Global Fishing Index

Key findings

Over the past 50 years, the world has witnessed a massive decline in the health of its fisheries.1 Quite simply, we are removing fish from the ocean at a far greater rate than they can naturally replenish.

Marine fisheries support approximately 260 million jobs,2 and fish is one of the most highly-traded food commodities globally – worth over US$160 billion in 2018.3 Additionally, seafood consumption continues to grow every year, with more than three billion people dependent on seafood for one-fifth of their protein needs.4

Without healthy fish stocks and marine ecosystems, the planet and future populations will suffer. Yet, many fisheries resources are being severely misused. This is due to insufficient, inappropriate or absent management, leading to overfishing. The ocean, and the livelihoods of coastal communities that depend on it, are being destroyed by short-term interests, rather than protected by a vision of long-term sustainability.

The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 aims to prevent this coming disaster by setting out a framework to conserve and sustainably use the oceans.5

Under SDG target 14.4, global leaders committed to:

“By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics.”

In 2021, this goal is far from being met.

While there have been pockets of success where strong interventions have improved stock health,6,7 globally, the state of fish stocks is not improving.8 Fisheries operate across the ocean, with government subsidies inflating fleets far beyond what is economically viable.9,10,11 Policy makers and businesses focus their resources on big, valuable species, with little regard for smaller, less valuable fisheries. And perhaps most importantly, many fisheries continue to operate with little oversight. As a result, there is a serious lack of knowledge – and data – about fisheries. Without this information, we cannot accurately measure, monitor or manage fisheries for sustainability.

The Global Fishing Index aims to address this problem by providing the largest assessment of the state of fisheries to date and connecting this information with decision-makers to drive global change. The Index assesses the status – whether they are sustainable or overfished – of 1,465 fish stocks across 142 coastal countries. By combining this information with catch data and new information about how fisheries are governed in each country, we report for the first time on the state of fisheries and country-level progress toward SDG target 14.4.

This information is used to identify critical gaps and recommendations for improvement – equipping decision-makers with the information they need to end overfishing, restore fish stocks and manage fisheries to ensure long-term sustainability.

GettyImages-1314200650-croppedGettyImages-1314200650-cropped

Commercial fishing vessel for Atlantic bluefin tuna. Tuna are an important species for many countries in terms of catch (tonnage) and value – Mediterranean Sea. Photo Credit: Antonio Busiello via Getty Images.

1

Half of assessed fish stocks are overfished – and nearly 1 in 10 have been driven to the point of collapse.

Of the 1,465 stocks we assessed, 49 per cent are overfished – meaning they have been depleted below 40 per cent of unfished populations (the level that can produce MSY). This is considerably higher than a previous estimate of 34 per cent, based on a smaller sample of stocks.12 Additionally, if we were to apply a hard limit for MSY at 50 per cent (with no margin of error), the proportion of overfished stocks would rise to 62 per cent.

Alarmingly, one in five stocks within our data is estimated to be below 20 per cent of unfished levels of abundance, far below what is considered sustainable. Additionally, eight per cent of stocks have been reduced to less than 10 per cent of unfished populations (Figure 1) – the point of collapse.

01-Figure-201-Figure-2

Figure 1: Number of fish stocks, by relative abundance. Relative abundance is defined as a stock’s current abundance (biomass) relative to historic, unfished levels. Half of assessed stocks are currently less than 40 per cent of unfished levels of abundance, one quarter sit at 40–60 per cent, and one quarter are above 60 per cent.

Overfished stocks require between three and 30 years to recover to sustainable levels of abundance – depending on the extent to which they have been depleted, their exploitation history, how fast they grow and reproduce, and fishing pressure during the recovery period.13,14,15,16 The fate of these fish stocks, and associated marine ecosystems and fishing communities, depends on authorities taking swift and decisive action to rebuild them to sustainable levels.

Interestingly, most countries (74 per cent) in our dataset have a stock sustainability score above 50 per cent – meaning that over half of the assessed stocks in their national waters are sustainable. This figure on its own, however, is misleading – as many countries have assessed few stocks or the assessed stocks comprise only a small portion of their total catch. For example, an estimated 91 per cent of the assessed stocks in Eritrean waters are sustainable. But these assessed stocks account for only one per cent of its total catch and the state of almost all its fish stocks is unknown. This calls to attention the importance of considering not only what is assessed, but also how much remains unknown about a country’s fish stocks when evaluating sustainability.

2

Half of the global catch is from unassessed stocks, which lack the data to say if they are sustainable or not.

Fifty-two per cent of the global catch since 1990 has come from stocks that lack sufficient data to estimate stock abundance. As a result, we do not know if this catch is sustainable. Without this information, decision-makers are operating ‘in the dark’, unable to effectively manage fisheries.

Globally, far too few fish stocks have been assessed: one-third of countries in our dataset have assessed less than a quarter of what is caught in their waters. Additionally, we find that 68 countries have assessed less than 10 per cent of their ‘nationally managed’ catch, which comes from fish stocks that occur completely within a country’s jurisdiction (national stocks) or are a shared responsibility of neighbouring countries (shared stocks).

Twenty-nine of these countries do not have a single national or shared stock assessed (Figure 4) – with their data availability limited to RFMO-managed stocks. More than half of these are small island developing states that rely on coastal stocks as a critical source of jobs, food, and nutrition for local communities.17,18 This result reveals a surprising contrast for many countries whose economies depend on highly migratory species, like tuna. Many of these countries, particularly in the Pacific, have made substantial progress to develop strong regional management of these straddling stocks19,20 – yet there is little information about the state of critical inshore fish stocks.21,22 For example, 82 per cent of Kiribati’s total catch is sustainable due to the dominance of tuna, but Kiribati is yet to assess a single national stock. Building capacity to monitor and manage coastal stocks will be crucial for ensuring sustainable use of these locally valuable resources.

We note that some countries have an advantage in terms of data coverage, with most of their catch coming from a handful of large stocks. This advantage depends on the level of marine biodiversity within a country’s waters and a country’s fisheries.

Peru, for example, scores well because its fisheries are dominated by two large anchoveta stocks that together account for over 70 per cent of the total catch (Figure 2).23 In comparison, other countries catch dozens of species in smaller amounts, making it harder to achieve good data coverage. Australia, for example, has 133 assessed stocks in our dataset, yet 60 per cent of its catch remains unassessed (Figure 2).

Peru & Australia Comparison

Countries differ in the size of fish stocks assessed, based on total catch. For example, the top 10 stocks by catch (in tonnes) in Peru account for 91 per cent of total catch. In comparison, the top 10 stocks by catch (in tonnes) in Australia account for only 21 per cent of total catch.

Figure 2 (top): Comparison of stock size as a proportion of total marine catch in Australia and Peru’s national waters
(1990-2018).

Figure 3 (bottom): Twenty-nine countries in our dataset have not assessed a single national stock, demonstrating the lack of data availability within coastal fisheries. Most of these countries occur in tropical areas and many (62 per cent) are Small Island Developing States.24

03_Figure-3-PERU03_Figure-3-PERU
03_Figure-3-AUS03_Figure-3-AUS

Data gaps

no-national-stocks-map-with-legendno-national-stocks-map-with-legend

Figure 5: Country-level performance based on progress towards restoring fish stocks and governance capacity to ensure sustainable fishing.
Colours indicate overall grade received.

3

With few exceptions, countries are failing to deliver on global commitments.

We find that globally, there is a clear gap between management commitments and the actions required to achieve on-the-water change. Over half (56 per cent) of the countries in our dataset have developed basic governance and management frameworks to prevent overfishing and restore fish stocks. However, on average countries score only 19 out of 100 for progress; this means that they are only one-fifth of the way towards achieving SDG target 14.4.

Based on current progress and governance capacity to improve fish stock health, no country achieved an
‘A’ or ‘B’ grade – in which most fish stocks are assessed and known to be sustainable. Just six countries – Chile, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Norway and the United States of America – received a ‘C’, the highest grade achieved. These countries achieve a Progress score of at least 40 out of 100 and have well-developed governance systems.

However, while progress has been made in some fisheries, additional work is needed to expand management across additional stocks to reach global sustainability goals.

Eighty-two per cent of countries received a ‘D’ or ‘E’ grade – including five of the top ten countries with the highest marine catch in their waters: China, Indonesia, Japan, Peru and the Russian Federation. These countries have made limited progress toward SDG target 14.4, a substantial portion of their stocks are overfished or unassessed and/or their fisheries governance system is lacking the basic elements needed to effectively manage fisheries.

Twenty countries get an ‘F’ grade – including Viet Nam and Malaysia, which are among the top ten countries with the highest marine catch in their waters. In these countries, nearly all stocks are unassessed or overfished, and there is little prospect of advancing without major improvements in management.

01-Figure-501-Figure-5

4

Most fisheries lack science-based management.

Science-based fisheries management, in which policy and management actions are based on fisheries data, is essential for preventing overfishing and securing sustainable fisheries.25,26,27

We find that most countries do not, and are currently unable to, effectively apply science-based management in all fisheries. This is because they do not collect or analyse basic fisheries data, do not base management on scientific evidence and/or do not monitor or enforce regulations to ensure fishers comply with the rules.

Even the highest performing countries are failing to apply science-based management in all fisheries. Nonetheless, most countries (85 per cent) have set clear environmental sustainability goals to guide decision-making – the first step of science-based management.

There are three key issues:

  • Most countries do not consistently collect or analyse fisheries data. Although 81 per cent of the countries assessed require fishers to collect catch or effort data in their most valuable fishery,28 nearly half do not independently verify the reported information or routinely enforce reporting requirements.29 Additionally, almost 40 per cent of countries do not use fisheries data to assess changes in abundance for most of their stocks.30
  • Where data is available, it is not being used for management. Only 46 per cent of countries assessed apply science-based catch or effort limits in more than a few fisheries.31 Further, only 41 per cent of countries use harvest control rules, pre-agreed rules that guide management action based on stock health, in their most valuable fishery.
  • Compliance with regulations is not being monitored or enforced. While 87 per cent of countries assessed require both in-port and on-water inspections,32 27 per cent of these do not consistently conduct these checks.33 Additionally, only one-third of countries have made strong commitments to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing by adopting a National Plan of Action to prevent IUU fishing and ratifying the FAO’s 2009 Port State Measures Agreement. While nearly all countries have strong penalties for rule breakers, bribery and corruption are considered a common occurrence in a quarter of the countries assessed, jeopardising compliance systems.34

5

Key stakeholders, including local fishing communities, are unable to effectively participate in management.

Despite their importance in enabling effective management, few countries empower stakeholders, including local fishing communities, to meaningfully participate in management processes. Stakeholders act as a source of information on fishing activities, threats and stock and ecosystem health and help
hold decision-makers to account.35,36,37 Stakeholder participation in decision-making, especially fishers, can also increase compliance with the rules, reducing enforcement costs.38,39

Yet one-quarter of countries assessed do not legally require authorities to include fishers in decision-making. Additionally, nearly 40 per cent of countries lack ‘bottom up’ forms of governance, such as community-based or customary management, where stakeholders are active participants in management processes.

In many countries, stakeholders lack the capacity to effectively engage in management due to a lack of organisation and representation, such as through fisher working groups or cooperatives, or transparency in decision-making. For example, only 23 per cent of countries publish minutes from management meetings, making it difficult for people to respond or to track how decisions are made. Transparency in decision-making is critical for improving information sharing, as well as holding decision-makers to account and tackling fisheries corruption.

Call to action

We call on governments, businesses and local communities to:

circle-number-onecircle-number-one

Set ambitious targets to restore fish stocks and follow through with management action.

Meeting SDG target 14.4 will require countries and businesses to require countries and businesses to not only commit to improving, but follow through with management action. It will require increased investment in fisheries management, as well as innovation and collaboration across sectors to identify new means of meeting policy commitments. Leaders should start by reviewing the areas where their performance is weakest – using the Index’s country-level results to identify critical gaps. Explore what has been successful elsewhere and work to adapt and recreate these interventions to meet local needs.

circle-number-twocircle-number-two

Establish systems to collect and publish fisheries data.

Establish and expand data collection programs and integrate other types of information, including ecological data and local stakeholder knowledge, into decision-making processes. Fisheries information such as catch and effort data, vessel and licence registries and vessel tracking data should be made publicly available to enable independent monitoring and help tackle entrenched issues, such as corruption and illegal behaviour.

circle-number-threecircle-number-three

Embed evidence in fisheries management, using a precautionary approach where uncertainty is high.

Ensure that management strategies and measures are based on scientific evidence, not politics. Train managers on how to best use data to develop policy and how to evaluate and adapt management to ensure success. When data are missing, managers should take a precautionary approach, applying cautious measures to account for uncertainty and reduce potential risks. Considering the vital role fisheries play in livelihoods, food security and nutrition, this process must be applied in all fisheries, not just those with high economic value.

GettyImages-638057470-croppedGettyImages-638057470-cropped

Fishermen throw fishing net on boats to catch fish in Hue, Viet Nam. Photo Credit: Tran Tuan Viet via Getty Images.
icon-governmenticon-government

recommendations

government

Governments have the primary responsibility for governing fisheries. They have a responsibility to their citizens to prevent overfishing and ensure the sustainable use of marine resources.

circle-number-onecircle-number-one

Eliminate the worst drivers of overfishing first.

Reconsider the management measures in place for overfished stocks and take corrective action where needed. Work to improve governance, focusing on the gaps identified in your assessment results. Combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing by adopting a National Plan of Action and ratifying the FAO 2009 Port State Measures Agreement. Commit to protecting worker rights and safety by signing the 2007 ILO Work in Fishing Convention (No. 188) and the 2012 IMO Cape Town Agreement. Eliminate perverse incentives that drive overfishing, such as harmful subsidies.

circle-number-twocircle-number-two

Implement strategies to achieve sustainability goals.

Set public, time-bound and measurable targets to improve the state of fisheries, such as rebuilding plans for overfished stocks, track your performance and publish fisheries data to increase accountability.

Adopt evidence-based policies that promote sustainable fishing – such as science-based catch and effort limits and harvest control rules.

circle-number-threecircle-number-three

Set ambitious targets to restore fish stocks and follow through with management action.

Including the personnel, infrastructure and equipment needed to apply science-based management. Develop and trial innovative approaches to achieve these goals (available at www.globalfishingindex.org).

icon-fishing-and-seafood-businessicon-fishing-and-seafood-business

recommendations

Fishing and seafood businesses

Businesses represent a powerful force that can dramatically and rapidly improve seafood supply chains through corporate policies and market incentives.40 Businesses have a responsibility to ensure they contribute to fisheries improvements and don’t profit from overfishing.

circle-number-onecircle-number-one

Audit your supply chain.

Require full disclosure from companies in your supply chain about where they are fishing, what they are catching and how it is being caught or produced, including labour practices. Insist on who, what, where and how as mandatory reported metrics.

circle-number-twocircle-number-two

Change sourcing habits.

Adopt real, quantifiable and time-bound commitments to avoid companies or fishing regions that are not sustainable, and shift to suppliers that demonstrate good sustainability practices and management.

circle-number-threecircle-number-three

Support improvements.

Take an active role in advocating, funding and implementing policy and management reform that will increase the sustainability of fisheries in your supply chain. This includes collaborating with like-minded stakeholders in your supply chain to effect change, for example via pre-competitive action or credible fishery improvement projects.

icon-local-fishing-communitiesicon-local-fishing-communities

recommendations

Local fishing communities

Small-scale, artisanal and subsistence fishing plays an integral role in global fisheries – representing a range of diverse fishing activities from beach collecting to coastal fishing using small vessels. These communities stand to lose the most if fisheries and ecosystems collapse, and they play an important role in achieving a productive, equitable and sustainable future for fisheries.

circle-number-onecircle-number-one

Trial local solutions.

We recognise that each fishery is different, and solutions to overfishing in the small-scale sector must be locally driven and fit-for-purpose. Improvements will require the use of new and existing management tools that are simple, affordable and scalable across these systems. Where available, collaborate with government agencies, scientists, other fisher groups, civil society organisations and local communities to address sustainability concerns and threats to local fish stocks and ecosystems.

circle-number-twocircle-number-two

Advocate for change.

All individuals and small operators – from harvesters to sellers – can advocate for change and contribute to a better approach to fisheries. To help accelerate management improvements, consider joining with others (in an association or cooperative) to coordinate and negotiate with regulators, and the companies who buy, process and market your fish.

Endnotes

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in Action., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 1-224. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en [15 June 2020]
  2. Teh, L.C.L. and Sumaila, U.R. (2013). Contribution of marine fisheries to worldwide employment, Fish and Fisheries 14, (1), pp. 77-88, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00450.x [1 March 2021]
  3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in Action., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 1-224. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en [15 June 2020]
  4. As above
  5. United Nations General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, New York, United States of America. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf [8 October 2021]
  6. Hilborn, R., Amoroso, R.O., Anderson, C.M., Baum, J.K., Branch, T.A., Costello, C., Moor, C.L.d., Faraj, A., Hively, D., Jensen, O.P., Kurota, H., Little, L.R., Mace, P., McClanahan, T., Melnychuk, M.C., Minto, C., Osio, G.C., Parma, A.M., Pons, M., Segurado, S., Szuwalski, C.S., Wilson, J.R. and Ye, Y. (2020). Effective fisheries management instrumental in improving fish stock status, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, (4), pp. 2218-2224, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1909726116 [13 November 2020]
  7. Melnychuk, M.C., Kurota, H., Mace, P.M., Pons, M., Minto, C., Osio, G.C., Jensen, O.P., de Moor, C.L., Parma, A.M., Richard Little, L., Hively, D., Ashbrook, C.E., Baker, N., Amoroso, R.O., Branch, T.A., Anderson, C.M., Szuwalski, C.S., Baum, J.K., McClanahan, T.R., Ye, Y., Ligas, A., Bensbai, J., Thompson, G.G., DeVore, J., Magnusson, A., Bogstad, B., Wort, E., Rice, J. and Hilborn, R. (2021). Identifying management actions that promote sustainable fisheries, Nature Sustainability, (4), pp. 440-449, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00668-1 [10 March 2021]
  8. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in Action., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 1-224. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en [15 June 2020]
  9. Kroodsma, D., Mayorga, J., Hochberg, T., Miller, N.A., Boerder, K., Ferretti, F., Wilson, A., Bergman, B., White, T.D., Block, B.A., Woods, P., Sullivan, B., Costello, C. and Worm, B. (2018). Tracking the global footprint of fisheries, Science 359, (6378), pp. 904-908, http://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao5646 [15 March 2020]
  10. Rousseau, Y., Watson, R.A., Blanchard, J.L. and Fulton, E.A. (2019). Evolution of global marine fishing fleets and the response of fished resources, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116, (25), pp. 12238-12243, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820344116 [17 December 2019]
  11. Yozell, S. and Shaver, A. (2019). Shining a Light: The Need for Transparency across Distant Water Fishing, Stimson Center, pp. 1-52. https://www.stimson.org/wp-content/files/file-attachments/Stimson%20Distant%20Water%20Fishing%20 Report.pdf [7 March 2020]
  12. Based on official country reporting of approximately 440 stocks, an estimated of 34 per cent of fish stocks are overfished (using the same threshold abundance less than 40 per cent of unfished biomass); Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in Action., Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 1-224. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en [15 June 2020]
  13. Costello, C., Ovando, D., Clavelle, T., Strauss, C.K., Hilborn, R., Melnychuk, M.C., Branch, T.A., Gaines, S.D., Szuwalski, C.S., Cabral, R.B., Rader, D.N. and Leland, A. (2016). Global fishery prospects under contrasting management regimes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, (18), pp. 5125-5129, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1520420113 [16 December 2019]
  14. Lotze, H.K., Coll, M., Magera, A.M., Ward-Paige, C. and Airoldi, L. (2011). Recovery of marine animal populations and ecosystems, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 26, (11), pp. 595-605, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.07.008 [26 September 2021]
  15. MacNeil, M.A., Graham, N.A.J., Cinner, J.E., Wilson, S.K., Williams, I.D., Maina, J., Newman, S., Friedlander, A.M., Jupiter, S., Polunin, N.V.C. and McClanahan, T.R. (2015). Recovery potential of the world’s coral reef fishes, Nature 520, (7547), pp. 341-344, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14358 [5 October 2021]
  16. Neubauer, P., Jensen, O.P., Hutchings, J.A. and Baum, J.K. (2013). Resilience and Recovery of Overexploited Marine Populations, Science 340, (6130), pp. 347-349, https://www.science.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1230441 [5 October 2021]
  17. Gillett, R. (2016). Fisheries in the economies of Pacific Island countries and territories, Pacific Community, Forum Fisheries Agency and Australian Aid, Noumea, New Caledonia. http://www.spc.int/fame/en/component/content/article/237-benefish-study-2016 [18 June 2020]
  18. Taylor, S.F.W., Roberts, M.J., Milligan, B. and Ncwadi, R. (2019). Measurement and implications of marine food security in the Western Indian Ocean: an impending crisis?, Food Security 11, (6), pp. 1395-1415, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00971-6 [1 December 2020]
  19. Hare, S.R., Williams, P.G., Ducharme-Barth, N.D., Hamer, P.A., Hampton, W.J., Scott, R.D., Vincent, M.T. and Pilling, G.M. (2020). The western and central Pacific tuna fishery: 2019 overview and status of stocks Tuna Fisheries Assessment, Tuna Fisheries Assessment Report, Pacific Community, Noumea, New Caledonia, pp. 1-49. https://meetings.wcpfc.int/node/11964 [11 October 2021]
  20. Aqorau, T. (2019). Fishing for Success: Lessons in Pacific Regionalism, Department of Pacific Affairs, The Australian National University, Canberra. http://dpa.bellschool.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/uploads/2020-07/tuna-aqorau_dpa_book_ final_v8_ july_2020_centred_cover_smallfile.pdf [12 October 2021]
  21. Hare, S.R., Williams, P.G., Ducharme-Barth, N.D., Hamer, P.A., Hampton, W.J., Scott, R.D., Vincent, M.T. and Pilling, G.M. (2020). The western and central Pacific tuna fishery: 2019 overview and status of stocks Tuna Fisheries Assessment, Tuna Fisheries Assessment Report, Pacific Community, Noumea, New Caledonia, pp. 1-49. https://meetings.wcpfc.int/node/11964 [11 October 2021]
  22. Aqorau, T. (2019). Fishing for Success: Lessons in Pacific Regionalism, Department of Pacific Affairs, The Australian National University, Canberra. http://dpa.bellschool.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/uploads/2020-07/tuna-aqorau_dpa_book_ final_v8_ july_2020_centred_cover_smallfile.pdf [12 October 2021]
  23. Based on average total reconstructed catches in a country’s national waters for 1990 – 2018. Pauly, D., Zeller, D. and Palomares, M.L.D. (2021). Sea Around Us Concepts, Design and Data. www.seaaroundus.org [30 June 2021]
  24. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2021). World Economic Situation and Prospects 2021: Statistical Annex, United Nations, New York. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/WESP2021_ANNEX.pdf [20 October 2021]
  25. Cooke, S.J., Wesch, S., Donaldson, L.A., Wilson, A.D.M. and Haddaway, N.R. (2017). A Call for Evidence-Based Conservation and Management of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Fisheries 42, (3), pp. 143-149, https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2017.1276343 [18 July 2021]
  26. Melnychuk, M.C., Kurota, H., Mace, P.M., Pons, M., Minto, C., Osio, G.C., Jensen, O.P., de Moor, C.L., Parma, A.M., Richard Little, L., Hively, D., Ashbrook, C.E., Baker, N., Amoroso, R.O., Branch, T.A., Anderson, C.M., Szuwalski, C.S., Baum, J.K., McClanahan, T.R., Ye, Y., Ligas, A., Bensbai, J., Thompson, G.G., DeVore, J., Magnusson, A., Bogstad, B., Wort, E., Rice, J. and Hilborn, R. (2021). Identifying management actions that promote sustainable fisheries, Nature Sustainability, (4), pp. 440-449, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00668-1 [10 March 2021]
  27. Hilborn, R., Amoroso, R.O., Anderson, C.M., Baum, J.K., Branch, T.A., Costello, C., Moor, C.L.d., Faraj, A., Hively, D., Jensen, O.P., Kurota, H., Little, L.R., Mace, P., McClanahan, T., Melnychuk, M.C., Minto, C., Osio, G.C., Parma, A.M., Pons, M., Segurado, S., Szuwalski, C.S., Wilson, J.R. and Ye, Y. (2020). Effective fisheries management instrumental in improving fish stock status, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, (4), pp. 2218-2224, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1909726116 [13 November 2020]
  28. 115 countries with a score of 33 or higher in either Governance Indicators 3.1.1: ‘Collection and verification of catch data in the most valuable fishery’ or 3.1.2: ‘Collection and verification of effort data in the most valuable fishery’
  29. Of these 115 countries that collect either catch or effort data in the single most valuable fishery, 51 countries score 33 or 66 in either Governance Indicators 3.1.1: ‘Collection and verification of catch data in the most valuable fishery’ or 3.1.2: ‘Collection and verification of effort data in the most valuable fishery’
  30. 55 countries with a score of 25 ‘Few’ or 0 ‘None/Unknown’ for Governance Indicator 3.2.1: ‘Proportion of fish stocks that are formally assessed’. A formal stock assessment is defined as the process of collecting and analysing biological and statistical information to determine the changes in the abundance of fishery stocks in response to fishing and, to the extent possible, to predict future trends of stock abundance. This includes quantitative and qualitative (such as risk-based approaches) assessments completed by a recognised fisheries authority or research institute.
  31. 65 countries score 50 or higher in either Governance Indicator 2.2.4: ‘Prevalence of science-based catch and/or effort limits
  32. 123 countries score 25 or higher in both Governance Indicators 5.1.2: ‘Use of targeted on-land or in-port inspections’ or 5.1.3: ‘Use of targeted on-water inspections’
  33. Of these 123 countries that conduct both in-port and on-water inspections, 33 countries score 50 or lower in either Governance Indicator 5.1.2: ‘Use of targeted on-land or in-port inspections’ or 5.1.3: ‘Use of targeted on-water inspections’
  34. 37 countries with a score of 25 ‘More often than not’ or 0 ‘Routine and expected/Unknown’ for Indicator 5.3.4: ‘Prevalence of executive bribery or corrupt exchanges’. Sourced from Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C.H., Lindberg, S., Teorell, I.J., Altman, D., Bernhard, M., Fish, M.S., Glynn, A., Hicken, A., Luhrmann, A., Marquardt, K.L., McMann, K., Paxton, P., Pemstein, D., Seim, B., Sigman, R., Skaaning, S.E., Staton, J., Cornell, A., Gastaldi, L., Gjerløw, H., Mechkova, V., von Römer, J., Sundtröm, A., Tzelgov, E., Uberti, L., Wang, Y.T., Wig, T. and Ziblatt, D. (2020). ‘V-Dem Codebook v10’ Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/28/14/28140582-43d6-4940-948f-a2df84a31893/v-dem_codebook_v10.pdf [13 January 2021]
  35. Charnley, S., Carothers, C., Satterfield, T., Levine, A., Poe, M.R., Norman, K., Donatuto, J., Breslow, S.J., Mascia, M.B., Levin, P.S., Basurto, X., Hicks, C.C., García-Quijano, C. and St. Martin, K. (2017). Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-making, Environmental Science & Policy 73, pp. 80-88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.002 [5 August 2020]
  36. Stephenson, R.L., Benson, A.J., Brooks, K., Charles, A., Degnbol, P., Dichmont, C.M., Kraan, M., Pascoe, S., Paul, S.D., Rindorf, A. and Wiber, M. (2017). Practical steps towards integrating economic, social and institutional elements in fisheries policy and management, ICES journal of marine science 74, (7), pp. 1981-1989, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsx057 [7 July 2021]
  37. Fritz, J.-S. (2010). Towards a ‘new form of governance’ in science-policy relations in the European Maritime Policy, Marine Policy 34, (1), pp. 1-6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. marpol.2009.04.001 [18 March 2020]
  38. Karr, K.A., Fujita, R., Carcamo, R., Epstein, L., Foley, J.R., Fraire-Cervantes, J.A., Gongora, M., Gonzalez-Cuellar, O.T., Granados-Dieseldorff, P., Guirjen, J., Weaver, A.H., Licón-González, H., Litsinger, E., Maaz, J., Mancao, R., Miller, V., Ortiz-Rodriguez, R., Plomozo-Lugo, T., Rodriguez-Harker, L.F., Rodríguez-Van Dyck, S., Stavrinaky, A., Villanueva-Aznar, C., Wade, B., Whittle, D. and Kritzer, J.P. (2017). Integrating Science-Based Co-management, Partnerships, Participatory Processes and Stewardship Incentives to Improve the Performance of Small-Scale Fisheries, Frontiers in Marine Science 4, (345), https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00345 [14 August 2020]
  39. Stephenson, R.L., Benson, A.J., Brooks, K., Charles, A., Degnbol, P., Dichmont, C.M., Kraan, M., Pascoe, S., Paul, S.D., Rindorf, A. and Wiber, M. (2017). Practical steps towards integrating economic, social and institutional elements in fisheries policy and management, ICES journal of marine science 74, (7), pp. 1981-1989, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsx057 [7 July 2021]
  40. Österblom, H., Jouffray, J.-B., Folke, C., Crona, B., Troell, M., Merrie, A. and Rockström, J. (2015). Transnational Corporations as ‘Keystone Actors’ in Marine Ecosystems, PLOS ONE 10, (5), p. e0127533, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0127533 [11 November 2020]

Disclaimer

The Global Fishing Index is authored by Minderoo Foundation Limited as trustee for The Minderoo Foundation Trust ABN 24 819 440 618 (Minderoo Foundation) and is published by Minderoo Productions Limited (Minderoo Productions). Between them, Minderoo Foundation and Minderoo Productions have exercised care and diligence in the preparation of this report and have relied on information from public sources and contributors they believe to be reliable. However, the report is published on an “as is” basis. Neither Minderoo Foundation nor Minderoo Productions, nor any of their respective directors, officers, employees or agents make any representations or give any warranties, nor accept any liability, in connection with this report (or any use of the report), including as to its accuracy or suitability for use for any purpose. Minderoo Foundation and Minderoo Productions would like to thank the individuals and organisations that contributed to the report (collectively contributors) for their constructive input. Contribution to this report, or any part of it, does not create or reflect any kind of partnership or agency between Minderoo Foundation or Minderoo Productions and the contributors, nor an endorsement of its conclusions or recommendations by the contributors. The inclusion of a contributor’s details in the Contributors section above reflects that the contributor supports the general direction of this report, but does not necessarily agree with every individual conclusion or recommendation.

Minor revisions are occasionally made to publications after release. The digital copies available on the Global Fishing Index website will always include any revisions.