AMBIO

, Volume 42, Issue 8, pp 910–922

Exploring Patterns of Seafood Provision Revealed in the Global Ocean Health Index

  • Kristin M. Kleisner
  • Catherine Longo
  • Marta Coll
  • Ben S. Halpern
  • Darren Hardy
  • Steven K. Katona
  • Frédéric Le Manach
  • Daniel Pauly
  • Andrew A. Rosenberg
  • Jameal F. Samhouri
  • Courtney Scarborough
  • U. Rashid Sumaila
  • Reg Watson
  • Dirk Zeller
Article

Abstract

Sustainable provision of seafood from wild-capture fisheries and mariculture is a fundamental component of healthy marine ecosystems and a major component of the Ocean Health Index. Here we critically review the food provision model of the Ocean Health Index, and explore the implications of knowledge gaps, scale of analysis, choice of reference points, measures of sustainability, and quality of input data. Global patterns for fisheries are positively related to human development and latitude, whereas patterns for mariculture are most closely associated with economic importance of seafood. Sensitivity analyses show that scores are robust to several model assumptions, but highly sensitive to choice of reference points and, for fisheries, extent of time series available to estimate landings. We show how results for sustainable seafood may be interpreted and used, and we evaluate which modifications show the greatest potential for improvements.

Keywords

Indicator Status Assessment Fisheries Mariculture Aquaculture Seafood FAO 

Supplementary material

13280_2013_447_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (27.3 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 27978 kb)

References

  1. Bostock, J., B. McAndrew, R. Richards, K. Jauncey, T. Telfer, K. Lorenzen, D. Little, L. Ross, et al. 2010. Aquaculture: Global status and trends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 365: 2897–2912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Branch, T.A., D.J. Hively, and R. Hilborn. 2013. Is the ocean food provision index biased? Nature 495: E5–E6.Google Scholar
  3. Byron, C., J. Link, B. Costa-Pierce, and D. Bengtson. 2011. Calculating ecological carrying capacity of shellfish aquaculture using mass-balance modeling: Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island. Ecological Modelling 222: 1743–1755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charles, A.T., R.F. Agbayani, E.C. Agbayani, M. Agüero, E.T. Belleza, E. González, B. Stomal, and J.-Y. Weigel. 1997. Aquaculture economics in developing countries: Regional assessments and an annotated bibliography. FAO Fisheries Circular No 932, Rome, Italy, FAO, 401 pp.Google Scholar
  5. CIESIN. 2012. National aggregates of geospatial data collection: Population, landscape, and climate estimates, Version 3 (PLACE III). NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), Palisades, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. Coll, M., S. Libralato, S. Tudela, I. Palomera, and F. Pranovi. 2008. Ecosystem overfishing in the ocean. PLoS ONE 3: e3881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Costello, C., D. Ovando, R. Hilborn, S.D. Gaines, O. Deschenes, and S.E. Lester. 2012. Status and solutions for the world’s unassessed fisheries. Science 338: 517–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dyck, A.J., and R. Sumaila. 2010. Economic impact of ocean fish populations in the global fishery. Journal of Bioeconomics 12: 227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edwards, P. 1997. Sustainable food production through aquaculture. Aquaculture Asia 2: 4–7.Google Scholar
  10. FAO. 2012. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 197 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Halpern, B.S., S. Walbridge, K.A. Selkoe, C.V. Kappel, F. Micheli, C. D’Agrosa, J.F. Bruno, K.S. Casey, et al. 2008. A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319: 948–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Halpern, B.S., C. Longo, D. Hardy, K.L. McLeod, J.F. Samhouri, S.K. Katona, K. Kleisner, S.E. Lester, et al. 2012. An index to assess the health and benefits of the global ocean. Nature 488: 615–620.Google Scholar
  13. Kleisner, K., D. Zeller, R. Froese, and D. Pauly. 2013. Using global catch data for inferences on the world’s marine fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 14: 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Link, J.S., S. Gaichas, T.J. Miller, T. Essington, A. Bundy, J. Boldt, K.F. Drinkwater, and E. Moksness. 2012. Synthesizing lessons learned from comparing fisheries production in 13 northern hemisphere ecosystems: Emergent fundamental features. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 459: 293–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Martell, S., and R. Froese. 2012. A simple method for estimating MSY from catch and resilience. Fish and Fisheries. doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2012.00485.x.
  16. Mora, C., R.A. Myers, M. Coll, S. Libralato, T.J. Pitcher, R.U. Sumaila, D. Zeller, R. Watson, et al. 2009. Management effectiveness of the world’s marine fisheries. PLoS Biology 7: e1000131.Google Scholar
  17. Pauly, D., D. Belhabib, R. Blomeyer, W.W.L. Cheung, A.M. Cisneros-Montemayor, D. Copeland, S. Harper, V.W.Y. Lam, et al. 2013a. China’s distant-water fisheries in the 21st century. Fish and Fisheries. doi:10.1111/faf.12032.
  18. Pauly, D., R. Hilborn, and T.A. Branch. 2013b. Does catch reflect abundance? Nature 494: 303–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Samhouri, J.F., S.E. Lester, E.R. Selig, B.S. Halpern, M.J. Fogarty, C. Longo, and K.L. McLeod. 2012. Sea sick? Setting targets to assess ocean health and ecosystem services. Ecosphere 3: 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Smith, M.D., C.A. Roheim, L.B. Crowder, B.S. Halpern, M. Turnipseed, J.L. Anderson, F. Asche, L. Bourillon, et al. 2010. Sustainability and global seafood. Science 327: 784–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sumaila, U., W. Cheung, A. Dyck, K. Gueye, L. Huang, V. Lam, D. Pauly, T. Srinivasan, et al. 2012. Benefits of rebuilding global marine fisheries outweigh costs. PLoS ONE 7: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thorson, J.T., T.A. Branch, and O.P. Jensen. 2012. Using model-based inference to evaluate global fisheries status from landings, location, and life history data. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 69: 645–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Trujillo, P. 2008. Using a mariculture sustainability index to rank countries’ performances. In A comparative assessment of biodiversity, fisheries, and aquaculture in 53 countries’ Exclusive Economic Zones Fisheries Centre Research Reports 16(7), ed. J. Alder, and D. Pauly. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  24. UNDP. 2011. Human Development Report 2011, sustainability and equity: A better future for all, 178 pp. New York: Palgrave MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  25. Villasante, S., D. Rodríguez, M. Antelo, M. Quaas, and H. Österblom. 2012. The Global Seafood Market Performance Index: A theoretical proposal and potential empirical applications. Marine Policy 36: 142–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Watson, R., A. Kitchingman, A. Gelchu, and D. Pauly. 2004. Mapping global fisheries: Sharpening our focus. Fish and Fisheries 5: 168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zeller, D., and D. Pauly (eds.). 2007. Reconstruction of marine fisheries catches for key countries and regions (1950–2005). Fisheries Centre Research Reports 15(2): 163.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristin M. Kleisner
    • 1
  • Catherine Longo
    • 2
  • Marta Coll
    • 3
  • Ben S. Halpern
    • 9
  • Darren Hardy
    • 4
  • Steven K. Katona
    • 5
  • Frédéric Le Manach
    • 1
    • 10
  • Daniel Pauly
    • 1
  • Andrew A. Rosenberg
    • 6
  • Jameal F. Samhouri
    • 7
  • Courtney Scarborough
    • 2
  • U. Rashid Sumaila
    • 1
  • Reg Watson
    • 8
  • Dirk Zeller
    • 1
  1. 1.Fisheries CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS)Santa BarbaraUSA
  3. 3.Department of Marine Renewal ResourcesInstitute of Marine ScienceBarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Digital Library Systems & ServicesStanford University LibrariesStanfordUSA
  5. 5.Conservation International, Betty and Gordon Moore Center for Science and OceansArlingtonUSA
  6. 6.Center for Science and Democracy, Union of Concerned ScientistsCambridgeUSA
  7. 7.Conservation Biology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSeattleUSA
  8. 8.IMASUniversity of TasmaniaHobartAustralia
  9. 9.Bren School of Environmental Science and ManagementUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  10. 10.Institut de Recherche pour le DéveloppementSète cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations