PreprintPDF Available
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.


A group of ocean experts brainstormed about the most pressing actions to be taken in favour of ocean conservation in the context of SARS-CoV2
The oceans with SARS-CoV-2
A nine-point agenda for immediate action
David Grémillet1,2, Britta Denise Hardesty3, Heike K. Lotze4, David Obura5,
Daniel Pauly6, Yunne-Jai Shin7 & U. Rashid Sumaila6,8
1 Centre d’Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UMR 7372, CNRS La Rochelle Université, Villiers en
Bois, France
2 Fitz Patrick Institute, DST/NRF Excellence Centre at the University of Cape Town,
Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
3 CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Hobart, Tasmania, 7000 Australia
4 Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada
5 CORDIO East Africa, P.O.BOX 10135 Mombasa 80101, Kenya
6 Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T
1Z4, Canada
7 IRD, Univ Montpellier, Ifremer, CNRS, MARBEC Univ Montpellier, place Eugène Bataillon,
CC093, 34095 Montpellier cedex 5, France.
8 School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC,
V6T 1Z4, Canada
Worldwide threats - such as SARS-CoV-2 - are becoming more pervasive with global change.
Solutions to environmental issues challenging nature and humanity are well-identified, but
our modern societies so far failed to implement them (Ripple et al., 2018). Yet, as the SARS-
CoV-2 crisis demonstrates in a spectacular manner, the functioning of entire nations can be
transformed within days if needed. Because of the current pandemic, humanity will adjust and
more people than ever are ready to transform the world we live in. This is a historical
opportunity to reboot our socio-economic systems and revise the values that underpin them,
to achieve sustainability and equity. It is essential for environmental scientists to stand up
now, to provide guidance before our societies are pushed back into business-as-usual.
The oceans are the cradle of life on earth, a critical part of global biogeochemical cycles, and
harbor essential natural resources. Marine life has suffered from the tragedy of the commons,
with extremely unequitable share of ocean services captured by wealthier nations. As
humanity is challenged by the current crisis, we need well-functioning oceans more than ever
to ensure our own resilience and survival. We are therefore calling for immediate and rapid
global action on nine key commitments to ocean conservation, with the overarching objective
of a collective, legacy mindset to decision making, to ensure the health and well-being of both
current and future generations. The following nine commitments encompass major
anthropogenic drivers that impact ocean ecosystems and marine life as well as dependent
human well-being:
1. Promote carbon neutral economies to mitigate global warming (Gençsü et al., 2020)
and climate-change effects on ocean ecosystems, as well as associated goods and
services (Lotze et al., 2019; Boyce et al., 2020). Ending jet fuel subsidies will be an
essential step, which will challenge our current mobility and mass tourism that have
large impacts on coastal ecosystems worldwide. In rich countries, the SARS-CoV-2 crisis
has shown that much personal mobility is actually superfluous, proving that this target
is achievable.
2. Support local food provisioning and sustainable land-use practices, including
agroecological practices, sustainable forestry and land-conversion, moving away from
the massive use of fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals (Dainese et al., 2019). This
will have the triple benefit of shortening supply-chains, reducing pollution of coastal
zones, and providing livelihoods for inland populations which otherwise overcrowd
and severely alter coastal ecosystems. Such changes are on the top of the
environmental agenda because agriculture, notably as it is operated in wealthy
nations, is currently the main driver of environmental degradation (Pe’er et al., 2020).
3. Strive for social and economic dignity (Sperling 2020). This includes creating a universal
minimum income while ending harmful subsidies to all sectors, notably those leading
to fishing and agricultural overcapacity, and ensuring fair labor practices to avoid
modern slavery (Tickler et al., 2018). Nearly thirty countries around the world are
seriously considering implementing a universal minimum income, and most attempts
thus far report success.
4. Promote sustainable fishing by moving towards less destructive and more selective
fishing practices, by regulating the access of the high seas to fisheries (Sala et al., 2018)
and protecting areas within national exclusive economic zones through networks of
marine protected areas (Pauly 2018). This will also be achieved by preserving local food
production capacities, local markets, and local communities (Harper et al., 2020). At
the moment the SARS-CoV-2 crisis rather runs to the detriment of small-scale fisheries,
but there are also positive effects in terms of globally-reduced fishing pressure and the
revival of local seafood supply chains (Bennett et al., 2020).
5. Promote sustainable aquaculture practices. This will include farming lower-trophic
level species, preferably not salmon and other carnivores (Rosa et al., 2020), to move
away from the use of fishmeal and oil, and reduce pollution, destruction and other
harmful effects in coastal zones. This now achievable, notably through the use of novel
feeds (Cottrell et al., 2020) and low-contaminant integrated multi-trophic aquaculture
6. Place a levy on fossil-fuel-based manufacturing and products (Forrest et al., 2019). Tax
plastics at the top of the supply chain and throughout - to ensure consistent pricing
that supports circular economic principles and promotes recyclability and economic
benefits for waste pickers; all of which will reduce plastic leakage to the ocean (Worm
et al., 2017). This point seems particularly important as the SARS-CoV-2 crisis is in the
process of generating large volumes of additional non-biodegradable waste.
7. Reduce maritime traffic. This will be achieved by preserving and rebuilding local
industries and supply chains, moving away from imports of luxury products, reducing
trade globalization and global tourism (Kellerman 2020). This will also have the added
benefits of reduced ocean pollution (noise, light, discharges), reduced ship strikes of
vulnerable species (e.g. whales), and reduced transport of invasive species. Such
changes are now being strongly supported by incentives to revive national industrial
activities, reducing global trade (Ozili & Arun 2020)
8. Apply the One-Health principle to ocean conservation and management
(Destoumieux-Garzón et al., 2018). Our societies have to take into account that marine
biodiversity and human health are intricately linked. More diverse, productive and
resilient marine ecosystems are needed to support a humanity otherwise riddled with
socio-economic stress and chronic disease (Blanchard et al., 2017; Boyce et al., 2020).
Shaken by the current crisis, humanity is ready to rethink its relationship with wild
nature (Martin et al. 2018).
9. Promote conservation of coastal land- and seascapes, including the protection of key
habitats such as wetlands, mangroves, saltmarshes, kelp forests, seagrass beds, oyster
and coral reefs. Those biodiversity hotspots serve as essential nursery, foraging,
breeding and spawning grounds for a multitude of species. They also capture carbon,
stabilize sediments and protect from storm surges. A recent synthesis demonstrates
that rebuilding marine life is indeed achievable by 2050 (Duarte et al., 2020).
Some will argue that nature conservation has become optional under SARS-CoV-2, because
humanity has more urgent matters to deal with. We strongly disagree with this short-
sightedness and think that we will face many other crises such as SARS-CoV-2 if environmental
issues are not being dealt with via a transformation of our societies. Taken together, the
emergency measures we propose in favor of ocean health challenge the notion of unmitigated
blue growth (Otero et al., 2020), but raise hopes for alternative socio-economic trajectories
enabling a future for humanity under the sea wind.
- Bennett, N. J., Finkbeiner, E. M., Ban, N. C., Belhabib, D., Jupiter, S. D., Kittinger, J. N.,
... & Christie, P. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic, Small-Scale Fisheries and Coastal
Fishing Communities. Coastal Management.
- Blanchard, J. L. et al. (2017). Linked sustainability challenges and trade-offs among
fisheries, aquaculture and agriculture. Nature Ecology and Evolution, 1, 1240-1249.
- Boyce, D., Lotze, H. K., Tittensor, D. P., Carozza, D., Worm, B. (2020). Future ocean
biomass losses may widen socioeconomic equity gaps. Nature Communications, 11,
- Cottrell, R. S., Blanchard, J. L., Halpern, B. S., Metian, M., & Froehlich, H. E. (2020).
Global adoption of novel aquaculture feeds could substantially reduce forage fish
demand by 2030. Nature Food, 1(5), 301-308.
- Dainese, M., et al. (2019). A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits
for crop production. Science Advances, 5(10), eaax0121.
- Destoumieux-Garzón, D., et al. (2018). The one health concept: 10 years old and a
long road ahead. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 5, 14.
- Duarte, C. M. et al. (2020) Rebuilding marine life. Nature 580: 39-51.
- Forrest, Andrew, et al. (2019) Eliminating Plastic Pollution: How a Voluntary
Contribution From Industry Will Drive the Circular Plastics Economy. Frontiers in
Marine Science 6: 627.
- Gençsü, I., Whitley, S., Trilling, M., van der Burg, L., McLynn, M., & Worrall, L. (2020).
Phasing out public financial flows to fossil fuel production in Europe. Climate Policy,
- Harper, S., Adshade, M., Lam, V. W., Pauly, D., & Sumaila, U. R. (2020). Valuing
invisible catches: Estimating the global contribution by women to small-scale marine
capture fisheries production. PloS one, 15(3), e0228912.
- Kellerman, A. (2020). Globalization and Spatial Mobilities: Commodities and People,
Capital, Information and Technology. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Lotze, H. K. et al. (2019). Global ensemble projections reveal trophic amplification of
ocean biomass declines with climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences USA, 116(26), 1290712912.
- Martin, J. L., Maris, V., & Simberloff, D. S. (2016). The need to respect nature and its
limits challenges society and conservation science. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 113(22), 6105-6112.
- Otero, I. et al. (2020) Biodiversity policy beyond economic growth. Conservation
- Ozili, P. K., & Arun, T. (2020). Spillover of COVID-19: impact on the Global Economy.
Available at SSRN 3562570.
- Pauly, D. (2018). A vision for marine fisheries in a global blue economy. Marine Policy,
87, 371-374.
- Pe'er, G., Bonn, A., Bruelheide, H., Dieker, P., Eisenhauer, N., Feindt, P. H., ... &
Marquard, E. (2019). Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to
address sustainability challenges. People and Nature.
- Ripple, W. J. et al. (2018). The role of Scientists’ Warning in shifting policy from
growth to conservation economy. BioScience, 68(4), 239-240.
- Rosa J, Lemos MFL, Crespo D, Nunes M, Freitas A, Ramos F, Pardal MA, Leston S,
(2020) Integrated multitrophic aquaculture systems Potential risks for food safety.
Trends in Food Science and Technology 96 : 79-90.
- Sala, E. et al. (2018) The economics of fishing the high seas. Science advances 4, no. 6
(2018): eaat2504. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat2504
- Sperling, G. (2020). Economic Dignity. Penguin.
- Tickler, D. et al. (2018). Modern slavery and the race to fish. Nature communications,
9(1), 1-9.
- Worm, B., Lotze, H. K., Jubinville, I., Wilcox, C., Jambeck, J. (2017). Plastic as a
persistent marine pollutant. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 42, 1-26.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly spread around the world with extensive social and economic effects. This editorial focuses specifically on the implications of the pandemic for small-scale fishers, including marketing and processing aspects of the sector, and coastal fishing communities, drawing from news and reports from around the world. Negative consequences to date have included complete shut-downs of some fisheries, knock-on economic effects from market disruptions, increased health risks for fishers, processors and communities, additional implications for marginalized groups, exacerbated vulnerabilities to other social and environmental stressors, and increased Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing. Though much of the news is dire, there have been some positive outcomes such as food sharing, the revival of local food networks, increases in local sales through direct marketing and deliveries, collective actions to safeguard rights, collaborations between communities and governments, and reduced fishing pressure in some places. While the crisis is still unfolding, there is an urgent need to coordinate, plan and implement effective short- and long-term responses. Thus, we urge governments, development organizations, NGOs, donors, the private sector, and researchers to rapidly mobilize in support of small-scale fishers, coastal fishing communities, and associated civil society organizations, and suggest actions that can be taken by each to help these groups respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Full-text available
Future climate impacts and their consequences are increasingly being explored using multi-model ensembles that average across individual model projections. Here we develop a statistical framework that integrates projections from coupled ecosystem and earth-system models to evaluate significance and uncertainty in marine animal biomass changes over the 21st century in relation to socioeconomic indicators at national to global scales. Significant biomass changes are projected in 40%–57% of the global ocean, with 68%–84% of these areas exhibiting declining trends under low and high emission scenarios, respectively. Given unabated emissions, maritime nations with poor socioeconomic statuses such as low nutrition, wealth, and ocean health will experience the greatest projected losses. These findings suggest that climate-driven biomass changes will widen existing equity gaps and disproportionally affect populations that contributed least to global CO2 emissions. However, our analysis also suggests that such deleterious outcomes are largely preventable by achieving negative emissions (RCP 2.6). Numerous marine ecosystem models are used to project animal biomass over time but integrating them can be challenging. Here the authors develop a test for statistical significance in multi-model ensemble trends, and thus relate future biomass trends to current patterns of ecological and socioeconomic status.
Full-text available
How did a health crisis translate to an economic crisis? Why did the spread of the coronavirus bring the global economy to its knees? The answer lies in two methods by which coronavirus stifled economic activities. First, the spread of the virus encouraged social distancing which led to the shutdown of financial markets, corporate offices, businesses and events. Second, the exponential rate at which the virus was spreading, and the heightened uncertainty about how bad the situation could get, led to flight to safety in consumption and investment among consumers, investors and international trade partners. We focus on the period from the start of 2020 through March when the coronavirus began spreading into other countries and markets. We draw on real-world observations in assessing the restrictive measures, monetary policy measures, fiscal policy measures and the public health measures that were adopted during the period. We empirically examine the impact of social distancing policies on economic activities and stock market indices. We also empirically the effect of COVID infection cases and COVID deaths on macroeconomic performance during the 2020 to 2021 period. The findings reveal that the increasing number of lockdown days, monetary policy decisions and international travel restrictions severely affected the level of economic activities and the closing, opening, lowest and highest stock price of major stock market indices. We also find that the rising number of COVID cases and rising death cases led to a significant increase in global inflation rate, global unemployment rate, and global energy commodity index.
Full-text available
The role that women play in fisheries around the world is receiving increasing international attention yet the contributions by women to fisheries catches continues to be overlooked by society, industry and policy makers. Here, we address this lack of visibility with a global estimation of small-scale fisheries catches by women. Our estimates reveal that women participate in small-scale fishing activities in all regions of the world, with approximately 2.1 million (± 86,000) women accounting for roughly 11% (± 4%) of participants in small-scale fishing activities, i.e., catching roughly 2.9 million (± 835,000) tonnes per year of marine fish and invertebrates. The landed value of the catch by women is estimated at USD 5.6 billion (± 1.5 billion), with an economic impact of USD 14.8 billion per year (± 4 billion), which is equivalent to 25.6 billion real 2010 dollars (± 7.2 billion). These catches are mostly taken along the shoreline, on foot, or from small, non-motorized vessels using low-technology, low-emission gears in coastal waters. Catches taken by women are often for home consumption, and thus considered part of the subsistence sub-sector. However, in many contexts, women also sell a portion of their catch, generating income for themselves and their families. These findings underscore the significant role of women as direct producers in small-scale fisheries value chains, making visible contributions by women to food and livelihood security, globally.
Full-text available
Marine plastic pollution is a symptom of an inherently wasteful linear plastic economy, costing us more than US$ 2.2 trillion per year. Of the 6.3 billion tonnes of fossil fuel-derived plastic (FFP) waste produced to date, only 9% has been recycled; the rest being incinerated (12%) or dumped into the environment (79%). FFPs take centuries to degrade, meaning five billion tonnes of increasingly fragmented and dangerous plastics have accumulated in our oceans, soil and air. Rates of FFP production and waste are growing rapidly, driven by increased demand and shifting strategies of oil and gas companies responding to slowing profit growth. Without effective recycling, the harm caused by FFP waste will keep increasing, jeopardizing first marine life and ultimately humankind. In this Perspective article, we review the global costs of plastic pollution and explain why solving this is imperative for humanity's well-being. We show that FFP pollution is far beyond a marine environmental issue: it now invades our bodies, causing disease and dysfunction, while millions of adults and children work in conditions akin to slavery, picking through our waste. We argue that an integrated economic and technical solution, catalyzed through a voluntary industry-led contribution from new FFP production, is central to arrest plastic waste flows by making used plastic a cashable commodity, incentivizing recovery and accelerating industrialization of polymer-to-polymer technologies. Without much-needed systematic transformation, driven by a contribution from FFP production, humanity and the oceans face a troubling future.
Full-text available
While the physical dimensions of climate change are now routinely assessed through multimodel intercomparisons, projected impacts on the global ocean ecosystem generally rely on individual models with a specific set of assumptions. To address these single-model limitations, we present standardized ensemble projections from six global marine ecosystem models forced with two Earth system models and four emission scenarios with and without fishing. We derive average biomass trends and associated uncertainties across the marine food web. Without fishing, mean global animal biomass decreased by 5% (±4% SD) under low emissions and 17% (±11% SD) under high emissions by 2100, with an average 5% decline for every 1 °C of warming. Projected biomass declines were primarily driven by increasing temperature and decreasing primary production, and were more pronounced at higher trophic levels, a process known as trophic amplification. Fishing did not substantially alter the effects of climate change. Considerable regional variation featured strong biomass increases at high latitudes and decreases at middle to low latitudes, with good model agreement on the direction of change but variable magnitude. Uncertainties due to variations in marine ecosystem and Earth system models were similar. Ensemble projections performed well compared with empirical data, emphasizing the benefits of multimodel inference to project future outcomes. Our results indicate that global ocean animal biomass consistently declines with climate change, and that these impacts are amplified at higher trophic levels. Next steps for model development include dynamic scenarios of fishing, cumulative human impacts, and the effects of management measures on future ocean biomass trends.
Under the Paris Agreement, the world’s governments, including European governments and the European Union (EU), are committed to a low-carbon transition, with a goal of net zero emissions in the second half of this century, while ‘making finance flows consistent’ with that pathway. In addition, the EU has called upon Member States to phase out their support to fossil fuels by 2020. Progress towards this goal, however, has been slow. Our research finds that 11 countries (accounting for 83% of the EU’s emissions) and the EU’s budget and public banks still provide at least €21 billion per year of support for the production of coal, oil, and gas (with €2.6 billion of this amount allocated to the transition away from coal). This is via three distinct financial flows: fiscal support via budgetary transfers and tax breaks; public lending to the sector; and capital investment by fossil fuel-related state-owned enterprises. The financing captured by this figure is a minimum estimate due to lack of transparency in the data provided by governments. We argue that it is vital for European governments to fulfil their promises to phase out subsidies and other financial flows to fossil fuels to meet their climate goals. This must start with greater transparency around the support being provided and phase-out plans, including annual reporting on support for production and consumption of fossil fuels, in line with the EU’s recently strengthened Energy Union Governance framework for 2030. This entails the inclusion of national policies, timelines, and measures aimed at phasing out financial support to fossil fuels in Member States’ National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs). Key Policy insights: • Between 2014 and 2016, 11 European countries and the EU public banks and budget provided at least €21 billion per year of support for the production of coal, oil, and gas. • Meeting commitments to phase out subsidies towards the production of fossil fuels is critical for meeting climate goals. • EU Member States insufficiently reported on their fossil fuel subsidies in their draft NECPs. • Greater transparency and reporting on all fossil fuel financing is a key first step towards phase-out.
Sustainable Development Goal 14 of the United Nations aims to “conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”. Achieving this goal will require rebuilding the marine life-support systems that deliver the many benefits that society receives from a healthy ocean. Here we document the recovery of marine populations, habitats and ecosystems following past conservation interventions. Recovery rates across studies suggest that substantial recovery of the abundance, structure and function of marine life could be achieved by 2050, if major pressures—including climate change—are mitigated. Rebuilding marine life represents a doable Grand Challenge for humanity, an ethical obligation and a smart economic objective to achieve a sustainable future.
A brief history of marine fisheries is presented which emphasizes the expansion of industrial fleets in the 20th century, and their inherent lack of sustainability. In contrast, small scale fisheries, i.e. artisanal, subsistence and recreational fisheries could become part of a blue economy, given that care is taken to reduce incentives for building up fishing effort. However, they usually receive little attention from policy makers, as reflected by the almost complete absence from the catch data submitted by member countries to the FAO. While industrial fisheries tend to lack the features that would make them compatible with a blue economy, small-scale fisheries possess most of these features, and thus may represent the future of sustainable fisheries.