THE STATE OF WORLD FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE
2020
understood, the next step is to consider the
timing and uncertainty of future climate risks.
The combined sequence of risks – from current
through to the future – can then be used to
consider possible adaptation, and in particular,
to identify early adaptation options to address
immediate, medium-term and long-term
risks. This requires
analysis of when potential
risks might emerge in order to sequence the
adaptation response, as well as the lifetime of
decisions involved.
The next step in the cycle is to identify adaptation
options to address the potential climate risks
identified. The use of frameworks to help
prioritize promising early adaptation options can
be very useful at this stage. These typically focus
on identifying adaptation priorities for the next
five
years or so, to tackle short-, medium- and
long-term risks. The literature (e.g. Warren
et al
.,
2018) identifies three priorities for these early
adaptation priorities:
Interventions that address current climate
impacts and early trends (the existing
adaptation deficit). These are often known
as no- or low-regret actions. Many of these
overlap with current
good practices in the
fisheries and aquaculture sector.
Early interventions to ensure that
adaptation is considered in early decisions
that have a long lifetime or a risk of
lock-in, e.g. long-lived investment that
will be exposed to future change such as
infrastructure development.
Early adaptive management actions to help
inform decisions that have a long lead time or
longer-term risks, e.g. planning, monitoring
and pilots.
All the above options may be needed, and they
are not mutually exclusive.
In
many cases, the application of an initial
analysis as set out above may be sufficient
to identify and plan adaptation road maps.
In other cases, a more formalized appraisal
may be needed to help select the most
appropriate adaptation options. Where such
an appraisal is focused on short-term, no-
and low-regret adaptation, conventional
decision-support methods, such as cost–benefit
analysis or multicriteria analysis, can be used.
For options that involve longer-term decisions,
where uncertainty becomes important, a
more detailed set of appraisal methods is
applicable. These
methods include those for
decision-making under uncertainty. There is
emerging guidance available on the application
of these approaches (Watkiss, Ventura and
Poulain, 2019), although to date this has
not been widely applied for fisheries and
aquaculture. Together with the appraisal of
adaptation, there is a focus on mainstreaming
climate change adaptation in fisheries/
aquaculture policy and planning. Mainstreaming
can leverage resources and activities associated
with fisheries and/or aquaculture, and help
integrate climate
change alongside other issues,
allowing a more holistic approach. However, it
also raises additional challenges, given the
difficulty of delivering cross-cutting and
cross-sectoral policy and programmes.
Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded
fishing gear and its pollution of the
marine environment
Marine litter from fishing operations has received
much international attention and is considered
one of the most prominent and impactful forms
of sea-based sources of litter.
Recent high-profile
publications related to plastic litter in the sea
have put the issue at the forefront of marine
environmental problems. States have expressed
growing concern about this issue and adopted
resolutions on marine litter, plastic debris and/
or microplastics at every session of the United
Nations Environment Assembly in recent
years. The key elements in these resolutions
are reiterated in SDG 14,
particularly in SDG
Target 14.1: by 2025, prevent and significantly
reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular
from land-based activities, including marine
debris and nutrient pollution.
Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded
fishing gear (ALDFG), also called “ghost gear”,
constitutes a significant part of marine plastic
pollution in the world’s oceans and seas.
It threatens marine life – 46 percent of the species
on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
have been impacted by ALDFG, mainly through
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
