Small-scale fisheries and aquaculture (SSFA) provide livelihoods for over 100 million people and sustenance for ~1 billion people, particularly in the Global South. Aquatic foods are distributed through diverse supply chains, with the potential to be highly adaptable to stresses and shocks, but face a growing range of threats and adaptive challenges. Contemporary governance assumes homogeneity in SSFA despite the diverse nature of this sector. Here we use SSFA actor profiles to capture the key dimensions and dynamism of SSFA diversity, reviewing contemporary threats and exploring opportunities for the SSFA sector. The heuristic framework can inform adaptive governance actions supporting the diversity and vital roles of SSFA in food systems, and in the health and livelihoods of nutritionally vulnerable people—supporting their viability through appropriate policies whilst fostering equitable and sustainable food systems.

BACKGROUND: Globally, there is increasing scientific evidence of critical links between the oceans and human health, with research into issues such as pollution, harmful algal blooms and nutritional contributions. However, Oceans and Human Health (OHH) remains an emerging discipline. As such these links are poorly recognized in policy efforts such as the Sustainable Development Goals, with OHH not included in either marine (SDG14) or health (SDG3) goals. This is arguably short-sighted given recent development strategies such as the EU Blue Growth Agenda. OBJECTIVES: in this systematic map we aim to build on recent efforts to enhance OHH in Europe by setting a baseline of existing evidence, asking: What links have been researched between marine environments and the positive and negative impacts to human health and wellbeing? METHODS: We searched eight bibliographic databases and queried 57 organizations identified through stakeholder consultation. Results include primary research and systematic reviews which were screened double blind against pre-defined inclusion criteria as per a published protocol. Studies were limited to Europe, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Data was extracted according to a stakeholder-defined code book. A narrative synthesis explores the current evidence for relationships between marine exposures and human health outcomes, trends in knowledge gaps and change over time in the OHH research landscape. The resulting database is available on the website of the Seas, Oceans and Public Health in Europe website (https://sophie2020.eu/). RESULTS: a total of 1,542 unique articles were included in the database, including those examined within 56 systematic reviews. Research was dominated by a US focus representing 50.1% of articles. A high number of articles were found to link: marine biotechnology and cardiovascular or immune conditions, consumption of seafood and cardiovascular health, chemical pollution and neurological conditions, microbial pollution and gastrointestinal or respiratory health, and oil industry occupations with mental health. A lack of evidence relates to direct impacts of plastic pollution and work within a number of industries identified as relevant by stakeholders. Research over time is dominated by marine biotechnology, though this is narrow in focus. Pollution, food and disease/injury research follow similar trajectories. Wellbeing and climate change have emerged more recently as key topics but lag behind other categories in volume of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: the evidence base for OHH of relevance to European policy is growing but remains patchy and poorly co-ordinated. Considerable scope for future evidence synthesis exists to better inform policy-makers, though reviews need to better incorporate complex exposures. Priorities for future research include: proactive assessments of chemical pollutants, measurable impacts arising from climate change, effects of emerging marine industries, and regional and global assessments for OHH interactions. Understanding of synergistic effects across multiple exposures and outcomes using systems approaches is recommended to guide policies within the Blue Growth Strategy. Co-ordination of research across Europe and dedicated centres of research would be effective first steps.

Free or subsidised mosquito net (MN) distribution has been an increasingly important tool in efforts to combat malaria in recent decades throughout the developing world, making great strides towards eradicating this hugely detrimental disease. However, there has been increasing concern in the natural resource management and healthcare communities over alternative use of MNs, particularly in artisanal fisheries where it has been suggested they pose a threat to sustainability of fish stocks. So far, little evidence has been presented as to the global prevalence and characteristics of MN fishing, limiting global management initiatives and incentives for action across disciplines. We conducted a rapid global assessment of mosquito net fishing (MNF) observations from expert witnesses living and/or working in malarial zones using an internet survey. MNF was found to be a broadly pan-tropical activity, particularly prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa. MNF is conducted using a variety of deployment methods and scales including seine nets, scoop/dip nets, set nets and traps. MNF was witnessed in a broad range of marine and freshwater habitats and was seen to exploit a wide range of taxa, with capture of juvenile fish reported in more than half of responses. Perceived drivers of MNF were closely related to poverty, revealing potentially complex and arguably detrimental livelihood and food security implications which we discuss in light of current literature and management paradigms. The key policies likely to influence future impacts of MNF are in health, regarding net distribution, and natural resource management regarding restrictions on use. We outline critical directions for research and highlight the need for a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach to development of both localised and broad-scale policy.

Research on the values of fish populations and fisheries has primarily focused on bio-economic aspects; a more nuanced and multidimensional perspective is mostly neglected. Although a range of social aspects is increasingly being considered in fisheries research, there is still no clear understanding as to how to include these additional values within management policies nor is there a cogent appreciation of the major knowledge gaps that should be tackled by future research. This paper results from a workshop held during the 50th anniversary symposium of the Fisheries Society of the British Isles at the University of Exeter, UK, in July 2017. Here, we aim to highlight the current knowledge gaps on the values of fish populations and fisheries thus directing future research. To this end, we present eight questions that are deeply relevant to understanding the values of fish populations and fisheries. These can be applied to all habitats and fisheries, including freshwater, estuarine and marine.

AbstractWidespread, anecdotal reports of the use of bed nets designed for malaria control (“mosquito nets”) in artisanal fisheries have led to concern from health and natural resource management sectors. However, mosquito net fishing (MNF) may play an important role in the livelihoods of artisanal fishers, an aspect not yet investigated. At a coastal Kenyan site among Giriama fishers, nearly half of homesteads interviewed used mosquito nets as fishing gear, targeting juvenile fish and prawns for subsistence and sale. The majority of mosquito net (MN) fishers here were men, suggesting that the assumption that MNF is a female activity is not valid in this case. However, MN use for fishing at this site is unlikely to impact malaria protection as fishers used old or surplus nets. Respondents perceived both positive aspects of MNF (e.g. food and income) and negative aspects (e.g. impact on fishery). As mosquito nets are widely available, they may enable new entrants to access fisheries. There is a critical need to review current management responses, which predominately focus on banning the practice, and instead promote integrated strategies for sustainable livelihoods.