Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-3 (section)

===== 3.6.3.1.2 Fisheries and mariculture =====

<div id="h4-19-siblings" class="h4-siblings"></div>

SROCC ( [[#Bindoff--2019a|Bindoff et al., 2019a]] ) assessed adaptation in fisheries and mariculture (marine aquaculture), and socioeconomically focused updates are provided in [[IPCC:Wg2:Chapter:Chapter-5#5.8.4|Section 5.8.4]] and Cross-Chapter Box MOVING SPECIES in Chapter 5. Here, we present a brief synthesis of how fisheries and mariculture adaptations interact with the natural environment, with further detail and supporting material in SM3.5.2.

Mobility allows fishing fleets and fishers to adapt to shifts in marine species distributions ( ''high agreement'' ) (Sections 3.4.3.1, 3.5.3; [[#Peck--2018|Peck and Pinnegar, 2018]] ; [[#Pinsky--2018|Pinsky et al., 2018]] ; [[#Frazão%20Santos--2020|Frazão Santos et al., 2020]] ) but with limits and unintended consequences ( [[#Pinsky--2012|Pinsky and Fogarty, 2012]] ; [[#Bell--2021|Bell et al., 2021]] ). Diversification of target species, harvest tactics and employment sectors, including transitions from fisheries to mariculture and ecotourism, allows some fishers to accommodate some impacts on their livelihoods ( [[#Miller--2018|Miller et al., 2018]] ; [[#Robinson--2020|Robinson et al., 2020]] ; [[#Gonzalez-Mon--2021|Gonzalez-Mon et al., 2021]] ). Technology and infrastructure adaptations can improve marine harvest efficiency, reduce risk and support resource management goals ( [[#Friedman--2020|Friedman et al., 2020]] ; [[#Bell--2021|Bell et al., 2021]] ; [[#Melbourne-Thomas--2021|Melbourne-Thomas et al., 2021]] ), but their ability to overcome climate-change impacts remains uncertain ( [[#Bell--2020|Bell et al., 2020]] ). Improving capacity to predict anomalous conditions in coastal and marine ecosystems ( [[#Jacox--2019|Jacox et al., 2019]] ; [[#Holbrook--2020|Holbrook et al., 2020]] ; [[#Jacox--2020|Jacox et al., 2020]] ), storm-driven flooding in reef-lined coasts ( [[#Scott--2020|Scott et al., 2020]] ; [[#Winter--2020|Winter et al., 2020]] ) and fisheries stocks ( [[#Payne--2017|Payne et al., 2017]] ; [[#Tommasi--2017|Tommasi et al., 2017]] ; [[#Muhling--2018|Muhling et al., 2018]] ) can improve forecasts of coastal and marine resources; these can enhance sustainability of wild-capture fisheries under climate change ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Blanchard--2017|Blanchard et al., 2017]] ; [[#Tommasi--2017|Tommasi et al., 2017]] ; [[#Pinsky--2020a|Pinsky et al., 2020a]] ; [[#Bell--2021|Bell et al., 2021]] ). Limiting overexploitation is the central goal of fishery management, and it ''very likely'' benefits fisheries adaptation to climate change ( [[#Burden--2019|Burden and Fujita, 2019]] ; [[#Free--2019|Free et al., 2019]] ; [[#Sumaila--2020|Sumaila and Tai, 2020]] ). Conventional tools include catch and size limits, spatial management and adaptive management. Ecosystem-based fisheries management outperforms single-species management ( [[#Fulton--2019|Fulton et al., 2019]] ), is widely legislated ( [[#Bryndum-Buchholz--2021|Bryndum-Buchholz et al., 2021]] ) and can reduce climate impacts in fisheries in the near-term, especially under low-emission scenarios ( [[#Karp--2019|Karp et al., 2019]] ; [[#Holsman--2020|Holsman et al., 2020]] ). Transboundary agreements on shifting fisheries will reduce the risk of overharvesting ( ''medium confidence'' ) ( [[#Gaines--2018|Gaines et al., 2018]] ). Permits tradable across political boundaries could also address this challenge, but ''limited evidence'' is available regarding their efficacy (Cross-Chapter Box MOVING SPECIES in Chapter 5; [[#Pinsky--2018|Pinsky et al., 2018]] ). Climate-smart conservation ( [[#3.6.3|Section 3.6.3]] 2.1) under the negotiations on areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) ( [[#Pinsky--2018|Pinsky et al., 2018]] ; [[#Tittensor--2019|Tittensor et al., 2019]] ; [[#Frazão%20Santos--2020|Frazão Santos et al., 2020]] ), and in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) areas designed as other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) ( [[#Tittensor--2019|Tittensor et al., 2019]] ), provide further benefits. Despite the potential for adaptive management to achieve sustainable fisheries, outcomes will ''very likely'' be inequitable ( [[#Gaines--2018|Gaines et al., 2018]] ; [[#Lam--2020|Lam et al., 2020]] ), with lower-income countries suffering the greater biomass and economic losses, increasing inequalities, especially under higher-emission scenarios ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Boyce--2020|Boyce et al., 2020]] ). Flexible and polycentric governance approaches have facilitated some short-term successes in achieving equitable, sustainable fisheries practices, but these may be challenging to implement where other governance systems, especially hierarchical systems, are well established ( [[#Cvitanovic--2018|Cvitanovic et al., 2018]] ; [[#Bell--2020|Bell et al., 2020]] ).

<div id="3.6.3.1.3" class="h4-container"></div>

<span id="tourism"></span>