Transnational companies have substantive impacts on nature: a hallmark of living in the Anthropocene. Understanding these impacts through company provision of information is a precursor to holding them accountable for nature outcomes. The effect of increasing disclosures (of varying quality) is predicated on 'information governance', an approach that uses disclosure requirements to drive company behaviour. However, its efficacy is not guaranteed. We argue that three conditions are required before disclosures have the possibility to shape nature outcomes, namely: (1) radical traceability that links company actions to outcomes in particular settings; (2) developing organizational routines, tools and approaches that translate strategic intent to on-the-ground behaviour; and (3) mobilizing and aligning financial actors with corporate nature ambitions. While disclosure is key to each of these conditions, its limits must be taken into account and it must be nested in governance approaches that shape action, not just reporting.This article is part of the theme issue 'Bringing nature into decision-making'.

Humanity has never benefited more from the ocean as a source of food, livelihoods, and well-being, yet on a global scale this has been accompanied by trajectories of degradation and persistent inequity. Awareness of this has spurred policymakers to develop an expanding network of ocean governance instruments, catalyzed civil society pressure on the public and private sector, and motivated engagement by the general public as consumers and constituents. Among local communities, diverse examples of stewardship have rested on the foundation of care, knowledge and agency. But does an analog for stewardship exist in the context of globally active multinational corporations? Here, we consider the seafood industry and its efforts to navigate this new reality through private governance. We examine paradigmatic events in the history of the sustainable seafood movement, from seafood boycotts in the 1970s through to the emergence of certification measures, benchmarks, and diverse voluntary environmental programs. We note four dimensions of stewardship in which efforts by actors within the seafood industry have aligned with theoretical concepts of stewardship, which we describe as (1) moving beyond compliance, (2) taking a systems perspective, (3) living with uncertainty, and (4) understanding humans as embedded elements of the biosphere. In conclusion, we identify emerging stewardship challenges for the seafood industry and suggest the urgent need to embrace a broader notion of ocean stewardship that extends beyond seafood.

Building on the inputs by a range of experts who participated in the February 2017 international symposium on Designing the Future for Fisheries Certification Schemes at the University of Tokyo, this manuscript traces the origins of fisheries certification schemes, relevant developments, and remaining challenges from an Asian perspective. Over the past 20 years, seafood certification has emerged as a powerful tool for meeting growing demands for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture products. Despite broad consensus among countries regarding what constitute responsible fishing practices, the fisheries certification landscape remains uneven. A plethora of certification schemes has generated confusion among consumers and retailers, and capital-intensive certification schemes may be out-of-reach or impractical for some small-scale fisheries, particularly within the developing world. A recent initiative by the Global Sustainable Seafood Initiative (GSSI) is aiming to address the diversity within the certification landscape by creating a tool to benchmark certification schemes that are in line with the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and other relevant agreed FAO guidelines on fisheries, ecolabelling and aquaculture. Countries in Asia are among the world's top consumers and exporters of seafood, yet have faced some particular challenges with regard to seafood certification, underscoring the need for certification schemes that account for regional and local conditions and management practices, particularly with regard to small-scale fisheries.

The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development 2021-2030 (the 'Ocean Decade') is poised to stimulate new cooperation for ocean science, but makes no mention of conflict or peace. We contend that this is a missed opportunity, and use an environmental peacebuilding typology to review how ocean science has historically contributed to peace. Such considerations are timely in the context of an increasingly complex and multidimensional ocean risk landscape, due among other things to unprecedented growth in the extent and intensity of ocean uses, and increasing conflict potential as the ocean becomes a more crowded and coveted place. We conclude by proposing the Ocean Decade Implementation Plan be appended to include an eighth intended outcome: 'A Peaceful Ocean'.

Who owns ocean biodiversity? This is an increasingly relevant question, given the legal uncertainties associated with the use of genetic resources from areas beyond national jurisdiction, which cover half of the Earth's surface. We accessed 38 million records of genetic sequences associated with patents and created a database of 12,998 sequences extracted from 862 marine species. We identified >1600 sequences from 91 species associated with deepsea and hydrothermal vent systems, reflecting commercial interest in organisms from remote ocean areas, as well as a capacity to collect and use the genes of such species. A single corporation registered 47% of all marine sequences included in gene patents, exceeding the combined share of 220 other companies (37%). Universities and their commercialization partners registered 12%. Actors located or headquartered in 10 countries registered 98% of all patent sequences, and 165 countries were unrepresented. Our findings highlight the importance of inclusive participation by all states in international negotiations and the urgency of clarifying the legal regime around access and benefit sharing of marine genetic resources. We identify a need for greater transparency regarding species provenance, transfer of patent ownership, and activities of corporations with a disproportionate influence over the patenting of marine biodiversity. We suggest that identifying these key actors is a critical step toward encouraging innovation, fostering greater equity, and promoting better ocean stewardship.

Research on pathways to reducing plastic pollution often concludes that greater action is needed by the private sector. Yet the private sector is not a monolithic or homogeneous entity. We compiled a novel library of 2,317 corporate reports from the world's 200 largest companies, by revenue, over a ten-year period (2010–2019) and used text mining tools to identify pronounced regional and sectoral variability in the extent to which plastic waste and pollution is of material importance to corporate operations. The results show a dominant focus on recycling, with far less attention to the other stages of the life cycle of plastic. While green clubs have emerged in recent years to mobilize voluntary actions by companies seeking to position themselves as leaders in this context, we see regional and sectoral gaps in green club membership, as well as a tendency for members to be those companies that already had a history of reporting on plastics issues. This analysis provides a starting point for a more nuanced consideration of the private sector's role in addressing plastic pollution, and suggests sectors and regions for prioritization by policymakers and civil society actors seeking to broaden the range of committed corporate actors.

Future impacts of climate change on marine fisheries have the potential to negatively influence a wide range of socio-economic factors, including food security, livelihoods and public health, and even to reshape development trajectories and spark transboundary conflict. Yet there is considerable variability in the vulnerability of countries around the world to these effects. We calculate a vulnerability index of 147 countries by drawing on the most recent data related to the impacts of climate change on marine fisheries. Building on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change framework for vulnerability, we first construct aggregate indices for exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity using 12 primary variables. Seven out of the ten most vulnerable countries on the resulting index are Small Island Developing States, and the top quartile of the index includes countries located in Africa (17), Asia (7), North America and the Caribbean (4) and Oceania (8). More than 87% of least developed countries are found within the top half of the vulnerability index, while the bottom half includes all but one of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development member states. This is primarily due to the tremendous variation in countries' adaptive capacity, as no such trends are evident from the exposure or sensitivity indices. A negative correlation exists between vulnerability and per capita carbon emissions, and the clustering of states at different levels of development across the vulnerability index suggests growing barriers to meeting global commitments to reducing inequality, promoting human well-being and ensuring sustainable cities and communities. The index provides a useful tool for prioritizing the allocation of climate finance, as well as activities aimed at capacity building and the transfer of marine technology.

Official development assistance (ODA) is intended to spur progress and increase security among recipient countries. Billions in ODA have been allocated to fisheries to support nutrition and livelihoods worldwide. Yet, from 2010 to 2015, fisheries allocations decreased by > 30%, while grants for non-fisheries sectors increased by > 13%. Globally, grants for climate change adaptation and mitigation fell for fisheries, while rapidly increasing in sectors like agriculture and forestry. In Oceania, a region highly dependent on fisheries for food security and particularly vulnerable to climate change, disbursements fell by 44%. Grants for fisheries research, education and training fell in absolute numbers, and as a proportion of total ODA to fisheries. These findings are out of alignment with recent international commitments, including the Sustainable Development Goals (2015), The Future We Want (2012), and relevant Aichi Targets (2010). Risk aversion among donors; redirection of climate finance into other sectors; and allocation decisions based on factors unrelated to fisheries are identified as contributing to observed findings. Increasing the volume of fisheries-related ODA and better aligning it with international commitments could bring substantial co-benefits and contribute to the sustainable use of marine ecosystems, support sustainable trade and economic opportunities, increase adaptive capacity, and foster human well-being.

This final manuscript in the special issue on Funding for ocean conservation and sustainable fisheries is the result of a dialogue aimed at connecting lead authors of the special issue manuscripts with relevant policymakers and practitioners. The dialogue took place over the course of a two-day workshop in December 2018, and this coda manuscript seeks to distil thinking around a series of key recurring topics raised throughout the workshop. These topics are collected into three broad categories, or needs: 1) a need for transparency, 2) a need for coherence, and 3) a need for improved monitoring of project impacts. While the special issue sought to collect new research into the latest trends and developments in the rapidly evolving world of funding for ocean conservation and sustainable fisheries, the insights collected during the workshop have helped to highlight remaining knowledge gaps. Therefore, each of the three needs identified within this manuscript is followed by a series of questions that the workshop participants identified as warranting further attention as part of a future research agenda. The crosscutting nature of many of the issues raised as well as the rapid pace of change that characterizes this funding landscape both pointed to a broader need for continued dialogue and study that reaches across the communities of research, policy and practice.

Life has evolved in the ocean for 3.7 billion years, resulting in a rich 'ocean genome', the ensemble of genetic material present in all marine biodiversity, including both the physical genes and the information they encode. Rapid advances in sequencing technologies and bioinformatics have enabled exploration of the ocean genome and are informing innovative approaches to conservation and a growing number of commercial biotechnology applications. However, the capacity to undertake genomic research and to access and use sequence data is inequitably distributed among countries, highlighting an urgent need to build capacity, promote inclusive innovation and increase access to affordable technologies. The ocean genome is the genetic material present in marine biodiversity. While technological advances are enabling exploration, conservation and innovation of this resource, the associated capacities are inequitably distributed among countries.

Ocean activities are rapidly expanding as Blue Economy discussions gain traction, creating new potential synergies and conflicts between sectors. To better manage ocean sectors and their development, we need to understand how they interact and the respective outcomes of these interactions. To provide a first comprehensive picture of the situation, we review 3187 articles to map and analyze interactions between economically important ocean sectors and find 93 unique direct and 61 indirect interactions, often mediated via the ocean ecosystem. Analysis of interaction outcomes reveals that some sectors coexist synergistically (e.g. renewable energy, tourism), but many interactions are antagonistic, and negative effects on other sectors are often incurred via degradation of marine ecosystems. The analysis also shows that ocean ecosystems are fundamental for supporting many ocean sectors, yet 13 out of 14 ocean sectors have interactions resulting in unidirectional negative ecosystem impact. Fishing, drilling, and shipping are hubs in the network of ocean sector interactions, and are involved in many of the antagonistic interactions. Antagonistic interactions signal trade-offs between sectors. Qualitative analysis of the literature shows that these tradeoffs relate to the cumulative nature of many ecosystem impacts incurred by some sectors, and the differential power of ocean sectors to exert their rights or demands in the development of the ocean domain. There are also often time lags in how impacts manifest. The ocean governance landscape is not currently well-equipped to deal with the full range of trade-offs, and opportunities, likely to arise in the pursuit of a Blue Economy in a rapidly changing ocean context. Based on our analysis, we therefore propose a set principles that can begin to guide strategic decision-making, by identifying both tradeoffs and opportunities for sustainable and equitable development of ocean sectors.

Plastic pollution has caused significant environmental and health challenges. Corporations that contribute to the manufacture, use, and distribution of plastics can play a vital role in addressing global plastic pollution and many are committing to voluntary pledges. However, the extent to which corporations’ voluntary commitments are helping solve the problem remains underexplored. Here, we develop a novel typology to characterize voluntary commitments to reduce plastic pollution made between 2015 and 2020 by 973 companies, including the top 300 of the Fortune Global 500. We find that 72% of these companies have made some form of commitment(s) to reduce plastic pollution. About 67% of companies participating in voluntary environmental programs (VEPs) and 17% of non-VEP participants made measurable and timebound commitments. However, rather than tackle virgin plastics, most companies target packaging and general plastics and frequently emphasize recycling-related efforts. Growing commitments on plastic pollution are made by large and important companies, but significantly more efforts beyond plastic recycling are required to effectively address plastic pollution challenges.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are increasingly being promoted as an ocean-based climate solution. However, such claims remain controversial because of the diffuse and poorly synthesized literature on climate benefits of MPAs. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a systematic literature review of 22,403 publications spanning 241 MPAs and analyzed these across 16 ecological and social pathways through which MPAs could contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Our meta-analysis demonstrates that marine conservation can significantly enhance carbon sequestration, coastal protection, biodiversity, and the reproductive capacity of marine organisms as well as fishers’ catch and income. Most of these benefits are only achieved in fully or highly protected areas and increase with MPA age. Although MPAs alone cannot offset all climate change impacts, they are a useful tool for climate change mitigation and adaptation of social-ecological systems.

An in-depth assessment was conducted on the functioning of a Taiwanese Sakuraebi (Sergia lucens) fishery management institution to understand the role of leadership in the context of long-term incentive creation. Interviews with relevant stakeholders and statistical analysis of fisheries data indicated that the daily vessel quota system and fishers' collective efforts to influence the market resulted in increased sales value, while simultaneously allowing for the equitable distribution of benefits from the Sakuraebi fishery in Donggang, Taiwan. Local fishers expressed a high level of satisfaction with the corresponding activities initiated by the fisher's organization. Interview respondents felt that promotional marketing activities led by the organization to enhance domestic consumption were particularly effective, and statistical analysis suggests that these activities helped to reduce the dependency of Taiwanese Sakuraebi fishers on export markets. A notable characteristic of this fishery is that it combines a large-scale sales organization, which enables the exertion of market influence, with a small-sized subsidiary organization for fisheries management. An annually rotating leadership system for managing fishery operations also provides members with the opportunity to share a sense of participation and responsibility, while keeping long-term policy goals. This study reinforces previous findings that leadership, social cohesion, and the nature of the resource are key factors determining the effectiveness and success of fisheries management.

Foreign aid constitutes a significant part of the national income of many developing countries. Fisheries are often of relevance for livelihoods and food security in these countries, so funding aimed at supporting sustainable fisheries can directly contribute to human well-being. In theory, foreign aid is aimed at promoting the economic development and welfare of developing countries and its allocation should therefore be aligned with development needs. However, the aid literature points to colonialism and donor self-interest at national levels as well as in the international arena as important forces shaping aid flows. Using network analytical techniques, this study examines to what extent both the magnitude and structural patterns of Official Development Assistance (ODA) funding for fisheries have changed over time (2002-2016) and what appear to be sources of stability or long-term tie formation in the network. The resulting network demonstrates that short-term ties, typically over a single year, are the norm for fisheries-related ODA, while long-term ties are uncommon. Among donor states, Japan has fostered the greatest number of donor-recipient ties over the entire study period, which in some cases appear to overlap with geopolitical priorities. The existence of historical colonial linkages is a poor predictor for ties that last the entire 15 years under examination; however, they are a strong predictor of shorter duration ties. The analysis suggests that more effort is needed to optimize resource use towards achieving the international development agenda reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals.

The tremendous diversity of life in the ocean has proven to be a rich source of inspiration for drug discovery, with success rates for marine natural products up to 4 times higher than other naturally derived compounds. Yet the marine biodiscovery pipeline is characterized by chronic underfunding, bottlenecks and, ultimately, untapped potential. For instance, a lack of taxonomic capacity means that, on average, 20 years pass between the discovery of new organisms and the formal publication of scientific names, a prerequisite to proceed with detecting and isolating promising bioactive metabolites. The need for edge research that can spur novel lines of discovery and lengthy high-risk drug discovery processes, are poorly matched with research grant cycles. Here we propose five concrete pathways to broaden the biodiscovery pipeline and open the social and economic potential of the ocean genome for global benefit: (1) investing in fundamental research, even when the links to industry are not immediately apparent; (2) cultivating equitable collaborations between academia and industry that share both risks and benefits for these foundational research stages; (3) providing new opportunities for early-career researchers and under-represented groups to engage in high-risk research without risking their careers; (4) sharing data with global networks; and (5) protecting genetic diversity at its source through strong conservation efforts. The treasures of the ocean have provided fundamental breakthroughs in human health and still remain under-utilised for human benefit, yet that potential may be lost if we allow the biodiscovery pipeline to become blocked in a search for quick-fix solutions.

Conflict over marine fishery resources is a growing security concern. Experts expect that global changes in our climate, food systems and oceans may spark or exacerbate resource conflicts. An initial scan of 803 relevant papers and subsequent intensive review of 31 fisheries conflict studies, focused on subnational and international conflicts, suggests that four substantial scientific gaps need addressing to improve our understanding of the nature and drivers of fisheries conflict. First, fisheries conflict and levels of conflict intensity are not precisely defined. Second, complex adaptive systems thinking is underutilized but has the potential to produce more realistic causal models of fishery conflict. Third, comparative large-scale data and suitably integrative methodologies are lacking, underscoring the need for a standardized and comparable database of fisheries conflict cases to aid extrapolation beyond single case-studies. Fourth, there is room for a more widespread application of higher order concepts and associated terminology. Importantly, the four gaps highlight the homogenized nature of current methodological and theoretical approaches to understanding fishery conflict, which potentially presents us with an oversimplified understanding of these conflicts. A more nuanced understanding of the complex and dynamic nature of fishery conflict and its causes is not only scientifically critical, but increasingly relevant for policymakers and practitioners in this turbulent world.

International fisheries conflict can cause crises by threatening maritime security, ecosystems and livelihoods. In a highly connected world, the possibility for localized fisheries conflict to escalate into 'systemic risks', where risk in one domain such as food supply can increase risk in another domain such as maritime security and international relations, is growing. However, countries often choose hard-line actions rather than strategies initiating or repairing fisheries cooperation. To design, prioritize and implement more effective responses, a deeper understanding of the temporal and regional patterns of fisheries conflict is needed. Here, we present novel findings from the first global and longitudinal database of international fisheries conflict between 1974-2016. We explore the characteristics of conflict over time and develop a typology of eight distinct types of conflict. Fisheries conflict increased between 1974 and 2016, with substantial variation in both the type of conflict and the countries involved. Before 2000, fisheries conflict involved mostly North American and European countries fighting over specific species. Since then, conflict primarily involved Asian countries clashing over multiple and nonspecified species linked to illegal fishing practices. We use this empirical data to consider potential response strategies that can foster maritime security and thereby contribute to broader societal stability.

Synthetic chemicals and biologically engineered materials are major forces in today's food systems, but they are also major drivers of the global environmental changes and health challenges that characterize the Anthropocene. To address these challenges, we will need to increase assessment activity, promote alternative production practices with less reliance on such technologies, and regulate social campaigns and experiments. 

The ocean economy is growing as commercial use of the ocean accelerates, while progress toward achieving international goals for ocean conservation and sustainability is lagging. In this context, the private sector is increasingly recognized as having the capacity to hamper efforts to achieve aspirations of sustainable ocean-based development or alternatively to bend current trajectories of ocean use by taking on the mantle of corporate biosphere stewardship. Here, we identify levels of industry concentration to assess where this capacity rests. We show that the 10 largest companies in eight core ocean economy industries generate, on average, 45% of each industry's total revenues. Aggregating across all eight industries, the 100 largest corporations (the Ocean 100) account for 60% of total revenues. This level of concentration in the ocean economy presents both risks and opportunities for ensuring sustainability and equity of global ocean use.

A suite of recent international commitments and aspirational targets related to ocean conservation and sustainable fisheries management suggest growing consensus among states regarding the urgency of action. Yet, securing adequate financial resources to achieve these goals will be a crucial hurdle for many countries and will depend on financing mechanisms that go beyond traditional official development assistance (ODA) and philanthropy. An expanding and diversifying universe of financing mechanisms, however, risks generating confusion, incoherence, and uneven outcomes. This Special Issue on Funding for ocean conservation and sustainable fisheries was conceived to gain insights into current and emerging trends in the rapidly evolving world of 'blue' finance. While one emphasis of the Special Issue is on ODA and philanthropy, additional contributions also cover new and emerging financing mechanisms. Throughout the Special Issue, authors reflect on important gaps, future perspectives and prospects for greater impact. Two relevant topics for the Special Issue, for which dedicated manuscripts are not available, are also briefly addressed: China's growing role as a provider of development finance and a shift to overtly transactional use of aid by the current US administration.

Corporations are perceived as increasingly powerful and critically important to ensuring that irreversible climatological or ecological tipping points on Earth are not crossed. Environmental impacts of corporate activities include pollution of soils, freshwater and the ocean, depletion of ecosystems and species, unsustainable use of resources, changes to air quality, and alteration of the global climate. Negative social impacts include unacceptable working conditions, erosion of traditional practices, and increased inequalities. Multiple formal and informal mechanisms have been developed, and innovative examples of corporate biosphere stewardship have resulted in progress. However, the biosphere crisis underscores that such efforts have been insufficient and that transformative change is urgently needed. We provide suggestions for aligning corporate activities with the biosphere and argue that such corporate biosphere stewardship requires more ambitious approaches taken by corporations, combined with new and formalized public governance approaches by governments.

Swedens legacy as a global leader in the push to put climate and the environment at the heart of government decision-making may have come to an end on 18 October 2022. The first casualty of the countrys new right-wing government was the Ministry of the Environment, eliminated on Day 1. A key question is the extent to which this change derails progress made toward building a sustainable nation and world.

There is substantial and unexplored potential for scientists to engage with the private sector for a sustainable ocean. The importance of such cooperation is a frequent emphasis of international dialogues and statements, it is embedded within the Sustainable Development Goals, and has been championed by prominent business leaders and scientists. But an uncritical embrace of science-industry collaboration is unhelpful, and candid reflections on the benefits and pitfalls that marine scientists can expect from actively engaging with the private sector are rare. In this Perspective, we draw on our collective experiences working with ocean industries in different parts of the world to reflect on how this has influenced our work, the effects these collaborations have generated, and the barriers to overcome for such partnerships to become more common. In doing so, we hope to help empower a new generation of marine scientists to explore collaboration with industry as a way to develop and scale up solutions for ocean sustainability.

The biosphere crisis requires changes to existing business practices. We ask how corporations can become sustainability leaders, when constrained by multiple barriers to collaboration for biosphere stewardship. We describe how scientists motivated, inspired and engaged with ten of the world’s largest seafood companies, in a collaborative process aimed to enable science-based and systemic transformations (2015–2021). CEOs faced multiple industry crises in 2015 that incentivized novel approaches. New scientific insights, an invitation to collaborate, and a bold vision of transformative change towards ocean stewardship, created new opportunities and direction. Co-creation of solutions resulted in new knowledge and trust, a joint agenda for action, new capacities, international recognition, formalization of an organization, increased policy influence, time-bound goals, and convergence of corporate change. Independently funded scientists helped remove barriers to cooperation, provided means for reflection, and guided corporate strategies and actions toward ocean stewardship. By 2021, multiple individuals exercised leadership and the initiative had transitioned from preliminary and uncomfortable conversations, to a dynamic, operational organization, with capacity to perform global leadership in the seafood industry. Mobilizing transformational agency through learning, collaboration, and innovation represents a cultural evolution with potential to redirect and accelerate corporate action, to the benefit of business, people and the planet.