Conclusion

Over the course of writing this blog, I've gained an appreciation of how complex fisheries dynamics are particularly because they face pressures that are both physical and human. We've seen in previous weeks that climate change impacts on fisheries are not straightforward and that our understanding of what the future holds is quite uncertain.

In more recent weeks, we've examined some of the possible responses to the problems faced by fisheries. While it seems there is considerable potential for reducing emissions and adopting more sustainable practices, we've seen that there is no single, universal quick fix and that different practices work best in different contexts.

So far it seems that this concluding post is quite inconclusive, raising more problems than answering questions! But in a way I think this is reflective of the approach we must take to all climate issues (including fisheries): incessantly asking new questions, critically pointing out the flaws in any answers we find.

I hope you've enjoyed following this blog as much as I've enjoyed writing it, and that you'll keep track of the rapidly expanding yet problematic world of fisheries. Thanks!

Mitigation

Previously we examined adaptation measures - steps that can be taken to prepare for a world in which the predicted consequences of climate change are a reality. You might consider this a pessimistic approach which accepts the worst, but adaptation is often implemented alongside mitigation. Mitigation involves taking action now that can limit climate change and therefore minimise damaging and unforeseen impacts.

Technical fixes play a big role in mitigation - measures to improve fuel efficiency and reduce degradation caused by existing technologies. In the context of fisheries, an important strand in mitigation has been improving the fuel efficiency of fishing vessels. IFAD (2014) suggests that this can be achieved through the adoption of lightweight materials and aerodynamic hull shapes, as well as improving the engines themselves. On the 30th October 2014, Finnish marine technology and energy company Wärtsilä announced that they had been contracted by Scottish company Lunar Fishing to provide fuel-efficient engines for two 78m vessels (see below) which will operate in the North Sea upon construction in 2016.

Figure 1 - Two trawlers with energy efficient engines, scheduled for completion 2016 (source: Wärtsilä)

Of course, on paper it sounds very easy to simply install better gears onto vessels. As demonstrated with the above example, however, this option is only really feasible on large scales and require significant financial input. Suuronen et al. (2012) point out that there are significant barriers to entry when it comes to obtaining more efficient technologies, including 'restricted access to capital; ineffective technology infrastructure support; and inflexible fisheries management systems that restrict the rapid development and uptake of alternative gears'. So while it is clear that technology will be instrumental in reducing human impact, the existing fisheries infrastructure will have to be altered to make the widespread proliferation of these gears and technological fixes more viable. One solution might be the offer of government investment and loans to small and medium scale fisheries businesses to help them buy better equipment.

Now while this is a step in the right direction, the bulk of fisheries GHG emissions stem from product transport (FAO 2014). As such, the greatest potential for reducing emissions can be found in reforming transportation practices. The 2014 report by the FAO suggests that an industry-wide shift to bulk sea freight instead of non-bulk sea freight and air freight transportation can considerably reduce the emissions per unit of product. Daw et al. (2009) go so far as to assert that even with fisheries activity forecast to intensify over the coming decades, emissions reductions still be achieved if the above measures are executed.

While this is clearly a viable option in more economically developed parts of the world, it cannot be as easily implemented in the Global South where much fishing is carried out on the localised subsistence level. In this case, where individual fishermen try to feed their families, the bulk freight approach is fundamentally incompatible. In this case, it might be worth considering local management approaches which take into consideration the livelihoods and knowledge of coastal communities.