• Energy Research
• 13. Climate action close
• AU close
• Marine Policy close

World fisheries, already vulnerable, are under increasing pressure from the impacts of climate change. Using the Tasmanian rock lobster industry as a case study, we considered the efficacy of risk perception as a tool to inform how to communicate the science of climate change and suggestions for management in relation to development of adaptation strategies for fisheries. Fishers surveyed in this study operate in a fishery that is expected to undergo large changes as a consequence of climate change. Fishers also reported observations of similar large changes in the marine environment and lobster fishery consistent with climate change; yet most fishers surveyed expressed doubts about whether climate change was a real process. The important point for adaption of the industry to climate change is that fisher perceptions of risk tended to create barriers to acceptance of climate change as an issue. This means that there is a barrier to communication and awareness about climate change and thus a barrier to future action on the issue. Improving acceptance of climate change and thus ability to adapt will require the development of communications that are culturally appropriate and palatable to fishers. We argue that the application of social learning principles in communications about climate change may be one constructive way forward.

Abstract Marine policymakers are facing increasing calls to consider the resilience of communities that rely on coastal and marine ecosystem goods and services, and the resilience of natural systems themselves. These calls are in response to increasing threats to coastal communities from external factors such as coastal hazards, possibly associated with climate change, reductions in natural capital often caused by over-fishing and invasive species, and drivers that act to change local and regional economic conditions leading to changes in employment and inequality. However, most communities have had little experience in explicitly managing for resilience. Similarly, our understanding of the factors that make a natural or social system resilient is also somewhat limited. Furthermore, there is a lack of consensus-based definitions and performance measures for assessing resilience. These factors, along with other barriers, will need to be overcome before effective resilience-based management can be implemented.

Abstract Adaptation to climate change has experienced a recent rapid increase in guides, manuals and strategies, including the EU adaptation strategy of 2013. However, minimal critical review or evaluation has been done on the process and outcomes of adaptation strategies. This work presents a comparative analysis of progress towards adaptation strategies in nine coastal areas in NW Europe (from Belgium, France, Ireland and UK) where the INTERREG IVb IMCORE project was implemented. Adaptation progress was evaluated using a suite of indicators in six categories: Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Results & Impact, Sustainability and Management. Data were obtained through a combination of questionnaires and interviews. Although a similar IMCORE adaptation process was implemented there were notable differences between areas. Two alternate modes of implementation were identified: one focused more on impact and results and one on institutionalisation and future security of the adaptation process. The length of history of collaborative working was positively associated with progress in adaptation planning. The results thus recommend creation of a base for collaborative working prior to undertaking an adaptation initiative. However, this contrasts with the EU approach for developing adaptation strategies in which seeking agreement with stakeholders responsible for implementation is the penultimate stage.

Abstract Since the 1990s, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has used global assessments of vulnerability to inform investment and action against the effects of climate change. Beyond the IPCC, others have undertaken global assessments to understand the vulnerability of coastal areas to climate change. Eight global vulnerability assessments are compared to understand similarities and differences in their results and the metrics used to construct a vulnerability index. Variations in objectives, conceptualizations of vulnerability, operationalization of the concepts, scope and depth of data drawn upon lead to contradictory rankings of priority areas for climate action between assessments. The increased complexity and scope of indicators make it difficult to untangle the root causes of such differences in rankings. It is also difficult to identify the degree to which climate change influences vulnerability rankings compared to other factors such as local environmental conditions and the capacity of populations to deal with environmental change. The way to undertake global assessments needs to be reshaped to better inform planning of international development along different objectives. Global level assessments need to be simplified and harmonized to better isolate the impact of climate change specific drivers. Decision-makers would make better use of such global assessments as scoping studies rather than expect comprehensive and robust priorities for investment. Such scoping studies can help target locations where supplementary, in-depth local analyses need to be conducted. At the local level, the possibility to collect context-specific information, particularly on adaptive capacity, allows the robust assessment of vulnerability.

Abstract Assessing the vulnerability of species to anthropogenic threats is an essential step when developing management strategies for wild populations. With industrial development forecasted to increase in Spencer Gulf, South Australia, it is crucial to assess the ongoing effects of anthropogenic threats to resident and migratory species. Expert elicitation was used to assess 27 threats against 38 threatened, protected, and iconic marine-associated species. Species and threat interactions were assessed individually, and as taxonomic or functional groups. Climate change had the greatest overall exposure (c.f. risk) across species, followed by disturbance, pollution, disease/invasive species, and fishing/aquaculture threats. The largest overall sensitivities (c.f. consequences) were pollution and disease/invasive species, followed by climate change, disturbance and fishing/aquaculture threats. Vulnerability scores (exposure x sensitivity) showed the climate change group posing the greatest overall threat in Spencer Gulf, with individual climatic threats ranking as three of the top four biggest threats to most animal groups. Noise, shipping, and net fishing were considered the greatest region-specific individual threats to marine mammals; as were trawl fishing, line fishing, and coastal activities to fish/cuttlefish; trawl fishing, line fishing, and net fishing to elasmobranchs; and oil spill, disease, and coastal activities to sea/shorebirds. Eighteen of the 20 highest vulnerability scores involved the short-beaked common dolphin, Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin, and Australian sea lion, highlighting the particular susceptibility of these species to specific threats. These findings provide a synthesis of key threats and vulnerable species, and give management a basis to direct future monitoring and threat mitigation efforts in the region.

This paper explores institutional responses from Regional Fisheries Bodies (RFBs) to climate change. Fisheries management is highly dependent on the stability or predictability of targeted fish populations. Oceanic changes occurring as a result of climate change will see continuing and potentially irreversible deviations from the conditions of fisheries past. These changes present challenges to fisheries management at all scales – from local to international – relating to food security, sustainability, and ecological integrity. Areas of measurably warmer ocean, or ‘hotspots’, are a very clear indicator of direct climate change effects. RFBs with hotspots in their areas of competence were chosen for this study. Three levels of institutional engagement were developed: Awareness of climate change; Learning about climate change; Action taken by the institutions. While 94% of institutions demonstrated awareness of climate change and 82% demonstrated learning about climate change, only 41% demonstrated some form of action; and these were mainly procedural and administrative. Only two of the RFBs considered made explicit statements about incorporating climate change into future fishing management plans. The inference is that RFBs are largely practising business-as-usual, with the implication that many exploited fish populations will face additional survival pressure as the sea around them alters.

Up until the recent oil and commodity price crash in 2015, there has been exponential growth in global shipping and trade, and this increase means that prompt action is required to reduce vessel-sourced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Future projections suggest that maritime CO2 emissions will increase substantially by between 50% and 250%. However, there is currently no international instrument holding global shipping corporations accountable for their vessels' performance in emissions reduction. This article critically assesses the current accountability practices and regulations in place for these corporations. It suggests that stakeholders in this industry need to further explore the market based mechanisms (MBMs) that can encourage and even demand that these corporations systematically disclose their vessels' emissions reduction performance in an accurate and timely manner. Developing such mechanisms is vital to assist in the reduction of GHG emissions since a comprehensive international instrument is unlikely to be implemented soon.