 15, 75–89 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00751-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Tuna
  • Sustainability
  • Political ecology
  • Access
  • Overfishing