Are we choosing the right flagships? The bird species and traits Australians find most attractive

Understanding what people like about birds can help target advocacy for bird conservation. However, testing preferences for characteristics of birds is methodologically challenging, with bias difficult to avoid. In this paper we test whether preferred characteristics of birds in general are shared by the individual bird species the same people nominate as being those they consider most attractive. We then compare these results with the birds which appear most frequently in the imagery of conservation advocates. Based on a choice model completed by 638 general public respondents from around Australia, we found a preference for small colourful birds with a melodious call. However, when the same people were asked which five birds they found most attractive, 48% named no more than three, mostly large well-known species. Images displayed by a leading Australian bird conservation organisation also favoured large colourful species. The choice model results suggest conservation advocates can promote a much wider range of bird types as flagships, particularly smaller species that might otherwise be neglected

Threatened bird valuation in Australia

Threatened species programs need a social license to justify public funding. A contingent valuation survey of a broadly representative sample of the Australian public found that almost two thirds (63%) supported funding of threatened bird conservation. These included 45% of a sample of 645 respondents willing to pay into a fund for threatened bird conservation, 3% who already supported bird conservation in another form, and 15% who could not afford to pay into a conservation fund but who nevertheless thought that humans have a moral obligation to protect threatened birds. Only 6% explicitly opposed such payments. Respondents were willing to pay about AUD 11 annually into a conservation fund (median value), including those who would pay nothing. Highest values were offered by young or middle aged men, and those with knowledge of birds and those with an emotional response to encountering an endangered bird. However, the prospect of a bird going extinct alarmed almost everybody, even most of those inclined to put the interests of people ahead of birds and those who resent the way threatened species sometimes hold up development. The results suggest that funding for threatened birds has widespread popular support among the Australian population. Conservatively they would be willing to pay about AUD 14 million per year, and realistically about AUD 70 million, which is substantially more than the AUD 10 million currently thought to be required to prevent Australian bird extinctions

A fulfilled human life: eliciting sense of place and cultural identity in two UK marine environments through the Community Voice Method

Human impacts on the marine environment threaten the wellbeing of hundreds of millions of people. Marine environments are a common-pool resource (CPR) and one of their major management challenges is how to incorporate the value of ecosystem services to society in decision-making. Cultural ecosystem services (CES) relate to the often intangible benefits people receive from their interactions with the natural environment and contribute to individual and collective human wellbeing. Priority knowledge gaps include the need to better understand shared values regarding CES, and how to effectively integrate these values into decision-making. We filmed 40 Community Voice Method interviews with marine stakeholders in two areas of the UK to improve on the valuation of coastal and marine CES. Results show that cultural benefits including sense of place, aesthetic pleasure and cultural identity were bi-directional, contributed directly to a ‘fulfilled human life’ and were associated with charismatic marine life and biodiversity. Other-regarding self-transcendence values were salient underscoring a desire for sustainable marine management. We critically reflect on our analytical framework that integrates aspects of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment and IPBES conceptual frameworks. The thematic codebook developed for this study could prove useful for future comparative studies in other marine CES contexts. We propose that values-led management could increase the efficacy of marine planning strategies

Economic contribution and social welfare of recreational charter boat fisheries in the northeast Atlantic: The cases of Galicia (Spain) and Madeira archipelago (Portugal)

Recreational charter boat fisheries provide alternative economic development to traditional commercial fisheries, especially to coastal communities in warm seas. Charter boat fishing has been little studied in temperate regions, and the factors that trigger its development and social contribution to fishing communities are unknown. We performed an economic analysis of recreational charter boat fisheries in the Eastern North Atlantic to assess their contribution to social welfare. We selected two case studies located in Galicia (NW Spain) and Madeira archipelago (Portugal). The two cases differ in the socioecological attributes in which recreational charter boat fishing is developed (e.g., relevance of commercial fishing, tourism, or targeted species), that were included in the assessment. Up to 7 charter fishing companies were identified in Galicia (10 boats) and 14 in Madeira (18 boats), and information on the costs and benefits of the activity were collected by a questionnaire answered by company managers and skippers. Charter boats in Galicia are operating throughout the year, and anglers mostly engage in bottom fishing targeting demersal predators like ballan wrasse (Labrus bergylta) and European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) that they retain. Despite the strong seasonality of the fishery in Madeira, focused on summers, the fishing effort is higher than in Galicia. On average, charter boats go fishing for 39.3 ± 41.5 (SD) fishing journeys and take 2 500 anglers on board per year in Galicia, while in Madeira they fish 63.7 ± 32.7 journeys and take 3 200 anglers on board. Anglers target in Madeira pelagic top predators like blue marlin (Makaira nigricans), or some tuna species, e.g., bigeye (Thunnus obesus), by trolling in a catch and release fishery. The economic balance of companies was more favorable in Madeira, with an average gross annual profit of € 28 883 ± 30 755, while economic yield in Galicia was € 4 444 ± 7 916. We also applied a travel cost method to assess the recreation demand of recreational fishing trips based on a questionnaire answered by 150 clients in Galicia and 55 in Madeira. We estimated the visitor surplus mean value to be € 1 385 per year in Galicia (95% confidence interval, CI95%= € 1 219 – € 1 550), and € 1 738 in Madeira (CI95%= € 1 433 – 2 043). The social annual recreation value of Galician fishery was worth € 3.4 Million, ranging between € 3.0 M and € 3.8 M, a value well below the annual economic impact generated by commercial fishing (€ 700 M). The recreation value of the charter boat fishery in Madeira, € 6.3 M, ranging between € 5.2 M and € 7.5 M, is comparable to the annual economic impact of commercial fishing, that contributes to the local economy with € 12 M

Disentangling global market drivers for cephalopods to foster transformations towards sustainable seafood systems

21 pages, 11 figures, 1 table.-- Open accessAquatic food systems are important contributors to global food security to satisfy an intensifying demand for protein-based diets, but global economic growth threatens marine systems. Cephalopod (octopus, squid and cuttlefish) fisheries can contribute to food security; however, their sustainable exploitation requires understanding connections between nature's contributions to people (NCP), food system policies and human wellbeingThe authors acknowledge the financial support from the Cephs and Chefs Project (https://www.cephsandchefs.com/) funded by the European Regional Development Fund (https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/funding/erdf/) through the Interreg Atlantic Area Programme grant number EAPA_282/2016. CP, TF, KR and DC acknowledge financial support to CESAM by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia/MCTES (UIDP/50017/2020 + UIDB/50017/2020 + LA/P/0094/2020), through national funds. CP acknowledges the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia research contract 2020.02510. CEECIND and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). SV and PP acknowledge financial support from the Xunta de Galicia (https://www.xunta.gal/portada) (RECREGES II project under Grant 1400 ED481B2018/017 and Grupo de Referencia Competitiva GI-2060 AEMI, under Grant 1401 ED431C2019/11)Peer reviewe

Global cephalopod market drivers

ICES Annual Science Conference 2021, online 6-10 SeptemberN

Identifying sustainability priorities among value chain actors in artisanal common octopus fisheries

The United Nations (UN) Decade of Ocean Science highlights a need to improve the way in which scientific results effectively inform action and policies regarding the ocean. Our research contributes to achieving this goal by identifying practical actions, barriers, stakeholder contributions and resources required to increase the sustainability of activities carried out in the context of artisanal fisheries to meet UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and International Year of Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture (IYAFA) Global Action Plan (GAP) Pillar targets. We conducted a novel ‘social value chain analysis’ via a participatory workshop to elicit perspectives of value chain actors and fisheries stakeholders associated with two Spanish artisanal common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) fisheries (western Asturias—Marine Stewardship Council [MSC] certified, and Galicia—non-MSC certified) about their priorities regarding sustainable octopus production and commercializationOpen Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Cephs and Chefs Project (https://www.cephsandchefs.com/) funded by the European Regional Development Fund (https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/funding/erdf/) through the Interreg Atlantic Area Programme grant number EAPA_282/2016. CP, TF, KR and DC would also like to acknowledge financial support to CESAM by FCT/MCTES (UIDP/50017/2020 + UIDB/50017/2020 + LA/P/0094/2020), through national funds. CP acknowledges the FCT research contract 2020.02510.CEECIND. SV and PP acknowledge the financial support from the Xunta de Galicia (https://www.xunta.gal/portada) (RECREGES II project under Grant 1400 ED481B2018/017 and Grupo de Referencia Competitiva GI-2060 AEMI, under Grant 1401 ED431C2019/11). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscriptS

Identifying sustainability priorities among value chain actors in artisanal common octopus fisheries

30 pages, 6 figures, 1 table.-- This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International LicenseThe United Nations (UN) Decade of Ocean Science highlights a need to improve the way in which scientific results effectively inform action and policies regarding the ocean. Our research contributes to achieving this goal by identifying practical actions, barriers, stakeholder contributions and resources required to increase the sustainability of activities carried out in the context of artisanal fisheries to meet UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and International Year of Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture (IYAFA) Global Action Plan (GAP) Pillar targets. We conducted a novel ‘social value chain analysis’ via a participatory workshop to elicit perspectives of value chain actors and fisheries stakeholders associated with two Spanish artisanal common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) fisheries (western Asturias—Marine Stewardship Council [MSC] certified, and Galicia—non-MSC certified) about their priorities regarding sustainable octopus production and commercialization. Our adapted Rapfish sustainability framework emphasised the importance of economic, environmental, ethical, institutional, social, and technological indicators to different actors across the value chain. We mapped participants’ shared sustainability priorities (e.g. integrated fisheries management, knowledge-based management, product traceability) to six Rapfish indicators, seven IYAFA Pillars and twelve SDGs to reveal how our results can inform ocean policy and actions. This identified how certification incentives and other cooperative approaches can facilitate environmental, economic and social sustainability (e.g. value-added products, price premiums for producers, gender inclusive organisations); support IYAFA priority outcomes (raised awareness, strengthened science-policy interface, empowered stakeholders, partnerships); and help to achieve UN SDG targets (e.g. SDG 14.b, SDG 17.17). The results can inform actors, stakeholders and policymakers about how different actors contribute to efforts to achieve the SDGs and how to manage priorities for sustainable actions within artisanal fisheries and their value chains. We recommend inclusive and equitable participatory knowledge transfer and governance platforms as part of the UN Decade of Ocean Science and beyond where participants can create theories of change towards sustainability involving the development of multi-sectoral ocean policies framed at the level of the value chain and supported by appropriate governance structuresOpen Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Cephs and Chefs Project (https://www.cephsandchefs.com/) funded by the European Regional Development Fund (https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/funding/erdf/) through the Interreg Atlantic Area Programme grant number EAPA_282/2016. CP, TF, KR and DC would also like to acknowledge financial support to CESAM by FCT/MCTES (UIDP/50017/2020 + UIDB/50017/2020 + LA/P/0094/2020), through national funds. CP acknowledges the FCT research contract 2020.02510.CEECIND. SV and PP acknowledge the financial support from the Xunta de Galicia (https://www.xunta.gal/portada) (RECREGES II project under Grant 1400 ED481B2018/017 and Grupo de Referencia Competitiva GI-2060 AEMI, under Grant 1401 ED431C2019/11)Peer reviewe

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication