• Energy Research

AbstractClimate change is expected to profoundly affect key food production sectors, including fisheries and agriculture. However, the potential impacts of climate change on these sectors are rarely considered jointly, especially below national scales, which can mask substantial variability in how communities will be affected. Here, we combine socioeconomic surveys of 3,008 households and intersectoral multi-model simulation outputs to conduct a sub-national analysis of the potential impacts of climate change on fisheries and agriculture in 72 coastal communities across five Indo-Pacific countries (Indonesia, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, and Tanzania). Our study reveals three key findings: First, overall potential losses to fisheries are higher than potential losses to agriculture. Second, while most locations (> 2/3) will experience potential losses to both fisheries and agriculture simultaneously, climate change mitigation could reduce the proportion of places facing that double burden. Third, potential impacts are more likely in communities with lower socioeconomic status.

AbstractEmerging fishing activity due to melting ice and poleward species distribution shifts in the rapidly‐warming Arctic Ocean challenges transboundary management and requires proactive governance. A 2021 moratorium on commercial fishing in the Arctic high seas provides a 16‐year runway for improved scientific understanding. Given substantial knowledge gaps, characterizing areas of highest uncertainty is a key first step. Marine ecosystem model ensembles that project future fish distributions could inform management of future Arctic fisheries, but Arctic‐specific variation has not yet been examined for global ensembles. We use the Fisheries and Marine Ecosystem Intercomparison Project ensemble driven by two Earth System Models (ESMs) under two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP1‐2.6 and SSP5‐8.5) to illustrate the current state of and uncertainty among biomass projections for the Arctic Ocean over the duration of the moratorium. The models generally project biomass increases in more northern Arctic ecosystems and decreases in southern ecosystems, but wide intra‐model variation exceeds projection means in most cases. The two ESMs show opposite trends for the main environmental drivers. Therefore, these projections are currently insufficient to inform policy actions. Investment in sustained monitoring and improving modeling capacity, especially for sea ice dynamics, is urgently needed. Concurrently, it will be necessary to develop frameworks for making precautionary decisions under continued uncertainty. We conclude that researchers should be transparent about uncertainty, presenting these model projections not as a source of scientific “answers,” but as bounding for plausible, policy‐relevant questions to assess trade‐offs and mitigate risks.