Explore the vast range of titles available.

Climate change is expected to have a profound impact on the distribution, abundance and diversity of marine species globally1,2. These ecological impacts of climate change will affect human communities dependent on fisheries for livelihoods and well-being3. While methods for assessing the vulnerability of species to climate change are rapidly developing4 and socio-ecological vulnerability assessments for fisheries are becoming available5, there has been less work devoted to understanding how impacts differ across fishing communities. We developed a linked socio-ecological approach to assess the exposure of fishing communities to risk from climate change, and present a case study of New England and Mid-Atlantic (USA) fishing communities. We found that the northern part of the study region was projected to gain suitable habitat and the southern part projected to lose suitable habitat for many species, but the exposure of fishing communities to risk was strongly dependent on both their spatial use of the ocean and their portfolio of species caught. A majority of fishing communities were projected to face declining future fishing opportunities unless they adapt, either through catching new species or fishing in new locations. By integrating climatic, ecological and socio-economic data at a scale relevant to fishing communities, this analysis identifies where strategies for adapting to the ecological impacts of climate change will be most needed.

Social indicators, both mature and emerging, are underused With humans altering climate processes, biogeochemical cycles, and ecosystem functions ( 1 ), governments and societies confront the challenge of shaping a sustainable future for people and nature. Policies and practices to address these challenges must draw on social sciences, along with natural sciences and engineering ( 2 ). Although various social science approaches can enable and assess progress toward sustainability, debate about such concrete engagement is outpacing actual use. To catalyze uptake, we identify seven key social concepts that are largely absent from many efforts to pursue sustainability goals. We present existing and emerging well-tested indicators and propose priority areas for conceptual and methodological development.

Research on enclosure has often examined the phenomenon as a process and outcome of state, neoliberal, and hybrid territorial practices with detrimental impacts for those affected. The proliferation of increasingly complex environmental governance regimes and new enclosures, such as those now seen in the oceans, challenge these readings, however. Using the case of U.S. marine spatial planning (MSP), this article reexamines enclosure through the lens of assemblage. A comprehensive new approach to oceans governance based on spatial data and collaborative decision making, MSP appears to follow past governance programs toward a broad-scale rationalization and enclosure of U.S. waters. Yet this appearance might only be superficial. As an assemblage, U.S. MSP-and its shifting actors, associations, and practices-holds the potential to both close and open the seas for oceans communities, environments, and other actors. Planning actors use three practices to stabilize U.S. MSP for governance and enclosure: narrativizing MSP, creating a geospatial framework to underlie planning, and engaging stakeholders. These practices, however, simultaneously provide opportunities for communities and environments to intervene in U.S. MSP toward alternative outcomes. Rather than a closed seas, U.S. MSP presents opportunities for enclosure to happen differently or not at all, producing alternative outcomes for coastal and oceans communities, environments, and governance.

The oceans have become a juncture of great visions of blue growth as well as strong environmental concern. This paper discusses the essential role of the social sciences as the oceans increasingly emerge as a contested social arena. The marine social sciences have generated a vast knowledge about the development of fisheries and the implications of fisheries policies on coastal communities. We review this heritage and show that it makes the marine social sciences well qualified to address contemporary challenges raised by the increasing ambitions of exploiting and conserving the world’s oceans. However, with the current transformation of the oceans as sites of comprehensive industrialization, captured in the concept of blue growth, we argue that marine social scientists need to rethink their research objectives. This requires a reflection on the lessons learned from decades of engagement with fisheries and fisheries policy to understand and intervene in processes and practices of modernization, science-based management, and privatization of resources. We suggest how the marine social sciences can provide new knowledge and actively engage in current developments by studying emergent processes in the marine environment, and the institutions, practices, and discourses that shape them. The social sciences have a responsibility to contribute to growth and conservation issues, and are in the capacity to do so, through formulating governance alternatives, anticipating future trends, imagining desirable futures, and facilitating socially just processes and outcomes.

This Perspective links climate change and the distribution of wealth. Using an 'inclusive wealth' framework, it is shown that climate change could dramatically reallocate wealth, with important implications for sustainable development. Climate change is often described as the greatest environmental challenge of our time. In addition, a changing climate can reallocate natural capital, change the value of all forms of capital and lead to mass redistribution of wealth. Here we explain how the inclusive wealth framework provides a means to measure shifts in the amounts and distribution of wealth induced by climate change. Biophysical effects on prices, pre-existing institutions and socio-ecological changes related to shifts in climate cause wealth to change in ways not correlated with biophysical changes. This implies that sustainable development in the face of climate change requires a coherent approach that integrates biophysical and social measurement. Inclusive wealth provides a measure that indicates sustainability and has the added benefit of providing an organizational framework for integrating the multiple disciplines studying global change.

As species respond to warming water temperatures, fishers dependent upon such species are being compelled to make choices concerning harvest strategies. Should they “follow fish” to new fishing grounds? Should they change their mix of target species? Should they relocate their operations to new ports? We examined how fishing communities in the Northeast United States —a hotspot of recent warming—have already responded to documented shifts in the distribution and abundance of fluke, red and silver hake. We focused on groundfish trawl communities that historically targeted these species and examined their “at-sea” responses by combining qualitative interviews with quantitative analysis of fishing records and ecological surveys. Three distinct responses emerged: shifting fishing grounds, shifting target species, and shifting port of landing. Our research finds that following the fish is rare and only occurred in one of the assessed communities, the large trawler community of Beaufort, North Carolina. The more common response was a shift in target species and a change in catch composition. However, regulations and markets often constrained the ability to take advantage of a changing mix of species within fishing grounds. Indeed, the overall species diversity in catch has declined among all of our focal communities suggesting that communities have lost the ability to be flexible when it may be most needed as a response to climate change. Additionally, the high value of fluke and the need to land in southern states with higher quota allocations is likely a driver of the changing nature of “community” with increasing vessels landing outside their home port, especially when landing fluke. Our findings suggest that fidelity to historical fishing grounds combined with perceiving environmental change as non-permanent, predispose many fishers to trust in “cyclicality” and return of species over time. However, this strategy may make those communities unable or unwilling to “follow fish” more vulnerable to changes in distribution and abundance due to climate change. Our findings have the potential to directly inform resource management policies as well as more deliberate adaptations by communities themselves as they strive to address the imminent risks of climate change.

Introduction: Interrelated social and ecological challenges demand an understanding of how environmental change and management decisions affect human well-being. This paper outlines a framework for measuring human well-being for ecosystem-based management (EBM). We present a prototype that can be adapted and developed for various scales and contexts. Scientists and managers use indicators to assess status and trends in integrated ecosystem assessments (IEAs). To improve the social science rigor and success of EBM, we developed a systematic and transparent approach for evaluating indicators of human well-being for an IEA. Methods: Our process is based on a comprehensive conceptualization of human well-being, a scalable analysis of management priorities, and a set of indicator screening criteria tailored to the needs of EBM. We tested our approach by evaluating more than 2000 existing social indicators related to ocean and coastal management of the US West Coast. We focused on two foundational attributes of human well-being: resource access and self-determination. Outcomes and Discussion: Our results suggest that existing indicators and data are limited in their ability to reflect linkages between environmental change and human well-being, and extremely limited in their ability to assess social equity and justice. We reveal a critical need for new social indicators tailored to answer environmental questions and new data that are disaggregated by social variables to measure equity. In both, we stress the importance of collaborating with the people whose well-being is to be assessed. Conclusion: Our framework is designed to encourage governments and communities to carefully assess the complex tradeoffs inherent in environmental decision-making.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: to produce a mega‐map which identifies, maps and provides a visual interactive display, based on systematic reviews on all the main aspects of elder abuse in both the community and in institutions, such as residential and long‐term care institutions.

The dominant discourse of fisheries science and management, bioeconomics, places the behavior of individual fishermen operating on an open-access commons at the center of its understanding of fisheries resources and the fishing industry. Within this discourse, fishermen are the sole actors and the fishery is the fixed stage for an inevitable 'tragedy of the commons.' Starting from these particular assumptions of both subject and space, bioeconomics proposes solutions to fisheries crisis that differ sharply from fishers' perceptions of the resource and their desires for management. These divergent understandings of both the natural and social environments are reflected in the maps produced by fisheries scientists/managers and those produced by fishers themselves. Remapping fisheries in terms of fishers' perceptions and scales of operation reveals diverse natural landscapes and communities in which the dominant discourse charted only quantities of fish and individual fishermen. The landscape of fishing communities, once made visible, suggests an opportunity for forms of area-based management that might facilitate community development rather than just individual prosperity.