Lessons from bright-spots for advancing knowledge exchange at the interface of marine science and policy.

Evidence-informed decision-making is in increasing demand given growing pressures on marine environments. A way to facilitate this is by knowledge exchange among marine scientists and decision-makers. While many barriers are reported in the literature, there are also examples whereby research has successfully informed marine decision-making (i.e., 'bright-spots'). Here, we identify and analyze 25 bright-spots from a wide range of marine fields, contexts, and locations to provide insights into how to improve knowledge exchange at the interface of marine science and policy. Through qualitative surveys we investigate what initiated the bright-spots, their goals, and approaches to knowledge exchange. We also seek to identify what outcomes/impacts have been achieved, the enablers of success, and what lessons can be learnt to guide future knowledge exchange efforts. Results show that a diversity of approaches were used for knowledge exchange, from consultative engagement to genuine knowledge co-production. We show that diverse successes at the interface of marine science and policy are achievable and include impacts on policy, people, and governance. Such successes were enabled by factors related to the actors, processes, support, context, and timing. For example, the importance of involving diverse actors and managing positive relationships is a key lesson for success. However, enabling routine success will require: 1) transforming the ways in which we train scientists to include a greater focus on interpersonal skills, 2) institutionalizing and supporting knowledge exchange activities in organizational agendas, 3) conceptualizing and implementing broader research impact metrics, and 4) transforming funding mechanisms to focus on need-based interventions, impact planning, and an acknowledgement of the required time and effort that underpin knowledge exchange activities.

Risk Assessment and Characterization in Tuna Species of the Canary Islands According to Their Metal Content.

Bioaccumulation is the process by which living organisms accumulate substances, such as pesticides, heavy metals, and other pollutants, from their environment. These substances can accumulate in the organism's tissues over time, leading to potential health risks. Bioaccumulation can occur in both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, and can have a significant impact on the health of both humans and wildlife. The objective of this study is to find out if the concentrations of metals in the tuna species of the Canary Islands are suitable for human consumption and if they pose a health risk. Fifteen samples of Acanthocybium solandri, Katsuwonus pelamis, Thunnus albacares, Thunnus obesus and Thunnus thynnus present in canaries were analyzed. Ten grams of muscle were taken from each specimen and the metals Al, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Li, Ni, Pb and Zn were determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES). The tuna species that presented more metals with a higher concentration compared to the others was T. thynnus, reaching up to 100 times more than the other studied species in Fe content with 137.8 ± 100.9 mg/Kg, which may be due to the fact that it is the largest species that reaches ages of more than fifteen years. The species Thunnus thynnus should not be suitable for commercialization according to the current legislation on the concentrations of Cd in blue fish, since 75% of the specimens studied exceeded the concentration legislated for Cd. A total of 40% of the studied specimens of this this species exceeded the legislated values for the concentration of Pb in oily fish meat, so this species must be monitored to ensure that it does not pose a risk to human health.

A sustainability scoring system to assess food initiatives in city regions.

The City Region Food Systems approach has been proposed to achieve food system resilience and nutrition security while promoting the urgent ecological transition within urban and peri-urban areas, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the great diversity of the initiatives composing City Region Food Systems in Europe poses barriers to the assessment of their integrated sustainability. Hence, the present work is developed within the EU-H2020 project Food System in European Cities (FoodE), to build a consistent sustainability scoring system that allows comparative evaluation of City Region Food System Initiatives. Adopting a Life Cycle Thinking approach, it advances on existing knowledge and past projects, taking advantage of a participatory process, with stakeholders from multidisciplinary expertise. As a result, the research designs, and tests on 100 case studies a simplified and ready-to-use scoring mechanism based on a quali-quantitative appraisal survey tool, delivering a final sustainability score on a 1-5 points scale, to get insights on the social, economic, and environmental impacts. As in line with the needs of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, the outcome represents a step forward for the sustainable development and social innovation of food communities in cities and regions, providing a practical and empirical lens for improved planning and governance.