The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) envisage a desirable society where equity is a normative goal that is given attention, and ways to improve inclusivity and diversity of equity beyond concept, process and outcome are being actively explored. Here, we examine how equity is considered in a suite of papers that explored possible sustainable futures for the oceans by 2030, and mapped out pathways to achieve these, collectively aiming to move as far towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals as technically feasible. Our analysis revealed that a large range of equity issues were recognised and considered, in outcome-based (i.e. distributive), process-based (i.e. procedural) and concept (i.e. contextual) dimensions. However, often, the equity problem was not explicitly stated, but rather implied through the action pathway identified to move towards a more sustainable 2030, highlighting that reducing inequity is interlinked with improving sustainability. Based on these findings, we reflect on the way equity is conceptualised and considered within this work as well as futures science for the oceans more broadly. These reflections are distilled into lessons learnt, a key one of which is that science and knowledge production are immediate areas where we can work to improve equity in terms of building capacity to understand and include equity issues, develop mechanisms to be more inclusive and diverse and continually, and in particular, critically reflect on our own practices to fundamentally challenge how we work and think in the space of marine science research.

A document by Delphi Ward. Click on the document to view its contents.

Danielle Smithabc, Marcus Hawardbc, Jeffrey McGeeabc, Graham Woodd, Geoff Symee, Rowan Trebilcobce, Larelle Bossibcd, Piers Dunstance, Joanna Vincecfa Faculty of Law, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 89, Hobart 7001, Tasmania, Australia.b Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 129, Hobart 7001, Tasmania, Australia.c Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 129, Hobart 7001, Tasmania, Australia.d School of Humanities, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 41, Hobart, 7001, Tasmania, Australia.e CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Castray Esplanade, Battery Point, Hobart 7004, Tasmania, Australia.f School of Social Sciences, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Locked Bag 1340, Launceston, 7250, Tasmania, Australia.Keywords: Fairness, Equity, Marine Protected Areas, Sustainable Development Goals

One of the most pronounced effects of climate change on the world's oceans is the (generally) poleward movement of species and fishery stocks in response to increasing water temperatures. In some regions, such redistributions are already having diverse impacts on marine socioecological systems, including profoundly altering ecosystem structure and function, challenging domestic and international fisheries, and impacting on human communities. Such effects are expected to become increasingly widespread as waters continue to warm and species ranges continue to shift. Actions taken over the coming decade (2021-2030) can help us manage and adapt to species redistributions and minimise negative impacts on ecosystems and human communities, achieving a more sustainable future in the face of ecosystem change. We describe key drivers related to climate-driven species redistributions that are likely to have a high impact and influence on whether a sustainable future is reached by 2030. We posit two different futures-a 'business as usual' future and a technically achievable and more sustainable future, aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals. We then identify concrete actions that provide a pathway towards the more sustainable 2030 and that acknowledge and include Indigenous perspectives. Achieving this sustainable future will depend on improved monitoring and detection, and on adaptive, cooperative management to proactively respond to the challenge of species redistribution. We synthesise examples of such actions as the basis of a strategic approach to tackle this global-scale challenge for the benefit of humanity and ecosystems.

Empowering her guardians to nurture our oceans future

Humans have relied on coastal resources for centuries. However, current growth in population and increased accessibility of coastal resources through technology have resulted in overcrowded and often conflicted spaces. The recent global move towards development of national blue economy strategies further highlights the increased focus on coastal resources to address a broad range of blue growth industries. The need to manage sustainable development and future exploitation of both over-utilised and emergent coastal resources is both a political and environmental complexity. To address this complexity, we draw on the perspectives of a multidisciplinary team, utilising two in depth exemplary case studies in New Zealand and within the Myanmar Delta Landscape, to showcase barriers, pathways and actions that facilitate a move from Business as Usual (BAU) to a future aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the UN International Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development 2021-2030. We provide key recommendations to guide interest groups, and nations globally towards sustainable utilisation, conservation and preservation of their marine environments in a fair and equitable way, and in collaboration with those who directly rely upon coastal ecosystems. We envision a sustainable future where: (i) Change is motivated and facilitated (ii) Coastal ecosystems are co-managed by multiple reliant groups (iii) Networks that maintain and enhance biodiversity are implemented (iv) Decision-making is equitable and based on ecosystem services (v) Knowledge of the marine realm is strengthened-'mapping the ocean of life' (vi) The interests of diverse user groups are balanced with a fair distribution of benefits

PUBLISHED IN REVIEWS IN FISH  BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-021-09674-8Kathryn A. Willis1,2,5†, Catarina S. Gonçalves1,3, Kelsey Richardson1,2,5, Qamar A. Schuyler2, Halfdan Pedersen8, Kelli Anderson4, Jonathan Stark7, Joanna Vince1,5, Britta D. Hardesty2, Chris Wilcox2, Barbara Nowak4, Jennifer L. Lavers3, Jayson M. Semmens3, Dean Greeno1,6, Catriona MacLeod3, Per Ole Frederiksen (Nunnoq)9,10, Peter S. Puskic1,3*†1 Centre for Marine Sociology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia2 CSIRO Ocean & Atmosphere, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia3 Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia4 Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, Fisheries and Aquaculture, University of Tasmania, Newnham, Tasmania, Australia5 School of Social Sciences, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia6 School of Creative Arts and Media, College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia7 Australian Antarctic Division, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia8 Pikkoritta Consultancy, Greenland9 The PSUNA Project, Qaasuitsup Municipality, Attu, Greenland10 Snowchange Cooperative, Selkie, Finland*Corresponding Author: Peter S. Puskic ([email protected]), Centre for Marine Sociology & Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies; University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.† P.S. Puskic and K.A. Willis share equal lead authorship on this paper.

Food for all: designing sustainable and secure future seafood systemsAnna K. Farmery*1, 2, Karen A. Alexander2,3, Kelli Anderson2,4, Julia L. Blanchard2,3, Chris. G. Carter2,3, Karen Evans2,5, Mibu Fischer7, Aysha Fleming2,6, Stewart Frusher2,3, Elizabeth A. Fulton2,5, Bianca Haas2,3, Catriona K. MacLeod2,3, Linda Murray8, Kirsty L. Nash2,3, Gretta T. Pecl2,3, Yannick Rousseau2,3, Rowan Trebilco2,5, Ingrid E. van Putten2,5, Senoveva Mauli1, Leo X.C Dutra2,7, Dean Greeno9, Jeremie Kaltavara1, Reg Watson2,3 and Barbara Nowak2,4* [email protected] Australian National Centre for Ocean Resource and Security, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia2 Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia3 Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia4 Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Newnham, Tasmania, Australia5 CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart Tasmania, Australia6 CSIRO Land and Water, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia7 CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia8 College of Health, Massey University, Massey, New Zealand9 College of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

This paper is part of the Future Seas project (www.futureseas2030.org), and has been been submitted to the Future. Seas special issue in Reviews in Fish Biology & Fisheries to be published  in 2021.  Key words equity; Future Seas; industry; interdisciplinary research; ocean; Sustainable Development Goals

Ocean governance is complex and influenced by multiple drivers and actors with different worldviews and goals. While governance encompasses many elements, in this paper we focus on the processes that operate within and between states, civil society and local communities, and the market, including industry. Specifically, in this paper, we address the question of how to move towards more sustainable ocean governance aligning with the sustainable development goals and the UN Ocean Decade. We address three major risks to oceans that arise from governance-related issues: 1) the impacts of the overexploitation of marine resources; 2) inequitable distribution of access to and benefits from marine ecosystem services, and 3) inadequate or inappropriate adaptation to changing ocean conditions. The SDGs have been used as an underlying framework to develop these risks. We identify five drivers that may determine how ocean governance evolves, namely formal rules and institutions, evidence and knowledge-based decision-making, legitimacy of decision-making institutions, stakeholder engagement and participation, and empowering communities. These drivers were used to define two alternative futures by 2030: (a) ‘Business as Usual’ - a continuation of current trajectories and (b) ‘More Sustainable Future’ – optimistic, transformational, but technically achievable. We then identify what actions, as structured processes, can reduce the three major governance-related risks and lead to the More Sustainable Future. These actions relate to the process of co-creation and implementation of improved, comprehensive, and integrated management plans, enhancement of decision-making processes, and better anticipation and consideration of ambiguity and uncertainty.

Proactive and coordinated action to mitigate and adapt to climate change will be essential for achieving the healthy, resilient, safe, sustainably harvested and biodiverse ocean that the UN Decade of Ocean Science and sustainable development goals (SDGs) seek. Ocean-based mitigation actions could contribute 12% of the emissions reductions required by 2030 to keep warming to less than 1.5ºC but, because substantial warming is already locked in, extensive adaptation action is also needed. Here, as part of the Future Seas project, we use a “foresighting/hindcasting” technique to describe two scenarios for 2030 in the context of climate change mitigation and adaptation for ocean systems. The “business-as-usual” future is expected if current trends continue, while an alternative future could be realised if we were to effectively use available data and knowledge to push as far as possible towards achieving the UN SDGs. We identify three drivers that differentiate between these alternative futures: (i) appetite for climate action, (ii) handling extreme events and (iii) climate interventions. Actions that could navigate towards the optimistic, sustainable and technically achievable future include:proactive creation and enhancement of economic incentives for mitigation and adaptation;supporting the proliferation of local initiatives to spur a global transformation;enhancing proactive costal adaptation management;investing in research to support adaptation to emerging risks;deploying marine-based renewable energy;deploying marine-based negative emissions technologies;developing solar radiation management approaches; anddeploying existing and new solar radiation management approaches to help safeguard critical ecosystems.

The oceans face a range of complex challenges for which the impacts on society are highly uncertain but mostly negative. Tackling these challenges is testing society’s capacity to mobilise large-scale transformative action and engendering a sense of ‘doom and gloom’. Envisaging positive but realistic visions of the future, and considering how current knowledge, resources, and technology could be used to achieve these futures, may lead to greater action to achieve sustainable transformations. The Future Seas project (www.FutureSeas2030.org) aims to leverage interdisciplinary knowledge to improve society’s capacity to purposefully shape the direction of marine social-ecological systems over the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021-2030). Teams comprising researchers across career stages, Indigenous Peoples and environmental managers, collaborated over a series of workshops to develop narrative futures for 12 Key Challenges facing the oceans. We focused the narratives on two futures: our current trajectory based on published evidence, and a more sustainable future, consistent with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which is technically achievable using existing and emerging knowledge. Presentation of Business-as-usual and More Sustainable futures - together - allows communication of both trajectories, whilst also highlighting achievable , sustainable versions of the future. The advantages of the interdisciplinary approach taken here include: (1) integrating different perspectives on actions and solutions, (2) capacity to explore the interactions between Life Under Water (Goal 14) and other SDGs, and (3) cross-disciplinary learning. This approach allowed participants to conceptualise shared visions of the future and co-design transformative pathways to achieving those futures.

The concentration of human population along coastlines has far-reaching effects on ocean and societal health. The oceans provide benefits to humans such as food, coastal protection and improved mental well-being, but can also impact negatively via natural disasters. At the same time, humans influence ocean health, for example, via coastal development or through environmental stewardship. Given the strong feedbacks between ocean and human health there is a need to promote desirable interactions, while minimising undesirable interactions. To this end, we articulate two scenarios for 2030. First, Business-as-Usual, named ‘Command & (Out of) Control ’, focuses on the anticipated future based on our current trajectory. Second, a more sustainable scenario called ‘Living & Connecting ’, emphasises the development of interactions between oceans and society consistent with achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. We describe a potential pathway to achieving the ‘Living & Connecting’ scenario, centred on improving marine citizenship, achieving a more equitable distribution of power among stakeholders, and more equitable access to resources and opportunities. The constituent actions of this pathway can be categorised into four groups: (i) improved approaches to science and health communication that account for society’s diverse values, beliefs and worldviews, (ii) a shift towards more trusted relationships among stakeholders to enable two-way knowledge exchange, (iii) economic incentives that encourage behavioural changes necessary for achieving desired sustainability outcomes, and (iv) stronger regulations that simultaneously focus on ocean and human health. We contend that these changes will provide improved outcomes for both oceans and society over the UN Decade of Ocean Science.