Openproof - A Flexible Framework for Heterogeneous Reasoning

Dave Barker-Plummer,J. Etchemendy,Albert Liu,Michael D. Murray,N. Swoboda

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87730-1_32

2008-09-19

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Sedimentary carbon on the continental shelf: Emerging capabilities and research priorities for Blue Carbon

Carolyn A. Graves,Lisa Benson,John Aldridge,William E. N. Austin,Franck Dal Molin,Vera G. Fonseca,Natalie Hicks,Clare Hynes,Silke Kröger,Philip D. Lamb,Claire Mason,Claire Powell,Craig Smeaton,Sarah K. Wexler,Clare Woulds,Ruth Parker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.926215

IF: 5.247

2022-09-09

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:Continental shelf sediments store large amounts of organic carbon. Protecting this carbon from release back into the marine system and managing the marine environment to maximize its rate of accumulation could both play a role in mitigating climate change. For these reasons, in the context of an expanding "Blue Carbon" concept, research interest in the quantity and vulnerability of carbon stored in continental shelf, slope, and deep ocean sediments is increasing. In these systems, carbon storage is physically distant from carbon sources, altered between source and sink, and disturbed by anthropogenic activities. The methodological approaches needed to obtain the evidence to assess shelf sea sediment carbon manageability and vulnerability within an evolving blue carbon framework cannot be transferred directly from those applied in coastal vegetated "traditional" blue carbon habitats. We present a toolbox of methods which can be applied in marine sediments to provide the evidence needed to establish where and when marine carbon in offshore sediments can contribute to climate mitigation, focusing on continental shelf sediments. These methods are discussed in the context of the marine carbon cycle and how they provide evidence on: (i) stock: how much carbon is there and how is it distributed? (ii) accumulation: how rapidly is carbon being added or removed? and (iii) anthropogenic pressures: is carbon stock and/or accumulation vulnerable to manageable human activities? Our toolbox provides a starting point to inform choice of techniques for future studies alongside consideration of their specific research questions and available resources. Where possible, a stepwise approach to analyses should be applied in which initial parameters are analysed to inform which samples, if any, will provide information of interest from more resource-intensive analyses. As studies increasingly address the knowledge gaps around continental shelf carbon stocks and accumulation – through both sampling and modelling – the management of this carbon with respect to human pressures will become the key question for understanding where it fits within the blue carbon framework and within the climate mitigation discourse.

marine & freshwater biology
A blueprint for national assessments of the blue carbon capacity of kelp forests applied to Canada’s coastline

Jennifer McHenry,Daniel K. Okamoto,Karen Filbee-Dexter,Kira Krumhansl,Kathleen A. MacGregor,Margot Hessing-Lewis,Brian Timmer,Philippe Archambault,Claire M. Attridge,Delphine Cottier,Maycira Costa,Matt Csordas,Ladd E. Johnson,Joanne Lessard,Alejandra Mora-Soto,Anna Metaxas,Chris Neufeld,Ondine Pontier,Luba Reshitnyk,Samuel Starko,Jennifer Yakimishyn,Julia K. Baum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.05.586816

2024-04-06

Abstract:Kelp forests offer substantial carbon fixation, with the potential to contribute to natural climate solutions (NCS). However, to be included in national NCS inventories, governments must first quantify the kelp-derived carbon stocks and fluxes leading to carbon sequestration. Here, we present a blueprint for assessing the national carbon sequestration capacity of kelp forests in which data synthesis and Bayesian hierarchical modelling enable estimates of kelp forest carbon production, storage, and export capacity from limited data. Applying this blueprint to Canada’s extensive coastline, we find kelp forests store an estimated 1.4 Tg C in short-term biomass and produce 3.1 Tg C yr with modest carbon fluxes to the deep ocean. Arctic kelps had the highest carbon stocks and production capacity, while Pacific kelps had greater carbon fluxes overall due to their higher productivity and export rates. Our transparent, reproducible blueprint represents an important step towards accurate carbon accounting for kelp forests.

Ecology
Supporting Risk Assessment: Accounting for Indirect Risk to Ecosystem Components

Cathryn Clarke Murray,Megan E Mach,Rebecca G Martone,Gerald G Singh,Miriam O,Kai M A Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162932

IF: 3.7

2016-09-15

PLoS ONE

Abstract:The multi-scalar complexity of social-ecological systems makes it challenging to quantify impacts from human activities on ecosystems, inspiring risk-based approaches to assessments of potential effects of human activities on valued ecosystem components. Risk assessments do not commonly include the risk from indirect effects as mediated via habitat and prey. In this case study from British Columbia, Canada, we illustrate how such "indirect risks" can be incorporated into risk assessments for seventeen ecosystem components. We ask whether (i) the addition of indirect risk changes the at-risk ranking of the seventeen ecosystem components and if (ii) risk scores correlate with trophic prey and habitat linkages in the food web. Even with conservative assumptions about the transfer of impacts or risks from prey species and habitats, the addition of indirect risks in the cumulative risk score changes the ranking of priorities for management. In particular, resident orca, Steller sea lion, and Pacific herring all increase in relative risk, more closely aligning these species with their "at-risk status" designations. Risk assessments are not a replacement for impact assessments, but-by considering the potential for indirect risks as we demonstrate here-they offer a crucial complementary perspective for the management of ecosystems and the organisms within.
Investigating the effects of mobile bottom fishing on benthic carbon processing and storage: a systematic review protocol

Stacey L. Felgate,John Aldridge,Stefan G. Bolam,Sarah Breimann,Emil de Borger,Jolien Claes,Jochen Depestele,Graham Epstein,Clement Garcia,Natalie Hicks,Michel Kaiser,Jack H. Laverick,Gennadi Lessin,Finbarr G. O’Neill,Sarah Paradis,Ruth Parker,Ryan Pereira,Alex J. Poulton,Claire Powell,Craig Smeaton,Paul Snelgrove,Justin Tiano,Johan van der Molen,Sebastiaan van de Velde,Marija Sciberras

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-024-00348-z

2024-10-16

Environmental Evidence

Abstract:Marine sediments represent one of the planet's largest carbon stores. Bottom trawl fisheries constitute the most widespread physical disturbance to seabed habitats, which exert a large influence over the oceanic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) sink. Recent research has sparked concern that seabed disturbance from trawling can therefore turn marine sediments into a large source of CO 2 , but the calculations involved carry a high degree of uncertainty. This is primarily due to a lack of quantitative understanding of how trawling mixes and resuspends sediments, how it alters bioturbation, bioirrigation, and oxygenation rates, and how these processes translate into carbon fluxes into or out of sediments.

environmental sciences
An Australian blue carbon method to estimate climate change mitigation benefits of coastal wetland restoration

Catherine E. Lovelock,Jennifer Bradley,Sabine Dittmann,Valerie Hagger,Sharyn M. Hickey,Alice Jones,Jeffrey J. Kelleway,Peter I. Macreadie,Damien T. Maher,Soraya McGinley,Alice McGlashan,Sarah Perry,Luke Mosley,Kerrylee Rogers,James Z. Sippo,Maria Fernanda Adame,Lindsay Hutley,Paul Lavery

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13739

2022-05-28

Restoration Ecology

Abstract:Restoration of coastal wetlands has the potential to deliver both climate change mitigation, called blue carbon, and adaptation benefits to coastal communities, as well as supporting biodiversity and providing additional ecosystem services. Valuing carbon sequestration may incentivise restoration projects, however, it requires development of rigorous methods for quantifying blue carbon sequestered during coastal wetland restoration. We describe the development of a blue carbon abatement model (BlueCAM) used within the Tidal Restoration of Blue Carbon Ecosystems Methodology Determination 2022 of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), which is Australia's voluntary carbon market scheme. The new BlueCAM uses Australian data to estimate abatement from carbon and greenhouse gas sources and sinks arising from coastal wetland restoration (via tidal restoration) and aligns with the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. BlueCAM includes carbon sequestered in soils and biomass and avoided emissions from alternative land uses. A conservative modelled approach was used to provide estimates of abatement (as opposed to on‐ground measurements); and in doing so, this will reduce the costs associated with monitoring and verification for ERF projects and may increase participation in blue carbon projects by Australian landholders. BlueCAM encompasses multiple climate regions and plant communities and therefore may be useful to others outside Australia seeking to value blue carbon benefits from coastal wetland restoration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

ecology
Redefining blue carbon with adaptive valuation for global policy

Jack Sheehy,Jo Porter,Michael Bell,Sandy Kerr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168253

2024-01-15

Abstract:Blue carbon has multiple definitions but is mostly defined, by criteria, as specific habitats or species: seagrass, saltmarsh, and mangrove. These qualifying criteria include significant capacity of carbon, long-term storage of carbon, feasibility of conservation to support carbon sequestration, and other criteria depending on the definition used. If 'blue carbon' habitats and species may change given new data, however, blue carbon will never fit a constant definition. As such, this approach underpins uncertainty in the blue carbon definition and impedes policy integration; policy frameworks require clear and unambiguous definitions. Global policy considers blue carbon for climate change mitigation through carbon trading. As such, the requirements for blue carbon inclusion in policy mechanisms are functionally determined by carbon trading verification agencies - Standard Setting Organisations (SSOs). In practice then, accreditation criteria override and make redundant the conditions used in criteria-based definitions of blue carbon. The definition of blue carbon would therefore be more effective in policy if simply aligned to the SSO's five criteria: an established baseline, additionality, permanence, leakage, and co-benefits. This paper presents a redefinition of blue carbon that is better aligned to policy application, accreditation criteria, and research agendas: This may include sedimentary stocks in addition to carbon stored in living biomass, which may be essential to protecting or maintaining sedimentary stocks of carbon, and with potential to be increased through protection and/or restoration. Alongside other recommendations, including a novel approach for adaptive accreditation and valuation, this paper explores how this redefinition of blue carbon would work in practice to support climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, and biodiversity conservation.
A Guide to International Climate Mitigation Policy and Finance Frameworks Relevant to the Protection and Restoration of Blue Carbon Ecosystems

Mathew A. Vanderklift,Dorothée Herr,Catherine E. Lovelock,Daniel Murdiyarso,Jacqueline L. Raw,Andrew D. L. Steven

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.872064

IF: 5.247

2022-07-07

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:The protection, management and restoration of vegetated ecosystems on land and in the ocean ('natural climate solutions') can be a useful strategy for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions to help limit global warming. Their potential contribution to reducing net emissions has led to the development of policies and financial incentives for their protection and restoration. These have in turn created a set of expectations among some stakeholders, and interest in expanding these to encompass other ecosystems. However, there are specific rules about how abatement is calculated in international policy and climate finance, and the frameworks and terminology associated with them are often complex. This can be a barrier to stakeholders who want to leverage the potential of natural climate solutions, sometimes leading to incongruence between realised and anticipated benefits. In this article, we attempt to outline some of the key international policy and carbon market frameworks for coastal 'blue carbon' ecosystems, and the extent to which different ecosystems are accommodated. Currently, among the coastal ecosystems, only mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, and tidal marshes are typically considered in international policy and carbon market frameworks. The defining feature of these ecosystems is that the foundation species are plants that grow in sediment (soil). They are the only coastal ecosystems currently included in IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories, and in compliance and voluntary carbon markets. There is interest in potentially including other marine ecosystems, such as kelp forests and unvegetated tidal flats, into carbon accounting frameworks, but there are unresolved questions about whether sequestration and storage of carbon by these ecosystems meets the rigorous standards required. Voluntary carbon markets have greater flexibility than mechanisms linked to national greenhouse gas inventories, and so might be early implementers of expanding methods to include other ecosystems. Incorporating coastal ecosystems into national greenhouse gas inventory is a useful action countries can take that will likely help generate incentives for protection and restoration of these important ecosystems.

marine & freshwater biology
Fisheries Impact Pathway: Making Global and Regionalised Impacts on Marine Ecosystem Quality Accessible in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

Chloe Stanford-Clark,Eleonore Loiseau,Arnaud Helias

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093870

IF: 3.9

2024-05-06

Sustainability

Abstract:Overexploitation in wild-capture fisheries is a principal driver of marine biodiversity loss. Currently, efforts are underway to improve the representation of marine damage indicators in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods. The recently operationalised fisheries impact pathway has introduced fishing impacts on the marine system into the LCIA framework, and the current work seeks to further develop this complex pathway. In total, 5000+ Characterisation Factors for exploited marine organisms have been re-computed with updated fisheries production data (2018), exploring temporal effects on dynamic, biotic resource impacts. An estimation of discarded unwanted by-catch is incorporated into the characterisation. Regional to global scaling factors are tested for the representation of species-specific vulnerability. The temporal and spatial variations in impacts reflect the dynamic nature of real-world fisheries trends, global average impacts increased by 41% (2015–2018). Discarding as an additive, regional estimate increases impacts, most notably for lower impacted stocks. The retention of species-specific detail relating to species distributions is of particular relevance to fisheries when computing global-scale impacts. Updating CFs improves the relevance of the fisheries impact assessment, and continued periodic re-computation is recommended to maintain relevance with real-world trends. Data availability remains a challenge to large-scale marine impact assessment and the continued development of this emergent impact pathway is expected.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
The sociotechnical dynamics of blue carbon management: Testing typologies of ideographs, innovation, and co-impacts for marine carbon removal

Benjamin K. Sovacool,Chad M. Baum,Sean Low,Livia Fritz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103730

IF: 6.424

2024-03-24

Environmental Science & Policy

Abstract:Efforts to halt the precipitous decline of marine ecosystems are taking on additional importance in relation to discussions of climate change and carbon removal. Out of all biological carbon captured in the world, more than half is stored by marine living organisms, and the oceans represent the largest long-term sink for carbon. Blue carbon, the preservation and enhancement of marine and coastal ecosystems for carbon removal, is treated as a potentially cost-effective way to capture and store carbon, generate community co-benefits, and implement conservation and climate agendas. However, blue carbon ecosystems are among the most unproven climate intervention options, in part given their status as highly threatened systems which moreover have critical connections to planetary health and food security. Based on extensive place-based field research and document analysis, this study examines three blue carbon innovations: coral reef preservation in Australia, seagrass restoration in the United Kingdom, and macroalgae (seaweed) cultivation and deep ocean storage in the United States. Empirically, it utilizes an extensive, original dataset of expert interviews (N=46), site visits (N=38) and document analysis undertaken over late 2022 and 2023. Conceptually, it advances our understanding of typologies related to narratives and ideographs, innovation and technological styles, and community co-impacts. It thus offers comparative case study work across three locations and blue carbon approaches with original mixed-methods data aimed at novel theoretical triangulation across three typological frameworks.

environmental sciences
Treading lightly: Quantitative estimates of seafloor contact for longline trap and hook fishing gear

Beau Doherty,Lisa Lacko,Allen R Kronlund,Kenyon Alexander,Sean P Cox

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.11.04.621693

2024-11-06

Abstract:Despite increasing calls for sustainability and ecosystem objectives to manage fishing gear interactions with bottom habitats there are few quantitative approaches for assessing risks from bottom contact fishing. Risk assessments for bottom longline fisheries are particularly challenging due to a lack of information for estimating bottom contact areas from longline gear. In this paper, we demonstrate how data sensors and video cameras deployed on fishing gear can be used to quantify the bottom contact area for longline trap and hook fishing gear from the British Columbia Sablefish fishery. Our bottom contact estimates indicate that Sablefish fishing risks to bottom habitat are low in the majority of fishing areas, since 91.8% of the area fished is expected to have had zero bottom contact over the last 17 years. For the other 8.2% of Sablefish fishing areas that experience some contact from fishing gear, the majority are only contacted once. This indicates that most habitats contacted by Sablefish gear can be expected to have a minimum of 17 years to recover between subsequent bottom contact events. We demonstrate an approach for estimating fisheries bottom contact that can be widely implemented across longline fisheries. Our findings address key data gaps in bottom impacts research for longline gear fisheries, allowing fishing risks to be quantified over fine spatial scales. Such quantitative approaches for habitat risk assessment can provide essential information for management decisions aimed at determining acceptable trade-offs between habitat preservation and fishery benefits.

Ecology
A risk assessment for the remote ocean: the case of the South East Atlantic

Holly J. Niner,Siân E. Rees,Giulia La Bianca,Kirsty A. McQuaid,Kerry L. Howell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2023.1168686

IF: 5.247

2024-01-10

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:Degradation of the natural world and associated ecosystem services is attributed to a historical failure to include its 'value' in decision-making. Uncertainty in the quantification of the relationship between natural capital 'assets' that give rise to critical societal benefits and people is one reason for the omission of these values from natural resource management. As this uncertainty increases in marine systems and further still with distance from the coast, the connection between society and natural capital assets is less likely to be included adequately in decision-making. Natural capital assets of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ), including those of the deep sea, are distant but are known to generate many benefits for society, from the diffuse and broad-scale benefits of climate regulation to the provision of wild fish for food. While our understanding of the precise relationships (the status of asset stocks, ecosystem functions and processes) that control the availability of ecosystem services and the flows of benefits is limited, this does not preclude opening a discourse on how these natural capital assets could best be managed to continue to benefit society. Here we apply a natural capital approach to the South East Atlantic ABNJ, one of the least scientifically understood regions of the planet, and develop a framework for risk assessment. We do this by describing the benefit flows from the natural capital assets of the region, appraising how activities are creating pressures on these flows and whether the controls for these pressures protect them. Our risk register highlights how governance currently favours the protection of direct (extractive) benefit flows from natural capital assets of the region, which are primarily targeted for financial benefit. Without a systems-based framework that can account for the cumulative pressures on natural capital assets their status, associated ecosystem services and benefits are at risk. Such an approach is essential to capture and protect the foundational and often diffuse connections between marine natural capital and global society.

marine & freshwater biology
Don't miss the big fish! Operational accounting of two major drivers of marine biodiversity loss in LCA of seafood products

Aurore Wermeille,Grégoire Gaillet,Anne-Claire Asselin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140245

IF: 11.1

2024-01-08

Journal of Cleaner Production

Abstract:Impact of fishing activities on marine biodiversity lacks important impact pathways in Life cycle Assessment . We develop Biomaris, a novel LCA-based way of accounting for multifunctionality of fisheries through the "fishnet approach" that includes various species in the fishnet and allocates impacts between co-products at landing. Biomaris adds two important LCIA pathways: resource depletion and seabed impact and uses the ecosystem quality endpoint of LC Impact. Impact pathways are grouped to display impacts for 4 drivers of biodiversity loss: direct exploitation, land and sea-use change, climate change, and pollution. It is applied to a business case study of a fishery of saithe ( Pollachius virens ) with bottom trawling. Case study at landing shows that impact on seabed is substantial ( 1×10−9PDF.year/kgliveweight ), and that resource depletion and climate change are of similar order of magnitude ( 2×10−14PDF.year/kgliveweight ), the pollution driver being less important. Case study also displays impact of processed product at distribution (Climate change impact: 6×10−14PDF.year/kgnetweight ). As of now, despite drivers being expressed in the same unit (PDF.yr), aggregating them is not advised, as, depending on driver, unit concretely represent different level of species disappearance, either (eco)regional or global. There are still important missing impact pathways to comprehensively assess impacts on biodiversity of seafood products (e.g., ghost fishing, plastic pollution, ...), but Biomaris displays practical guidance to account, to our knowledge, for the most up-to-date science in the LCA domain.

environmental sciences,green & sustainable science & technology,engineering, environmental
Reforming International Fisheries Law Can Increase Blue Carbon Sequestration

Niels Krabbe,David Langlet,Andrea Belgrano,Sebastian Villasante

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.800972

IF: 5.247

2022-04-13

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:The oceans are by far the largest carbon sink and are estimated to have absorbed roughly 40 percent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions since the beginning of the industrial era. The climate services performed by the oceans can be described as an interaction between a physical and a biological carbon pump. Whereas the role of the physical carbon pump is well established, the full scale of the climate services provided by the biological carbon pump has only recently been understood. This pump is made up of services provided by different marine species, from microbes to marine mammals. Many of these species are managed under the international law of the sea and subject to the concept of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). Although the MSY concept has developed since its inception, maximum generation of fish for human consumption remains the core objective according to the law of the sea. Under MSY based management, states are not required to consider the climate services represented by different marine organisms, making this regime unable to balance the interest of maximizing fish as a product against the oceans’ role in carbon sequestration. In order to make optimal use of the carbon sequestering features of marine organisms, this perspective proposes five action points. Foremost, MSY should be complemented with a new management objective: maximum carbon sequestration (MCS). Although many aspects of climate-based fisheries management remain to be explored, it appears clear that this would imply allowing stocks to recover to maintain a larger amount of biomass, increasing conservation measures for species particularly efficient in providing negative emissions, differentiation of fisheries within species as well as a new approach to ecosystem management. Climate reforming international fisheries law could make an important contribution to the operationalization of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, as well as the UN Sustainable Development Goals. As a first step, international guidelines should be developed on how to integrate the concept of maximum carbon sequestration in fisheries management.

marine & freshwater biology
Assessing the potential vulnerability of sedimentary carbon stores to bottom trawling disturbance within the UK EEZ

Kirsty E. Black,Craig Smeaton,William R. Turrell,William E. N. Austin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.892892

IF: 5.247

2022-08-05

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:It is estimated that within the UK exclusive economic zone (UK EEZ), 524 Mt of organic carbon (OC) is stored within seabed sediment. However, the stability and potential vulnerability of OC in these sediments under anthropogenic stressors, such as bottom trawling activity, remains poorly quantified. To improve our understanding of the areas where sedimentary OC is likely to be at greatest risk from trawling events, we have developed a carbon vulnerability ranking (CVR) to identify areas of the seabed where preventative protection may be most beneficial to help maintain current OC stocks while further research continues to shed light on the fate of OC after trawling (e.g., remineralization, transport, and consumption). Predictive maps of currently available fishing intensity, OC and sediment distribution, and sediment OC lability have been generated within ArcGIS using fuzzy set theory. Our results show that the west coast of Scotland represents one of the key areas where sedimentary OC is potentially at greatest risk from bottom trawling activity. This is due mainly to the high reactivity of these OC rich sediments combined with the pressures of repetitive trawling activity within inshore waters. Our research shows that these OC hotspots are potentially at risk of disturbance from bottom trawling activity and should be prioritized for the consideration of future safeguarding (management) measures to ensure emissions are minimized and to provide greater protection of this natural carbon capital resource.

marine & freshwater biology
Counting (on) blue carbon—Challenges and ways forward for carbon accounting of ecosystem-based carbon removal in marine environments

Nadine Mengis,Allanah Paul,Mar Fernández-Méndez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000148

2023-08-26

PLOS Climate

Abstract:The latest IPCC assessment report highlights once more the need for negative emissions via carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures to reach ambitious mitigation goals. In particular ecosystem-based CDR measures are currently the focus of national net-zero strategies and novel carbon crediting efforts. Blue carbon dioxide removal (blueCDR) options are anthropogenic activities that aim to enhance such ecosystem-based carbon sinks in the marine environment. The protection and conservation of existing marine ecosystems that naturally sequester carbon, does not qualify as CDR. Using blueCDR as an example, we highlight key challenges concerning the monitoring and evaluation of marine carbon fluxes for carbon crediting. Challenges specific to ecosystem-based CDR measures are i) the definition of baseline natural carbon fluxes, which is necessary for ii) clear anthropogenic CDR signal attribution, as well as iii) accounting for possible natural or anthropogenic disturbances of the carbon stock and hence an assessment for the durability of the carbon storage. In addition, the marine environment poses further monitoring and evaluation challenges due to i) temporal and spatial decoupling of the carbon capturing and sequestration processes, combined with ii) signal dilution due to high ecosystem connectivity, and iii) large pre-existing carbon stocks which makes any human-made increase in carbon stocks even harder to quantify. To increase the scientific rigour and ensure additionality behind issued carbon credits, we support the current trend of focusing monitoring efforts on carbon sequestration rather than on capturing processes, and on establishing a baseline for natural carbon sequestration in diverse marine ecosystems. Finally, we believe that making carbon credits subject to dynamic adjustments over time, will increase their credibility.
Operationalizing marketable blue carbon

Peter I. Macreadie,Alistar I. Robertson,Bernadette Spinks,Matthew P. Adams,Jennifer M. Atchison,Justine Bell-James,Brett A. Bryan,Long Chu,Karen Filbee-Dexter,Lauren Drake,Carlos M. Duarte,Daniel A. Friess,Felipe Gonzalez,R. Quentin Grafton,Kate J. Helmstedt,Melanie Kaebernick,Jeffrey Kelleway,Gary A. Kendrick,Hilary Kennedy,Catherine E. Lovelock,J. Patrick Megonigal,Damien T. Maher,Emily Pidgeon,Abbie A. Rogers,Rob Sturgiss,Stacey M. Trevathan-Tackett,Melissa Wartman,Kerrie A. Wilson,Kerrylee Rogers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.04.005

IF: 14.944

2022-05-20

One Earth

Abstract:The global carbon sequestration and avoided emissions potentially achieved via blue carbon is high (∼3% of annual global greenhouse gas emissions); however, it is limited by multidisciplinary and interacting uncertainties spanning the social, governance, financial, and technological dimensions. We compiled a transdisciplinary team of experts to elucidate these challenges and identify a way forward. Key actions to enhance blue carbon as a natural climate solution include improving policy and legal arrangements to ensure equitable sharing of benefits; improving stewardship by incorporating indigenous knowledge and values; clarifying property rights; improving financial approaches and accounting tools to incorporate co-benefits; developing technological solutions for measuring blue carbon sequestration at low cost; and resolving knowledge gaps regarding blue carbon cycles. Implementing these actions and operationalizing blue carbon will achieve measurable changes to atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, provide multiple co-benefits, and address national obligations associated with international agreements.
Shaping sustainability of seafood from capture fisheries integrating the perspectives of supply chain stakeholders through combining systems analysis tools

Sara Hornborg,Alistair J Hobday,Friederike Ziegler,Anthony D M Smith,Bridget S Green

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsy081

2018-07-20

ICES Journal of Marine Science

Abstract:Abstract Seafood from capture fisheries can be assessed in many ways and for different purposes, with sometimes divergent views on what characterizes “sustainable use”. Here we use two systems analysis tools—Ecological Risk Assessment for Effects of Fishing (ERAEF) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)—over the historical development of the Australian Patagonian toothfish fishery at Heard and McDonald Islands since the start in 1997. We find that ecological risks have been systematically identified in the management process using ERAEF, and with time have been mitigated, resulting in a lower risk fishery from an ecological impact perspective. LCA inventory data from the industry shows that fuel use per kilo has increased over the history of the fishery. Our results suggest that LCA and ERAEF may provide contrasting and complementary perspectives on sustainability and reveal trade-offs when used in combination. Incorporation of LCA perspectives in assessing impacts of fishing may facilitate refinement of ecosystem-based fisheries management, such as improved integration of the different perspectives of supply chain stakeholders.

fisheries,marine & freshwater biology,oceanography
Towards Incorporation of Blue Carbon in Falkland Islands Marine Spatial Planning: A Multi-Tiered Approach

Narissa Bax,David K. A. Barnes,Santiago E. A. Pineda-Metz,Tabitha Pearman,Markus Diesing,Stefanie Carter,Rachel V. Downey,Chris D. Evans,Paul Brickle,Alastair M. M. Baylis,Alyssa M. Adler,Amy Guest,Kara K. S. Layton,Paul E. Brewin,Daniel T. I. Bayley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.872727

IF: 5.247

2022-06-11

Frontiers in Marine Science

Abstract:Ecosystem-based conservation that includes carbon sinks, alongside a linked carbon credit system, as part of a nature-based solution to combating climate change, could help reduce greenhouse gas levels and therefore the impact of their emissions. Blue carbon habitats and pathways can also facilitate biodiversity retention, aiding sustainable fisheries and island economies. However, robust blue carbon research is often limited at the scale of regional governance and management, lacking both incentives and facilitation of policy-integration. The remote and highly biodiverse coastal ecosystems and surrounding continental shelf can be used to better inform long-term ecosystem-based management in the vast South Atlantic Ocean and sub-Antarctic, to synergistically protect both unique biodiversity and inform on the magnitude of nature-based benefits they provide. Understanding key ecosystem information such as their location, extent, and condition of habitat types, will be critical in understanding carbon pathways to sequestration, threats to this, and vulnerability. This paper considers the current status of blue carbon data and information available, and what is still required before blue carbon can be used as a conservation management tool integrated in national Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) initiatives. Our research indicates that the data and information gathered has enabled baselines for a number of different blue carbon ecosystems, and indicated potential threats and vulnerability that need to be managed. However, significant knowledge gaps remain across habitats, such as salt marsh, mudflats and the mesophotic zones, which hinders meaningful progress on the ground where it is needed most.

marine & freshwater biology
Impacts of land management practices on blue carbon stocks and greenhouse gas fluxes in coastal ecosystems—A meta‐analysis

J. Jack O’Connor,Benedikt J. Fest,Michael Sievers,Stephen E. Swearer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14946

IF: 11.6

2020-01-12

Global Change Biology

Abstract:<p>Global recognition of climate change and its predicted consequences has created the need for practical management strategies for increasing the ability of natural ecosystems to capture and store atmospheric carbon. Mangrove forests, saltmarshes and seagrass meadows, referred to as blue carbon ecosystems (BCEs), are hotspots of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> storage due to their capacity to sequester carbon at a far higher rate than terrestrial forests. Despite increased effort to understand the mechanisms underpinning blue carbon fluxes, there has been little synthesis of how management activities influence carbon stocks and greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes in BCEs. Here, we present a global meta‐analysis of 111 studies that measured how carbon stocks and GHG fluxes in BCEs respond to various coastal management strategies. Research effort has focused mainly on restoration approaches, which resulted in significant increases in blue carbon after 4 years compared to degraded sites, and the potential to reach parity with natural sites after 7 – 17 years. Lesser‐studied management alternatives, such as sediment manipulation and altered hydrology, showed only increases in biomass and weaker responses for soil carbon stocks and sequestration. The response of GHG emissions to management was complex, with managed sites emitting less than natural reference sites but emitting more compared to degraded sites. Individual GHGs also differed in their responses to management. To date, blue carbon management studies are under‐represented in the southern hemisphere and are usually limited in duration (61% of studies < 3 yrs duration). Our meta‐analysis describes the current state of blue carbon management from the available data and highlights recommendations for prioritising conservation management, extending monitoring timeframes of BCE carbon stocks, improving our understanding of GHG fluxes in open coastal systems and redistributing management and research effort into under‐studied, high‐risk areas.</p>

environmental sciences,biodiversity conservation,ecology
The Role of Blue Carbon in Climate Change Mitigation and Carbon Stock Conservation

Nathalie Hilmi,Ralph Chami,Michael D. Sutherland,Jason M. Hall-Spencer,Lara Lebleu,Maria Belen Benitez,Lisa A. Levin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2021.710546

2021-09-07

Frontiers in Climate

Abstract:The potential for Blue Carbon ecosystems to combat climate change and provide co-benefits was discussed in the recent and influential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. In terms of Blue Carbon, the report mainly focused on coastal wetlands and did not address the socio-economic considerations of using natural ocean systems to reduce the risks of climate disruption. In this paper, we discuss Blue Carbon resources in coastal, open-ocean and deep-sea ecosystems and highlight the benefits of measures such as restoration and creation as well as conservation and protection in helping to unleash their potential for mitigating climate change risks. We also highlight the challenges—such as valuation and governance—to marshaling their mitigation role and discuss the need for policy action for natural capital market development, and for global coordination. Efforts to identify and resolve these challenges could both maintain and harness the potential for these natural ocean systems to store carbon and help fight climate change. Conserving, protecting, and restoring Blue Carbon ecosystems should become an integral part of mitigation and carbon stock conservation plans at the local, national and global levels.

Openproof - A Flexible Framework for Heterogeneous Reasoning

Sedimentary carbon on the continental shelf: Emerging capabilities and research priorities for Blue Carbon

A blueprint for national assessments of the blue carbon capacity of kelp forests applied to Canada’s coastline

Supporting Risk Assessment: Accounting for Indirect Risk to Ecosystem Components

Investigating the effects of mobile bottom fishing on benthic carbon processing and storage: a systematic review protocol

An Australian blue carbon method to estimate climate change mitigation benefits of coastal wetland restoration

Redefining blue carbon with adaptive valuation for global policy

A Guide to International Climate Mitigation Policy and Finance Frameworks Relevant to the Protection and Restoration of Blue Carbon Ecosystems

Fisheries Impact Pathway: Making Global and Regionalised Impacts on Marine Ecosystem Quality Accessible in Life Cycle Impact Assessment

The sociotechnical dynamics of blue carbon management: Testing typologies of ideographs, innovation, and co-impacts for marine carbon removal

Treading lightly: Quantitative estimates of seafloor contact for longline trap and hook fishing gear

A risk assessment for the remote ocean: the case of the South East Atlantic

Don't miss the big fish! Operational accounting of two major drivers of marine biodiversity loss in LCA of seafood products

Reforming International Fisheries Law Can Increase Blue Carbon Sequestration

Assessing the potential vulnerability of sedimentary carbon stores to bottom trawling disturbance within the UK EEZ

Counting (on) blue carbon—Challenges and ways forward for carbon accounting of ecosystem-based carbon removal in marine environments

Operationalizing marketable blue carbon

Shaping sustainability of seafood from capture fisheries integrating the perspectives of supply chain stakeholders through combining systems analysis tools

Towards Incorporation of Blue Carbon in Falkland Islands Marine Spatial Planning: A Multi-Tiered Approach

Impacts of land management practices on blue carbon stocks and greenhouse gas fluxes in coastal ecosystems—A meta‐analysis

The Role of Blue Carbon in Climate Change Mitigation and Carbon Stock Conservation