Guidelines for co-creating climate adaptation plans for fisheries and aquaculture

Description

Climate change is having a significant impact on the biology and ecology of fish stocks and aquaculture species and will affect the productivity within seafood supply chains in the future. The challenges are further amplified when actors within the fisheries and aquaculture sectors have very different ideas and assumptions about climate change and what risks and opportunities they entail. In order to address the challenges of climate change, several countries have developed national adaptation plans. However, fisheries and aquaculture are rarely included in these plans, resulting in a general lack of documented adaptation strategies within these sectors in most countries.

The paper presents guidelines that provide a practical step-by-step approach to the development of Climate Adaptation Plans (CAP) for fisheries and aquaculture. It provides details on the theoretical background and approach for each step, in the light of other existing adaptation tools, highlighting the differences between fisheries and aquaculture in the CAP development process.

The process proposed consists of three main tasks: (1) assess risks and opportunities; (2) identify adaptation measures; and (3) implement adaptation measures. A co-creation approach is applied that allows different stakeholders with diverse backgrounds and positions to jointly scope and plan their adaptation efforts. The guidelines have been tested and prototyped through their application in seven fisheries and aquaculture case studies across Europe (Italy, Greece, Hungary, Scotland, Spain and two in the North-East Atlantic).

Through this process, the stakeholders of the respective case studies have validated their practical applicability. The guidelines are transferable to different geographical areas and to different scales, from single species to ecosystem levels. This co-creation approach ensures realistic and inclusive CAPs that are fully applicable to the selected sector and increase the likelihood of success. 

The three-step process is also part of a larger cycle, including implementation, monitoring, and evaluation, again generating iterative feedback loops over time. Lessons learned are discussed, and the advantages and challenges of developing CAPs are highlighted. While the guidelines are designed for and tested within fisheries and aquaculture systems, the CAP approach is also employable for other natural resource-based systems.

 

Reference information