Global Fishery Prospects: Modeling & Management › sites › sfg.msi.ucsb.edu › files › images...

,

Global Fishery Prospects: Modeling &Management

Dr. Christopher Costello

Bren School of Environmental Science & ManagementUniversity of California, Santa Barbara

Marine Fisheries Research InstituteZhejiang, China

6 December, 2016

Christopher Costello – UC Santa Barbara Global Fishery Prospects

,

Roadmap for this talk

Current status and trends in global fisheries

Timing-to-recovery

Prospects: Food, livelihoods, conservation

Research ideas and next steps


,

Global fishery prospects under contrastingmanagement regimesChristopher Costelloa,1, Daniel Ovandoa, Tyler Clavellea, C. Kent Straussb, Ray Hilbornc, Michael C. Melnychukc,Trevor A. Branchc, Steven D. Gainesa, Cody S. Szuwalskia, Reniel B. Cabrala, Douglas N. Raderb, and Amanda Lelandb

aBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106; bEnvironmental Defense Fund, New York, NY10010; and cSchool of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195

Edited by James A. Estes, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, and approved February 26, 2016 (received for review October 14, 2015)

Data from 4,713 fisheries worldwide, representing 78% of globalreported fish catch, are analyzed to estimate the status, trends,and benefits of alternative approaches to recovering depletedfisheries. For each fishery, we estimate current biological statusand forecast the impacts of contrasting management regimes oncatch, profit, and biomass of fish in the sea. We estimate uniquerecovery targets and trajectories for each fishery, calculate the year-by-year effects of alternative recovery approaches, and model howalternative institutional reforms affect recovery outcomes. Currentstatus is highly heterogeneous—the median fishery is in poor health(overfished, with further overfishing occurring), although 32%of fish-eries are in good biological, although not necessarily economic, con-dition. Our business-as-usual scenario projects further divergence andcontinued collapse for many of the world’s fisheries. Applying soundmanagement reforms to global fisheries in our dataset could gener-ate annual increases exceeding 16 million metric tons (MMT) in catch,$53 billion in profit, and 619 MMT in biomass relative to business asusual. We also find that, with appropriate reforms, recovery can hap-pen quickly, with the median fishery taking under 10 y to reach re-covery targets. Our results show that commonsense reforms tofishery management would dramatically improve overall fish abun-dance while increasing food security and profits.

fishery recovery | fishery reform | rights-based fishery management |bioeconomic model

Recent advances in our understanding of global fishery status(1–4) provide a foundation for estimating the targets for, and

potential benefits from, global fishery recovery. Although exist-ing aggregate estimates make a compelling general case for re-form (5, 6) new data, models, and methods allow for moredetailed analysis of the benefits and trade-offs of contrasting man-agement regimes. Indeed, emerging empirical evidence shows thateffective reforms and scientific assessments taken by some countrieshave already placed their fisheries on a positive path (1, 7). Reformsspan a range of approaches, from scientifically informed harvestpolicies to institutional reforms that restructure the incentives in afishery to align profits with conservation. In many cases, thesechanges have successfully reduced fishing effort to sustainable levelsand stabilized overfished stocks (7, 8). These cases of successfulmanagement contain lessons that can be applied more broadly andalso suggest that effects of fishery reform will differ across fisheries,nations, and reform policies. However, these new data, models, andlessons learned have never been synthesized to inform the futurepotential from global fishery recovery.Here, we ask, what might be the future of global fisheries

under alternative management regimes? In addition, what mighthappen if we undertook the reforms that previous studies havestressed are urgently needed? We couple the latest individualfishery data to bioeconomic models to estimate alternative sce-narios of fishery recovery for individual fisheries, countries, andthe globe. We seek to inform policy recommendations for re-covering fisheries, including insights regarding the following: (i)what is the status of fisheries across the globe? (ii) Are therestrong trade-offs or synergies between recovery efforts that

emphasize fishery profits vs. catch vs. biomass conservation? (iii)In a world with limited resources to devote to fishery recovery,which countries provide the most compelling and urgent casesfor fishery reform? In addition, (iv) how long will benefits ofreform take to arrive?We examined three approaches to future fishery management:

(1) business-as-usual management (BAU) (for which status quomanagement is used for projections) (SI Appendix), (2) fishing tomaximize long-term catch (FMSY), and (3) rights-based fisherymanagement (RBFM), where economic value is optimized. Thelatter approach, in which catches are specifically chosen tomaximize the long-term sustainable economic value of the fish-ery, has been shown to increase product prices (primarily due toincreased quality and market timing) and reduce fishing costs(primarily due to a reduced race to fish); these are reflected inthe model. In all scenarios, we account for the fact that fishprices will change in response to levels of harvest.For each fishery, we estimate future trajectories out to 2050 of

catch, profit, and biomass under each policy. Other social ob-jectives such as employment, equity, or biodiversity conservationare clearly important, and may be correlated with these out-comes, but are not explicitly modeled here. Aggregating acrossfisheries provides country and global estimates of the conse-quences and trade-offs of alternative policies for recoveringfisheries. A strength of our approach is the ability to forecasteffects for fisheries in the Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO) “not elsewhere included” (NEI) category (SI Appendix).Bioeconomic theory provides some predictions for the trade-

offs across alternative societal objectives of food, profit, and

Significance

What would extensive fishery reform look like? In addition, whatwould be the benefits and trade-offs of implementing alternativeapproaches to fisheries management on a worldwide scale? Tofind out, we assembled the largest-of-its-kind database and cou-pled it to state-of-the-art bioeconomic models for more than 4,500fisheries around the world. We find that, in nearly every countryof the world, fishery recovery would simultaneously drive in-creases in food provision, fishery profits, and fish biomass in thesea. Our results suggest that a suite of approaches providing in-dividual or communal access rights to fishery resources can alignincentives across profit, food, and conservation so that few trade-offs will have to be made across these objectives in selecting ef-fective policy interventions.

Author contributions: C.C., C.K.S., R.H., M.C.M., T.A.B., S.D.G., C.S.S., D.N.R., and A.L.designed research; C.C., D.O., T.C., C.K.S., M.C.M., C.S.S., and R.B.C. performed research;D.O., T.C., R.H., M.C.M., C.S.S., R.B.C., and D.N.R. analyzed data; and C.C., S.D.G., R.B.C., D.N.R.,and A.L. wrote the paper.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected].

This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1520420113/-/DCSupplemental.

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1520420113 PNAS Early Edition | 1 of 5

SUST

AINABILITY

SCIENCE

ENVIRONMEN

TAL

SCIENCE

S


,

Global wild fish production


,

Biology: fish growth


,

Fishery status: 1800


,

Bioeconomics: low fishing


,

Bioeconomics: medium fishing


,

Bioeconomics: over-fishing


,

Bioeconomics: extreme over-fishing


,

Bioeconomics: revenue & costs


,

Bioeconomics: optimal condition


,

Bioeconomics: current condition


,

Food upside


,

Fish upside


,

Profit upside


,

Institutional reforms


,

A model of global fishery reform

Stock-by-stock analysis (4,713 fisheries worldwide)

Economics data, ecological data, dynamic models

Current status & projectionsBAU, Fmsy, Rights-based fishery management

Triple-bottom-line outcomesFood, Profits, Conservation


,

Data-poor ecosystems in worst shape

95% of fisheries lack formal assessmentHow to design/prioritize reforms without data?Develop new methods for global data-poor assessment


,

Global snapshot of fishery status & trends


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

≥ 4

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 ≥ 2.5B/Bmsy

F/F

msy

,

“Conservation Concern:” 77% of global stocks


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

≥ 4

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 ≥ 2.5B/Bmsy

F/F

msy

,

Global snapshot, highlighting China

Christopher Costello – UC Santa Barbara Global Fishery ProspectsDensityData$x

Den

sity

Dat

a$y

1

2

3

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0B BMSY

FF

MS

Y

China

,

Timing to rebuild global fisheries


1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

0

20

40

60

80

100

●● BAU (all stocks)

BAU (conservation concern)

RBFM

FMSY

Profit/year ($ Billion)−10 80

% S

tock

s ab

ove

0.8

B/B

MS

Y

Year

Total harvest (MMT)

8849

,

Country-level effects: RBFM vs. BAU


0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

●China

4.4

0.2

Cha

nge

in A

nnua

l Pro

fit (

$ B

illio

n)

Change in Biomass (MMT)

MSY

Change in Catch (MMT)0 1

A

0 10 20 30

0

1

2

3

4

5

Indonesia

India

Japan

PhilippinesThailand

MalaysiaViet Nam

S. KoreaTaiwan

B

Cha

nge

in A

nnua

l Pro

fit (

$ B

illio

n)

,

Global effects: Today


400 600 800 1000 1200

0

20

40

60

80

Today62.4

Biomass (MMT)

Ann

ual P

rofit

($

Bill

ions

)

Policy applied to stocks of conservation concernPolicy applied to all stocks

,

Global effects: Conservation Concern stocks


400 600 800 1000 1200

0

20

40

60

80

BAU

RBFM

Fmsy

Today58.2

64.1

64.1

62.4

Biomass (MMT)

Ann

ual P

rofit

($

Bill

ions

)


,

Global effects: All stocks


400 600 800 1000 1200

0

20

40

60

80

BAU

BAU

RBFMRBFM

FMSY FMSY

Today58.2

54.6

64.1

70.6

73.1 64.1

62.4

Biomass (MMT)

Ann

ual P

rofit

($

Bill

ions

)


,

Conclusions

Global fisheries are in poor average healthCompromises food provision, livelihoods, conservation

Business-as-usual shows continued declines

Fishery management alternatives show tremendouspromise:

Recovery in just 10 yearsCatch increases 20%

Models and approaches to jointly consider production andconservation


,

New frontiers and unanswered questions

1 Restoring ecosystems & food websTiming, policies, areas, resilience

2 Ocean enhancementEffects, for production, for restoration

3 Role of pollutionPollution vs. overfishing - which to fix first?

4 Climate change


,

Climate change and fisheries (preliminary results)

800 species - model productivity changes over timeStatus quo managementOptimize under current conditionsFully adaptive management anticipating climate change

Cost of climate change

Value of adaptation


,

Climate change alters productivity


2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

050

100

150

Time (yrs)

Car

ryin

g C

apac

ity (

scal

ed)

,

Can fishery management be naturally adaptive?


0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Biomass (MT*)

F*

F*SQ F

,

Fishery management effect >> Climate effect


,


Thank You

Questions?

[email protected]

Global Fishery Prospects: Modeling & Management › sites › sfg.msi.ucsb.edu › files › images...

Documents

Transcript of Global Fishery Prospects: Modeling & Management › sites › sfg.msi.ucsb.edu › files › images...