Global aquatic foods are a key source of nutrition, but how their production is influenced by anthropogenic environmental changes is not well known. The vulnerability of global blue food systems to main environmental stressors and the related spatial impacts across blue food nations are now quantified. Global aquatic or 'blue' foods, essential to over 3.2 billion people, face challenges of maintaining supply in a changing environment while adhering to safety and sustainability standards. Despite the growing concerns over their environmental impacts, limited attention has been paid to how blue food production is influenced by anthropogenic environmental changes. Here we assess the vulnerability of global blue food systems to predominant environmental disturbances and predict the spatial impacts. Over 90% of global blue food production faces substantial risks from environmental change, with the major producers in Asia and the United States facing the greatest threats. Capture fisheries generally demonstrate higher vulnerability than aquaculture in marine environments, while the opposite is true in freshwater environments. While threats to production quantity are widespread across marine and inland systems, food safety risks are concentrated within a few countries. Identifying and supporting mitigation and adaptation measures in response to environmental stressors is particularly important in developing countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa where risks are high and national response capacities are low. These findings lay groundwork for future work to map environmental threats and opportunities, aiding strategic planning and policy development for resilient and sustainable blue food production under changing conditions.

Blue foods, sourced in aquatic environments, are important for the economies, livelihoods, nutritional security and cultures of people in many nations. They are often nutrient rich1, generate lower emissions and impacts on land and water than many terrestrial meats2, and contribute to the health3, wellbeing and livelihoods of many rural communities4. The Blue Food Assessment recently evaluated nutritional, environmental, economic and justice dimensions of blue foods globally. Here we integrate these findings and translate them into four policy objectives to help realize the contributions that blue foods can make to national food systems around the world: ensuring supplies of critical nutrients, providing healthy alternatives to terrestrial meat, reducing dietary environmental footprints and safeguarding blue food contributions to nutrition, just economies and livelihoods under a changing climate. To account for how context-specific environmental, socio-economic and cultural aspects affect this contribution, we assess the relevance of each policy objective for individual countries, and examine associated co-benefits and trade-offs at national and international scales. We find that in many African and South American nations, facilitating consumption of culturally relevant blue food, especially among nutritionally vulnerable population segments, could address vitamin B₁₂ and omega-3 deficiencies. Meanwhile, in many global North nations, cardiovascular disease rates and large greenhouse gas footprints from ruminant meat intake could be lowered through moderate consumption of seafood with low environmental impact. The analytical framework we provide also identifies countries with high future risk, for whom climate adaptation of blue food systems will be particularly important. Overall the framework helps decision makers to assess the blue food policy objectives most relevant to their geographies, and to compare and contrast the benefits and trade-offs associated with pursuing these objectives.

In this review of reviews, we overview the current global body of available evidence from structured reviews of epidemiological studies that explore human health outcomes associated with exposure to phthalates (chemical plasticisers commonly found in plastics). We found robust evidence for an association with lower semen quality, neurodevelopment and risk of childhood asthma, and moderate to robust evidence for impact on anogenital distance in boys. We identified moderate evidence for an association between phthalates/metabolites and low birthweight, endometriosis, decreased testosterone, ADHD, Type 2 diabetes and breast/uterine cancer. There was some evidence for other outcomes including anofourchette distance, fetal sex hormones, pre-term birth, lower antral follicle count, reduced oestrodiol, autism, obesity, thyroid function and hearing disorders. We found no reviews of epidemiological human studies on the impact of phthalates from recycled plastics on human health. We recommend that future research should use urine samples as exposure measures, consider confounders in analyses and measure impacts on female reproductive systems. Our findings align with emerging research indicating that health risks can occur at exposure levels below the safe dose levels set out by regulators, and are of particular concern given potential additive or synergistic cocktail effects of chemicals. This raises important policy and regulatory issues for identifying and controlling plastics and health related impacts and highlights a need for more research into substances of concern entering plastics waste streams via recycling.

Background: Globally, there is increasing scientific evidence of critical links between the oceans and human health, with research into issues such as pollution, harmful algal blooms and nutritional contributions. However, Oceans and Human Health (OHH) remains an emerging discipline. As such these links are poorly recognized in policy efforts such as the Sustainable Development Goals, with OHH not included in either marine (SDG14) or health (SDG3) goals. This is arguably short-sighted given recent development strategies such as the EU Blue Growth Agenda.

Objectives: In this systematic map we aim to build on recent efforts to enhance OHH in Europe by setting a baseline of existing evidence, asking: What links have been researched between marine environments and the positive and negative impacts to human health and wellbeing?

Methods: We searched eight bibliographic databases and queried 57 organizations identified through stakeholder consultation. Results include primary research and systematic reviews which were screened double blind against pre-defined inclusion criteria as per a published protocol. Studies were limited to Europe, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Data was extracted according to a stakeholder-defined code book. A narrative synthesis explores the current evidence for relationships between marine exposures and human health outcomes, trends in knowledge gaps and change over time in the OHH research landscape. The resulting database is available on the website of the Seas, Oceans and Public Health in Europe website (https://sophie2020.eu/).

Results: A total of 1,542 unique articles were included in the database, including those examined within 56 systematic reviews. Research was dominated by a US focus representing 50.1% of articles. A high number of articles were found to link: marine biotechnology and cardiovascular or immune conditions, consumption of seafood and cardiovascular health, chemical pollution and neurological conditions, microbial pollution and gastrointestinal or respiratory health, and oil industry occupations with mental health. A lack of evidence relates to direct impacts of plastic pollution and work within a number of industries identified as relevant by stakeholders. Research over time is dominated by marine biotechnology, though this is narrow in focus. Pollution, food and disease/injury research follow similar trajectories. Wellbeing and climate change have emerged more recently as key topics but lag behind other categories in volume of evidence.

Conclusions: The evidence base for OHH of relevance to European policy is growing but remains patchy and poorly co-ordinated. Considerable scope for future evidence synthesis exists to better inform policy-makers, though reviews need to better incorporate complex exposures. Priorities for future research include: proactive assessments of chemical pollutants, measurable impacts arising from climate change, effects of emerging marine industries, and regional and global assessments for OHH interactions. Understanding of synergistic effects across multiple exposures and outcomes using systems approaches is recommended to guide policies within the Blue Growth Strategy. Co-ordination of research across Europe and dedicated centres of research would be effective first steps.

Small-scale fisheries and aquaculture (SSFA) provide livelihoods for over 100 million people and sustenance for -1 billion people, particularly in the Global South. Aquatic foods are distributed through diverse supply chains, with the potential to be highly adaptable to stresses and shocks, but face a growing range of threats and adaptive challenges. Contemporary governance assumes homogeneity in SSFA despite the diverse nature of this sector. Here we use SSFA actor profiles to capture the key dimensions and dynamism of SSFA diversity, reviewing contemporary threats and exploring opportunities for the SSFA sector. The heuristic framework can inform adaptive governance actions supporting the diversity and vital roles of SSFA in food systems, and in the health and livelihoods of nutritionally vulnerable people-supporting their viability through appropriate policies whilst fostering equitable and sustainable food systems.

Blue foods play a central role in food and nutrition security for billions of people and are a cornerstone of the livelihoods, economies, and cultures of many coastal and riparian communities. Blue foods are extraordinarily diverse, are often rich in essential micronutrients and fatty acids, and can often be produced in ways that are more environmentally sustainable than terrestrial animal-source foods. Capture fisheries constitute the largest wild-food resource for human extraction that would be challenging to replace. Yet, despite their unique value, blue foods have often been left out of food system analyses, policies, and investments. Here, we focus on three imperatives for realizing the potential of blue foods: (1) Bring blue foods into the heart of food system decision-making; (2) Protect and develop the potential of blue foods to help end malnutrition; and (3) Support the central role of small-scale actors in fisheries and aquaculture. Recognition of the importance of blue foods for food and nutrition security constitutes a critical justification to preserve the integrity and diversity of aquatic species and ecosystems.