Millions of people are suffering from malnutrition despite some of the most nutritious fish species in the world being caught near their homes, according to published Sept. 25 in Nature.

Children in many tropical coastal areas are particularly vulnerable and could see significant health improvements if just a fraction of the fish caught nearby was diverted into their diets.

As well as omega-3 fatty acids, fish are also a source of important micronutrients such as iron, zinc and calcium. Yet more than 2 billion people worldwide suffer from micronutrient deficiencies, which are linked to maternal mortality and stunted growth, among other conditions.

This new research, led by an international team including the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý, suggests enough nutrients are already being fished out of the oceans to substantially reduce malnutrition and, at a time when the world is being asked to think more carefully about where and how we produce our food, fishing more may not be the answer.

“Nearly half the global population lives within 100 kilometers (62 miles) of the coast. Half of those countries have moderate to severe deficiency risks; yet, our research shows that the nutrients currently fished out of their waters exceeds the dietary requirements for all under age 5 within their coastal band. If these catches were more accessible locally they could have a huge impact on global food security and combat malnutrition-related disease in millions of people,” said lead author and professor of Lancaster University’s Environment Centre.

The research team collected data on the concentration of seven nutrients in more than 350 species of marine fish and developed a statistical model for predicting how much nutrition any given species of fish contains, based on their diet, sea water temperature and energy expenditure.

This modelling allowed researchers to accurately predict the likely nutrient composition of thousands of fish species that have never been nutritionally analyzed before.

Using current fish landings data, they quantified the global distribution of nutrients available from existing marine fisheries. This information was then compared with the prevalence of nutrient deficiencies around the world.

Their results showed important nutrients were readily available in the fish already being caught, but they were not reaching many local populations that were often most in need.

For example, the amount of fish currently caught off the West African coast — where people suffer from high levels of zinc, iron and vitamin A deficiencies — was sufficient to meet the nutritional needs of the people living within 100 kilometers (62 miles) of the sea.

Parts of Asia, the Pacific and the Caribbean were some of the other coastal regions showing a similar pattern of high malnutrition, despite sufficient fish nutrients in the local catch.

Researchers say that a complex picture of fisheries policies, global-local market interactions and international and illegal fishing — along with varied cultural preferences or aversions to seafood — are standing between malnourished people and the more-than-adequate fish nutrients caught on their doorstep.

“Our food systems are a mosaic of local and global products, and fish are among the most internationally traded foods,” said co-author , professor in the UW School of Marine and Environmental Affairs. “There are two ways in which seafood slips out of the hands of the poor. One is that lower-cost, often highly nutritious small, oily fish are the basis for the world’s aquaculture, animal feeds and pet food trades. These markets can pay as much or more than low-income consumers for their fish. The second is that the demand for high-quality imported seafood in wealthy countries means that our fishery management systems and markets tend to funnel fish toward those who can pay the most for it. Fisheries management has to be orientated more toward contributing to human nutrition if we want to close this nutrition gap.”

Other co-authors are Philippa Cohen, Coralie D’Lima, David Mills, Matthew Roscher and Shakuntala Thilsted of WorldFish; Nicholas Graham of Lancaster University; Kirsty Nash of the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania; Andrew Thorne-Lyman of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; and Aaron MacNeil of Dalhousie University.

The research was funded by the European Research Council, Lancaster University, the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, the Royal Society University Research Fellowship, the Canada Research Chairs program, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research and the U.S. Agency for International Development.

For more information, contact Allison at eha1@uw.edu or Hicks at christina.hicks@lancaster.ac.uk.

This was adapted from a Lancaster University .

Authored by a team from Conservation International, the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý and other organizations, the paper is the first integrated approach to meeting this global challenge and will be presented as part of the UN Oceans Conference and the Seafood Summit, which both take place June 5-9 in New York and Seattle, respectively.

The article, published June 1 in Science, is in direct response to investigative reports by the Associated Press, the Guardian, The New York Times and other media outlets that uncovered glaring human rights violations on fishing vessels. The investigations tracked the widespread use of slave labor in Southeast Asia and its role in bringing seafood to American restaurants and supermarkets, chronicling the plight of fishermen tricked and trapped into working 22-hour days, often without pay and while enduring abuse.

Subsequent investigations have documented the global extent of these abuses in a wide array of countries.

“The scientific community has not kept pace with concerns for social issues in the seafood sector,” said lead author Jack Kittinger, Conservation International’s senior director for global fisheries and aquaculture. “The purpose of this initiative is to ensure that governments, businesses, and nonprofits are working together to improve human rights, equality and food and livelihood security. This is a holistic and comprehensive approach that establishes a global standard to address these social challenges.”

The paper identifies three key principles that together establish a global standard for social responsibility in the seafood sector: protecting human rights, dignity and respecting access to resources; ensuring equality and equitable opportunities to benefit; and improving food and livelihood security.

“This paper stresses that if we are serious about social responsibility in our food systems, we need to go beyond dealing with the ‘worst-case’ headlines of ‘slavery at sea,'” said co-author , a UW professor in the School of Marine and Environmental Affairs.

“We argue that committing to sustainable seafood sourcing and supply is also about ensuring people who work in the food business ― whether as harvesters or processors and packers ― have decent work. It is also about ensuring communities who rely on the sea economically and culturally, particularly coastal indigenous communities, don’t have their harvest rights appropriated by powerful outside interests.”

More than half of the world’s fisheries sector workforce is female, and there are still widespread gender-based disparities in income and working conditions, Allison added.

Seafood is the world’s most internationally traded food commodity. By 2030, the oceans will need to supply more than 150 million metric tons of seafood to meet the demands of a growing population. The paper calls on governments, businesses and the scientific community to take measurable steps to ensure seafood is sourced without harm to the environment and people that work in the seafood industry.

“In some places, commercial fishing boats from other parts of the world are virtually robbing local small-scale fishers of the fish that they rely on to make a living and survive. Fisheries are not truly sustainable unless local people are able to benefit from the harvesting of resources,” said co-author , a postdoctoral researcher at the UW.

As part of the initiative, Conservation International has organized a , calling on governments, NGOs, businesses and other organizations to improve social responsibility in the seafood sector.

Zach Koehn, a doctoral student in aquatic and fishery sciences, is another co-author from the UW.

This was adapted from a Conservation International .

At its heart, the problem is a simple one of supply and demand: Global fish catches peaked in 1996, while the Earth’s human population is expected to rise through 2050, from the current 7.3 billion to between 9 billion and 10 billion.

But that straightforward dynamic oversimplifies a problem also affected by natural processes, economic pressures, international regulations and human health needs.

Lead author , research scientist at the and associate director of the , said that it is important to include human nutrition, along with biodiversity preservation and economic considerations, in determining how fisheries are managed.

The work estimates that, in the coming decades, 11 percent of the global population — 845 million people — is vulnerable to micronutrient deficiencies due to its reliance on seafood, a figure that climbs to 19 percent, or 1.39 billion people, if nutrients only found in animal sources, such as vitamin B12 and DHA omega-3 fatty acids, are included.

Co-author , a professor in the UW’s , said fish usually are considered to be a good source of protein. Perhaps more important, however, are the micronutrients found in fish and other seafood, particularly in poor nations where there may not be another source to get these necessary nutrients.

“We are able to quantify for the first time what supply and availability of a major food group such as fish and seafood means for maintaining the health of populations that are vulnerable to nutrient deficiencies,” Allison said.

Fish provide often overlooked micronutrients, including vitamin B12, iron and zinc. According to the , published June 16 as a commentary in the journal Nature, micronutrient deficiencies can affect maternal mortality, child mortality, cause cognitive defects, and impact immune function. Some 45 percent of mortality in children under age 5 is attributable to undernutrition.

The report says that the vulnerability of these poor, fish-dependent populations in the tropics has been underestimated and that these are the very places whose fish resources are under the most intense pressure.

The analysis of two new databases, one from the research initiative at the and the other from a team led by Samuel Myers at Harvard, says that those most likely to suffer the impact of fisheries’ decline are the global poor, particularly those for whom fish make up a significant part of their diet.

“We’re missing an enormous piece of this picture, because many of the consequences of the way we manage resources and conserve natural systems will have very strong and powerful downstream effects on human health,” said Golden, of Harvard. “It’s not just a biodiversity issue, it’s not just an economics issue. We need to be really thinking through this third dimension, human health and well-being.”

Golden said those in industrialized nations can compensate for the nutritional gap left by a decline of fish in the diet. They can afford to buy replacement foods, supplements, and vitamins, while those in developing nations often have few alternatives.

The Planetary Health Alliance officially launched in January in partnership with the Wildlife Conservation Society and with support from The Rockefeller Foundation. The study was conducted under joint leadership of Harvard, the University of British Columbia, the UW, and the University of California at Santa Barbara.

The research was supported by the , through the “” initiative and the .

###

This was adapted from a Harvard news release. 

Researchers have discovered a handful of “bright spots” among the world’s embattled coral reefs, offering the promise of a radical new approach to conservation.

In one of the of its kind, researchers including ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý professor reviewed more than 6,000 reef surveys in 46 countries across the globe, and discovered 15 bright spots — places where, against all odds, there were a lot more fish on coral reefs than expected.

“Given the widespread depletion of coral reef fisheries globally, we were really excited to find these bright spots that were faring much better than we anticipated,” said lead author , a professor with the at James Cook University in Queensland, Australia.

The was published June 15 in Nature. Nearly 40 scientists from 34 different universities and conservation groups conducted the research.

Bright spots are reefs with more fish than expected based on their exposure to factors such as human population, poverty and unfavorable environmental conditions. Bright spots are not necessarily pristine reefs, but rather reefs that have more fish than they should, given the pressures they face.

Allison, a professor in the UW’s , contributed ideas from his studies of international development and business organizations on ways to identify coral reefs that were doing better, ecologically, than expected, given global and local pressures they are under.

“This allows us to focus on these areas to learn lessons which might help conserve or restore other reefs, a particularly urgent task given the mounting pressure from global change,” Allison said.

This type of bright spots analysis has been used in fields such as human health to improve the well-being of millions of people. This study is the first time the method has been rigorously developed for conservation.

The scientists also identified 35 “dark spots” — reefs with fish stocks in worse shape than expected.

Bright spots were typically found in the Pacific Ocean in places like the Solomon Islands, parts of Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Kiribati. Dark spots were more globally distributed and found in every major ocean basin.

“Many bright spots had strong local involvement in how the reefs were managed, local ownership rights, and traditional management practices,” said co-author Christina Hicks of Lancaster and Stanford universities. “Dark spots also had a few defining characteristics; they were subject to intensive netting activities and there was easy access to freezers so people could stockpile fish to send to the market.”

The study found that marine waters deemed important to conserve were also areas that people use heavily, supporting a number of livelihoods such as fishing. This study could change the emphasis from creating marine protected areas in remote parts of the ocean to recognizing that conservation is important, and possible, in heavily used waters, Allison said.

“This kind of science really helps us make good choices on where to invest efforts and resources on marine protection,” he said. “This allows us a whole new entry point into conservation and planning, especially as the seas are increasingly zoned for different uses such as energy generation, conservation and food production.”

“We believe that the bright spots offer hope and some solutions that can be applied more broadly across the world’s coral reefs,” Cinner said. “Specifically, investments that foster local involvement and provide people with ownership rights can allow people to develop creative solutions that help defy expectations of reef fisheries depletion.”

This was adapted from an ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies news release.

Less visible, but perhaps more indelible, signs of changing climate lie in the oceans. A ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý researcher argues in the journal that people — including world leaders who will gather later this month in Paris for global climate change negotiations — should pay more attention to how climate change’s impacts on ocean and coastal environments affect societies around the globe.

“When people see headlines on big science findings that the oceans are acidifying, or sea levels are rising, they feel a sense of helplessness in the face of inexorable change,” said lead author and UW professor of marine and environmental affairs . “Yet there are many things that people can, and indeed are already, doing.”

The review , published Nov. 13, looks at scientific understanding of changes to the world’s oceans and how people around the world are responding to those changes. These reactions include denial, planned adaptation, a search for technical fixes, and political activism to reduce emissions and tackle the root causes of climate change. The paper also looks at how projected changes in climate and ocean conditions will impact economic activities related to the oceans, to begin a discussion about the future of the human relationship with the marine environment.

“I felt that there was a gap in the research being carried out by the ocean sciences community,” Allison said. “Research hasn’t really engaged with the politics of climate mitigation and adaptation in the way that scientists working on forests and agriculture have.”

“There’s a lot of citizen action that can be done at a local level to prevent coastal damage,” he said. Examples cited in the paper include planting mangroves, saving coral reefs, or preventing beach erosion by planting coconut palms. In the Pacific Northwest, shellfish growers have begun to look at how to adapt their practices to account for more acidic seawater.

On a broader scale, Allison points to this spring’s “” protesters in Seattle’s Puget Sound, where people took to non-motorized marine craft to protest plans to capitalize on melting Arctic sea ice to extract more fossil fuels from the Arctic Ocean.

“I think the kayaktivists send a message that the future of the oceans, when it comes to energy generation, should be in renewables rather than in fossil fuels,” Allison said. “You have this perverse situation where the melting of polar ice caps has allowed more economic exploitation of the Arctic, including for industries that contribute most to global warming.”

Allison began his career in marine biology, but later moved to fisheries management and international development, a background that helps him bring an interdisciplinary perspective to marine issues. A he co-authored looked at the tradeoffs between sustainable-fish certification programs and food for local fishing communities.

Co-author , a UW master’s student in marine and environmental affairs, reviewed existing literature on how climate change will affect marine industries. The impacts on most industries will be negative, she found. But a few, including research and development of new ocean technologies, may benefit. She also found that while aquaculture is often cited as a possible adaptation strategy for declining wild fish stocks, aquaculture itself is anticipated to feel some negative impacts from climate change.

The paper lays out the case for a more interdisciplinary approach to ocean research, with natural and social scientists working together to document the impact of climate change and resulting actions and to understand how oceanic peoples are experiencing, adapting and even influencing changes in the world’s oceans.

Shifts in the world’s oceans are long-lasting, extend far beyond the coast, and touch humans on many different levels, Allison said.

“The ocean is not just a place for economic activity,” he said. “It’s a place for inspiration, it’s a place for enjoyment, it defines many cultures, and it’s a place where we get some of our most nutritious food. What’s at stake here? It’s a timely moment to think about that.”

This week’s Science is a special issue focusing on the oceans. Sarah Ann Thompson, a visiting scientist with the UW’s Climate Impacts Group, is co-author of an on how climate change will affect marine fish, mammals, turtles and seabirds.

###

For more information, contact Allison at eha1@uw.edu or 206-685-0694.

A team of researchers has evaluated fishery improvement projects, which are designed to bring seafood from wild fisheries to the certified market while promising sustainability in the future. In a appearing May 1 in Science, they conclude these projects need to be fine tuned to ensure that fisheries are delivering on their promises.

“Fishery improvement projects are a good idea for sustaining fisheries that supply developed countries like the U.S., but they don’t reach the small-scale fisheries supplying local markets in Africa and Asia that employ the vast majority of the world’s fisher folk and support a larger proportion of the world’s fish consumers,” said co-author , a ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý professor of marine and environmental affairs.

“Nevertheless, with the E.U. and North America being among the largest markets for the seafood that is exported from developed countries, making this export-orientated part of the seafood system sustainable would help sustain some of their major fishery resources.”

Retailers such as Walmart in the U.S. and Sainsbury’s in the U.K. have promised that soon all the fresh, frozen, farmed and wild seafood they sell will come from sustainable sources. Respected private third-party certification programs like the are helping to ensure compliance with standards designed to help conserve fish populations and protect oceans.

While many of the sustainability standards have been met by commercial fisheries in the developed world, fisheries in developing countries make up only 7 percent of the council’s certified fisheries, even though these developing-country fisheries account for about half of all seafood entering the international market.

Sustaining fisheries that supply the seafood choices of well-fed consumers in developed countries could lead to neglect of the management needs of fisheries that supply poorer consumers in developing countries, Allison said.

“While the fish imported to the U.S. from poorer countries helps their economies, we do need to leave space for small-scale fishers and fish traders to stay in business, and we shouldn’t let our developed-world appetite for sustainable seafood override more pressing needs for food, employment and the survival of their societies and cultures,” he said. “This means also supporting local community-based management and local marketing systems.”

Fishery improvement projects have been developed to get fisheries on a path to sustainability. These projects involve partnerships between the fishermen and firms up and down the international seafood supply chain. The partnerships must create market incentives for continual improvements by allowing seafood from these developing-country fisheries to enter the potentially more lucrative export market for certified seafood.

“It is hoped that the projects will protect marine life and ecosystems in areas where local and national governments have not acted to oversee sustainable practices, while also satisfying the demand for sustainable seafood,” said Gabriel Sampson, a UC Davis graduate student and lead author of the study.

Fishery management reforms should include data collection and ongoing monitoring, strengthening harvest and access rights to the resources, limits on the catch, and instituting traceability throughout the supply chain, the researchers say. They suggest, for example, that if access to the fisheries is not better regulated, the current efforts by retailers to secure sustainable, wild-caught seafood could stimulate a “race to fish” and ultimately undermine the sustainability claims.

Without the proper safeguards to ensure progress and reforms in fishery improvement projects, fisheries with full sustainability certification – such as that provided by the Marine Stewardship Council – could find their market benefits diluted by the increased competition for a share of the global certified seafood market.

The researchers project that multiple types of certified seafood in the market could lead to a “race to the bottom” in terms of sustainability standards, unless the fisheries improvement projects are carefully monitored to make sure that seafood retailers closely adhere to the sustainable-improvement requirements for market access.

Other co-authors are James Sanchirico and J. Edward Taylor of UC Davis; Cathy Roheim of the University of Idaho in Moscow; Simon Bush of Wageningen University in the Netherlands; James Anderson of the University of Florida in Gainesville; Natalie Ban of the University of Victoria in Canada; Rod Fujita of the Environmental Defense Fund; Stacy Jupiter of the Wildlife Conservation Society; and Jono Wilson of The Nature Conservancy.

This research was funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. Allison’s work on food security was also funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

###

This story was adapted from a UC Davis news release.