Search

Formally incorporating established and mathematically operationalizable rules of fair allocation into biodiversity decision-making could provide a means to operationalize equity and reduce conflict when deciding who should bear the costs of biodiversity conservation. Rules of fair allocation can be applied at multiple scales – from establishing protected areas to calculating proportional positive contributions of countries and multi-national corporations to the goals of the Global Biodiversity Framework – to facilitate multi-party negotiations and deliver fair and just outcomes for biodiversity and people. If more widely applied, rules of fair allocation could help humanity to remain within a safe and just operating space, where basic human needs are met without exceeding an ecological ceiling, thus supporting achievement of multiple societal goals. Biodiversity is declining at alarming rates, with some negative impacts caused by activities that are necessary for meeting basic human needs and others which should be avoided to prevent ecological collapse. Avoidance of biodiversity impacts is costly; these costs must be distributed fairly. Principles of fair allocation – which are grounded in longstanding theories of justice and are mathematically operationalizable – are rarely used in biodiversity decision-making but can help to deliver procedural and distributive justice alongside biodiversity outcomes. We show how incorporating rules of fair allocation into biodiversity decision-making could advance policy formulation towards a safe and just future. Such rules provide a means to operationalize equity and create space for cooperatively and constructively negotiating avoidance liabilities within biodiversity impact mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sharks are highly threatened by overfishing, but hold important subsistence, economic and cultural values for many communities globally, highlighting the need for sustainable and equitable fisheries management. A robust understanding of market structure and dynamics of shark trade, and how they may be driving their fishing and consumption, is needed to develop effective policies for sustainability. Our study described the actor types, supply chain and market dynamics of shark fishing in two sites (Goa and Kakinada) in India to identify leverage points for interventions. Shark meat, rather than fins, was found to be the main traded product at both sites. Shark harvest appeared to be driven predominantly by supply-side factors, although we also identified the importance of demand-side factors (like rising consumption) in influencing shark trade. In Goa, small-scale fishers emerged as the supply chain actors with whom interventions might have most leverage, as they seasonally targeted juvenile sharks, and were found to have relatively high access and negotiation power in the market. In Kakinada, wholesalers appeared to monopolise trade in shark products, particularly fins, and may be a pivotal leverage group. We describe the main uncertainties in our evidence, such as consumption patterns and motivations related to different shark products, to be addressed by future research. We outline a set of potential interventions and policies, from enhancing fisher access to increasing supply chain traceability, to improve the sustainability and socio-economic outcomes of shark trade. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The blue shark (Prionace glauca) is commonly caught by recreational anglers around the United Kingdom (UK) – part of a population (North Atlantic) which has sustained declines of > 50% over the last three generations (36 years). Therefore, mitigating any detrimental impacts recreational fisheries might have on this species is crucial. This requires understanding anglers' perceptions and behaviours, to co-design appropriate management measures. Here, we explore the socio-cultural relationship between anglers and blue sharks in the UK through structured surveys. A total of seven business operators and 44 recreational anglers responded throughout Aug-Nov 2021. Respondents primarily comprised of over-fifty, educated and wealthy male anglers. A positive relationship was identified: 100% of anglers have respect for sharks; 80% (n = 42) would like their fishing to inform research. We also found that socio-demographic variables correlate with certain perceptions, e.g., education level and political leanings were associated with the level of agreement to the statement "sharks are there for my enjoyment to catch" and "I want to catch the biggest shark possible", respectively. Operators follow best fishing practices to minimise stress to sharks and 100% of operators wanted to contribute to research. Currently 43% (n = 3) submit catch data and one operator tags sharks. This willingness to contribute to research could improve our understanding of blue shark population structure, habitat use, and post-release mortality rates associated with recreational angling. This will not only help sustain shark stocks but also engage anglers in understanding the threats to sharks and benefit recreational fisheries that rely on stable shark populations. • Historical fears of sharks do not exist amongst anglers. • Instead, a positive relationship between anglers and sharks exists around the UK. • Few fishing operators around the UK partake in shark research. • However, anglers are keen to do more for shark conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fisheries bycatch is the foremost threat to the conservation of many marine species. Evaluation of alternative bycatch management strategies can account for the relative strength of evidence, contribution to achieving objectives, costs to commercial viability, likelihood of compliance and tradeoffs from multispecies conflicts. This study describes benefits and limitations of a complementary approach of applying a sequential mitigation hierarchy to develop evidence-informed bycatch policy. Measures that avoid bycatch are considered before those that minimize catch risk. These are then followed by remediation interventions that reduce fishing mortality and sublethal impacts. Finally, direct, compensatory banking or in lieu fee-based offsets of residual impacts that were not possible to avoid, minimize and remediate can be implemented as a last resort. However, offset activities can be socioeconomically unjust, and some bycatch impacts are irreversible and cannot be offset. Air-breathing bycatch are exposed to a wide range of anthropogenic hazards across ontogenetic stages, presenting more options for offset conservation activities than fishes. Averted loss offsets, which avoid foregone losses predicted to occur had an intervention not occurred, implemented in combination with true offsets can achieve at least an equivalent gain and contribute to meeting broad, population- and species-level conservation objectives. Robust metrics are needed to determine equivalency, such as in relative reproductive value and population viability, between residual impacts and in-kind versus out-of-kind and on-site versus offsite offsets. Bycatch management strategies guided by a sequential mitigation hierarchy promise to achieve ecological and socioeconomic objectives, including going bycatch-neutral or bycatch-negative through a net biodiversity gain. • Fisheries bycatch is the leading threat to many marine species. • Evidence-informed bycatch policy should apply a sequential mitigation hierarchy. • Identifies benefits and risks of a mitigation hierarchy for bycatch management. • Direct and compensatory offsets can obtain equivalent gains for bycatch losses. • Robust metrics are needed to determine equivalency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large, long-lived marine animals ('marine megafauna') are amongst the world's most threatened taxa, primarily due to overfishing. Reducing fisheries' impacts on marine megafauna is particularly challenging in small-scale fisheries (SSFs), where endangered species can have important consumptive use values. Payments for ecosystem services (PES) have been proposed as a potential solution, but there is a lack of empirical data on if and how they might work in this context. We present a novel combination of methods – scenario interviews with contingent valuation (CV) – for exploring and designing locally-appropriate PES schemes; and apply these methods to investigate how different types of incentives might influence fisher behaviour and mortality of Critically Endangered taxa in two case study SSFs in Indonesia. Fishers almost unanimously supported positive conditional incentives: 98 % and 96 % of fishers would stop landing hammerhead sharks (Sphyrna spp.) and wedgefish (Rhynchobatus spp.), respectively, in contrast to 1 % and 6 % under a business-as-usual scenario, and 52 % and 46 % in response to a negative incentive (fine). CV results showed that an incentive-based scheme for catch mitigation of all hammerheads and wedgefish across both sites could cost US$71,408–235,927 annually, and save up to 18,500 and 2140 individuals, respectively. This study provides empirical evidence that PES could offer a cost-effective and socially-just approach for marine conservation in SSFs; and offers a scalable method for designing locally-appropriate investment-ready schemes, which could support the delivery of societal goals such as net positive outcomes for marine biodiversity and a sustainable and equitable blue economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many shark and ray species (Class Chondrichthyes, herein 'sharks') are threatened by overfishing. Tackling this requires implementation of context-specific fisheries management measures, which are both technically effective and socio-economically feasible. Here we explore the cost-effectiveness of various input-oriented management measures for mitigating capture of seven priority shark taxa (i.e., threatened and CITES-listed species) in a small-scale longline mixed-species shark fishery in Indonesia, where there is a need to balance difficult trade-offs between conservation and socio-economic objectives. We apply Boosted Regression Trees (BRT) to analyse five years of landings and profit data, to identify and assess the relative influence of different plausible management measures (e.g., effort restrictions, gear restrictions, spatio-temporal closures). We then use predictive models to inform a semi-quantitative assessment of the hypothetical cost-effectiveness of these management measures, based on the estimated conservation benefits (reduced risk of capture of priority taxa) and socio-economic cost (relative profit foregone). Our results show that fishery closures in January–March, depth limits at <100 m, hook limits at <500 hooks, and gear restrictions on bottom longlines could have the greatest relative conservation impact for lowest profit foregone. However, there are clear trade-offs between taxa, with these measures primarily benefiting Critically Endangered bottlenose wedgefish (Rhynchobatus Australiae) and scalloped hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini), while potentially increasing pressure on Vulnerable silky sharks (Carcharhinus falciformis) and Endangered mako sharks (Isurus spp.). When shark fishing is important for economic welfare, and entire fishery closures or buy-outs are unfeasible, managing small-scale shark fisheries for multiple outcomes may require hard choices. This may require prioritising slow-growing Critically Endangered taxa for protection – by restricting fishing during seasons and at depths in which they are most susceptible to capture – while faster-growing taxa can continue to provide benefits for coastal communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sharks and their cartilaginous relatives (Class Chondrichthyes, herein 'sharks') are one of the world's most threatened species groups. Their slow life history traits and vulnerability to capture make them particularly susceptible to overfishing, and they are widely caught in both target and by-catch fisheries. Fisheries management measures that can effectively reduce shark fishing mortality are urgently required to halt population declines and species extinctions. We provide an overview of typical measures for understanding and managing risks to sharks, and highlight critical gaps relating to incorporating socio-economic factors in to research and management. We argue that neglecting these factors hinders effective shark conservation, and has negative consequences for people. We emphasise the importance of a holistic approach, which explicitly considers socio-economic factors in decision-making. Based on this, we propose the first framework for assessing feasibility in a shark management context, which could be integrated with traditional fisheries risk assessments in order to bridge this gap. This framework considers key dimensions of the costs, benefits and overall enabling environment for shark management in a given fishery. Overall, managers and policy makers must consider socio-economic factors in shark conservation efforts to deliver better outcomes for sharks and people. Our simple feasibility framework can support this by enabling costs, benefits and context to be explicitly considered in planning and policy-making, alongside the typical biological and technical risks to sharks in fisheries. • An overview of typical measures for managing risks to sharks is given. • Gaps relating to socio-economic aspects of management are highlighted. • Socio-economic complexities of managing shark fisheries are described. • Priorities for including socio-economic factors in decision-making are discussed. • A framework to assess feasibility in shark management planning is proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]