Contrasting regional impacts of climate change upon fisheries
As the World continues to squabble about who might reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and people in the developed world become increasingly duped into believing media moguls over scientists, yet another assessment of the World in 2050 paints a harsh picture. Researchers from Canada, the UK and the US have published research in Global Change Biology (see here for the full article) that provides estimates of how climate change might have contrasting affects upon different regions of the fisheries of the world.
Whilst those countries largely responsible for initially causing global climate change (e.g. parts of Europe, the US and Australia) may have improved fisheries production in 2050, the tropical regions that contain the majority of the worlds developing nations could have fisheries declines of up to 40%. Nations at the forefront of debate in Europe about the need for climate change adaptation assistance (e.g. Brazil and Indonesia) may suffer huge socio-economic consequences of reduced fisheries production. Such impacts have the potential to particularly hit those vulnerable members of society most dependent upon seafood for daily subsistence protein requirements.

Change in maximum catch potential (10-year average) from 2005 to 2055 in each 300 _300 cell under climate change scenarios: (a) Special Report on Emission Scenarios A1B and (b) stabilization at 2000 level (Chueng et al. 2009)
Whilst these proposed scenarios are only models, and may contain many inaccuracies, they do provide some of the most detailed levels of information available about what the direct consequences of global warming could be to the world’s fisheries. When you consider that factors such as ocean acidification, overfishing, pollution and coastal development are not included within these models, fisheries production in 2050 could be a lot worse with much greater socio-economic consequences.
These findings are of great importance at a time of continued debate about who should take what level of responsibility for emissions reductions and climate adaptation.
Archives
- January 2013 (10)
- December 2012 (2)
- November 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (4)
- July 2012 (4)
- June 2012 (3)
- May 2012 (2)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (5)
- February 2012 (6)
- January 2012 (3)
- November 2011 (3)
- October 2011 (3)
- September 2011 (2)
- August 2011 (11)
- July 2011 (11)
- June 2011 (5)
- May 2011 (17)
- April 2011 (6)
- March 2011 (5)
- February 2011 (8)
- January 2011 (9)
- December 2010 (8)
- November 2010 (15)
- October 2010 (16)
- September 2010 (6)
- August 2010 (13)
- July 2010 (8)
- June 2010 (26)
- May 2010 (18)
- April 2010 (26)
- March 2010 (42)
- February 2010 (61)
- January 2010 (24)
- December 2009 (43)
- November 2009 (30)
- October 2009 (29)
- September 2009 (36)
- August 2009 (31)
- July 2009 (33)
- June 2009 (23)
- May 2009 (19)
- April 2009 (21)
- March 2009 (19)
- February 2009 (7)
- January 2009 (19)
- December 2008 (20)
- November 2008 (15)
- October 2008 (8)
- September 2008 (13)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (12)
- June 2008 (14)
- May 2008 (17)
- April 2008 (11)
- March 2008 (11)
- February 2008 (16)
- January 2008 (11)
- December 2007 (7)
- November 2007 (18)
- October 2007 (10)
- September 2007 (18)
- August 2007 (25)
- July 2007 (18)
- June 2007 (4)





