Search

Abstract Although the Paris Agreement establishes targets to limit global warming—including carbon market mechanisms—little research has been done on developing operational tools to achieve them. To cover this gap, we use CO2 permit markets towards a market-based solutions (MBS) scheme to implement blue carbon climate targets for global fisheries. The scheme creates a scarcity value for the right to not sequester blue carbon, generating an asset of carbon sequestration allowances based on historical landings, which are considered initial allowances. We use the scheme to identify fishing activities that could be reduced because they are biologically negative, economically inefficient, and socially unequitable. We compute the annual willingness to sequester carbon considering the CO2e trading price for 2022 and the social cost of carbon dioxide (SC-CO2), for years 2025, 2030 and 2050. The application of the MBS scheme will result in 0.122 Gt CO2e sequestered or US$66 billion of potential benefits per year when considering 2050 SC-CO2. The latter also implies that if CO2e trading prices reach the 2050 social cost of carbon, around 75% of the landings worldwide would be more valuable as carbon than as foodstuff in the market. Our findings provide the global economy and policymakers with an alternative for the fisheries sector, which grapples with the complexity to find alternatives to reallocate invested capital. They also provide a potential solution to make climate resilience, social sustainability and equity of global fisheries real, scientific and practical for a wide range of social-ecological and political contexts.

Marine recreational fishing (MRF) has been shown to substantially contribute to fishing mortality of marine fish. However, European MRF catches are only quantified for a small number of stocks, so it is unclear whether a significant part of fishing mortality is excluded from stock assessments. This study estimated: (i) European MRF removals, which were defined as landings plus dead releases; and (ii) impact at stock level by comparing the percentage contribution to total removal by MRF and commercial fishing. As MRF data were limited for some European countries, catches were reconstructed using a mixture of average release proportions, average fish weights, and extrapolation using the catch per fisher of the nearest country providing catch estimates. Where catch reconstructions exceeded 50%, data were excluded from further analysis. Furthermore, as MRF survey methodology can be variable, semi-quantitative estimates of bias and error were calculated for each stock. Only 10 of the 20 stocks assessed in this study had sufficient MRF data for full reliable estimates. Percentage contribution to total removals (MRF + commercial removals) by MRF ranged between 2% for Atlantic mackerel in the North Sea and Skagerrak and 43% for Atlantic pollack in the Celtic Seas and English Channel. The biomass removed ranged between 297 (± 116) tonnes (Atlantic cod in the western English Channel and southern Celtic seas) and 4820 (± 1889) tonnes (Atlantic mackerel in the North Sea and Skagerrak), but the errors were substantial. Additionally, the bias in the estimated removals was low for most stocks, with some positive biases found. The present study indicates that removals by MRF can represent a high proportion of the total removals for some European marine fish stocks, so inclusion in stock assessments should be routine. To achieve this, regular surveys of MRF are required to collect data essential for stock assessments.

The European Union Common Fisheries Policy has established a discard ban, which states that fish below a reference size cannot be sold directly for human consumption. In a fishing effort-regulated fishery, the discard ban can result in extra handling, storing and landing costs. In an output-regulated fishery, this policy might also limit the effort levels as all the catches count against the quota. In both cases, this regulation can reduce the economic performance of the companies, even in single-species fisheries. A possible solution is to increase the mesh size, thus retaining fewer small individuals. To study this option, a bioeconomic simulation of a change in the gear selectivity from 100- to 120-mm minimum mesh size (MMS) was performed. The results show that the private perspective (profits) does not change. Furthermore, due to the lower retention of 120 mm MMS, the efficiency of a fishing day was reduced by 5% and 2.5%, from the point of view of capital and labour productivity, respectively. In contrast, gross revenues increased by 1.5% and crew compensation by 2%. Given a societal benefit of this change in the mesh size, this gain could be re-distributed to provide an incentive for selectivity improvements.

Fishery systems are complex systems that need to be managed in order to ensure a sustainable and efficient exploitation of marine resources. Traditionally, fisheries management has relied on biological models. However, in recent years the focus on mathematical models which incorporate economic and social aspects has increased.Here, we present FLBEIA, a flexible software to conduct bio-economic evaluation of fisheries management strategies. The model is multi-stock, multi-fleet, stochastic and seasonal. The fishery system is described as a sum of processes, which are internally assembled in a predetermined way. There are several functions available to describe the dynamic of each process and new functions can be added to satisfy specific requirements. Keywords: Bio-economic model, Fleet dynamics, Fisheries management, Impact assessment, Management strategy evaluation