Towards a model of port-based resilience against fisher labour exploitation
In: Marine policy, Band 142, S. 105108
ISSN: 0308-597X
6 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Marine policy, Band 142, S. 105108
ISSN: 0308-597X
Labor abuse on fishing vessels and illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing violate human rights, jeopardize food security, and deprive governments of revenues. We applied a multi-method approach, combining new empirical data with satellite information on fishing activities and vessel characteristics to map risks of labor abuse and IUU fishing, understand their relationships, and identify major drivers. Port risks were globally pervasive and often coupled, with 57% of assessed ports associated with labor abuse or IUU fishing. For trips ending in assessed ports, 82% were linked to labor abuse or IUU fishing risks. At-sea risk areas were primarily driven by fishing vessel flags linked to poor control of corruption by the flag state, high ownership by countries other than the flag state, and Chinese-flagged vessels. Transshipment risk areas were related to the gear type of fishing vessels engaged in potential transshipment and carrier vessel flags. Measures at port offer promise for mitigating risks, through the Port State Measures Agreement for IUU fishing, and ensuring sufficient vessel time at port to detect and respond to labor abuse. Our results highlight the need for coordinated action across actors to avoid risk displacement and make progress towards eliminating these socially, environmentally and economically unsustainable practices.
BASE
Recent studies suggest that the pervasive impacts on global fishery resources caused by stressors such as overfishing and climate change could dramatically increase the likelihood of fishery conflict. However, existing projections do not consider wider economic, social, or political trends when assessing the likelihood of, and influences on, future conflict trajectories. In this paper, we build four future fishery conflict scenarios by considering multiple fishery conflict drivers derived from an expert workshop, a longitudinal database of international fishery conflict, secondary data on conflict driver trends, and regional expert reviews. The scenarios take place between the years 2030 and 2060 in the North-East Atlantic ("scramble for the Atlantic"), the East China Sea ("the remodeled empire"), the coast of West Africa ("oceanic decolonization"), and the Arctic ("polar renaissance"). The scenarios explore the implications of ongoing trends in conflict-prone regions of the world and function as accessible, science-based communication tools that can help foster anticipatory governance capacity in the pursuit of future ocean security.
BASE
In: Marine policy, Band 155, S. 105740
ISSN: 0308-597X
Blue foods – fish, invertebrates, algae and aquatic plants captured or cultured in freshwater and marine ecosystems – play a central role in food and nutrition security for billions of people and are a cornerstone of the livelihoods, economies, and cultures of many coastal and riparian communities. Blue food systems are extraordinarily diverse, involving thousands of species in many different production systems and supporting a wide array of cultures and diets. Many blue foods are rich in please see back-page) bioavailable micronutrients and can be produced in ways that are more environmentally sustainable than terrestrial animal-source foods. Yet despite their unique value and interconnections with terrestrial food systems, blue foods are often left out of food system analyses, discussions, decisions, and solutions. Realizing the potential of blue foods to play a central role in ending malnutrition and in building healthy, nature-positive and resilient food systems will require that governments embed blue foods in food- system governance. Here, we focus on three central imperatives for policymakers.
BASE
This document contains the draft Chapter 3 of the IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Governments and all observers at IPBES-7 had access to these draft chapters eight weeks prior to IPBES-7. Governments accepted the Chapters at IPBES-7 based on the understanding that revisions made to the SPM during the Plenary, as a result of the dialogue between Governments and scientists, wouldbe reflected in the final Chapters.IPBES typically releases its Chapters publicly only in their final form, which implies a delay of several months post Plenary. However, in light of the high interest for the Chapters, IPBES is releasing the six Chapters early (31 May 2019) in a draft form. Authors of the reports are currently working to reflect all the changes made to the Summary for Policymakers during the Plenary to the Chapters, and to perform final copyediting.
BASE