An index to assess the health and benefits of the global ocean.

The ocean plays a critical role in supporting human well-being, from providing food, livelihoods and recreational opportunities to regulating the global climate. Sustainable management aimed at maintaining the flow of a broad range of benefits from the ocean requires a comprehensive and quantitative method to measure and monitor the health of coupled human­ocean systems. We created an index comprising ten diverse public goals for a healthy coupled human­ocean system and calculated the index for every coastal country. Globally, the overall index score was 60 out of 100 (range 36­86), with developed countries generally performing better than developing countries, but with notable exceptions. Only 5% of countries scored higher than 70, whereas 32% scored lower than 50. The index provides a powerful tool to raise public awareness, direct resource management, improve policy and prioritize scientific research.

Exploring patterns of seafood provision revealed in the global Ocean Health Index.

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.

Quantifying fish range shifts across poorly defined management boundaries.

Management regimes of marine resources that rely on spatial boundaries might be poorly adapted to climate change shifts in species distributions. This is of specific concern for the management of fish stocks that cross management jurisdictions, known as shared stocks. Transitioning to dynamic rules in spatial management has been suggested as a solution for mismatches between species distributions and the spatial boundaries. However, in many cases spatial boundaries are not clearly drawn, hampering such transitions. Here, we use black sea bass (Centropristis striata), summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) and scup (Stenotomus chrysops) as case studies to explore different approaches to designing spatial regulatory units to facilitate the adaptation of fisheries management to shifting distributions of shared stocks. First, we determine the yearly distribution of each stock within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone from 1951 to 2019 during Fall and Spring sampling seasons. Second, we explore two approaches for drawing regulatory units based on state waters and historical landings. Finally, we estimate each state's proportion of the stock's distribution and compare historical and recent values. We show that the distribution of all three stocks has changed relative to the years used to determine the current quota allocation across states, with an overall gain for central-northern states at the expense of the southernmost states. In terms of the distribution of allocation, we find that, while seasonal differences exist, the biggest differences in the proportion of the stock spatial distribution attributed to each state come from the method for designing regulatory units. Here, we show that the method used to define allocation units can have meaningful impacts on resulting adaptive policy. As climate change-driven conflicts in fishing resource allocation are expected to increase and deepen around the world, we provide a replicable approach to make an informed and transparent choice to support data-driven decision-making.

Identifying sustainability priorities among value chain actors in artisanal common octopus fisheries.

The United Nations (UN) Decade of Ocean Science highlights a need to improve the way in which scientific results effectively inform action and policies regarding the ocean. Our research contributes to achieving this goal by identifying practical actions, barriers, stakeholder contributions and resources required to increase the sustainability of activities carried out in the context of artisanal fisheries to meet UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and International Year of Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture (IYAFA) Global Action Plan (GAP) Pillar targets. We conducted a novel 'social value chain analysis' via a participatory workshop to elicit perspectives of value chain actors and fisheries stakeholders associated with two Spanish artisanal common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) fisheries (western Asturias-Marine Stewardship Council [MSC] certified, and Galicia-non-MSC certified) about their priorities regarding sustainable octopus production and commercialization. Our adapted Rapfish sustainability framework emphasised the importance of economic, environmental, ethical, institutional, social, and technological indicators to different actors across the value chain. We mapped participants' shared sustainability priorities (e.g. integrated fisheries management, knowledge-based management, product traceability) to six Rapfish indicators, seven IYAFA Pillars and twelve SDGs to reveal how our results can inform ocean policy and actions. This identified how certification incentives and other cooperative approaches can facilitate environmental, economic and social sustainability (e.g. value-added products, price premiums for producers, gender inclusive organisations); support IYAFA priority outcomes (raised awareness, strengthened science-policy interface, empowered stakeholders, partnerships); and help to achieve UN SDG targets (e.g. SDG 14.b, SDG 17.17). The results can inform actors, stakeholders and policymakers about how different actors contribute to efforts to achieve the SDGs and how to manage priorities for sustainable actions within artisanal fisheries and their value chains. We recommend inclusive and equitable participatory knowledge transfer and governance platforms as part of the UN Decade of Ocean Science and beyond where participants can create theories of change towards sustainability involving the development of multi-sectoral ocean policies framed at the level of the value chain and supported by appropriate governance structures. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11160-023-09768-5.

Oceans of plenty? Challenges, advancements, and future directions for the provision of evidence-based fisheries management advice.

Marine population modeling, which underpins the scientific advice to support fisheries interventions, is an active research field with recent advancements to address modern challenges (e.g., climate change) and enduring issues (e.g., data limitations). Based on discussions during the 'Land of Plenty' session at the 2021 World Fisheries Congress, we synthesize current challenges, recent advances, and interdisciplinary developments in biological fisheries models (i.e., data-limited, stock assessment, spatial, ecosystem, and climate), management strategy evaluation, and the scientific advice that bridges the science-policy interface. Our review demonstrates that proliferation of interdisciplinary research teams and enhanced data collection protocols have enabled increased integration of spatiotemporal, ecosystem, and socioeconomic dimensions in many fisheries models. However, not all management systems have the resources to implement model-based advice, while protocols for sharing confidential data are lacking and impeding research advances. We recommend that management and modeling frameworks continue to adopt participatory co-management approaches that emphasize wider inclusion of local knowledge and stakeholder input to fill knowledge gaps and promote information sharing. Moreover, fisheries management, by which we mean the end-to-end process of data collection, scientific analysis, and implementation of evidence-informed management actions, must integrate improved communication, engagement, and capacity building, while incorporating feedback loops at each stage. Increasing application of management strategy evaluation is viewed as a critical unifying component, which will bridge fisheries modeling disciplines, aid management decision-making, and better incorporate the array of stakeholders, thereby leading to a more proactive, pragmatic, transparent, and inclusive management framework-ensuring better informed decisions in an uncertain world. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11160-022-09726-7.

Shifting focus: The impacts of sustainable seafood certification.

Alongside government driven management initiatives to achieve sustainable fisheries management, there remains a role for market-based mechanisms to improve fisheries outcomes. Market-based mechanisms are intended to create positive economic incentives that improve the status and management of fisheries. Research to understand consumer demand for certified fish is central but needs to be mirrored by supply side understanding including why fisheries decide to gain or retain certification and the impact of certification on them and other stakeholders involved. We apply semi-structured interviews in seven different Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certified fisheries that operate in (or from) Western Australia with the aim of better understanding fisheries sector participation in certification schemes (the supply side) and the impacts and unintended benefits and costs of certification. We find that any positive economic impacts of certification were only realised in a limited number of MSC fisheries in Western Australia, which may be explained by the fact that only a small proportion of Western Australian state-managed fisheries are sold with the MSC label and ex-vessel or consumer market price premiums are therefore mostly not obtained. Positive impacts of certification in these Western Australian fisheries are more of a social and institutional nature, for example, greater social acceptability and increased efficiency in the governance process respectively. However, opinion is divided on whether the combined non-monetary and monetary benefits outweigh the costs.

Correction: Shifting focus: The impacts of sustainable seafood certification.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233237.].

DNA barcoding validates species labelling of certified seafood.

Seafood is one of the most traded food commodities in the world with demand steadily increasing [1]. There is, however, a rising concern over the vulnerability of seafood supply chains to species mislabelling and fraud [1,2]. DNA methods have been widely used to detect species mislabelling and a recent meta-analysis of 4500 seafood product tests from 51 publications found an average of 30 percent were not the species stated on the label or menu [3]. This high rate poses a serious threat to consumer trust, reputations of seafood businesses and the sustainability of fishery resources. Seafood certification schemes may help reduce this problem. Here, we use DNA barcoding [4] to validate the species identity of 1402 certified seafood products derived from 27 species across 18 countries and find that in over 99% of cases species labelling was correct.

Mapping Uncertainty Due to Missing Data in the Global Ocean Health Index.

Indicators are increasingly used to measure environmental systems; however, they are often criticized for failing to measure and describe uncertainty. Uncertainty is particularly difficult to evaluate and communicate in the case of composite indicators which aggregate many indicators of ecosystem condition. One of the ongoing goals of the Ocean Health Index (OHI) has been to improve our approach to dealing with missing data, which is a major source of uncertainty. Here we: (1) quantify the potential influence of gapfilled data on index scores from the 2015 global OHI assessment; (2) develop effective methods of tracking, quantifying, and communicating this information; and (3) provide general guidance for implementing gapfilling procedures for existing and emerging indicators, including regional OHI assessments. For the overall OHI global index score, the percent contribution of gapfilled data was relatively small (18.5%); however, it varied substantially among regions and goals. In general, smaller territorial jurisdictions and the food provision and tourism and recreation goals required the most gapfilling. We found the best approach for managing gapfilled data was to mirror the general framework used to organize, calculate, and communicate the Index data and scores. Quantifying gapfilling provides a measure of the reliability of the scores for different regions and components of an indicator. Importantly, this information highlights the importance of the underlying datasets used to calculate composite indicators and can inform and incentivize future data collection.

Best practices for assessing ocean health in multiple contexts using tailorable frameworks.

Marine policy is increasingly calling for maintaining or restoring healthy oceans while human activities continue to intensify. Thus, successful prioritization and management of competing objectives requires a comprehensive assessment of the current state of the ocean. Unfortunately, assessment frameworks to define and quantify current ocean state are often site-specific, limited to a few ocean components, and difficult to reproduce in different geographies or even through time, limiting spatial or temporal comparisons as well as the potential for shared learning. Ideally, frameworks should be tailorable to accommodate use in disparate locations and contexts, removing the need to develop frameworks de novo and allowing efforts to focus on the assessments themselves to advise action. Here, we present some of our experiences using the Ocean Health Index (OHI) framework, a tailorable and repeatable approach that measures health of coupled human-ocean ecosystems in different contexts by accommodating differences in local environmental characteristics, cultural priorities, and information availability and quality. Since its development in 2012, eleven assessments using the OHI framework have been completed at global, national, and regional scales, four of which have been led by independent academic or government groups. We have found the following to be best practices for conducting assessments: Incorporate key characteristics and priorities into the assessment framework design before gathering information; Strategically define spatial boundaries to balance information availability and decision-making scales; Maintain the key characteristics and priorities of the assessment framework regardless of information limitations; and Document and share the assessment process, methods, and tools. These best practices are relevant to most ecosystem assessment processes, but also provide tangible guidance for assessments using the OHI framework. These recommendations also promote transparency around which decisions were made and why, reproducibility through access to detailed methods and computational code, repeatability via the ability to modify methods and computational code, and ease of communication to wide audiences, all of which are critical for any robust assessment process.

Spatial and temporal changes in cumulative human impacts on the world's ocean.

Human pressures on the ocean are thought to be increasing globally, yet we know little about their patterns of cumulative change, which pressures are most responsible for change, and which places are experiencing the greatest increases. Managers and policymakers require such information to make strategic decisions and monitor progress towards management objectives. Here we calculate and map recent change over 5 years in cumulative impacts to marine ecosystems globally from fishing, climate change, and ocean- and land-based stressors. Nearly 66% of the ocean and 77% of national jurisdictions show increased human impact, driven mostly by climate change pressures. Five percent of the ocean is heavily impacted with increasing pressures, requiring management attention. Ten percent has very low impact with decreasing pressures. Our results provide large-scale guidance about where to prioritize management efforts and affirm the importance of addressing climate change to maintain and improve the condition of marine ecosystems.

Patterns and emerging trends in global ocean health.

International and regional policies aimed at managing ocean ecosystem health need quantitative and comprehensive indices to synthesize information from a variety of sources, consistently measure progress, and communicate with key constituencies and the public. Here we present the second annual global assessment of the Ocean Health Index, reporting current scores and annual changes since 2012, recalculated using updated methods and data based on the best available science, for 221 coastal countries and territories. The Index measures performance of ten societal goals for healthy oceans on a quantitative scale of increasing health from 0 to 100, and combines these scores into a single Index score, for each country and globally. The global Index score improved one point (from 67 to 68), while many country-level Index and goal scores had larger changes. Per-country Index scores ranged from 41-95 and, on average, improved by 0.06 points (range -8 to +12). Globally, average scores increased for individual goals by as much as 6.5 points (coastal economies) and decreased by as much as 1.2 points (natural products). Annual updates of the Index, even when not all input data have been updated, provide valuable information to scientists, policy makers, and resource managers because patterns and trends can emerge from the data that have been updated. Changes of even a few points indicate potential successes (when scores increase) that merit recognition, or concerns (when scores decrease) that may require mitigative action, with changes of more than 10-20 points representing large shifts that deserve greater attention. Goal scores showed remarkably little covariance across regions, indicating low redundancy in the Index, such that each goal delivers information about a different facet of ocean health. Together these scores provide a snapshot of global ocean health and suggest where countries have made progress and where a need for further improvement exists.

A new framework for selecting environmental surrogates.

Surrogate concepts are used in all sub-disciplines of environmental science. However, controversy remains regarding the extent to which surrogates are useful for resolving environmental problems. Here, we argue that conflicts about the utility of surrogates (and the related concepts of indicators and proxies) often reflect context-specific differences in trade-offs between measurement accuracy and practical constraints. By examining different approaches for selecting and applying surrogates, we identify five trade-offs that correspond to key points of contention in the application of surrogates. We then present an 8-step Adaptive Surrogacy Framework that incorporates cross-disciplinary perspectives from a wide spectrum of the environmental sciences, aiming to unify surrogate concepts across disciplines and applications. Our synthesis of the science of surrogates is intended as a first step towards fully leveraging knowledge accumulated across disciplines, thus consolidating lessons learned so that they may be accessible to all those operating in different fields, yet facing similar hurdles.

A regional-scale Ocean Health Index for Brazil.

Brazil has one of the largest and fastest growing economies and one of the largest coastlines in the world, making human use and enjoyment of coastal and marine resources of fundamental importance to the country. Integrated assessments of ocean health are needed to understand the condition of a range of benefits that humans derive from marine systems and to evaluate where attention should be focused to improve the health of these systems. Here we describe the first such assessment for Brazil at both national and state levels. We applied the Ocean Health Index framework, which evaluates ten public goals for healthy oceans. Despite refinements of input data and model formulations, the national score of 60 (out of 100) was highly congruent with the previous global assessment for Brazil of 62. Variability in scores among coastal states was most striking for goals related to mariculture, protected areas, tourism, and clean waters. Extractive goals, including Food Provision, received low scores relative to habitat-related goals, such as Biodiversity. This study demonstrates the applicability of the Ocean Health Index at a regional scale, and its usefulness in highlighting existing data and knowledge gaps and identifying key policy and management recommendations. To improve Brazil's ocean health, this study suggests that future actions should focus on: enhancing fisheries management, expanding marine protected areas, and monitoring coastal habitats.

Assessing the health of the U.S. west coast with a regional-scale application of the Ocean Health Index.

Management of marine ecosystems increasingly demands comprehensive and quantitative assessments of ocean health, but lacks a tool to do so. We applied the recently developed Ocean Health Index to assess ocean health in the relatively data-rich US west coast region. The overall region scored 71 out of 100, with sub-regions scoring from 65 (Washington) to 74 (Oregon). Highest scoring goals included tourism and recreation (99) and clean waters (87), while the lowest scoring goals were sense of place (48) and artisanal fishing opportunities (57). Surprisingly, even in this well-studied area data limitations precluded robust assessments of past trends in overall ocean health. Nonetheless, retrospective calculation of current status showed that many goals have declined, by up to 20%. In contrast, near-term future scores were on average 6% greater than current status across all goals and sub-regions. Application of hypothetical but realistic management scenarios illustrate how the Index can be used to predict and understand the tradeoffs among goals and consequences for overall ocean health. We illustrate and discuss how this index can be used to vet underlying assumptions and decisions with local stakeholders and decision-makers so that scores reflect regional knowledge, priorities and values. We also highlight the importance of ongoing and future monitoring that will provide robust data relevant to ocean health assessment.

Assessing global marine biodiversity status within a coupled socio-ecological perspective.

People value the existence of a variety of marine species and habitats, many of which are negatively impacted by human activities. The Convention on Biological Diversity and other international and national policy agreements have set broad goals for reducing the rate of biodiversity loss. However, efforts to conserve biodiversity cannot be effective without comprehensive metrics both to assess progress towards meeting conservation goals and to account for measures that reduce pressures so that positive actions are encouraged. We developed an index based on a global assessment of the condition of marine biodiversity using publically available data to estimate the condition of species and habitats within 151 coastal countries. Our assessment also included data on social and ecological pressures on biodiversity as well as variables that indicate whether good governance is in place to reduce them. Thus, our index is a social as well as ecological measure of the current and likely future status of biodiversity. As part of our analyses, we set explicit reference points or targets that provide benchmarks for success and allow for comparative assessment of current conditions. Overall country-level scores ranged from 43 to 95 on a scale of 1 to 100, but countries that scored high for species did not necessarily score high for habitats. Although most current status scores were relatively high, likely future status scores for biodiversity were much lower in most countries due to negative trends for both species and habitats. We also found a strong positive relationship between the Human Development Index and resilience measures that could promote greater sustainability by reducing pressures. This relationship suggests that many developing countries lack effective governance, further jeopardizing their ability to maintain species and habitats in the future.