Concerns over overexploitation have fueled an ongoing debate on the current state and future prospects of global capture fisheries, associated threats to marine biodiversity, and declining yields available for human consumption. Management reforms have aimed to reduce fishing pressure and recover depleted stocks to biomass and exploitation rates that allow for maximum sustainable yield. Recent analyses suggest that scientifically assessed stocks, contributing over half of global marine fish catch, have, on average, reached or even exceeded these targets, suggesting a fundamental shift in the effectiveness of fisheries governance. However, such conclusions are based on calculations requiring specific choices to average over high interstock variability to derive a global trend. Here we evaluate the robustness of these conclusions by examining the distribution of recovery rates across individual stocks and by applying a diversity of plausible averaging techniques. We show that different methods produce markedly divergent trajectories of global fisheries status, with 4 of 10 methods suggesting that recovery has not yet been achieved, with up to 48% of individual stocks remaining below biomass targets and 40% exploited above sustainable rates. Furthermore, recent rates of recovery are only marginally different from zero, with up to 46% of individual stocks trending downward in biomass and 29% of stocks trending upward in exploitation rate. These results caution against overoptimistic assessments of fisheries writ large and support a precautionary management approach to ensure full rebuilding of depleted fisheries worldwide.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Journal||Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|
|State||Published - Jul 26 2021|
Bibliographical noteKAUST Repository Item: Exported on 2021-07-28
Acknowledgements: We thank the stock assessment scientists who produced the data used in this study and the research team who have compiled and curated
the RAM Legacy database. We gratefully acknowledge funding from the Simons Foundation (G.L.B.), the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (C.M.D.), and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (B.W.).
ASJC Scopus subject areas