ICES Journal of Marine Science, 2023, 0, 1–13

DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsad115
Food for Thought

Evaluating the sustainability and environmental impacts of

trawling compared to other food production systems
R. Hilborn 1 ,* , R. Amoroso1 , J. Collie 2 , J. G. Hiddink 3 , M. J. Kaiser4 , T. Mazor5,6 ,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

R. A. McConnaughey7 , A. M. Parma8 , C. R. Pitcher5 , M. Sciberras3,4 , and P. Suuronen9,10
1
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
2
Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA
3
School of Ocean Sciences, Bangor University, Menai Bridge LL59 5AB, UK
4
The Lyell Centre, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK
5
Oceans and Atmosphere, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Brisbane, QLD 4067, Australia
6
Biodiversity, Environment and Climate Change, Department of Environment Land Water and Planning, East Melbourne, VIC 3002, Australia
7
Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA 98115, USA
8
Centro para el Estudio de Sistemas Marinos Centro Nacional Patagónico-CONICET , Puerto Madryn, Chabut 9120, Argentina
9
Fisheries and fish resources, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Helsinki 00790, Finland
10
International Seafood Consulting Group (ISCG), Helsinki 00100, Finland
∗
Corresponding author: tel: +206-883-5049; e-mail: [email protected].

Mobile bottom contact gear such as trawls is widely considered to have the highest environmental impact of commonly used fishing gears,
with concern about impact on benthic communities, bycatch, and carbon footprint frequently highlighted as much higher than other forms of
fishing. As a result, the use of such gears has been banned or severely restricted in some countries, and there are many proposals to implement
such restrictions elsewhere. In this paper, we review the sustainability of bottom trawling with respect to target-species sustainability, impact
on benthic communities, bycatch and discards, carbon footprint from fuel use, and impact on carbon sequestration. We compare the impact to
other forms of fishing and other food production systems. We show that bottom-trawl and dredge fisheries have been sustained, and where
well managed, stocks are increasing. Benthic sedimentary habitats remain in good condition where fishing pressure is well managed and where
VME and species of concern can be protected by spatial management. Bycatch is intrinsically high because of the mixed-species nature of
benthic communities. The carbon footprint is on average higher than chicken or pork, but much less than beef, and can be much lower than
chicken or pork. The impact on carbon sequestration remains highly uncertain. Overall, the concerns about trawling impacts can be significantly
mitigated when existing technical gear and management measures (e.g. gear design changes and spatial controls) are adopted by industry and
regulatory bodies and the race-to-fish eliminated. When these management measures are implemented, it appears that bottom trawling would
have a lower environmental impact than livestock or fed aquaculture, which would likely replace trawl-caught fish if trawling was banned. A total
of 83 bottom-trawl fisheries are currently certified by the Marine Stewardship Council, which is the most widely accepted measure of overall
sustainability.
Keywords: Bottom trawling, bycatch, carbon footprint, discards, environmental impacts of fishing.

Introduction However, bottom trawling accounts for 26% of global ma-

Bottom trawls (such as beam trawls, otter trawls, and shellfish rine fisheries catches (Steadman et al., 2022), providing food
dredges, which we will refer to as bottom trawls) are designed and employment for millions of people at a time when the
to catch target species that live close to, in, and on the seabed. contributions of marine fisheries towards the United Nations
The use of bottom trawls as a means of catching fish has met Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2002) and,
with increasing opposition due to its impact on seafloor habi- specifically, to meet the food and nutrient needs of a grow-
tats and biological communities (Watling and Norse, 1998; ing population, are increasingly recognized. While alternative
Watling, 2013), its high bycatch rates (Pérez Roda et al., 2019; fishing gears and methods may be available and economi-
Gilman et al., 2020), CO2 release from fuel use (Tyedmers, cally viable in some cases, many benthic and demersal target
2004; Sala et al., 2022), and, lately, its potential contribution species would be difficult to catch without some form of bot-
to greenhouse emissions through the release of stored carbon tom trawling (Ziegler and Valentinsson, 2008; Suuronen et al.,
from disturbed seabed sediments (Sala et al., 2021). Although 2012).
the magnitude of those impacts remains the subject of in- From this perspective, bottom trawling needs to be consid-
tense scientific debate (Pitcher et al., 2022), concerns about ered as one form of food production, and its sustainability and
the environmental impacts of trawling have fueled strong environmental footprint should be compared to footprints of
public campaigns, resulting in bottom trawling being demo- other ways of producing food, including other capture fish-
nized (Willer et al., 2022), severely restricted, or effectively eries, aquaculture, livestock, and crop production.
banned in some countries and regions (McConnaughey et al., The purpose of this paper is to summarize the cur-
2020). rent knowledge about the sustainability and environmental

Received: 24 October 2022; Revised: 29 June 2023; Accepted: 4 July 2023

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. This is an Open Access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted
reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 R. Hilborn et al.

2.5
2.0
Stock abundance/target

1.5
1.0

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

0.5
0.0

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

Figure 1. The abundance trend in global groundfish stocks relative to management targets (solid black line). In most cases, management targets are
based on achieving maximum sustainable yield. Vertical bars show the range of 50% of the stocks, with 25% being below and 25% above. The thin grey
horizontal line shows where the stock abundance is equal to the management target. Redrawn from Hilborn et al. (2021).

impacts of bottom trawling, to compare trawling impacts to poses challenges to sustainable exploitation of mixed species
other forms of food production, to identify important infor- of differential productivity, but the increasing trend of ground-
mation gaps, and to suggest the best ways to minimize the fish in many regions of the world shows that even in mixed-
environmental impacts of trawling. species fisheries, good management can lead to sustainabil-
ity (Fernandes and Cook, 2013; Zimmermann and Werner,
2019).
Certifications as sustainable There are of course many stocks that are overexploited with
At present, 83 bottom-trawl fisheries representing 252 bottom trawls, but this is a failure of fisheries management
bottom-trawl-caught species/fisheries combinations have been to control fishing pressure rather than a direct consequence
certified by the Marine Stewardship Council (personal com- of the fishing gear used, as it has been clearly demonstrated
munication, Mike Melnychuk, MSC staff) as sustainable. that well-regulated bottom-trawl fisheries can avoid overfish-
These include 122 units of certification from Europe, 63 from ing (Hilborn et al., 2021). Bottom trawling and related mobile
the United States, 19 from Canada, 15 from Australia, 12 each bottom-contact gear like dredges are also commonly used for
from Chile and New Zealand, 5 from Africa, and 2 from Ar- many invertebrates, but there has been no global summary of
gentina. Many are recommended by the Seafood Watch pro- the trends in abundance of these species.
gramme of the Monterey Bay Aquarium (www.seafoodwatch
.org). These are the two best-known international standards
for fisheries sustainability, and the fact that bottom-trawl fish- Impact of trawling on benthic ecosystems
eries meet their standards is evidence that bottom-trawl fish- The magnitude of the effect of the trawl disturbance on ben-
ing can be sustainable. These sustainability evaluations con- thic communities depends on the frequency of trawling, the
sider not only the status of the target stock but also the ma- impact (or depletion rate) per trawl pass, and the individual
rine environmental impacts of the fishing method and have recovery rates of biota exposed to trawling (Hiddink et al.,
specific criteria regarding the management of bottom-trawl 2017). The effects of trawling on the commonly fished sedi-
impacts on benthic communities (Monterey Bay Aquarium, mentary habitats, such as muddy and sandy seabeds, are much
2023) (Marine Stewardship Council, 2023). less severe than on the more sensitive habitats, such as oys-
ter reefs in shallow waters and vulnerable marine ecosystems
(VMEs) (Parker et al., 2009), such as sponge gardens or cold-
Sustainability of target species water coral reefs (Clark and Rowden, 2009; Clark et al., 2015;
Bottom trawling is the primary method used to harvest many Kaiser et al., 2018), in deeper waters. For sedimentary habi-
demersal species known as groundfish, which include cod, tats, average depletion rates (the percentage of benthic inverte-
haddock, pollock, hake, and multiple species of flatfish and brates killed per passage of the gear) range from 4.7 to 26.1%
rockfish. Globally, almost all the catch of groundfish comes depending on trawl type, gear penetration depth, and habitat
from fish stocks whose trends in abundance are scientifically type, with otter trawls causing the lowest depletion, followed
assessed (Hilborn et al., 2021). Groundfish populations are by beam trawls and towed dredges causing the most impact
increasing overall and above the target levels for sustainable (Sciberras et al., 2018). Depletion rates are lower in sand than
exploitation (Figure 1) (Hilborn et al., 2021). Arguments that in gravel and mud (Collie et al., 2017; Pitcher et al., 2022).
bottom trawling is incompatible with sustaining a fishery for Recovery rates are related to the longevity of the affected
the target species are contradicted by the trends in the abun- species (Hiddink et al., 2019). Meta-analysis of studies report-
dance of groundfish stocks. The mixed-stock nature of all bot- ing how the biomass of the benthic community declines with
tom fishing methods (trawl, longline, Danish seine, gillnet) increasing trawling intensity produced estimates of recovery
Sustainability of trawling 3

rates that ranged from 29 to 68% per year along a gravel-to- Assessing the status of sedimentary habitats (the habitat
mud continuum (Pitcher et al., 2022). Slower recovery with types where most trawling occurs) is critical to ensuring the in-
increasing gravel reflects the greater proportions of longer- tegrity of the seabed ecosystems because sedimentary habitats
lived species found in more stable gravel habitats. Epiben- constitute most of the continental shelves. Nevertheless, much
thic megafauna and biogenic habitats are the most sensitive to concern surrounds rarer, more sensitive habitat types that can
all forms of trawling, and recovery rates are often measured characterize VMEs and biogenic habitats (FAO, 2009). These
in decades (Kaiser et al., 2018). However, complex habitats habitats are not well mapped over large scales in most regions,
like coral reefs and rocky bottoms are generally avoided by and while impact rates are known to be high in many cases,
trawlers because of the threats to their nets. When these habi- there are few quantitative estimates of the impact that bottom
tats are trawled, they are heavily impacted (Parker et al., 2009; trawling has on them because few studies have been carried

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

Williams et al., 2020), and a consensus is growing that the best out because it is hard to justify trawling over such sensitive
practise is to close such areas to mobile bottom contact gear habitats for a scientific experiment (Hall-Spencer and Moore,
(McConnaughey et al., 2020). 2000). Even the most resilient of these VMEs cannot with-
A global modelling assessment of trawl impacts on macro stand trawling more than once every three years (Thompson
epifauna and infauna in sedimentary habitats showed that et al., 2016). A preliminary assessment conducted by Pitcher
the status of benthic populations relative to an untrawled et al. (2022) calculated the percentage of each of the 24 regions
state differs greatly among regions and was related to the to- in their study where trawl intensity exceeded that frequency,
tal amount of trawling (Pitcher et al., 2022). The model in- which was used as a local extinction threshold for highly sen-
cluded 24 regions worldwide and used fine-scale data on the sitive biota. The percentage of seabed trawled at least once ev-
frequency of trawling and recovery rates of biota estimated ery three years ranged from 0.2% in southern Chile to 82% in
from meta-analysis (Figure 2). The measure used, relative ben- the Adriatic Sea and was >20% for 10 regions (all European
thic status (RBS), reflects the extent to which the macrofauna regions and northern Benguela) (Pitcher et al., 2022). In those
have been numerically reduced and is an aggregated measure regions, we would expect the sensitive species in VMEs to be
across many species (Pitcher et al., 2017). A status of 0.9, for eliminated in proportion to the amount of area trawled three
instance, would mean that the abundance of benthic macro- times or more. Because of the high sensitivity of the habitat-
fauna averaged across taxa would be 90% of the abundance forming biota types that characterize VMEs, fisheries manage-
in the absence of trawling. Even with a RBS of 0.9, some more ment should seek to prevent significant adverse impacts on
sensitive species would be reduced more than that and more them, according to the Deep-Sea Fisheries Guidelines (FAO,
resilient species less. The RBS for a region will reflect the aver- 2009).
age across untrawled, lightly trawled, and heavily trawled ar- The data on trawl intensity in Pitcher et al. (2022) cov-
eas in the region, weighted by the area of each level of trawl in- ers almost all European waters, Australia, New Zealand,
tensity. Mazor et al. (2021) were able to look at the impacts on South Africa, Namibia, Argentina, Chile, the western US,
specific species where data were available. There are no estab- and Alaska. There is no coverage of Asia, where trawling is
lished targets for this index, and as in discussions of changes thought to be quite intense (Suuronen et al., 2020), and Africa
in biodiversity, multiple measures are potentially usable. RBS with the exception of Namibia and South Africa.
allows us to compare widely across benthic habitats in many
different regions.
Overall impacts are low in most regions examined, and Indirect impact of trawling on productivity of
much of the seabed is untrawled in many regions. Regional target species
average status relative to an untrawled state (status = 1.0) was Intense bottom trawling causes a high level of local mortal-
high (>0.9) in 15 regions (mostly outside Europe) but <0.7 ity to benthic fauna, and for fish species that depend on ben-
in three European regions and only 0.25 in the Adriatic thic fauna for food, shelter, productivity, and hence sustain-
Sea. Across all regions, 66% of the seabed area was not able harvest may decline with increasing levels of bottom
trawled, 1.5% was depleted (status = 0), and 93% had sta- fishing disturbance. Indirect effects of bottom fishing have
tus >0.8 (Figure 2) (Pitcher et al., 2022). been demonstrated experimentally and with dynamic mod-
The RBS is calculated for each region in the most recent els in which trawling affects the target species, their benthic
range of years where trawl effort data were available (mostly prey, and the habitat-forming epifauna (Collie et al., 2017;
2010–2014), and reflects the expected status of benthos at that Pitcher et al., 2022). Ultimately, the response of fish produc-
intensity of trawling. RBS depends on habitat type (reflecting tivity to bottom fishing depends on the interplay between re-
both the taxa found and the sensitivity to trawling) and the duced benthic prey abundance and reduced competition for
intensity of trawling. In most areas where we have trawl-effort benthic food as fish density declines (Hiddink et al., 2011;
data, there is declining fishing pressure (see a later section on 2016). Historically, trawling may have modified habitat and
trends in trawl footprint), so we would expect that in general reduced the carrying capacity of fish stocks, but these ef-
RBS would be improving. fects are difficult to distinguish empirically because fishing
Mazor et al. (2021) provide more detail on impacts within and other factors may impact the abundance of target species.
different taxonomic groups. The status of populations of Over large areas of the continental shelf with sandy sedi-
benthic-invertebrate groups was examined for 13 of the 24 ments, these indirect effects are estimated to be small com-
regions for which suitable invertebrate distribution data were pared with the direct mortality caused by fishing target species
available and ranged between 0.86 and 1 (mean = 0.99), with (Collie et al., 2017; Pitcher et al., 2022). A possible expla-
78% of benthos-groups having a status >0.95 (Mazor et al., nation for this small effect is that the distribution of fishing
2021). Again, mean benthos status was lower in European re- effort is very patchy—small fractions of fishing grounds are
gions than regions elsewhere, which accords with the intensity heavily fished, while large fractions are lightly fished or un-
and history of fishing in Europe. fished (Amoroso et al., 2018). Therefore, the indirect effects of
4 R. Hilborn et al.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

Figure 2. Depletion level (RBS) of benthic flora and fauna in different regions of the world where data on trawl effort and sediment type are available.
Data from Pitcher et al. (2022).

bottom fishing are also likely to be localized, for example, Table 1. Mean discard rates and 95% confidence bound (CI) for different
where target species live on vulnerable habitats. fishing gears from Pérez Roda et al., 2019 (Table B1).

Mean percent
Gear Category discarded 95% CI
Bycatch and discards
Bycatch is generally defined as the “unintended, non-targeted Purse seine 5% 3.9–5.6%
Longline, pelagic 7% 5.8–9.4%
organisms caught while fishing for particular species (or sizes Pole-and-line 9% 6.4–14.4%
of species),” including “landed bycatch,” which is retained to Handline 10% 1.9–44.2%
be eaten or sold (Pérez Roda et al., 2019). Discards are the Gillnet, pelagic (driftnet) 12% 7.4–19.0%
portion of the catch that are returned to the sea whole, alive Otter trawl, midwater 12% 8.2–18.2%
or dead. Fishers are discarding in response to numerous and Longline, bottom and pelagic 13% 11.0–16.4%
continuously changing factors, including market conditions, Pots 17% 12.1–22.2%
Gillnet, surface and bottom 17% 8.8–32.9%
regulations, and the size and quality of the catch. Trawl, pair, midwater 19% 3.3–73.0%
Using Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) databases Trolling lines 20% 6.8–49.8%
on country-specific landings, Pérez Roda et al. (2019) esti- Longline, bottom 24% 18.0–31.1%
mated the discard rate and magnitude for the period 2010– Gillnet, bottom 26% 19.8–33.8%
2014 for global marine capture fisheries using fishery-specific Otter trawl, bottom 31% 28.5–60.0%
discard rates derived from direct observations and global gear- Trawl, otter twin 44% 28.5–60.0%
Trawl, beam 46% 37.7–53.8%
specific discard rates. Discard rates for trawl fisheries and se- Trawl, pair, bottom 48% 14.1–87.8%
lected other gear types are shown in Table 1. Trawl, shrimp 55% 50.0–59.6%
Table 1 shows that the dominant determinant of discard
rate is whether the fishing occurs on the bottom or surface or
Sustainability of trawling 5

Table 2. The average, minimum, and maximum amount of fuel used to capture one MT (litres per MT) of fish for different gear types and the amount of
carbon released per kilogramme (Kg) of fish wet weight landed (Kg CO2 per kg landed).

Liters of fuel per MT landed Kg CO2 per Kg landed

Gear Average Minimum Maximum Average Minimum Maximum

Surrounding nets 252 8 659 0.68 0.02 1.78

Dredges 506 15 1 822 1.37 0.04 4.92
Pelagic trawls 667 36 2 475 1.80 0.10 6.68
Gillnets 604 199 2 162 1.63 0.54 5.84
Divers 951 585 1 472 2.57 1.58 3.97

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

Hooks and lines 1 032 47 4 985 2.79 0.13 13.46
Bottom trawls 1 722 65 17 300 4.65 0.18 46.71
Pots and traps 3 014 331 9 474 8.14 0.89 25.58
Data source is Parker and Tyedmers (2015).

midwater. Bottom trawls generally have the highest discard Table 3. Kg CO2 per kg of processed product from life cycle analysis.
rate and account for an estimated 46% of all discards, with
Kg
shrimp trawls having particularly high discards (Pérez Roda Food type CO2/kg
et al., 2019). In many trawl fisheries (and most other fisheries),
most of the discarded catch will not survive, but this depends Corn 0.10
largely on species, size of organisms, handling practises (e.g. Wheat 0.23
sorting time), environmental conditions (e.g. air temperature), Rice 0.33
Tofu 0.60
and haul duration and depth (Broadhurst et al., 2006). For in-
Potatoes 0.80
stance, many crustaceans typically incur <50% discard mor- Alaska pollock fishery 0.83
talities, whereas small pelagic fish may suffer very high mor- Alaska bottom-trawl fishery 1.17
tality (reviewed by Broadhurst et al., 2006). Isle of Man scallop fishery 1.73
When comparing the FAO discard estimates covering four New Zealand hoki and ling 2.24
decades (Alverson et al., 1994; Kelleher, 2005; Pérez Roda Chicken 2.28
et al., 2019), it is obvious that there has been a declining trend Pork 2.92
Impossible Burger 3.50
from the late 1980s, as the latest discard estimate is less than Bottom-trawl fisheries average 4.65
half of the initial estimate. The estimates from the current as- Farmed Salmon Norway 5.50
sessment are consistent with the findings of Zeller et al. (2018), Beef 19.20
who found that annual discards peaked at around 19 million
Data sources: crops and livestock from Poore and Nemecek (2018); Pollock
tonnes in 1989 and gradually declined to under 10 million from Zhang et al. (2022); Alaska bottom trawl converted by ratio of fuel
tonnes by 2014. used in pollock fishery (Fissel et al., 2016); scallop fishery (Bloor et al., 2021);
Impossible Burger (Khan et al., 2019); New Zealand (Mazzetto and Ledgard
Improved gear selectivity and reduction of fishing effort 2023, ); Norwegian farmed salmon (Ziegler and Hilborn, 2023).
have contributed to the reduction of discards in many trawl
fisheries in Europe, North America, and Australia (Kennelly
and Broadhurst, 2021). A major change has also been the in- sembled an impressive collection of 878 studies of fuel use in
creased utilization of all species in trawl fisheries of SE Asia, fisheries since 1990, measured as litres of fuel used per metric
where trawling has been largely non-selective and thus has re- tonne (MT) landed. The data are predominantly from Europe,
sulted in large volumes of juvenile fish, small-sized fish species, North America, and Oceania, with few studies from Africa or
and other organisms in the landings (Funge-Smith et al., 2012; Asia. For bottom trawl gear, Europe had a fuel consumption
Suuronen et al., 2020). Most of these fish are now used in SE per MT landed that was 1.8 times as high as North America
Asia both for local markets and for aquaculture feed, and dis- and Oceania. Table 2 shows the fuel use and carbon released
carding is uncommon. Increased use of trawl “bycatch” is also by fuel use for different fishing gears.
growing in Africa and Latin America, leading to reduced dis- The most important feature of these data is the high vari-
cards. ability within and among different fisheries, indicating that
The capture of endangered, threatened, or protected almost any fishing gear type can catch fish with a much lower
species, such as rays, sharks, and sea turtles, as well as juveniles carbon footprint than the average, and no method is consis-
of target species, remains a cause of concern in some trawl tently best. Nevertheless, bottom trawls are among the least
fisheries (Gray and Kennelly, 2018). They estimated that 19% fuel-efficient gear types. Two-thirds of the bottom trawl data
of sea turtles discarded globally at sea were taken by trawls set is from Europe, and many of the data are from the 1990s,
(both pelagic and bottom), that the extensive Alaska bottom- a time of low stock status and highly competitive fisheries (i.e.
trawl fishery annually discarded 534 seabirds, the Argentine greater fishing effort was required to catch the same amount of
factory trawl fleet discarded 8500 seabirds and suggest that fish relative to when stock status was more abundant). In con-
the global trawl impact on seabirds may be on the same order trast, trawl fisheries for stocks at high abundance and where
as the longline fleets. the race-to-fish has been eliminated by the allocation of quota
to cooperatives have much lower fuel use and carbon foot-
print (Fissel et al., 2016). Two Alaskan trawl fisheries have
Carbon footprint of fuel use quite low carbon footprint per unit of edible product (0.83
The majority of the carbon footprint of capture fisheries and 1.17 kg CO2 /kg; see Table 3) and exemplify how the car-
comes from the fuel used, and Parker and Tyedmers (2015) as- bon footprint of trawling can be reduced by maintaining high
6 R. Hilborn et al.

stock size and eliminating the race-to-fish and sets a standard Breitburg et al., 2018). The combined effects of trawling
for other trawl fisheries to aspire to. The New Zealand deep- and hypoxia on benthic community biomass and seabed pro-
water trawl fleet has a carbon footprint of 2.24 kg CO2 /kg cesses may be synergistic and disproportionally impact ben-
(Mazzetto and Ledgard, 2023). Similarly, a well-managed ter- thic fauna, or trawl impacts may be smaller in hypoxic ar-
ritorial use rights-based scallop dredge fishery in the Isle of eas. Despite the high annual trawling intensities in the south-
Man (Irish Sea) resulted in emissions of 1.73 kg CO2 /kg of ern Baltic Sea (each square metre of bottom is trawled seven
scallop meat, compared with up to 4.07–13.61 kg CO2 /kg times per year on average), van Denderen et al. (2022) found
scallop meat in the adjacent open access scallop fishery (Bloor that the benthic community was predominantly impacted by
et al., 2021). At present, both the Alaskan and Isle of Man low oxygen concentrations (DO at sites studied ranged be-
fisheries are dominated by older vessels, and it would be ex- tween 0.8 and 5.8 ml O2 L−1 ) and found neither an effect of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

pected that newer, more fuel-efficient vessels could reduce the trawling nor a synergistic effect of trawling and hypoxia. In
carbon footprint further. such cases, benthic communities may be expected to benefit
most from management actions targeting reductions of nu-
trient loads and reversing eutrophication and hypoxia. Con-
Impact of trawling on carbon sequestration versely, management efforts for regulating trawling are better
Carbon stocks in seabed sediments are a large natural as- targeted to regions that are not in a prolonged state of hy-
set (e.g. 0.52 Pg of organic and 2 Pg of inorganic carbon in poxia.
UK waters) (Parker et al., 2020; Smeaton and Austin, 2022), Hypoxia has also been demonstrated to alter catch and
and bottom-trawl fishing is the most extensive anthropogenic effort patterns. Purcell et al. (2017) showed that hypoxia-
physical disturbance to these sediments (Legge et al., 2020). induced changes in the distribution of shrimp also alter the
The impacts of fishing on carbon stocks are currently unquan- spatial dynamics of the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fleet, with po-
tified and unregulated. The available evidence suggests that tential consequences for harvest interactions and the economic
the seabed disturbance could result in greenhouse gas release condition of the fishery. Bio-economic simulations of the Gulf
(CO2 , CH4 , and others) from the seabed into the water col- shrimp trawl fishery suggest that hypoxia can lead to both
umn (Epstein et al., 2022). A global extrapolation by Sala et al. short-term increases or decreases in catch, depending on the
(2021) suggested that seabed disturbance with mobile fishing effects of hypoxia on components of shrimp production (e.g.
gears releases 0.16–0.4 Pg carbon per year to the ocean, but growth, mortality) and the behaviour of the fishery (e.g. catch-
this estimate has been widely criticized and is likely to be two ability) (Smith et al., 2014).
orders of magnitude too high (Epstein et al., 2022) (Hiddink
et al., 2023), meaning that mineralization of benthic carbon
stores comes primarily from natural processes. Is the trawl footprint expanding?
This controversy has highlighted major uncertainties in the A common perception of trawling is that it is expanding
magnitude and even the direction of the response of sediment worldwide and new areas are being impacted each year. Some
carbon stores due to sediment mixing, resuspension, and a re- have compared trawling to forest clear cutting and stated that
duction in the bioturbation activity as a result of the loss of the area trawled each year, estimated from trawl effort, speed,
benthic fauna following trawling disturbance (Smeaton et al., and width of trawl nets, is 150 times the area of forest clearcut
2021; Epstein et al., 2022). Knowledge about how these effects (Watling and Norse, 1998). The obvious flaw in this analogy
translate into changes in carbon storage and fluxes into or out is that, for the most part, the same areas are trawled each year,
of seabed sediments and across the air-sea interface showed and indeed, in some cases, many times each year, but you can-
that of 49 investigations reporting the effect of bottom trawl- not clearcut the same area twice.
ing on seabed carbon, 61% of studies showed no significant Amoroso et al. (2018, SM) calculated the increase in the cu-
effect, 29% reported lower organic carbon after fishing, and mulative area impacted by trawling as a function of the num-
10% reported higher seabed organic carbon after fishing (Ep- ber of years considered using data from 32 regions of the con-
stein et al., 2022). Only five studies have estimated changes tinental shelf. They found that the trawling footprint tended to
in carbon mineralization and O2 uptake, and the majority of be rather stable, especially in mid-to-highly impacted regions.
these recorded a decrease rather than an increase in CO2 pro- For example, in regions where >30% of grid cells were annu-
duction with trawling (e.g. Polymenakou et al., 2005). With ally impacted by trawling, the cumulative number of cells im-
respect to potential impacts on climate change, even if trawl- pacted over a three-year period was at most 40% larger than
ing does significantly increase the mineralization of seabed the annual impact, indicating a substantial overlap in fishing
carbon, only a fraction of it would make it into the atmo- areas from year to year. Using detailed tow-by-tow data by
sphere (Collins et al., 2022). We conclude that there is little individual vessel in the British Columbia bottom trawl fleet,
evidence that trawling increases sediment carbon mineraliza- Branch et al. (2005) showed that each vessel fished over a lim-
tion significantly, even less that it impacts atmospheric CO2 ited number of standard locations (an average of 26 per ves-
levels, but uncertainty certainly remains. sel), where the vessel had previously fished, and exploration
of new fishing grounds was uncommon.
Certainly some new areas have been explored, particularly
Interaction of bottom trawling and hypoxia in deeper waters as gear technology has permitted deeper
Marine benthic habitats in continental shelf regions are tows, and as species distributions shift fishing effort may also
increasingly impacted by hypoxia [dissolved oxygen (DO) shift. For the major bottom-trawl fisheries on groundfish (cod,
≤2 mg L−1 ] caused by the combination of eutrophication pollock, haddock, hake, and flatfish), the annual harvest rates
and climate warming. Environmental hypoxia has been doc- and catches have been declining, the total effort declining, and
umented in over 400 marine systems globally and affects hence the area trawled is presumably also declining (Hilborn
>240000 km2 of coastal habitat (Diaz and Rosenberg, 2008; et al., 2021). However, without a longer time series of spatial
Sustainability of trawling 7

data on trawl effort, it is difficult to determine if the extent of (Blyth-Skyrme et al., 2006). At the same time, absolute pro-
bottom trawl footprints is expanding. hibition directly affects those employed in the trawl indus-
try and may cause redistribution of effort if the prohibition
is localized. Alternative trawl restrictions include freezing the
Conflicts with other fishing gears and ocean trawling footprint to prevent expansion into previously un-
uses trawled areas, but this limits a fleet’s adaptability to changing
Bottom-trawl fisheries have a long history of conflict with fish distributions.
static fishing gears that lie on the bottom, such as longlines, Particularly sensitive habitats, such as coral, sponge, and
gillnets, and pots, and when fishing grounds overlap, interfer- nearshore nurseries, can be effectively protected when their
ence may result in fixed gear losses and hazards for the trawls. locations are known and closures are implemented prior to

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

This has led, in some circumstances, to formal or informal significant disturbance. Substantial invertebrate bycatch can
zoning or rotational arrangements. In many cases, inter-gear be mitigated by voluntary or regulated movement to other
conflicts reflect competition for the same target resources be- areas with real-time reporting and closures; however, such
tween small and large-scale fleets, which has led to the estab- “move-on” rules displace effort to similar areas, thereby ex-
lishment of exclusive coastal zones for artisanal or small-scale panding the overall footprint and its effects. When move-on
fisheries where trawling is banned (McConnaughey et al., rules were combined with tradable quotas, detailed maps of
2020). An example of this is the Inshore Potting Agreement sensitive areas, and onboard observers, a substantial reduc-
(IPA), a voluntary fishery management system designed and tion in invertebrate bycatch was achieved in British Columbia,
operated by fishers of south Devon, England to reduce con- Canada without affecting overall fleet performance (Groen-
flict between static-gear (pot and net) and towed-gear (trawl baek et al., 2023). Perhaps the simplest change is to reduce
and dredge) fishers. The IPA is regarded as a successful fish- fishing effort when overfishing occurs. This reduces impacts
eries management regime by fishers and managers because it on benthic biota and increases fishery yield (Amoroso et al.,
has effectively allowed fishers from both sectors to operate 2018; McConnaughey et al., 2020), which may confer eco-
profitably on traditional fishing grounds (Hart et al., 2002). nomic benefits due to trip reductions and lower fuel usage but
Oil and gas pipelines and communication cables laid on the would normally have short-term negative economic impacts.
seafloor are also typically in conflict with fisheries, and new Fuel consumption is the primary source of the carbon foot-
demands on the seafloor, such as wind farms (Rodmell and print for all fishing vessels. Gear modifications that reduce
Johnson, 2002; Stokesbury et al., 2022), tidal power, and contact with the seafloor reduce fuel consumption and ex-
seabed mining, have added to the competition for space. On tend gear life, which improves overall profitability if target-
the West Coast of the United States, communication compa- species catchability is maintained or nearly so. However, in
nies negotiated financial arrangements with trawl fleets, pro- some fisheries, there is a trade-off between the catchability of
viding research funds administered by the trawl-fishing orga- the target species and bycatch reduction. Gear that reduces by-
nizations (https://bandoncable.org/history.asp). catch may require more effort (and fuel) to achieve the same
landings. Management measures that increase target-species
abundance will normally be expected to increase catch rates
Management actions to reduce impacts and thus lower fuel use per tonne captured. Newly constructed
A variety of management measures reduce the impacts of bot- vessels tend to have reduced fuel use as a major design crite-
tom trawling on benthic biota and habitats, minimize bycatch, rion.
and reduce fuel usage to address sustainability goals. These Many of the same measures that reduce benthic impacts
measures, voluntary industry actions, and their interactions and reduce fuel use are also used to manage bycatch and re-
with existing management systems address conflicting soci- duce discards. Technical, administrative, and economic mea-
etal, environmental, and economic objectives, often requiring sures include modifications to fishing gear or fishing practises,
trade-offs. They broadly consist of technical measures related time and area restrictions, bycatch limits, effort restrictions,
to gear and operations, spatial controls, impact quotas, and and discard bans (i.e. landing obligations), and may also lead
fishing-effort controls. Their efficacy and practicality, alone or to active avoidance of high bycatch areas and involve coop-
in combination, depend on the characteristics of the fishery, erative fleet communications, awareness raising, and training
the management capacity, and the local tradeoffs between en- (Pascoe, 1997; Suuronen and Gilman, 2020; Suuronen et al.,
vironmental effects, food security, income, and employment. 2020). Technical measures to manage trawling bycatch are
Guidance has been proposed to evaluate potential best prac- based on a large body of empirical experiments intended to
tises for a region (McConnaughey et al., 2020). In most cases, improve species- and size-selectivity by modifying gear and
compliance and performance are predicated on stakeholder operations (Kennelly and Broadhurst, 2021), with attention
engagement (Suuronen et al., 2020; Suuronen, 2022). paid to unobserved mortality rates (Rose et al., 2013). Real-
Direct impacts on the benthos can be significantly reduced time closures involving move-on protocols may be effective in
by gear modifications that reduce contact with the seafloor dynamic situations where the bycatch level is unpredictable.
and/or penetration depth while maintaining or increasing the Bycatch quotas or limits on “choke species” are incentives
catchability of the target species. Impacts have been reduced to avoid premature closures of target fisheries before quota
with otter trawl doors that do not touch the bottom, ele- uptake is achieved. Measures to limit effort are based on the
vated footropes, and the use of electricity to cause the fish to simple rationale that less effort equates to less bycatch (Alver-
swim into a net that is not making bottom contact (Delaney son et al., 1994). An outright discard ban, where all catches
et al., 2022). An absolute prohibition of bottom trawling is the of species or stocks with an established TAC or covered by
most comprehensive measure of protection and typically pro- minimum landing size regulations must be kept on board,
vides additional fishing opportunity to alternative gears and landed, and deducted from established quotas, was imple-
thus has been advocated for reasons other than conservation mented by the EU Common Fisheries Policy and represents a
8 R. Hilborn et al.

fundamental regulatory shift from landings to catches (Karp increasing the use of pots and longlines will increase the risk
et al., 2019), but has proven ineffective because of numerous of entanglement and bycatch of species of concern, for exam-
exceptions and the difficulty in implementation and enforce- ple, right whales in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, which interact
ment (Uhlmann et al., 2019; Borges, 2021). with lobster fisheries.
Management measures that minimize the footprint of fish- There does not appear to be an economically viable alter-
ing have been shown in one study to lead to higher yields than native to bottom trawling to catch high volumes of flatfish,
measures that spread fishing activity more widely and evenly and bottom trawling or dredges appear to be the only effec-
across the seabed (Bloor et al., 2021). This was demonstrated tive method for capturing offshore scallops, clams, and certain
in a case study in the Isle of Man, where a territorial use rights- species of shrimp.
based fishery ring-fenced vulnerable habitat from fishing while The use of electric stimulation (e.g. in pulse trawling)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

demarcating a fishing zone within the management system. (Soetaert et al., 2015) and lights (Lomeli et al., 2021) to lift
Pre-open season fishery surveys directed fishing activity specif- fish off the bottom and reduce the need for bottom contact has
ically to high-density aggregations of target species (scallops), been highly developed. Scientific trials have shown that pulse
thereby increasing the efficiency with which the total allow- trawls reduce the mortality of non-target invertebrate benthic
able catch was taken and reduced the amount of seabed im- megafauna, discards, and fuel emissions compared to the con-
pacted to a negligible level (3% of the available area for fish- ventional tickler chain beam trawl (ICES, 2018; Bergman and
ing; Bloor et al., 2021). Using such approaches or regulating Meesters, 2020). Nevertheless, in early 2019, the European
the overall fishing mortality rate proportionally mitigates the Union parliament decided to forbid any pulse trawling after
indirect effects of bottom trawling. July 2021 due to concerns over possible damage to fauna from
Bottom trawling, like other forms of fishing, may cause by- electrical stimulation.
catch of species of conservation concern; the best known is the
bycatch of turtles. Technical solutions, in the form of turtle
excluder devices, have been shown to be very effective at re- Environmental impacts compared to
ducing turtle bycatch (Magnuson et al., 1990) (Jenkins, 2012). alternative foods
Similarly, excluder devices for marine mammal bycatch have All food production has multidimensional environmental im-
been implemented and shown to be effective (Hamilton and pacts, including fuel use, carbon footprint, water use, nutrient
Baker, 2015). release into water, soil, and atmosphere, acidifying compound
A significant obstacle in bycatch reduction has been the lim- release, antibiotics use, toxic chemical use, including pesticides
ited uptake by fishers of remedial changes proposed that they and herbicides, soil erosion, and introduction of exotic species
consider inconvenient and costly (Suuronen, 2022). Some de- and diseases in aquaculture, livestock, and for pest control.
mersal trawl fleets have made great strides in reducing by- There is an extensive literature of some of these impacts using
catch, and the bottom-trawl fishery for flatfish in the Bering life cycle assessment (LCA) that covers some of these metrics
Sea now has only 6–8% bycatch of all species (personal (for instance, see the meta-analysis in Hilborn et al., 2018;
communication Phil Ganz, NMFS). This reduction has been Tlusty et al., 2019).
achieved primarily by bycatch limits and fleet coordination In the following sections, we present data comparing the
providing strong incentives for vessels to avoid areas with environmental impacts of different forms of food production.
high bycatch. This example serves as an aspirational target But in comparing bottom trawling to other food production
for other trawl fisheries. systems, two issues arise. There are relatively few LCAs of
trawling, but more of capture fisheries and individual LCAs
Can other fishing methods replace bottom differ in whether the impacts are limited to harvesting, or also
trawling? include consideration of processing, transport, and retail. As a
generalization, all capture fisheries use no antibiotics, no fertil-
It is possible to capture some of the same species caught izer or pesticides, do not introduce exotic species, do not cause
with bottom trawls with other gears. However, transitioning soil erosion, and use very little freshwater. The use of fuel
from one gear type to another is seldom easy or practical and in capture fisheries releases some acidifying compounds, and
has many uncertainties and economic risks (Suuronen et al., toxic antifouling paint is used. However, processing and pack-
2012). The size and design of existing fishing vessels and their aging require considerable amounts of water, and a range of
machinery often limit the possibilities of changing the fishing toxic substances may be used in the manufacture of the pack-
method. Furthermore, fishing practises have evolved over time aging. The environmental impacts may be dramatically dif-
and are often “tailor-made” to particular species and condi- ferent depending on the product form. For instance, Vázquez-
tions. Rowe et al. (2014) found 50-fold differences in water demand
Pots and longlines have been demonstrated to be an eco- between canned and fresh sardines. The sample size of bot-
nomically viable fishing method for Pacific cod and sablefish in tom trawl LCAs is too small to do a realistic comparison to
the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea (Thomsen et al., 2010), livestock or crops for anything except energy use and carbon
and such gears can be more species- and size-selective in addi- footprint.
tion to having a lower benthic impact. In some circumstances,
bottom seining can be used. The seine net is lighter in con-
struction, but the area swept can be 1.25–10 times larger than Carbon footprint
other bottom trawling. Because there are no trawl doors or Table 3 compares the carbon footprint of processed products
warps, there is less pressure on the seabed. Nonetheless, there from LCA of crops, livestock, and capture fisheries. The av-
are several operational limitations in bottom seine fisheries, erage carbon footprint for bottom-trawl fisheries from pub-
and it can be an alternative for bottom trawling only in spe- lished LCAs is higher than all other foods listed except beef
cific cases (Suuronen et al., 2012). As with all fishing methods, and much higher than plant-based foods. But we include
Sustainability of trawling 9

the three bottom-trawl fisheries that represent the most well- fact that lower trophic levels in marine ecosystems are largely
managed in terms of stock condition and capacity manage- unaffected by fishing—although individual species may be. In
ment, and these show carbon footprints below chicken and contrast, agriculture intentionally removes the lowest trophic
pork but above crops. The Alaska pollock fishery uses mid- levels.
water gear but is estimated to be in bottom contact roughly Perhaps the clearest difference between the ecosystem im-
half the time, so it is included here. These cases illustrate that pacts of marine capture fisheries and agriculture’s impact on
bottom trawling does not necessarily have a high carbon foot- terrestrial systems is encapsulated in the MSC’s Principle 2,
print, and the high carbon footprint of bottom-trawl fish- which states, “Fishing operations should allow for the main-
eries on average reflects the fact that most of the LCA studies tenance of the structure, productivity, function, and diversity
of trawl fisheries have a competitive race-to-fish feature and of the ecosystem on which the fishery depends. The ecosystem

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

stock abundance is relatively poor. includes habitat and associated dependent and ecologically re-
The Impossible Burger is included because it is the only ex- lated species.” Many trawl fisheries have met this standard, yet
ample we know of for which a plant-based meat or fish im- no form of large-scale crop production could do so, whether
itation has had an LCA performed, and this product is fre- for direct human consumption or as feed for livestock or aqua-
quently billed as more environmentally friendly because it is culture.
plant-based.
Other impacts
Biodiversity Catching fish in the ocean uses no pesticides or fertilizer, al-
most no freshwater, and no antibiotics (Sharpless and Evans,
Under an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management,
2013). The global impacts from these would be increased if
the sustainability of fisheries is assessed considering both the
bottom trawling was banned and/or agriculture or aquacul-
impact on the target species and on the marine ecosystem.
ture increased to compensate, although there are significant
Both the MSC standard and the Seafood Watch scoring cri-
differences in these impacts among cropping systems. Crops
teria consider bycatch of species of concern and impacts on
grown on unirrigated land do not require water other than
habitat. But when we consider calls to greatly reduce or ban
rainfall to grow, and organic agriculture does not use antibi-
trawling, we must consider the consequences not only to the
otics, synthetic fertilizers, or pesticides, although organic fer-
marine ecosystem, but the ecosystem consequences in both
tilizer contributes to significant nutrient release and hypoxia.
the ocean and on land if that food production is replaced
Livestock raised in natural habitats has far less impact on na-
by other fisheries, aquaculture, agriculture, and livestock. The
tive flora and fauna than the land transformation required for
most likely aquaculture replacement for trawl-caught fish is
crop production.
through fed aquaculture, which largely relies on crops as feed,
A major issue for many forms of agriculture is exotic pests,
as does almost all livestock production. Crop production,
and one method used to control these has been the introduc-
whether directly for human consumption or feed for livestock
tion of exotic predators. This has often had a serious impact
and aquaculture, replaces the natural, although potentially de-
on native species (Hoddle, 2004), with the cane toad intro-
graded, ecosystem with a totally artificial monoculture, inten-
duction in Australia perhaps the best known.
tionally removing the native vegetation and any biota depen-
Aquaculture deserves special consideration because it is
dent upon that. The most prominent cause of extinction risk
the most obvious immediate substitute for food produced
is agriculture (IUCN, 2020), and the impact of agriculture on
by trawling. There are two basic types of aquaculture: those
biodiversity has been shown to be the most significant form
species cultured with feed supplied by the grower and those
of land use after urbanization (Newbold et al., 2015). LCAs
that feed themselves. Unfed production systems typically have
have not provided useful data on the biodiversity impacts of
a very low impact (Hilborn, 2018), with farmed seaweed, and
food production systems.
mollusks having a particularly low impact. But the species of
One of the few studies to directly compare a wide range
fish grown in aquaculture most similar, or identical to those
of biodiversity between farming and undisturbed habitat was
from bottom-trawl fisheries are almost all fed, primarily from
done in Tanzania. The study compared small-scale farmland
crops as well as fish meal from capture fisheries. While aqua-
to the adjacent Serengeti National Park and to biodiversity
culture species often are more efficient converters of feed to
in a nearby national park. Hilborn and Sinclair (2021) found
flesh than livestock, fed aquaculture has a higher environmen-
that the primary producers, grasses, shrubs, and trees on farm-
tal impact relative to capture fisheries across most measures
land had been reduced by 80–90%, and the ungulates, birds,
(Hilborn, 2018).
and predators that depend on the primary producers were all
Another concern about aquaculture is how diseases, both
reduced by over 80%. Only rodents were more abundant in
endemic and exotic, which have been a recurring prob-
the farmland. In contrast, even the places most heavily im-
lem in aquaculture (Diana, 2009), negatively impact native
pacted by trawling are transformed less than by agriculture.
species.
As we saw earlier, well-managed trawl fisheries uniformly re-
duce benthic ecosystem biota in sand, mud, and gravel systems
by <10% (Mazor et al., 2021). Hilborn and Sinclair (2021) Summary of the comparison of environmental
also summarize data from 26 marine ecosystem models used impacts of bottom trawling to alternative foods
to compare current fished conditions to unfished conditions. Bottom trawling appears to have a lower impact on most en-
They found no significant change in trophic levels 1, 2, and 3 vironmental indicators than most other food production sys-
due to fishing, and only a 10% reduction in the abundance tems and, on average, has a higher carbon footprint. There
of trophic level 4 and a 30% reduction of trophic level 5. are efforts to reduce the impact of every food production
While the total abundance of a trophic level may not be the system by technical innovation and changing practise among
most relevant measure of fishing impact, it does illustrate the producers. In bottom-trawl fisheries, fuel consumption and
10 R. Hilborn et al.

carbon footprint can be reduced by new designs of doors and Acknowledgements

nets, more efficient vessel engines, better management of fish Alaska groundfish fleet age data came from J. Lee. Alaska
stocks, and restructuring access to fishing quotas to eliminate Fisheries Science Center reviewers who provided suggestions
competitive fishing. We saw three examples in Table 3 of how on this manuscript were G. Harrington, M. Martin, and R.
successful these efforts can be. Similar efforts are underway Reuter. Dr Michael Melnychuk retrieved data on MSC certi-
to reduce the amount of water needed to grow crops and to fication of bottom-trawl fisheries from MSC data bases.
lower pesticide, fertilizer, and antibiotic use. Thus, the com-
parisons made here are not static, and we would expect the
various impacts to decline over time in all the food produc- Data availability
tion systems.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

No new data were assembled for this project.
Our synthesis of information on the relative sustainability
of food production systems has brought to attention improve-
ments needed to better assess fishing with bottom trawls and Author contributions
guide management measures or industry actions for meeting
sustainability goals. In particular, a global assessment requires All authors contributed to the writing and editing of the paper.
studies of the unknown carbon footprint of fuel consumption
by the Asian and African fleets, as well as new data from Eu-
Conflict of interest
rope to reflect contemporary fishery conditions. Subsequently,
comprehensive LCAs of bottom trawling, including loads and No specific funding was received for this paper, but all of the
impacts for the harvesting, processing, transport, and retail authors were part of a study group entitled “Trawling best
components, are needed for a more informed sustainability practices” that has produced over a dozen papers on trawl
evaluation and for comparisons with other food production footprints and the impacts of trawling on benthic biota. The
systems. project was initially funded by the Walton Family Founda-
tion and the David and Luciele Packard Foundation, with
later funding from FAO, the Australian Government through
Conclusions CSIRO, and several fishing companies. The authors have re-
Bottom trawling is a food production method that has envi- ceived funds from a range of sources including governments,
ronmental impacts. However, trawling impacts are well below foundations, nongovernmental organizations, and industries
most animal-source foods from livestock or fed aquaculture that have interests in conservation, sustainable use, and ef-
for many categories of impacts such as water use, antibiotic fective fisheries management—which may be perceived as a
use, and nutrient release. We suggest that while banning bot- conflict of interest. However, the authors declare that neither
tom trawling would decrease marine impacts, it would actu- these nor any other interests have directly or indirectly influ-
ally increase negative global environmental impacts as trawl enced the objectivity of this paper, and the findings and con-
caught foods would be replaced with those of terrestrial origin clusions in the paper are those of the authors alone, indepen-
or aquaculture species fed largely with higher-impact crops. dent of their organizations or funding sources. Several authors
The negative environmental impacts of bottom trawling have have current or past relationships with the Marine Steward-
been reduced by maintaining stocks at high abundance with ship Council. MJK was formerly the Science & Standards Di-
low fishing mortality rates, eliminating the race to fish through rector of the MSC from 2018–2019. JGH has funding from
cooperative fisheries, bycatch limits that incentivize bycatch MSC for two projects. AMP is part of a project funded by
avoidance (Calderwood et al., 2023), technical modification MSC. No other authors have funding or relationships with
of fishing gear to reduce or eliminate bottom contact and MSC.
bycatch (Bloor et al., 2021), fuller utilization of lower-value
species that would otherwise be discarded, and reduction of
References
subsidies—especially fuel subsidies that encourage inefficient
fisheries and increase CO2 emissions. These proven manage- Alverson, D. L., Freeberg, M. K., Murawski, S. A., and Pope, J. G. 1994.
ment measures and voluntary actions are adaptable to a range A global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper, 339: 233.
of local conditions (McConnaughey et al., 2020) and, if ap-
Amoroso, R. O., Pitcher, C. R., Rijnsdorp, A. D., McConnaughey, R. A.,
plied on a global basis, would dramatically reduce the nega- Parma, A. M., Suuronen, P., Eigaard, O. R et al. 2018. Bottom trawl
tive environmental impacts of bottom trawling. fishing footprints on the world’s continental shelves. Proceedings of
The overall sustainability of bottom-trawl fisheries is per- the National Academy of Sciences, 115: E10275–E10282.
haps best demonstrated by the 83 bottom-trawl fisheries that Bergman, M. J., and Meesters, E. H. 2020. First indications for reduced
are currently certified by the MSC, which represent 252 indi- mortality of non-target invertebrate benthic megafauna after pulse
vidual fishery species units of certification. Collectively, MSC- beam trawling. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 77: 846–857.
certified fisheries constitute 50% of the global harvest of Bloor, I. S., Duncan, P. F., Dignan, S. P., Emmerson, J., Beard, D., Gell,
groundfish stocks summarized in Hilborn et al., (2021). Tak- F. R., McHarg, K et al. 2021. Boom not bust: cooperative manage-
ment as a mechanism for improving the commercial efficiency and
ing this as a measure of progress, it is largely confined to large
environmental outcomes of regional scallop fisheries. Marine Policy,
industrial fisheries in temperate latitudes. However, MSC cer- 132: 104649.
tification of bottom trawls is not totally confined to ground- Blyth-Skyrme, R. E., Kaiser, M. J., Hiddink, J. G., Edwards-Joones, G.,
fish; 48 of the bottom trawl units of certification are for and Hart, P. J. 2006. Conservation benefits of temperate marine pro-
shrimp, prawns, nephrops, or scallops. The evidence is that tected areas: variation among fish species. Conservation Biology, 20:
bottom-trawl fisheries can be well managed and be consid- 811–820.
ered sustainable, but many fisheries using bottom trawl gear Borges, L. 2021. The unintended impact of the European discard ban.
need to improve their performance to meet current standards. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 78: 134–141.
Sustainability of trawling 11

Branch, T. A., Hilborn, R., and Bogazzi, E. 2005. Escaping the tyranny of the British Columbia groundfish trawl fishery. ICES Journal of
of the grid: a more realistic way of defining fishing opportunities. Marine Science, 80: 483–491.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 62: 631–642. Hall-Spencer, J., and Moore, P. 2000. Scallop dredging has profound,
Breitburg, D., Levin, L. A., Oschlies, A., Grégoire, M., Chavez, F. P., Con- long-term impacts on maerl habitats. ICES Journal of Marine Sci-
ley, D. J., Garçon, V et al. 2018. Declining oxygen in the global ocean ence, 57: 1407–1415.
and coastal waters. Science, 359: eaam7240. Hamilton, S., and Baker, G. B. 2015. Review of research and assess-
Broadhurst, M. K., Suuronen, P., and Hulme, A. 2006. Estimating col- ments on the efficacy of sea lion exclusion devices in reducing the
lateral mortality from towed fishing gear. Fish and Fisheries, 7: 180– incidental mortality of New Zealand sea lions Phocarctos hookeri
218. in the Auckland Islands squid trawl fishery. Fisheries Research, 161:
Calderwood, J., Marshall, C. T., Haflinger, K., Alfaro-Shigueto, J., Man- 200–206.
gel, J. C., and Reid, D. G. 2023. An evaluation of information sharing Hart, P., Blyth, R., Kaiser, M. J., and Edwards Jones, G. 2002. Sustain-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

schemes to identify what motivates fishers to share catch informa- able exploitation with minimal conflict: is it possible. In Who Owns
tion. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 80: 556–577. the Sea, pp. 11–24. Ed. by P. Hartand and M. Johnson The Univer-
Clark, M. R., Althaus, F., Schlacher, T. A., Williams, A., Bowden, D. sity of Hull, Scarborough Campus. ISDN: 978-1-4092-5410-2
A., and Rowden, A. A. 2016. The impacts of deep-sea fisheries on Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Sciberras, M., Bolam, S. G., Cambiè, G., Mc-
benthic communities: a review. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 73: Connaughey, R. A., Mazor, T et al. 2019. Assessing bottom trawling
i51–i69. impacts based on the longevity of benthic invertebrates. Journal of
Clark, M. R., and Rowden, A. A. 2009. Effect of deepwater trawling on Applied Ecology, 56: 1075–1084.
the macro-invertebrate assemblages of seamounts on the Chatham Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Sciberras, M., Szostek, C. L., Hughes, K.
Rise. New Zealand. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Re- M., Ellis, N., Rijnsdorp, A. D et al. 2017. Global analysis of de-
search Papers, 56: 1540–1554. pletion and recovery of seabed biota after bottom trawling dis-
Collie, J., Hiddink, J. G., Kooten, T., Rijnsdorp, A. D., Kaiser, M. J., turbance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114:
Jennings, S., and Hilborn, R. 2017. Indirect effects of bottom fishing 8301–8306.
on the productivity of marine fish. Fish and Fisheries, 18: 619–637. Hiddink, J. G., Johnson, A. F., Kingham, R., and Hinz, H. 2011. Could
Collins, J. R., Kleisner, K. M., Fujita, R. M., and Boenish, R. E. 2022. At- our fisheries be more productive? Indirect negative effects of bottom
mospheric carbon emissions from benthic trawling depend on water trawl fisheries on fish condition. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48:
depth and ocean circulation. EarthArxiv. https://eartharxiv.org/rep 1441–1449.
ository/view/4633/. (Last accessed 11 July 2023). Hiddink, J. G., Moranta, J., Balestrini, S., Sciberras, M., Cendrier, M.,
Delaney, A., Reid, D. G., Zimmermann, C., Kraan, M., Steins, N. A., Bowyer, R., Kaiser, M. J et al. 2016. Bottom trawling affects fish
and Kaiser, M. J. 2022. Socio-technical approaches are needed for condition through changes in the ratio of prey availability to density
innovation in fisheries. Review in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, of competitors. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53: 1500–1510.
31: 1–17. Hiddink, J. G., van de Velde, S. J., McConnaughey, R. A., De Borger, E.,
Diana, J. S. 2009. Aquaculture production and biodiversity conserva- Tiano, J., Kaiser, M. J., Sweetman, A. K et al. 2023. Quantifying the
tion. Bioscience, 59: 27–38. carbon benefits of ending bottom trawling. Nature, 617: E1–E2.
Diaz, R. J., and Rosenberg, R. 2008. Spreading dead zones and conse- Hilborn, R., Banobi, J., Hall, S.J., Puclowski, T., and Walsworth, T.E.
quences for marine ecosystems. Science, 321: 926–929. 2018. The environmental cost of animal source foods. Frontiers in
Epstein, G., Middelburg, J. J., Hawkins, J. P., Norris, C. R., and Roberts, Ecology and the Environment, 16: 329–335 .
C. M. 2022. The impact of mobile demersal fishing on carbon stor- Hilborn, R., Hively, D. J., Baker Loke, N., de Moor, C. L., Kurota, H.,
age in seabed sediments. Global Change Biology, 28: 2875–2894. Kathena, J. N., Mace, P. M et al. 2021. Global status of groundfish
FAO 2009. International Guidelines for the Management of stocks. Fish and Fisheries, 22: 911–928.
Deep-sea Fisheries in the High Seas. Food and Agricul- Hilborn, R., and Sinclair, A. R. 2021. Biodiversity protection in the
ture Organization of the United Nations, Rome Italy. 21st century needs intact habitat and protection from overexploita-
https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings- before- 2013/ tion whether inside or outside parks. Conservation Letters, 14:
Scientific- Working- Group/SWG- 06- 2008/SPRFMO6- SWG- INF e12830.https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12830
01- FAO- Deepwater- Guidelines- Final- Sep20.pdf. (Last accessed 11 Hoddle, M. S. 2004. Restoring balance: using exotic species to control
July 2023). invasive exotic species. Conservation Biology, 18: 38–49.
Fernandes, P. G., and Cook, R. M. 2013. Reversal of fish stock decline ICES. 2018. Report of the Working Group on Electric Trawling (WG-
in the Northeast Atlantic. Current Biology, 23: 1432–1437. ELECTRA). https://ices-library.figshare.com/articles/report/Work
Fissel, B. E., Dalton, M., Felthoven, R. G., Garber-Yonts, B. E., ing_Group_on_Electrical_Trawling_WGELECTRA_/18618083.
Haynie, A., Himes-Cornell, A. H., Kasperski, S et al. 2016. (Last Accessed 11 July 2023).
Stock Assestment and Fishery Evaluation Report for the IUCN. 2020. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Version 2020-1.
Groundfishes Fisheries of the Gulf of Alaska and Bering https://www.iucnredlist.org/. (Last accessed 11 July 2023).
Sea/Aleutian Island Area: economic Status of the Groundfish Jenkins, L. D. 2012. Reducing sea turtle bycatch in trawl nets: a history
Fisheries off Alaska, 2015. National Marine Fisheries Service of NMFS turtle excluder device (TED) research.
Report. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/18817. Kaiser, M. J., Hormbrey, S., Booth, J. R., Hinz, H., and Hiddink, J. G.
(Last accessed 11 July 2023). 2018. Recovery linked to life history of sessile epifauna following
Funge-Smith, S., Briggs, M., and Miao, W. 2012. Regional Overview of exclusion of towed mobile fishing gear. Journal of Applied Ecology,
Fisheries and Aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific 2012. RAP Publi- 55: 1060–1070.
cation (FAO), Rome Italy. https://www.fao.org/3/i3185e/i3185e00. Karp, W. A., Breen, M., Borges, L., Fitzpatrick, M., Kennelly, S. J., Kold-
pdf. ing, J., Nielsen, K. N et al. 2019. Strategies used throughout the
Gilman, E., Perez Roda, A., Huntington, T., Kennelly, S., Suuronen, P., world to manage fisheries discards–lessons for implementation of
Chaloupka, M., and Medley, P. 2020. Benchmarking global fisheries the EU Landing Obligation. In The European Landing Obligation,
discards. Scientific Reports, 10: 1–8. pp. 3–26. Springer, New York City.
Gray, C. A., and Kennelly, S. J. 2018. Bycatches of endangered, threat- Kelleher, K. 2005. Discards in the World’s Marine Fisheries: An Update.
ened and protected species in marine fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biol- FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No 470, FAO, Rome.
ogy and Fisheries, 28: 521–541. Kennelly, S. J., and Broadhurst, M. K. 2021. A review of bycatch reduc-
Groenbaek, L., Lindroos, M., Munro, G., Pintassilgo, P., and Turris, B. tion in demersal fish trawls. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries,
2023. The avoidance of unwanted catch and cooperation: the case 31: 289–318.
12 R. Hilborn et al.

Khan, S., Dettling, J., Loyola, C., Hester, J., and Moses, R. 2019. Envi- Polymenakou, P. N., Pusceddu, A., Tselepides, A., Polychronaki, T., Gi-
ronmental life cycle analysis. impossible burger 2.0. https://imposs annakourou, A., Fiordelmondo, C., Hatziyanni, E et al. 2005. Ben-
iblefoods.com/sustainable- food/burger- life- cycle- assessment- 2019. thic microbial abundance and activities in an intensively trawled
(Last accessed 11 July 2023). ecosystem (Thermaikos Gulf, Aegean Sea). Continental Shelf Re-
Legge, O., Johnson, M., Hicks, N., Jickells, T., Diesing, M., Aldridge, search, 25: 2570–2584.
J., Andrews, J et al. 2020. Carbon on the northwest European shelf: Poore, J., and Nemecek, T. 2018. Reducing food’s environmental im-
contemporary budget and future influences. Frontiers in Marine Sci- pacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360: 987–992.
ence, 7: 143. Purcell, K. M., Craig, J. K., Nance, J. M., Smith, M. D., and Bennear, L.
Lomeli, M. J., Wakefield, W. W., Herrmann, B., Dykstra, C. L., Simeon, S. 2017. Fleet behavior is responsive to a large-scale environmental
A., Rudy, D. M., and Planas, J. V. 2021. Use of artificial illumination disturbance: hypoxia effects on the spatial dynamics of the northern
to reduce Pacific halibut bycatch in a US West Coast groundfish Bot- Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery. PLoS ONE, 12: e0183032.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

tom trawl. Fisheries Research, 233: 105737. Rodmell, D. P., and Johnson, M. L. 2002. The development of marine
Magnuson, J., Bjorndal, J., DuPaul, W., Graham, G., Owens, D., Pe- based wind energy generation and inshore fisheries in UK waters: are
terson, C., Prichard, P et al. 1990. Decline of Sea Turtles: Causes they compatible. In Who owns the sea, pp. 76–103. Ed. by P. Har-
and Prevention. Committee on Sea Turtle Conservation, Board of tand and M. Johnson The University of Hull, Scarborough Campus.
Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Board on Biology, Commis- ISDN 978-1-4092-5410-2.
sion of Life Sciences, National Research Council. National Academy Rose, C. S., Hammond, C. F., Stoner, A. W., Munk, J. E., and Gauvin,
Press, Washington, DC. J. R. 2013. Quantification and reduction of unobserved mortality
Marine Stewardship Council. 2023. https://www.msc.org/en-us/standar rates for snow, southern Tanner, and red king crabs (Chionoecetes
ds-and-certification/fisheries-standard. (Last accessed 11 July 2023). opilio, C. bairdi, and Paralithodes camtschaticus) after encounters
Mazor, T., Pitcher, C. R., Rochester, W., Kaiser, M. J., Hiddink, J. G., Jen- with trawls on the seafloor. https://aquadocs.org/handle/1834/303
nings, S., Amoroso, R et al. 2021. Trawl fishing impacts on the status 56. (Last accessed 11 July 2023).
of seabed fauna in diverse regions of the globe. Fish and Fisheries, Sala, A., Damalas, D., Labanchi, L., Martinsohn, J., Moro, F., Sabatella,
22: 72–86. R., and Notti, E. 2022. Energy audit and carbon footprint in trawl
Mazzetto, A., and Ledgard, S. 2023. Carbon footprint of fish from the fisheries. Scientific Data, 9: 1–20.
New Zealand Deepwater Trawl Fleet. https://tinyurl.com/DWGC Sala, E., Mayorga, J., Bradley, D., Cabral, R. B., Atwood, T. B., Auber, A.,
O2. (Last Accessed 11 July 2023). Cheung, W et al. 2021. Protecting the global ocean for biodiversity,
McConnaughey, R., Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Pitcher, C. R., Kaiser, food and climate. Nature, 592: 397–402.
M. J., Suuronen, P., Sciberras, M et al. 2020. Choosing best practices Sciberras, M., Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Szostek, C. L., Hughes, K. M.,
for managing impacts of trawl fishing on seabed habitats and biota. Kneafsey, B., Clarke, L. J et al. 2018. Response of benthic fauna to
Fish and Fisheries, 21: 319–337. experimental bottom fishing: a global meta-analysis. Fish and Fish-
Monterey Bay Aquarium. 2023. https://www.seafoodwatch.org/globa eries, 19: 698–715.
lassets/sfw/pdf/standards/fisheries/seafood- watch- fisheries- standar Sharpless, A., and Evans, S. 2013. The Perfect Protein: The Fish Lover’s
d- version- f4.pdf. (Last accessed 11 July 2023). Guide to Saving the Oceans and Feeding the World Rodale Press
Newbold, T., Hudson, L. N., Hill, S. L., Contu, S., Lysenko, I., Senior, R. Emmaus Pennsylvania.
A., Börger, L et al. 2015. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial Smeaton, C., and Austin, W. 2022. Quality not quantity: prioritizing
biodiversity. Nature, 520: 45–50. the management of sedimentary organic matter across continental
Parker, R., Benson, L., Graves, C., Kröger, S., and Vieira, R. shelf seas. Geophysical Research Letters, 49: e2021GL097481.
2020. Carbon stocks and accumulation analysis for Secre- Smeaton, C., Hunt, C. A., Turrell, W. R., and Austin, W. E. 2021. Ma-
tary of State (SoS) region. Cefas Report for Defra project rine sedimentary carbon stocks of the United Kingdom’s exclusive
ME5439., 42. https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/202 economic zone. Frontiers in Earth Science, 9: 50.
2/03/CCC- Briefing- Blue- Carbon- FINAL.pdf. (Last Accessed 11 Smith, M. D., Asche, F., Bennear, L. S., and Oglend, A. 2014. Spatial-
July 2023). dynamics of hypoxia and fisheries: the case of Gulf of Mexico brown
Parker, R. W., and Tyedmers, P. H. 2015. Fuel consumption of global shrimp. Marine Resource Economics, 29: 111–131.
fishing fleets: current understanding and knowledge gaps. Fish and Soetaert, M., Decostere, A., Polet, H., Verschueren, B., and Chiers,
Fisheries, 16: 684–696. K. 2015. Electrotrawling: a promising alternative fishing technique
Parker, S. J., Penney, A. J., and Clark, M. R. 2009. Detection criteria for warranting further exploration. Fish and Fisheries, 16: 104–124.
managing trawl impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems in high Steadman, D., Thomas, J. B., Rivas Villanueva, R., Lewis, F., Pauly, D.,
seas fisheries of the South Pacific Ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Palomares, M. L. D., Bailly, N et al. 2022. New perspectives on an
Series, 397: 309–317. old fishing practice: scale, context and impacts of bottom trawling.
Pascoe, S. 1997. Bycatch management and the economics of discard- https://oursharedseas.com/new- perspectives- on- an- old- fishing- pra
ing. Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FAO ctice/#:∼:text=Research%20Digests- , New%20perspectives%20
Technical Paper 370. https://www.fao.org/3/w6929e/w6929e00.ht on%20an%20old%20fishing%20practice%3A%20Scale%2C%
m. (Last Accessed 11 July 2023). 20context,and%20impacts%20of%20bottom%20trawling&tex
Pérez Roda, M. A., Gilman, E., Huntington, T., Kennelly, S. J., Su- t=A%20new%20report%20by%20leading,fishing%20practice%
uronen, P., Chaloupka, M., and Medley, P. 2019. A Third Assess- 20of%20bottom%20trawling. (Last accessed 11 July 2023).
ment of Global Marine Fisheries Discards FAO Technical Paper Stokesbury, K. D., Fay, G., and Griffin, R. 2022. A framework for cat-
633. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, egorizing the interactions of offshore windfarms and fisheries. ICES
Rome Italy. Journal of Marine Science, 79: 1711–1718.
Pitcher, C. R., Ellis, N., Jennings, S., Hiddink, J. G., Mazor, T., Kaiser, M. Suuronen, P. 2022. Understanding perspectives and barriers that affect
J., Kangas, M. I et al. 2017. Estimating the sustainability of towed fishers’ responses to bycatch reduction technologies. ICES Journal
fishing-gear impacts on seabed habitats: a simple quantitative risk of Marine Science, 79: 1015–1023.
assessment method applicable to data-limited fisheries. Methods in Suuronen, P., Chopin, F., Glass, C., Løkkeborg, S., Matsushita, Y.,
Ecology and Evolution, 8: 472–480. Queirolo, D., and Rihan, d. 2012. Low impact and fuel efficient
Pitcher, C. R., Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Collie, J., Parma, A. M., fishing—Looking beyond the horizon. Fisheries Research, 119-120:
Amoroso, R., Mazor, T et al. 2022. Trawl impacts on the relative 135–146.
status of biotic communities of seabed sedimentary habitats in 24 re- Suuronen, P., and Gilman, E. 2020. Monitoring and managing fisheries
gions worldwide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, discards: new technologies and approaches. Marine Policy, 116:
119: e2109449119. 103554.
Sustainability of trawling 13

Suuronen, P., Pitcher, C. R., McConnaughey, R., Kaiser, M. J., Hiddink, J. Watling, L. 2013. Deep-sea trawling must be banned. Nature, 501: 7–7.
G., and R, H. 2020. A path to a sustainable trawl fishery in southeast Watling, L., and Norse, E. A. 1998. Disturbance of the seabed by mo-
Asia. Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, 28: 499–517. bile fishing gear: a comparison to forest clearcutting. Conservation
Thompson, A., Sanders, J., Tandstad, M., Carocci, F., and Fuller, J. 2016. Biology, 12: 1180–1197.
Vulnerable marine ecosystems: processes and practices in the high Willer, D. F., Brian, J. I., Derrick, C. J., Hicks, M., Pacay, A., McCarthy,
seas. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper, 595: 185 A. H., Benbow, S et al. 2022. ‘Destructive fishing’—a ubiquitously
Thomsen, B., Humborstad, O.-B., and Furevik, D. M. 2010. Fish pots: used but vague term? Usage and impacts across academic research,
fish behavior, capture processes, and conservation issues. In Behav- media and policy. Fish and Fisheries, 23: 1039–1054.
ior of Marine Fishes: Capture Processes and Conservation Chal- Williams, A., Althaus, F., Maguire, K., Green, M., Untiedt, C., Alder-
lenges, pp. 143–158. Ed. by P. Heand and M. Pol John Wiley and slade, P., Clark, M. R et al. 2020. The fate of deep-sea coral reefs
Sons, Hoboken New Jersey. on seamounts in a fishery-seascape: what are the impacts, what

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/advance-article/doi/10.1093/icesjms/fsad115/7226311 by guest on 20 July 2023

Tlusty, M. F., Tyedmers, P., Bailey, M., Ziegler, F., Henriksson, P. J., Béné, remains, and what is protected? Frontiers in Marine Science, 7.
C., Bush, S et al. 2019. Reframing the sustainable seafood narrative. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.567002.
Global Environmental Change, 59: 101991. Zeller, D., Cashion, T., Palomares, M., and Pauly, D. 2018. Global ma-
Tyedmers, P. 2004. Fisheries and energy use. Encyclopedia of Energy, rine fisheries discards: a synthesis of reconstructed data. Fish and
2: 683–693. Fisheries, 19: 30–39.
Uhlmann, S. S., Ulrich, C., and Kennelly, S. J. 2019. The European Land- Zhang, X., Kotink, A., and Zgola, M. 2022. Life cycle assessment of
ing Obligation: Reducing Discards in Complex, Multi-species and wild Alaskan pollock final ISO LCA report. alaskapollock.org/medi
Multi-jurisdictional Fisheries Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland a/2246/final-report.pdf. (Last accessed 11 July 2023).
United Nations 2002. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable De- Ziegler, F., and Hilborn, R. 2023. Fished or farmed: life cycle impacts of
velopment, Johannesburg, South Africa, 26, August-4 September salmon consumer decisions and opportunities for reducing impacts.
2002. United Nations, New York Science of the Total Environment, 854: 158591.
van Denderen, P. D., Törnroos, A., Sciberras, M., Hinz, H., Friedland, R., Ziegler, F., and Valentinsson, d. 2008. Environmental life cycle as-
Lasota, R., Mangano, M. C et al. 2022. Effects of bottom trawling sessment of Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) caught along
and hypoxia on benthic invertebrate communities. Marine Ecology the Swedish west coast by creels and conventional trawls – LCA
Progress Series, 694: 13–27. methodology with case study. International Journal of Life Cycle
Vázquez-Rowe, I., Villanueva-Rey, P., Hospido, A., Moreira, M. T., and Assessment, 13: 487–497.
Feijoo, G. 2014. Life cycle assessment of European pilchard (Sardina Zimmermann, F., and Werner, K. M. 2019. Improved management is
pilchardus) consumption. A case study for Galicia (NW Spain). Sci- the main driver behind recovery of Northeast Atlantic fish stocks.
ence of the Total Environment, 475: 48–60. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 17: 93–99.

Handling editor: Saša Raicevich

Received: 24 October 2022; Revised: 29 June 2023; Accepted: 4 July 2023

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work
is properly cited.