Global patterns of international fisheries conflict

International conflict over fishery resources is a growing security concern. Increasing incidences of conflict, diminishing fishery resources and climate impacts on marine systems have alerted the international community to the potential of fisheries conflict as a security threat. However, we lack knowledge on conflict events over time, as well as the contextual variables shaping conflict. To address that gap, Jessica's thesis provides detailed understanding of the patterns of international fisheries conflict, including its frequency, type, geography, temporal dimensions, immediate drivers and underlying conditions (1974-2016). Insight into these patterns can aid improved development of conflict management strategies and policies to ensure future ocean security

Marine fisheries and future ocean conflict

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

Identifying predictors of international fisheries conflict

Marine capture fishery resources are declining, and demand for them is rising. These trends are suspected to incite conflict, but their effects have not been quantitatively examined. We applied a multi-model ensemble approach to a global database of international fishery conflicts between 1974 and 2016 to test the supply-induced scarcity hypothesis (diminishing supplies of fishery resources increase fisheries conflict), the demand-induced scarcity hypothesis (rising demand for fishery resources increases fisheries conflict), and three alternative political and economic hypotheses. While no single indicator was able to fully explain international conflict over fishery resources, we found a positive relationship between increased conflict over fishery resources and higher levels of per capita GDP for the period 1975–1996. For the period 1997–2016, we found evidence supporting the demand-induced scarcity hypothesis, and the notion that an increase in supply of fishery resources is linked to an increase in conflict occurrence. By identifying significant predictors of international fisheries conflict, our analysis provides useful information for policy approaches for conflict anticipation and management

Preparing ocean governance for species on the move

Policy must anticipate conflict over geographic shifts</jats:p

MEK and PI3K-AKT inhibitors synergistically block activated IL7 receptor signaling in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia

We identified mutations in the IL7Ra gene or in genes encoding the downstream signaling molecules JAK1, JAK3, STAT5B, N-RAS, K-RAS, NF1, AKT and PTEN in 49% of patients with pediatric T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL). Strikingly, these mutations (except RAS/NF1) were mutually exclusive, suggesting that they each cause the aberrant activation of a common downstream target. Expressing these mutant signaling molecules—but not their wild-type counterparts—rendered Ba/F3 cells independent of IL3 by activating the RAS-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT pathways. Interestingly, cells expressing either IL7Ra or JAK mutants are sensitive to JAK inhibitors, but respond less robustly to inhibitors of the downstream RAS-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathways, indicating that inhibiting only one downstream pathway is not sufficient. Here, we show that inhibiting both the MEK and PI3K-AKT pathways synergistically prevents the proliferation of BaF3 cells expressing mutant IL7Ra, JAK and RAS. Furthermore, combined inhibition of MEK and PI3K/AKT was cytotoxic to samples obtained from 6 out of 11 primary T-ALL patients, including 1 patient who had no mutations in the IL7R signaling pathway. Taken together, these results suggest that the potent cytotoxic effects of inhibiting both MEK and PI3K/AKT should be investigated further as a therapeutic option using leukemia xenograft models.Leukemia advance online publication, 13 May 2016; doi:10.1038/leu.2016.83

Exploring Misfit : A case study of the northeast Atlantic mackerel

The pressure of a growing and developing global human society creates environmental stresses that require collaborative management. Sudden and dramatic ecological changes can, however, impede such management by making social arrangements out of alignment with the ecosystem they were designed to manage. In sustainability science that failure is often referred to as a ‘misfit’. This thesis aims to add to our understanding of misfit by investigating what sparks misfits, and which causal mechanisms cause them to persist. To do that, a case study is used in which the geographical distribution shift of a marine species has produced a misfit, and a long-standing international conflict between stakeholders: the mackerel case. Since 2007 the northeast Atlantic mackerel stock started migrating and spawning towards more northern and western regions of the Nordic Seas, progressively going as far as Icelandic and south Greenlandic waters in the west. A misfit developed and endured because Iceland has not been included in the de facto management of the stock until this day. ‘Process-tracing’ is used to explain this outcome, i.e. to uncover the causal mechanisms behind the endurance of the misfit. The results show that the misfit persisted despite stakeholders recognizing its existence and making efforts to resolve it. The case study shows that an interaction of barriers to re-fitting, such as ‘absence of authority’, ‘politicization of scientific results’, ‘lack of trust’ etc., came into play at different points in time. Moreover, the results also demonstrate that misfit is dynamical, as it can enlarge or reduce through time. Some of the causal mechanisms that this study uncovered resonate with the literature on social-ecological misfit focusing on local and regional scales. Other causal mechanisms that were identified so far remained under-theorized in the literature. These mechanisms contributing to its endurance seem to be typical for misfits on international scales, i.e. absence of authority, interstate politics and influence of power imbalances (where powerful (coalitions of) actors are able to resist changes)

Collapse of cooperation? The North-Atlantic mackerel dispute and lessons for international cooperation on transboundary fish stocks

A changing climate will challenge the effectiveness and functioning of existing international resource management structures or international regimes. This is already evident in regimes that manage transboundary fish stocks, where rapid changes in the abundance and distribution of fishery resources threaten international cooperation. This article examines the breakdown in resource cooperation for the northeast Atlantic mackerel fishery where, for over a decade, Coastal States have failed to reach an agreement on the management of the stock after a climate-induced shift in the stock’s distribution. Why did the management regime fail? And what are lessons learnt for such regimes more generally? This article sheds light on the interplay between a relatively weak international regime, domestic interests related to the importance of the national fishing industry and a breakdown in the common principles – fisheries science – that international cooperation is based on. The limited flexibility in the negotiating position of the various states – and thus, the regime at large – can be ascribed to a combination of strong domestic industry influence on negotiating positions, and a disagreement over the appropriate methods to measure stock biomass in tandem with unclear allocation principles. Strengthening existing mechanisms to cooperatively manage shared stocks between Coastal States will be important to avoid such disputes in the future. However, states are weary of relinquishing decision-making powers. Therefore, starting with an agreement on the fundamentals, namely the science that underpins diverging claims, could be a first step towards a long-term solution for the northeast Atlantic mackerel.publishedVersio

Collapse of cooperation? The North-Atlantic mackerel dispute and lessons for international cooperation on transboundary fish stocks

A changing climate will challenge the effectiveness and functioning of existing international resource management structures or international regimes. This is already evident in regimes that manage transboundary fish stocks, where rapid changes in the abundance and distribution of fishery resources threaten international cooperation. This article examines the breakdown in resource cooperation for the northeast Atlantic mackerel fishery where, for over a decade, Coastal States have failed to reach an agreement on the management of the stock after a climate-induced shift in the stock’s distribution. Why did the management regime fail? And what are lessons learnt for such regimes more generally? This article sheds light on the interplay between a relatively weak international regime, domestic interests related to the importance of the national fishing industry and a breakdown in the common principles – fisheries science – that international cooperation is based on. The limited flexibility in the negotiating position of the various states – and thus, the regime at large – can be ascribed to a combination of strong domestic industry influence on negotiating positions, and a disagreement over the appropriate methods to measure stock biomass in tandem with unclear allocation principles. Strengthening existing mechanisms to cooperatively manage shared stocks between Coastal States will be important to avoid such disputes in the future. However, states are weary of relinquishing decision-making powers. Therefore, starting with an agreement on the fundamentals, namely the science that underpins diverging claims, could be a first step towards a long-term solution for the northeast Atlantic mackerel

Global patterns of fisheries conflict: forty years of data

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