Climate change increases risk of fisheries conflict
Todd McLeish
A
team of fisheries scientists and marine policy experts, led by a University of
Rhode Island researcher, examined how climate change is affecting the ocean
environment and found that the changing conditions will likely result in
increased fisheries-related conflicts and create new challenges in the
management of global fisheries.
A
team of fisheries scientists and marine policy experts, led by a University of
Rhode Island researcher, examined how climate change is affecting the ocean
environment and found that the changing conditions will likely result in
increased fisheries-related conflicts and create new challenges in the
management of global fisheries.
The team’s research was published
last month in the journal Marine Policy.
Elizabeth Mendenhall, URI assistant
professor of marine affairs, said that ocean warming, acidification and sea
level rise that are a direct result of climate change are causing populations
of fish to shift, making fish increasingly scarce, shifting the boundaries of
where nations can legally fish, and increasing the intensity of fishing
pressure around the world. The result will be growing conflicts between
individual fishermen, fishing communities, fishing nations and fishery
managers.
“These conflicts exist at multiple scales,” said Mendenhall, who is writing a book about geopolitics and ocean governance. “Some of it is one boat versus another, sometimes it’s one country versus another, and it can get very complicated. It isn’t just about overfishing any more. There are other drivers and other dynamics involved.”
As warming temperatures shift fish
populations to different areas, for instance, the bulk of those stocks may
cross the borders of a nations’ 200-mile exclusive economic zone, making it
illegal for those who have fished those stocks for many years to pursue them
any longer.
“We’re seeing examples of fishermen crossing borders more often now because the stocks they feel they have a right to have shifted across the border,” Mendenhall said.
Among the more challenging questions
that climate change is raising for fishing nations is what happens when sea
level rise submerges an island. Does that change the nation’s maritime
boundaries?
“It’s an ongoing debate about whether you keep your maritime claim even though you have no land base to manage it from,” said Mendenhall. “Or does your claim go away? There are a lot of nations that fish over long distances that are ready to exploit those areas if national boundaries no longer exist.”
The tiny Japanese atoll of
Okinotorishima is one such case. Located in the southernmost archipelago of
Japan, its submergence is raising questions about whether Taiwan and China may
legally fish in the area claimed by Japan.
“I argue that as sea level rises,
Japan’s argument gets weaker,” said Mendenhall, noting that the countries have
not challenged the boundaries based on the island’s submergence yet. “The rules
on where you can make your maritime claim are based on where the land is.
“The same problem applies to
coastlines,” she added. “Low-lying countries like Bangladesh and Vietnam could
lose a lot of maritime territory as sea level rises. The outer edge of their
claim could move closer to their coastline.”
The research team makes a series of
recommendations based on its findings designed to improve global fishery
management. They recommend greater multilateral fishery monitoring, similar to
what is in place off East Africa to combat piracy, which can help deter or
catch illegal fishers, thereby reducing the chance that individual fishing
boats will take matters into their own hands.
“We also suggest that marine
protected areas be used, but it’s critical that the area protected is one where
habitats are still thriving despite climate change,” Mendenhall said.
“There is concern, however, that when you protect one area, it may displace the fishers to somewhere else and make the problem worse elsewhere. We need to think about the dynamics that protected areas may cause and account for that in the site selection process.”
“There is concern, however, that when you protect one area, it may displace the fishers to somewhere else and make the problem worse elsewhere. We need to think about the dynamics that protected areas may cause and account for that in the site selection process.”
Finally, the researchers recommend
strengthening the global fisheries management regime by taking into account
climate change and the new sources of fishery conflict.
The management boundaries of many fish stocks were drawn decades ago, and some parts of the open ocean are not managed at all because no productive fish stocks were there many years ago, yet there may be fish stocks there in the future.
Most importantly, they suggest that the regional fishery management organizations work together to develop coordinated governance systems to better manage fisheries as environmental conditions change and greater conflicts arise.
The management boundaries of many fish stocks were drawn decades ago, and some parts of the open ocean are not managed at all because no productive fish stocks were there many years ago, yet there may be fish stocks there in the future.
Most importantly, they suggest that the regional fishery management organizations work together to develop coordinated governance systems to better manage fisheries as environmental conditions change and greater conflicts arise.
“These changes to how [regional
fishery management organizations] manage fisheries, and how they coordinate and
cooperate with one another, can make high seas fisheries management more
resilient to shifts in stocks and users, and changes in relative abundance,”
the researchers conclude.