# data[].attributes.headline
Nature and Connection: Marine and Human life

# data[].attributes.subject
Nature and Connection: Marine and Human life

# data[].attributes.body
Resilience and adaptation are deeply connected to our ability to cooperate and align with each other and the natural world, and this dynamic is just as vital for marine life. Just as dolphins and fishers benefit from synchronized behavior, “Foraging synchrony is key to benefiting both predators. Dolphins herd mullet schools toward the coast, increasing prey availability within the reach of the net-casting fishers, who gain higher foraging success—but only when matching the casting behavior with the dolphins’ foraging cues.” (Cantor et. al). This relationship reflects how humans, too, thrive when we work together toward common goals, adjusting our actions to support one another. On a larger scale, our ability to engage with the world in cooperative and adaptive ways is central to human survival and success. As the study notes, “Humans’ ability to learn to interact with nature in transformative ways has been key to our global ecological success but also to a global ecological crisis,” (Cantor et. al). By adopting this cooperative mindset, we can create sustainable interactions with the environment that benefit both humans and marine life. This shows how human resilience is not just about personal strength but about collective adaptation — learning to trust, communicate, and collaborate with others to navigate life’s challenges while fostering the preservation of marine ecosystems and species.

The dorsal fin’s evolution was in response to environmental challenges reflects how humans can develop habits and coping mechanisms to navigate life’s difficulties and build resilience.

Dolphins’ cooperative behavior highlights the importance of mutual support and shared responsibility in fostering personal and communal resilience during instability.

"I believe in the possibility of dorsal, or stabilizing practices in our own lives," (Gumbs 47). This quote from Undrowned emphasizes the importance of adaptation, community, and resilience.

# data[].attributes.body
The pod structure of dolphins emphasizes the power of community and collective care, suggesting that human survival and well-being are strengthened through cooperation rather than competition.

Interspecies cooperation in marine life teaches us that survival and abundance are more likely when communities engage in shared responsibility and collective action.

Marine life can mirror the human experience, emphasizing that our well-being and survival are deeply rooted in community efforts and shared responsibilities. By embracing collective action, humans and marine life can navigate challenges more effectively, creating environments where mutual support leads to greater resilience and prosperity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Much Like Humans, Dolphin Pods Have Complex Social Structures

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These marine mammals are known for building unique cultures within their social groups.

# data[].attributes.body
Dolphins’ scars symbolize vulnerability as a source of connection and healing, urging humans to embrace their imperfections to create deeper relationships and understanding.

Gumbs argues that acknowledging our vulnerabilities fosters resilience and love, allowing us to heal and strengthen communal ties.

Scars on dolphins show their challenges, like fights or encounters with predators. These marks are a sign of resilience, as dolphins heal and continue to thrive. Scars can also reflect the importance of their social groups, since dolphins often rely on their pods for protection and support after injury. These scars remind us that our own struggles and vulnerabilities can help us grow stronger and connect with others who support us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SCARS: Politics in the Big Blue - Full Documentary | Risso's Dolphin Documentary | The Dock

# data[].attributes.body
The resting practices of seals and sea elephants highlight the necessity of rest for renewal, emphasizing that rest and recovery are acts of resistance in a capitalist system.

The ability of seals to thrive in captivity while retaining a sense of freedom reflects the importance of setting personal boundaries and honoring one’s sense of self.

"And so there is a time to rest, like sea elephants who spend a whole month just snuggling and shedding their skin, pusa seals who dive deeper postpartum and spend more time alone, gray seals who offer a third of their bodyweight while nursing and then leave to regenerate themselves,"(Gumbs 141).

The study of elephant seals’ migration and their shifting strategies between feeding and resting offers valuable lessons for human behavior, in how we manage our priorities and navigate risks. Just like the seals prioritize safety for their body conditions, humans, too, must adapt to changing circumstances, balancing our immediate needs with longer-term sustainability. The seals’ behavior illustrates the importance of adjusting to both internal and external factors. When they are in poor condition, they take more risks to forage, but as they regain strength, they become more focused on safety, resting deeper in the water to avoid predators. This dynamic is a reflection of how humans, when facing hardships, may need to take more risks or push ourselves harder to meet our basic needs, but as our resources and stability grow, we can then focus more on ensuring our well-being and security, adjusting our approach to life’s challenges. Just as the seals navigate the balance between feeding and resting, we too must learn to balance work, rest, and self-care to thrive in the long run.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fear Shapes Feeding And Resting Strategies For Migrating Elephant Seals - Natural Reserve System

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tracking data show seals shift strategies for predator avoidance and foraging as their body condition improves during migration.

# data[].attributes.body
The slowing heart rate of harbor seals before diving symbolizes the importance of slowing down and being present, advocating for mindfulness and deeper self-awareness.

Meditation and sound, like the grounding practices of dolphins, are essential tools for reconnecting with oneself and the environment.

Harbor seals slow their heart rate before diving, which helps them stay calm and focused. This teaches us the importance of slowing down and being present, instead of always rushing.

Dolphins also use sound to communicate and heal. Listening to dolphin sounds can help us relax and feel more connected to ourselves.

"She slows her heart and listens, reaches, knows" (Gumbs 137). Gumbs underscores the importance of slowing down, listening to yourself, and being in the moment, just like seals and dolphins do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dolphin Meditation with Time Line Healing & Gentle Kundalini Activation

# data[].attributes.body
Sea lions’ ability to resolve territorial conflicts without prolonged aggression reflects the potential for humans to navigate conflict through communication and higher aspirations.

The cooperative behavior of marine mammals during conflict highlights the importance of listening and connection as tools for transforming tension into growth and understanding.

"And yes, sometimes I have to vocalize my limits and so do you. Let’s get it done though, and get back to breathing sky,"(Gumbs 85). Gumbs mentions how sea lions only fight for up to 15 seconds, showing the acceptance of disagreement and eventually letting that conflict go.

Manta rays do not have stingers, barbs, or teeth, and flee danger and conflict by swimming away, humans can learn from this conflict resolution by taking a peaceful route to problem solve.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Manta Rays can Teach Us About Conflict Resolution — Martina Wing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Manta rays can teach us a lot about peaceful conflict resolution. Learn more in this video!

# data[].attributes.body
Sperm whales’ deep dives symbolize the need for humans to engage deeply with their challenges, allowing transformation and growth through adversity.

The natural cycles of marine life teach that surrendering to life’s rhythms, much like whales do during their deep dives, can help us find strength and resilience, transforming obstacles into opportunities for personal growth and renewal.

"You will know when it has been enough time in the deep. it can vary. attune to your need. account for your nourishment. direct your thoughts, melt them down make them light. and return," (Gumbs 124).

Sperm whales have special adaptations that help them survive the immense pressure of deep dives. One key feature is how their bodies prevent damage to air-filled spaces, like their lungs and sinuses, which could otherwise be crushed under the pressure. These adaptations are what allow sperm whales to dive to such extreme depths without harm. We can apply this to our our lives and challenges by adapting to survive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How do deep-diving sea creatures withstand huge pressure changes?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientific American is the essential guide to the most awe-inspiring advances in science and technology, explaining how they change our understanding of the world and shape our lives.

# data[].attributes.body
The bonds among whales and dolphins reflect love as a living practice, suggesting that communal care and shared responsibility are essential for human survival and growth.

The strength and survival of blackfish reflect black resilience and solidarity, reinforcing the idea that love and communal strength can counter systemic oppression.bbs and flows rather than resisting them leads to greater harmony and adaptability.

Marine life emphasizes the acceptance of ebbs and flows rather than resisting them which often leads to greater harmony and adaptability.

"Calves appeared to be significant nodes in the network of the social unit, and thus provide quantitative support for the theory in which communal care acts as the evolutionary force behind group formation in this species," (Gero et. al).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Calves as social hubs: dynamics of the social network within sperm whale units - PubMed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is hypothesized that the primary function of permanent social relationships among female sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) is to provide allomothers for calves at the surface while mothers make foraging dives. In order to investigate how reciprocity of allocare within units of sperm whales fa …

# data[].attributes.body
The extinction of species like the vaquita reflects the destructive effects of capitalism and exploitation, underscoring the need for systemic change and environmental justice.

The commodification of marine life parallels the exploitation of marginalized communities, highlighting the need for collective action to resist systems of oppression.

"The isolation of workers at sea makes it hard to fully understand the scale of labor problems in fisheries. But recent investigations have uncovered many cases of serious abuse, sometimes involving hundreds of workers,"(Tickler et al.) This shows how labor exploitation in fisheries often goes unnoticed because of how hidden and isolated these workers are.

"The push to fish more has been made worse by harmful government subsidies, which keep fishing going beyond what’s sustainable," (Tickler et al.). This points to how overfishing is driven by government support, which in turn leads to the exploitation of workers as companies try to cut costs.

These quotes highlight how overfishing, labor abuse, and the exploitation of marine life are all connected. They show that we need real changes in how fisheries are run, better protections for workers, and a push for environmental justice to stop these harmful systems from continuing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Since the mid-1990s, global marine fisheries catches have steadily decreased1 while fishing effort has continued to increase, leading to intense competition, declining catch-per-unit-of-effort and fisheries profitability, and the over-exploitation of many stocks1,2,3,4. The consequent race to fish has been exacerbated by harmful government subsidies that enable fishing effort to persist beyond bio-economic limits5. The underlying pattern of decline has been masked in the officially reported data by inconsistent data reporting from some areas of the world and by a presentist bias8 that assumes improved catch reporting equals increased catches9. The resultant overly optimistic trend in government data has fostered suboptimal policies, in particular the allocation of resources to harmful capacity-enhancing subsidies rather than enforcement or stock rebuilding. Failure to manage fisheries sustainably has serious implications for human welfare, as fish (here meaning finfish and invertebrates) provide billions of people with protein and vital nutrients10, as well as employment and livelihoods for hundreds of millions of people11.

Falling productivity and financial returns in commercial fisheries can pressure vessels to cut operating costs, at the extreme by fishing illegally, circumventing licensing costs and catch limits12, and by reducing expenditure on crew pay, safety and living conditions. Estimates of fishing labour costs suggest that they comprise 30-50% of total fishing costs4,13. The large contribution of labour to fishing costs suggests that, in addition to government subsidies received for fuel, vessel operators can capture a significant additional subsidy by aggressively reducing expenditure on crew, for example, by non-compliance with labour and safety standards or by withholding pay.

The push to reduce operating expenses to maintain profitability has occurred in the context of rising living standards and employment expectations in industrialised fishing countries, leading to domestic crew shortages and higher wage demands14,15. Concurrently, the political marginalisation of coastal, small-scale fisheries throughout the developing world16, exacerbated by population growth, has contributed to a surplus of domestic and migrant labour in developing countries. This has polarised labour supply and demand between developed/emerging and developing economies, forcing people in the latter group to engage in any work available, including as fishing crew in an industry highly motivated to cut costs and that often operates out of reach of enforcement agencies14,20.

Given the nature of working at sea, labour conditions of fishing crews are difficult to monitor. Supported by reefers and supply ships, fishing vessels can remain at sea for months during which time the crew may be unable to disembark21, with living and working conditions on such vessels generally beyond the oversight of regulators15. Given jurisdictional complexities, it is also often unclear in which country a crew member can seek redress in cases of abuse22. While flag-state responsibility matters, the growing use of flags of convenience further weakens the capacity to enforce regulations23,24. These factors facilitate the use of exploitative employment practices to reduce labour costs at the expense of worker pay, safety and freedom25.

The isolation of workers at sea makes the extent of labour issues in fisheries difficult to quantify. In recent years, however, high profile media investigations have identified a number of cases of extreme labour abuses in fisheries, some involving hundreds of fishing crew. Investigations of the Thai, Taiwanese and South Korean fishing industries identified cases of human trafficking, forced confinement, physical abuse and even murder26,27,28,29,30. These incidents have not been confined just to the high seas or the waters of weaker jurisdictions. Some of the cases involving South Korean vessels took place while under charter in New Zealand waters. There have also been allegations of human trafficking and debt bondage of African and Asian crew on domestic vessels in British and Irish fisheries and trafficking and confinement among South East Asian fishers employed in US fisheries in Hawaii37. The US State Department lists 40 countries as source, destination or transit countries for human trafficking in fisheries38, and vessels exploiting fishing crew have been encountered in the waters of Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Russia and South Africa, as well as New Zealand25,39,40,41. Labour rights abuses in fisheries appear widespread and serious, in many cases meeting the definition of modern slavery.

Modern slavery is defined, for the purposes of measurement, by the International Labour Organisation and the Walk Free Foundation (WFF) as "any situation of exploitation that a person cannot refuse or leave because of threats, violence, coercion, deception, and/or abuse of power". This includes "forced labour, debt bondage, forced marriage, slavery and slavery-like practices and human trafficking"42. As the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime notes, "the common denominator of these crimes is that they are all forms of exploitation in which one person is under the control of another"43. At present, at least 40 million people are estimated to be trapped in modern slavery in textile, agriculture, construction and fisheries sectors, as well as in the sex industry and in forced marriage42. Modern slavery exists at the extreme end of a spectrum of exploitative and abusive labour practices, many of which remain legal in the jurisdiction in which they occur and/or are entered into voluntarily by workers14,20,25,44. Commentators rightly argue that a narrow focus on slavery, without broader attention to the needs, ambitions and vulnerability of workers, risks inadequate or even counter-productive responses25,44. However, unlike other labour issues, slavery is universally illegal, with prohibitions enshrined in global agreements including the 1926 Slavery Convention and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It can therefore, in principal, be addressed using existing legal frameworks and instruments, and measures that identify and tackle slavery may have a positive impact on other less explicit forms of labour abuse. Importantly for the purpose of identifying global patterns, the above definition of modern slavery has allowed country-level estimates of the prevalence of modern slavery to be made by the Global Slavery Index (GSI)45. While not directly quantifying slavery at sea, the GSI data provide a proxy for analysing the relationship between the prevalence of slavery-like practices in a country and fisheries' characteristics at the global level, which may help identify drivers and policy priorities.

In addition to the structural elements in industrial fisheries that may incentivise and enable modern slavery and labour rights abuses, the global seafood trade is another critical dimension of the issue. Seafood is the world's most widely traded food commodity46, involving complex supply chains, with the chain of custody often passing through several intermediaries and countries before reaching the consumer. Traceability issues often arise before the fish even enter the supply chain, with the widely used practice of transhipment at sea allowing catches of multiple fishing vessels to be combined before landing, making the tracing of fish back to individual vessels currently impossible47. A lack of consistent, accurate and transparent data from the point of capture to its final destination means that seafood caught illegally or unethically can effectively be laundered by combining it with legally caught fish in subsequent processing steps. The large consumer markets of the global north, including the USA and Europe, import large volumes of seafood to supplement domestic supply. Given that, for example, up to 32% of wild-caught fish imported into the US is estimated to have been caught illegally48, it seems likely that fish caught under conditions of modern slavery can also enter the domestic supply chains of countries otherwise considered low risk for labour issues in fishing.

Kittinger et al.49 called for the research community to more explicitly recognise and address the social dimensions of the ecological crises in the oceans. Modern slavery at sea is such an issue, but there is currently a paucity of quantitative research. The global data on country-level slavery from the GSI45 and comprehensive data on fisheries and seafood trade from the Sea Around Us 1,50 and the United Nations' COMTRADE database provide a base for a preliminary investigation. Here we (1) examine the empirical relationship between the GSI's country-wide prevalence of modern slavery (in all aspects of a country's economy) and fisheries' governance and financial performance; (2) separately identify factors common to those countries with reported labour issues specific to fisheries; and (3) model potential consumer exposure to modern slavery-derived seafood products by quantifying the flows of fish from high (GSI-based) slavery risk environments to relatively lower slavery risk markets.

Results

Analyses

Our analyses were performed in three separate stages. The first used linear models to test the overall relationship between the national prevalence of modern slavery, across all aspects of a country's economy, and industrial fisheries attributes among the major fishing countries of the world. Country-level estimates of the overall prevalence of modern slavery (of all types and across all economic aspects of a country) were taken from the GSI45, and fisheries catch and economic data were obtained from the Sea Around Us 1,50. Here national-level GSI data covering all socio-economic aspects of a country were used as a proxy for likely fisheries-specific estimates of slavery prevalence, which are currently lacking for fisheries at the global level. The second stage used a multivariate clustering approach to identify additional fisheries and economic factors shared by countries with specifically identified slavery issues in fisheries, as reported in the literature and media; this second analysis did not use GSI data. The goal was to develop a qualitative risk model based on the fisheries and socio-economic factors associated with reported incidents of slavery that can frame further research efforts. The third analysis used United Nations' COMTRADE data and the GSI slavery prevalence measure to model the impact of the global trade in seafood on the presence of potentially slave-caught or processed seafood in consumer markets in the United States and Europe, regions where the risk of slave-produced seafood in domestic fisheries is otherwise considered low.

Country-level slavery and fisheries metrics

Linear regression modelling focused on the 20 highest-volume fishing countries, collectively landing over 80% of global industrial fisheries catch. Exploratory analysis found the best explanatory variables to be percentage of unreported catch and landed value of catch (Supplementary Table 1). The mapping of unreported catch (Fig. 1a), mean landed value of the catch (Fig. 1b), and the overall prevalence of modern slavery at the country level (Fig. 1c) for the world's major fishing countries suggest regional hot-spots of forced labour or modern slavery in Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and parts of South America. Generally, these are areas with relatively high levels of unreported catch, predominantly low value fisheries and a relatively high overall prevalence of modern slavery at a national level. The country-wide prevalence of modern slavery in a given country is positively correlated with higher levels of unreported catch ( R ² = 0.24, p = 0.017, Fig. 1d) and negatively correlated with the landed value per tonne of fish being caught ( R ² = 0.26, p = 0.013, Fig. 1e). The multiple linear regression model using both variables explained 46% of the variance in the overall prevalence of country-wide modern slavery among countries ( p < 0.01, Fig. 1f). Thus a high level of unreported catch, representing poor management or enforcement oversight of fisheries, and a low unit-value catch, indicating poorer profitability, all other things being equal, correlate with a higher prevalence of modern slavery in the general economy of that country (Fig. 1f). While correlation is not causation, these results suggest a link between the presence of slavery and the overall performance of a country's fisheries. The analysis suggests broad underlying trends, yet also identifies outliers whose fisheries performance and country-level modern slavery prevalence do not fit the overall trend. While caution is needed when making inferences about specific economic sector-level labour abuses from the country-level GSI, the present analysis provides a basis for further, detailed sector-specific investigation.

Global patterns in country-level slavery and fisheries catch and value. Maps show a percentage of unreported catch, b mean landed catch value per kg, and c national prevalence of slavery, colour-coded by country. Scatterplots show relationship between country-level slavery prevalence and individual fisheries variables for the 20 largest fishing countries: d prevalence of slavery per thousand people (Slavery/1000) vs unreported catch (% Unreported catch), e prevalence of slavery vs mean landed value (Landed value $/kg), and f observed against predicted values for a combined model, with selected European, Asian and South American countries labelled. Regression model R ² values and F-test p values are labelled on scatterplots

Risk factors associated with known labour abuses at sea

Having identified in the first analysis a broad correlation between the prevalence of modern slavery at the country level and two key fisheries attributes (unreported catch and mean landed value) for the top 20 fishing countries, we performed a separate principal component analysis (PCA) for the same 20 countries. The PCA grouped countries across six variables describing their economic status and fisheries performance/policy: unreported catch (% Unreported), percentage of catch caught outside their own exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (% Catch outside EEZ), per person Gross Domestic Product (GDP per capita; www.imf.org), level of harmful subsidies as a percentage of landed value (% Subsidy), mean landed value per fisher (Value per fisher), and mean distance of catch (Distance). No GSI data were used for this analysis. PCA summarises information contained in a group of n predictor variables as n principal components that capture the main dimensions of variation among the groups being measured, in this case the top 20 fishing countries. The first two components of the PCA explained 74% of the variation between countries. The first principal component axis (PC1) explained 44% of variance between countries and was correlated most strongly with '% Subsidy', '% Catch outside EEZ' and 'Distance'. The second principal component axis (PC2) explained a further 30% of variance and was correlated positively with '% Unreported' and negatively with 'GDP per capita' and 'Value per fisher (Fig. 2). Overall, the individual explanatory variables made similar contributions to the model (Supplementary Figure 1). Clustering countries based on their score (i.e. location) on the first two PCA dimensions divided them into three distinct groups (Fig. 2). The first cluster comprised seven countries (red in Fig. 2), most of which have been reported for or suspected in serious labour abuses on fishing vessels15,32,39,40,51,52. Countries with documented incidents of serious labour abuses in fisheries are therefore characterised by high levels of unreported catch ('% Unreported'), a high proportion of catch taken outside their own EEZs ('% Catch outside EEZ') at a greater distance from home waters ('Distance') and higher than average levels of harmful subsidies ('% Subsidy'). It appears that distance from home waters, non-EEZ fishing and poor fisheries oversight ('% Unreported') may substitute as potential risk factors for modern slavery in fisheries. However, owing to a lack of fisheries specific data on modern slavery by country, such conclusions must be drawn with caution and require further investigation.

Biplot of principal components analysis (PCA) for the top 20 industrial fishing countries. Countries are represented based on their aggregate scores across three economic and three fishing activity measures. Arrows indicate direction of increasing value for each variable. Colour-coding indicates cluster membership determined by k-means clustering of countries based on their scores on the main PCA dimensions (PC1 and PC2)

The second group of countries (orange in Fig. 2) included mainly South American and Asian fishing countries with largely domestic fisheries or fisheries that use the waters of immediate neighbours. These countries were characterised not only by low levels of fishing outside their own or immediate neighbours' EEZs ('% Catch outside EEZ') and low levels of harmful subsidies ('% Subsidy') but also relatively low GDP per capita ('GDP per capita') and low value fisheries ('Value per fisher'). Future research may show how these countries and these fisheries parameters relate to potential labour abuses or modern slavery in fisheries. The third group (green in Fig. 2) consisted of countries generally deemed low slavery risk (the USA and three European fishing countries) that were associated with low levels of unreported catch ('% Unreported'), high GDP per person ('GDP per capita') and high landed value per fisher ('Value per fisher').

Global trade and slave-produced seafood

Finally, we assessed seafood trade data in relation to modern slavery risk to understand the extent to which fish being caught and processed by high slavery-risk countries is potentially consumed in markets that have a low risk of slavery in their own domestic supply chain. Globally, an average of >33 million tonnes of seafood were traded annually between 2005 and 2014, based on harmonised UN COMTRADE data ( http://www.cepii.fr). Seafood supply in the top developed countries includes significant proportions of imported wild-caught fish: in the United States, around 45% of domestically consumed seafood is imported wild-caught fish ( http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov), while in the EU this is 50%53. Total imports are even higher when aquaculture products are considered. Consequently, the seafood available to consumers in these otherwise low slavery-risk countries can end up being a mix of domestic products from local fisheries, predominately in national waters, and products imported from a wide variety of other countries, including from countries with a higher risk of country-wide slavery.

The United States is highly dependent on imported seafood to meet domestic demand and accounts for roughly 14% of global seafood imports. It has a national slavery prevalence of 1.8 victims per 10,000 persons in the population (0.018%)45. Expressed in term of kilograms of potential slavery-risk seafood per tonne, this equates to a slavery risk of 0.2 kg per tonne of domestically produced seafood, assuming the national prevalence of slavery is applied to all sectors of the seafood industry. Based on the average volumes of seafood imported from other countries, in particular from Asia-Pacific countries, seafood imported into the US has an average potential slavery risk of 3.1 kg per tonne, 17 times higher than the risk of seafood sourced from domestic fisheries (Fig. 3a). After accounting for the mix of domestic and imported seafood in US domestic supply, the potential slavery risk of seafood supply within the United States increases 8.5 times due to its dependence on imports (Fig. 3a).

River plots showing the impact of seafood imports on the modern slavery risk of domestically consumed seafood. Slavery risk is expressed in kilograms of seafood from slavery-risk countries per tonne consumed. Slavery risk scores based on the Global Slavery Index; trade flows from CEPII's BACI database of harmonised UN COMTRADE data. Plots show seafood imports for a the United States and b Western Europe and Scandinavia (includes Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and United Kingdom). Colour of trade flow components indicates the intensity of slavery risk

Similarly, the low slavery-risk countries of Europe also account for 14% of global seafood imports. Based on the GSI assessment, these countries (i.e., Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom) have an average national slavery prevalence of 2.8 victims per 10,000 persons (0.028%) across their combined populations. Considering the slavery prevalence of the countries from where seafood is imported into this block, the potential slavery risk of imported seafood is 3.8 kg per tonne, 13 times higher than that for their domestically sourced seafood (0.3 kg per tonne). Thus the mix of imported and domestically sourced seafood increases consumer exposure to potentially slavery-derived products is 8.6 times (Fig. 3b), similar to the modelled effect in the United States.

Discussion

Sustainable fisheries underpin both environmental and socio-economic development goals for the oceans54, but until recently much of the research has focused on environmental and economic impacts, with less focus on human rights4,29. While links between modern slavery and environmental destruction in illegal mining and deforestation are now well recognised55, the connections between environmental challenges and human rights in fisheries have been less systematically documented. However, labour issues in fisheries have received increased attention in recent years14,15,25,56, leading to emerging responses from governments and trading partners (e.g. Thailand-EU), non-governmental organisations (NGOs, e.g. Fair Trade), and major industry-research partnerships such as the Seafood Business for Ocean Stewardship initiative (SeaBOS57,58). An understanding of potential slavery at sea at the global level can place these isolated cases and responses in a broader policy context.

The present analyses have focussed on using comprehensive and publicly available global data sets to examine empirical links between country-level slavery prevalence and industrial fisheries and the role of the global trade in seafood in moving seafood products from potentially high slavery-risk producer to low-risk consumer countries. Treating the national, non-fisheries-specific prevalence of modern slavery measured by the GSI45 as a proxy for the as-yet unmeasured slavery risk across fishing industry sectors, we found a correlation between the prevalence of modern slavery within a country and proxies for poor fisheries accountability (i.e., high levels of unreported catch) and low profitability (i.e., low landed value of the catch) in the industrial fisheries of the major fishing countries. It should be emphasised that the GSI is not currently designed to differentiate sector-specific slavery risks, such as for fisheries. Indeed, localised fisheries-specific surveys conducted by NGOs suggest that the national, country-level GSI measure used here may in fact underestimate modern slavery practices in some industrialised fishing fleets. For example, interviews with migrant fishers in Thailand found that 17% of respondents had experienced conditions of modern slavery59, compared with the GSI's estimate of <1% of workers nationally across all sectors. Conversely, for countries where land-based slavery practices dominate (for example, mining or agriculture), the GSI's estimate may imply a higher risk for fisheries than may be the case. With this caveat, there remains a broadly linear relationship between national, country-wide levels of slavery prevalence and poor fisheries performance, based on the global data currently available.

To explore risk factors linking the smaller subset of known incidents of slavery at sea, a separate multivariate analysis was then used to identify fisheries and economic attributes shared by those countries with documented fisheries-specific labour abuses. Cluster analysis indicated that countries with documented labour abuses in sections of their fishing industry share several key features: high levels of harmful capacity-enhancing subsidies, likely leading to excess fishing capacity, increased competition and reduced per-vessel profitability; low catch value per individual fisher, suggesting downward pressure on wages; high levels of undocumented fishing activity, implying poor monitoring and enforcement of vessel operations at sea; and a reliance on fishing far from home in the waters of other countries where regulatory violations may be more likely to go undetected by domestic agencies. Additional evidence of the role of distant-water fisheries in slavery at sea appears in reports detailing specific cases of labour abuse in fisheries, with many victims never even visiting their employer's country (i.e. the vessel's flag or beneficial ownership state), instead transiting through maritime hubs or countries closer to fishing grounds15,51. The nature of distant-water fishing operations, where transhipment of catch and crew at sea are commonplace and observer coverage is typically low, appears to facilitate illegal behaviour47. The last factor in our multivariate model, GDP per capita, may reflect the importance of economic disparity between labour demand and labour supply countries in driving labour migration, with documented incidents of slavery occurring in countries with relatively high per capita wealth compared to the country of origin of the victims59. For example, Thailand's GDP per capita is over three and four times that of Myanmar and Cambodia, respectively, i.e. countries from which it sources the majority of its foreign fishing labour ( www.imf.org)60. In drawing these conclusions from our analyses, we recognise that fisheries within a single country will differ widely on both social and environmental performance metrics, as the coexistence of Fair Trade-certified tuna fisheries ( www.FairTradeUSA.org) and fishing slaves trapped on islands in Indonesia26 demonstrates. Nevertheless, while such distinctions must be factored into domestic policy, a model of the common drivers of potential slavery at sea across fishing countries can provide a framework to prioritise research and policy development at the international level. While exploratory in nature, our findings suggest that the well-recognised subsidy-fuelled race to fish, a lack of adequate monitoring, control and surveillance of industrial fishing activities and the influence of economic disparity on labour markets has made this sector a fertile ground for modern slavery and other violations.

The volume, diversity and global scale of the international trade in seafood46 means that seafood produced by countries with poor records in both modern slavery and fisheries governance may find its way into the domestic markets of better regulated countries. Potentially slave-caught or processed seafood can reach consumers directly, as wild-caught product, and indirectly via fishmeal used in livestock and aquaculture feed. Fishmeal supplied by reduction fisheries targeting pelagic fishes, together with millions of tonnes of unmarketable trash fish caught as bycatch, eventually end up on consumer plates as farmed salmon, tuna or prawns or even pork, chicken, eggs or beef63,64. Many wealthy seafood producing countries, including the United States and European countries, export much of the fish produced by their own fisheries and meet net domestic demand with imports of cheaper seafood products from areas such as Southeast Asia, Africa and Russia65,66. Our analysis of UN trade data suggested that this could result in a greater than eight-fold increase in the exposure of their consumers to potentially slave-caught or produced seafood. To date, however, cases linking specific products to labour abuses have been isolated, and further work on traceability as well as fisheries slavery is required to confirm this hypothesis. For comparison, work done to model the flow of illegally caught seafood into the major consumer markets of the US and Japan (together almost 30% of global seafood imports) found that illegally caught products likely constituted 20-32% and 24-36%, respectively, of each country's wild seafood imports48,67. It seems plausible that the current lack of supply chain transparency and product traceability that allows the products of illegal and unreported fishing to enter supply chains also facilitates the international movement of slave-caught and processed seafood.

The issues raised by our modelling of slavery, fisheries and seafood trade suggest four broad areas of policy engagement: (1) regulation and enforcement, specifically universal minimum standards for crew pay and conditions, such as those specified in the International Labour Organisation's Work in Fishing Convention (C-188), and improved monitoring and enforcement of currently weak jurisdictions, including the high seas, to reduce the scope for unsustainable and unethical fishing practices68; (2) supply chain transparency, specifically by adopting supply chain legislation, such as the UK's Modern Slavery Act (Modern Slavery Act 2015, s 54), which can bolster industry-led efforts such as SeaBOS to leverage businesses' market position to tackle sustainability and ethical issues58. Policing supply chains can be supported by technologies, such as Blockchain ledgers and smart seafood labelling, which improve the security and lower the cost of reliable supply chain data69; (3) industry restructuring, specifically by reducing harmful subsidies that currently overcapitalise fishing capacity5,70, and redirecting subsidies towards enforcement and the rebuilding of sustainably managed small-scale fisheries capable of providing more and better livelihoods11,71; and (4) improving equity between stakeholders in fisheries, specifically by restricting high seas fishing, which is currently dominated by higher-income countries72. Complete closure of the high seas to fishing has been modelled to reduce income inequality among fishing countries by 50%, by ensuring more equitable access to valuable migratory fish stocks73.

These issues have also emerged as key topics in the broader discussions of sustainability in global fisheries as they affect our current ability to effectively manage fisheries for the collective benefit of humanity. This apparent overlap offers an opportunity to leverage regional and international initiatives to benefit both ecological sustainability and social/ethical goals. As research around labour issues in fisheries crystallises, there is great potential for marine scientists and social scientists to collaborate in developing policy frameworks that jointly tackle sustainability and human rights issues. The rapid expansion of industrialised fishing over the past 60+ years has negatively impacted the ability of marine ecosystems to sustainably supply humanity with seafood. The concurrent failure by government decision makers, policy developers and fisheries managers in many regions to adapt to the changes in industrial fisheries has rendered much of the high seas, as well as the waters of developing countries in fisheries-rich areas such as West Africa, open to abuse of both fisheries regulations and international labour standards, allowing illegal fishing and, potentially, labour abuses to flourish15,24,73,74.

Modern slavery and fisheries' performance appear linked at the international level, with a correlation between increased prevalence of country-level modern slavery and higher levels of unreported catches and lower mean value of the catch of industrial fisheries for the 20 countries who supply the bulk of the world's wild-caught seafood. Further research and improved data are urgently needed, as the GSI can presently only report on the risk of slavery at the whole-country level. Given the current lack of reliable data on the prevalence of fishery-specific slavery and labour abuses, the country-level GSI is the most appropriate substitute metric currently available. Based on the limited information available on specific instances of slavery at sea, the over-subsidised and often poorly governed, distant-water fishing fleets of higher-income countries may be at particular risk of labour abuses and modern slavery. Our preliminary trade model, using peer-to-peer trade in seafood products, indicates that products of fisheries from slavery-prone regions/countries may be consumed in developed countries in significant quantities, potentially making seafood consumers in developed countries unwitting participants in modern slavery.

Much additional work is required to quantify the prevalence of labour abuses and modern slavery in seafood capture, aquaculture, processing and in the seafood supply chain. Generating comprehensive and accurate estimates of the prevalence of modern slavery in the fishing industry and seafood supply chain will not be easy, as fishing vessels rank among the world's most inaccessible workplaces. However, like the challenge of enforcing environmentally more benign fishing practices, it is an obstacle that must be overcome.

Methods

Data sources

Data on global fish catches by fishing country were obtained from the Sea Around Us reconstructed global catch database1. The methods used for catch data reconstructions and the spatial allocation of global catches are well established75 and individual country reconstructions are summarised in Pauly and Zeller50, with detailed technical descriptions accessible via www.seaaroundus.org for each country. Using the Sea Around Us reconstructed catch data, we calculated the annual mean (±SE) reported and unreported industrial landings (in tonnes, excluding discarded catch) for the decade between 2005 and 2014 for the top 20 industrial fishing countries representing 80% of global landings. Thus here the term catch is used to represent landed catch (i.e. landings) and excludes discarded catch76. In line with international data reporting mechanisms, all catches are supposed to be reported by the flag-state of the fishing vessel (i.e., the flag flown by the fishing vessel) and not the country of residence of the beneficial owner. The fishing activity modelled in our analysis is therefore that of the flag-state reporting the catch on behalf of its flagged fleets. Clearly, flag-hopping, i.e. the tendency by some distant-water fleets to regularly and often rapidly re-register to different flags, makes data reporting for distant-water fleets challenging, and better resolution of this issue needs to be a subject of further investigation.

Data on fisheries employment in the industrial sector used here were taken from Teh and Sumaila11, excluding small-scale fisheries. Estimates of fisheries subsidies by category (beneficial, harmful and ambiguous) and type (fuel, vessel buyback, etc.) were obtained from the Sea Around Us 5. Estimates of GDP per capita, in purchasing power parity-adjusted US dollars, were obtained from the International Monetary Foundation's IMF DataMapper site ( https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD). The catch weighted mean distance of fishing activity from home for each fishing country was calculated using the ½×½ degree cell-allocated catch data of the Sea Around Us 75. Sea Around Us catch data are spatially allocated by intersecting biological probability distributions for each taxon in the catch data with a global fishing access database detailing in which country's EEZ foreign fleets are permitted or have been observed to fish75. Distance from home for each catch cell was calculated as the great circle distance between the centroid of each catch cell and the closest domestic port of the fishing country, with port locations taken from the World Ports Index. The catch weighted mean distance was the weighted average of all such cell-port distances, weighted by the catch for that country in each spatial cell, using the methodology employed in Tickler et al.77.

Data on the scale of modern slavery were taken from the GSI database45, which reports estimates of vulnerability to and prevalence of slavery for 167 countries. Modern slavery was defined as 'situations of exploitation that a person cannot refuse or leave because of threats, violence, coercion, abuse of power or deception'45. Slavery vulnerability scores in the GSI were generated based on a detailed model of country-level measures of governance and civil protections45. Prevalence, defined as the percentage of the population trapped in modern slavery, was estimated from data collected on behalf of the WFF as part of the Gallup World Poll ( www.gallup.com) through face-to-face interviews with >42,000 respondents in 25 countries between 2014 and 2016. Estimates for unsurveyed countries were extrapolated from the subset of surveyed countries using a model based on the relationship between prevalence and vulnerability45. Slavery prevalence was presented in this study as individuals per 1000 population rather than a percentage for ease of comprehension and represents country-wide slavery prevalence across all economic sectors and not fishing-sector-specific slavery. A detailed description of the methods used for measuring modern slavery is provided in the 2016 GSI45 and the references therein.

Global trade flows for seafood commodities, estimated as imports and exports of individual seafood commodities in tonnes of seafood product (not wet weight) by country, were taken from the BACI harmonised trade database provided by the Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales (CEPII) in France ( www.cepii.fr). The BACI database uses data from the UN's COMTRADE database, processed so as to resolve inconsistencies between commodity-level import and export volumes and values between countries. BACI data categorised by commodity using the 2012 harmonised system six-digit codes were used, wherein the group of commodities beginning with 03---- represents both wild-caught and farmed seafood products; it was not possible to distinguish between farmed and wild-caught products. The BACI estimates of trade flows were averaged for 2011-2014.

GSI and fisheries performance measures

The relationship between country-wide slavery prevalence and candidate fisheries measures (percentage of unreported landings, landed value of catch per kg and tonnes landed per fisher) was tested using multiple linear regression, with competing models compared using sample size corrected Akaike's Information Criteria (AIC) scores (AICc). Model data were taken from the top 20 industrial fishing countries, representing 80% of global catch. Given the high prevalence of land-based modern slavery in India45, our approach was to treat India as an outlier for the linear regression analysis. This decision was made based on additional information available for India, for which GSI data were collected at the state level, indicating that modern slavery levels in land-locked states heavily influenced the whole-country estimate. The best model, judged by AICc, used percentage of unreported landings and landed value of catch per kg as predictor variables (Supplementary Table 1). The relationships between country-wide slavery prevalence and percentage of unreported catch and between country-wide slavery prevalence and the mean landed value of catch were visualised in individual scatterplots. Model fit for the final model was visualised by plotting observed against predicted values.

Sensitivity analysis was performed on the final multiple regression model to test the effect of uncertainty in the fisheries and slavery estimates on the model outcome. Fisheries parameters were modelled for each country as being normally distributed with the mean and standard deviation calculated from the 2005-2014 Sea Around Us data. Country-wide slavery data were modelled as normally distributed with a mean equal to the reported value and standard deviation equal to the 95% confidence interval divided by 1.96. A Monte Carlo simulation of 10,000 model runs of the multiple linear regression model was used to build a distribution of R ² values based on likely values for model inputs. Histograms of the output for three alternatives were plotted: varying all variables, varying only fisheries variables and varying only slavery variables (Supplementary Figure 2). The median R ² value for models varying all variables was 0.29, vs 0.46 for the model using mean fisheries values and the GSI-reported country-wide slavery values, which is reported in the results.

To visualise global geographic patterns in both country-wide slavery and fisheries performance, fishing countries' mean values for the predictor and response variables used in the final model (percentage of unreported catch, landed value of catch per kg, and slavery prevalence at the national level) were mapped. Countries were classified by the three measures, with red representing poor performance (high unreported catch, low mean landed value, high country-wide slavery prevalence) and green the opposite. The classification of prevalence of modern slavery, as reported in the GSI, are country-wide data and not specific to the fisheries sector.

Modelling risk factors associated with slavery at sea

PCA followed by k-means clustering was performed on the top 20 fishing countries based on 6 measures hypothesised to predict the occurrence of modern slavery in fisheries: unreported catch ('% Unreported'), mean landed value per fisher ('Value per fisher'), percentage of catch caught outside their own EEZ ('Catch outside EEZ'), GDP per capita ( www.imf.org), level of harmful subsidies as a percentage of landed value ('% Subsidy'5) and mean distance of catch ('Distance') calculated from cell-level catch data of the Sea Around Us 1,75. The objective of the analysis was to identify the shared characteristics of groups of major fishing countries based on their involvement in known cases of modern slavery in fisheries, to explain outliers in the linear model and to identify other at-risk fisheries that were not highlighted by the linear analysis. Scores on the first two principle components of the PCA, capturing the most important components of variation in the predictor data set, were used to group the countries using a k-means clustering algorithm (i.e. grouping countries into k groups based on their similarity across the composite measures). The optimum number of clusters ( k) for this step was determined analytically using the NbClust() function in R, which finds the number of clusters that minimises the total within-cluster variance (i.e. makes the group members as alike as possible). The first two components of the PCA were visualised as a biplot, with the cluster members colour-coded (red, orange, green) based on their score on the first two PCA components.

Slavery and global seafood trade

The impact of imports of seafood into a country or region on the country-wide slavery prevalence (risk) associated with its domestic seafood supply was modelled using commodity-level country-to-country trade flows in the BACI harmonised UN COMTRADE data. The BACI data allow individual commodity flows between countries to be identified, so that flows of seafood carrying different slavery risks, based on country of production, can be precisely estimated. No distinction could be made between seafood caught by a country and exported, or imported, processed and re-exported, since that level of information is not supplied. However, this was not a significant issue since national cross-sectoral country-wide slavery prevalence was being used to score seafood exported from a country. Therefore, it was implicitly assumed that all seafood exported by a given country, whether caught by domestic fleets or processed from imports, carried the same risk of potentially involving slavery. The slavery prevalence of seafood imports into a particular country or group of countries was then calculated as average of the GSI country-wide slavery prevalence scores of the countries supplying that seafood, weighted by tonnes of seafood products imported from each country. Although the GSI slavery prevalence is not specific to the capture fisheries sector, traded fisheries products necessarily involve labour across multiple sectors beyond fisheries, and so a cross-sectorial estimate of the prevalence of slavery gives a reasonable estimate of the slavery risk of products originating in or being re-exported from a particular country. Domestic supply in turn was the average of the slavery prevalence of imports and domestic production, weighted by import tonnage and domestic production net of exports. Internal trade within a bloc of importing countries was considered part of domestic supply, rather than exports. Seafood trade and consumption flows were visualised using a Sankey plot (also known as a river plot) where the width of connections between nodes is proportional to tonnes traded or produced. River plots were produced in this way for the United States (14% of global imports) and the low slavery risk seafood-importing countries of Western Europe (Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom; 14% of global imports).

All statistical analyses were performed using the R statistical language and packages in R Studio.

Data availability

All relevant data are available on request from the authors. All Sea Around Us data are freely available via www.seaaroundus.org and can also be accessed via the R package seaaroundus (see https://github.com/seaaroundus/). Teh & Sumaila's fisheries employment estimates are available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement? https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00450.x&file=faf450_sm_Table.S1.doc. Country-level estimates of the prevalence of modern slavery were taken from the Global Slavery Index ( https://www.walkfreefoundation.org/). Global trade flows for seafood commodities are provided by the Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales (CEPII) ( http://www.cepii.fr). The economic data used can be obtained from the International Monetary Foundation's DataMapper site ( https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper).

Acknowledgements

D.T., J.J.M., D.P., U.R.S. and D.Z. acknowledge the support of the Sea Around Us, the Fisheries Economics Research Unit and the Sea Around Us - Indian Ocean. All Sea Around Us activities are supported by the Marisla Foundation, the Paul M. Angell Family Foundation, the Oak Foundation, the MAVA Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and Oceana. K.B. F.D., E.G., J.J.L., B.O. and D.T. acknowledge the support of the Walk Free Foundation.

Author information

Affiliations

1. Marine Futures Lab, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia

David Tickler, Jessica J. Meeuwig, John A. H. Forrest & Beverly Oh

2. Walk Free Foundation, Perth, WA, 6009, Australia

David Tickler, Katharine Bryant, Fiona David, John A. H. Forrest, Elise Gordon, Jacqueline Joudo Larsen & Beverly Oh

3. Sea Around Us, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada

Daniel Pauly

4. Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada

Ussif R. Sumaila

5. Sea Around Us - Indian Ocean, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia

Dirk Zeller

Contributions

J.J.M., J.A.H.F., F.D., D.P., D.T. and D.Z. were involved in the conception of the project and bringing together the Walk Free Foundation and Sea Around Us databases. D.T. performed all data analyses and figure preparation, supported by E.G., J.J.L. and B.O. who collated and prepared the data sources and performed supporting analyses. D.T., J.J.M., F.D. and D.Z. drafted the manuscript, with substantial editorial input from K.B., J.A.H.F., E.G., B.O., D.P. and U.R.S.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Tickler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tickler, D., Meeuwig, J.J., Bryant, K. et al. Modern slavery and the race to fish. Nat Commun 9, 4643 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07118-9
Download citation

Received:

Accepted:

Published:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07118-9

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Modern slavery and the race to fish - Nature Communications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There have been growing concerns about the exploitation of workers in the fisheries sectors. Here, Tickler et al. use a country-level metric of slavery to determine the risk of fisheries-level slavery across 20 countries, and find it rises as unreported catch increases and mean value of catch decreases.

# data[].attributes.body
The symbolism of seal and whale hair as a form of communication and protection suggests that embracing one’s natural identity and cultural expressions is a form of resistance and empowerment.

"Who benefited from the conspiracy to teach us that we were not beautiful? That we were not possible? Who first turned our adaptation into profit? Our deep sharp realness into fairytale dust to sell back to us when we noticed ourselves, turning that prior scarcity of representation into a very high profit margin for whom? Ask the narwhal,"(Gumbs 96).

This passage asks who benefits from making people feel like they’re not good enough or beautiful. It points out that our real identities have been turned into something to profit off of. People sell us back the idea of beauty or value once we start noticing ourselves.

The mention of the narwhal is a reminder that even something rare and special beings like narwhals gets exploited for profit, like when its tusk is sold or used for its symbolic value. Just like people, animals like the narwhal are only seen as valuable when they can make money for someone.

When Gumbs says “ask the narwhal,” it’s pushes us to think about who’s profiting from exploiting both people and animals and to challenge these systems that benefit from this exploitation.

"The story of genetically modified salmon is bound to the commodification of food, the intensification of seafood production, the overexploitation of fish stocks, and so-called technological solutions to address environmental problems," (Longo et al.).

The commodification of genetically modified salmon can be applied to other marine life and human systems by showing how capitalism treats nature and resources as products to make money, often without considering the long-term impacts.

With genetically modified salmon, the goal is to create a faster-growing fish to meet the demand for cheap, mass-produced food. This focus on efficiency can also be seen in other areas, like the mass farming of fish in aquaculture, which can harm wild fish populations and ecosystems. Instead of protecting marine life, the priority becomes making more profit.

This is similar to how human societies operate under capitalism, where nature and even people's work are seen as resources to be exploited. For example, workers in the aquaculture industry may face poor working conditions, while small coastal communities that rely on traditional fishing may lose access to their resources as large companies take over. This pattern shows how capitalist systems prioritize profit over the health of the environment and the well-being of people, both in marine life and human communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Monthly Review | Capitalism and the Commodification of Salmon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On February 25, 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) closed the public comment period for the environmental assessment of the AquAdvantage Salmon. Their review of the first genetically…

# data[].attributes.headline
Collective Action and Environmental Justice

# data[].attributes.subject
Collective Action and Environmental Justice

# data[].attributes.body
The actions of environmental activists and indigenous fishing communities in preserving endangered species demonstrate that systemic change requires collective effort and a shift away from capitalist exploitation.

"They collectively forage and congregate in the hundreds or thousands. Maybe they know what community land trusts know: You can’t effectively respond to gentrification with individual buying choices one household at a time; it takes a collective," (Gumbs 61). This passage explains how just like animals stick together in large groups to survive, people can solve big problems better when they work together. It says that fighting systemic issues like gentrification can’t be done by just one person at a time. It takes everyone coming together to make a real change. It’s about teamwork and supporting each other to fix problems.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inspiring social change through community organizing | Dara Frimmer | TEDxUCLA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Can true change be made by one person? Or does change occur more efficiently when others are involved? Dara Frimmer gives us a talk that will help you understand how to make change occur. Dara Frimmer is a Rabbi at Temple Isaiah in Los Angeles.

# data[].attributes.body
The seasonal patterns of sea turtles returning to their nesting sites symbolize the power of cycles in life, reminding us that renewal often requires us to return to our roots for healing and growth.

"We can trust cycles older than our species. We can do this between work with grace and surrender. With patience and bravery. With all of who we are. And what made us will reclaim us as soon as the tide," (Gumbs 118). This passage leans in to trusting natural cycles that have been around much longer than humans, we can apply this to marine life. We should move through life with patience, courage, and acceptance, even in the quiet moments. Eventually, the natural world will bring us back to our true selves, just like the tide always returns. It’s about reconnecting with nature and trusting the flow of life.

The YouTube video represents the deep possible connections between human and marine life. This relationship brings this human to new understandings of life. The relationship even changed the way this person viewed and interacted with other people. This shows the deep knowledge we can acquire from marine life and their historic ways of living.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
My Octopus Teacher | Official Trailer | Netflix

# data[].attributes.body
The quiet nature of deep-sea creatures, which survive in the silence of the abyss, teaches the value of solitude and silence as spaces for deep reflection and personal clarity.

"The only sound was her breathing, but she could hear for miles and miles and miles. What a loss for listening. How can we honor it, the archive of your breathing?" (Gumbs 20).

This passage is about paying attention to the quiet, everyday things that are often overlooked, like your breathing. It describes a peaceful moment where, even though everything is silent, there’s still a deep connection and awareness. The idea of “hearing for miles” suggests that even in stillness, there’s a lot happening if we listen closely. The phrase “What a loss for listening” reflects how we often miss these deeper connections because of all the noise around us. The final question, “How can we honor it, the archive of your breathing?” asks how we can appreciate and respect the simple, yet important things in life, like breathing, that keep us alive and connected to the world. It’s a reminder to slow down and listen to the quieter parts of life.

# data[].attributes.body
The way orcas travel vast distances within the boundaries of their pod shows how freedom is not just about being unbound, but about finding strength in structure and community. Orcas stay connected to their pods for life, relying on each other for protection, guidance, and emotional support. This reflects the idea that true freedom comes from having a strong, supportive community rather than complete independence.

Marine life boundaries provide safety and connection.

"And the systems of harm that deprive us of restful boundaries are the exact same systems that enforce punitive borders where countless families are separated right now, caged, stressed and sleepless," (Gumbs 88). This passage highlights how oppressive systems create harm by denying people the security of the community and the peace of safe boundaries. Just like orcas thrive within the structure of their pod, people also need supportive communities and safe spaces to find true freedom. When families are separated or forced into stressful, unstable situations, that sense of safety and belonging is stripped away. The connection between orcas and human communities shows that strength comes from being part of a collective, where freedom is not the absence of structure but the presence of supportive, protective bonds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Orca-nization of Killer Whale Social Structures – NC DNA Day Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Orcas, also called killer whales, are marine mammals and the largest species of dolphin. Orcas can weigh up to 22,000 pounds, grow as long as 32 feet, and are found in all of the world’s oceans. Orcas can be recognized by their distinctive black and white coloration.

# data[].attributes.body
The adaptability of octopuses, who can change shape and color based on their environment, teaches us how embracing fluidity and change can help us navigate the unpredictability of life with ease.

Author Gumbs says, "My hope, my grand poetic intervention here is to move from identification, also known as that process through which we say what is what, like which dolphin is that over there and what are its properties, to identification, that process through which we expand our empathy and the boundaries of who we are become more fluid, because we identify with the experience of someone different, maybe someone of a whole different so-called species,"(Gumbs 11).

Marine life teaches us about fluidity by showing how survival comes from adapting and connecting. They adjust to elements like changing tides and temperatures instead of fighting them. Jellyfish drift with ocean currents, teaching us that sometimes it's better to go with the flow. Dolphins and whales form bonds even with other species, showing that connection can happen beyond differences. Coral reefs thrive through teamwork, reminding us that strength comes from supporting each other. Like marine life, we can grow by being flexible, open to change, and willing to connect with others, even those who seem different from us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Adaptation is an evolutionary process whereby an organism becomes increasingly well suited to living in a particular habitat. It is not a quick process! Natural selection over many generations results in helpful traits becoming more common in a population. This occurs because individuals with these traits are better adapted to the environment and therefore more likely to survive and breed.

Adaptation is also a common term to describe these helpful or adaptive traits. In other words, an adaptation is a feature of an organism that enables it to live in a particular habitat.

Different types of adaptations

Marine organisms have adapted to the great diversity of habitats and distinctive environmental conditions in the marine environment. Adaptations are many and varied but they are generally grouped into 3 main categories: structural, physiological and behavioural.

Structural adaptations

Structural (or morphological) adaptations are the physical features of the organism. These include things you can see, like its shape or body covering, as well as its internal organisation. Following are a few of the ways that marine organisms have adapted their physical features to suit a particular habitat.

Seawater is much denser than air - as a result, there are vast numbers of microscopic organisms suspended in it. Cockles, as well as many other bivalves, are filter feeders. They have adapted specialised siphon structures to filter these organisms and any other particles of food from the surrounding water.

Estuaries have quite variable conditions - tides, waves and salinity fluctuations affect the animals and plants that live there on a daily basis. Many animals, such as cockles, are adapted to live in these conditions. They have strong shells that protect them from wave action, drying out and the prying beaks of predators.

Coastal plants need special adaptations to survive. For example, many types of seaweed attach firmly to rocks so they are not swept away by waves. Their leaf-like fronds are tough and leathery, which helps protect them from being torn by the waves or dried out by the sun.

Dolphins are mammals, but they look very different to mammals that live on land, as they are adapted to living in water. They have a streamlined shape and fins instead of legs. They also have blowholes on the tops of their heads. They use these to breathe, rather than through their mouths and noses.

Physiological adaptations

Physiological adaptations relate to how the organism's metabolism works. These adaptations enable the organism to regulate their bodily functions, such as breathing and temperature, and perform special functions like excreting chemicals as a defence mechanism.

Some marine mammals, such as whales, migrate over large distances and may spend time in a combination of arctic, tropical and temperate waters. To cope with these temperature changes, they are endothermic or 'warm blooded'. This means that they are able to maintain a constant body temperature that is not dependent on the surrounding water.

Slow-moving species have adaptations that help protect them from predators. For example, many marine organisms can only move slowly or not all. This means they cannot easily get away from mobile predators, and they have other adaptations to protect them from being eaten. These can include chemical defences in their skin, for example, sea stars.

Behavioural adaptations

Behavioural adaptations are learned or inherited behaviours that help organisms to survive, for example, the sounds made by whales allow them to communicate, navigate and hunt prey. Crab larvae use sounds to help them find suitable habitats so they can settle and metamorphose (change into an adult form).

Bryozoan colonies are found in high numbers on the continental shelf in New Zealand. They look like plants but are actually made up of hundreds of tiny individual animals that have banded together in order to more successfully find food and survive predation,

Activity idea

Useful link

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Adaptation is an evolutionary process whereby an organism becomes increasingly well suited to living in a particular habitat. It is not a quick process! Natural selection over many generations results in helpful traits becoming more common in a population. This occurs because individuals with these traits are better adapted to the environment and therefore more likely to survive and breed.

# data[].attributes.body
We can see a vast amount of mutualistic relationships in marine life, the way sea anemones rely on symbiotic relationships with clownfish for protection and food reminds us that resilience is built not in isolation, but through the strength of interconnectedness.

"She is the smallest, rarest dolphin on the planet. Does that stop her from being connected to everything? No," (Gumbs 103).

This quote emphasizes that despite being the smallest and rarest dolphin, she is still deeply connected to the broader ecosystem and the world around it. It suggests that even though something or someone may be uncommon or feel small, they still play an important role in the larger network of life. The message is about the importance of interconnectedness and how every part of nature, no matter how seemingly insignificant, is linked to the whole. It can also reflect human experiences, where even those who may feel small or insignificant still have value and contribute to the larger community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Planet Earth is inhabited by millions of species-at least! Because different species often inhabit the same spaces and share-or compete for-the same resources, they interact in a variety of ways, known collectively as . There are four main symbiotic relationships: mutualism, commensalism, parasitism, and competition.

To explore these relationships, let's consider a natural ecosystem such as the ocean. Oceanic environments are known for their species diversity. Imagine you are on a diving expedition to explore the worlds beneath the waves. If we were in the warm waters of the Pacific or Indian Oceans, we'd likely spot an excellent example of mutualism: the relationship between clownfish and sea anemones. In a mutualistic relationship, both species benefit. Sea anemones live attached to the surface of coral reefs. They trap their prey with stinging cells called nematocysts, which are located on their tentacles. Nematocysts release toxins when a small animal contacts an anemone's tentacle. This paralyzes the stung animal, allowing the anemone to easily bring the animal into its mouth for ingestion.

While other fish succumb to these toxic stings, clownfish secrete a substance in the mucus covering their bodies that suppresses the firing of nematocysts. This allows the clownfish to swim comfortably between the tentacles of anemones, creating a protected environment in which potential predators are killed off by anemone stings. This clearly benefits the clownfish, but how about the sea anemones? The brightly colored clownfish attract other fish looking for a meal. These unsuspecting would-be predators are then caught and eaten by the anemones.

As we continue in our imaginary deep-sea voyage, we may observe the commensalistic relationship that exists between barnacles and humpback whales ( Megaptera novaeangliae). Commensalism happens when one species lives with, on, or in another species, known as the host. The host species neither benefits nor is harmed from the relationship. In our imagined example, various species of barnacles attach themselves to the skin of whales. Scientists have not discovered the exact mechanism by which barnacles are able to do this, but it does not appear to bother the whales. How do the barnacles benefit from this unlikely relationship? The huge whales transport the tiny barnacles to plankton-rich waters, where both species feast upon the abundant microorganisms that live there.

Of course, some symbiotic relationships do cause harm. In parasitism, one species (the parasite) lives with, on, or in a host species, at the expense of the host species. Unlike in predation, the host is not immediately killed by the parasite, though it may sicken and die over time. Examples of common parasites found in the ocean include nematodes, leeches, and barnacles. That's right-though barnacles exist commensally with whales, they are parasites for swimming crabs. A barnacle may root itself within a crab's reproductive system. While the crab does not die from this interaction, its reproductive capabilities are greatly diminished.

The last example of symbiosis we will explore on our imaginary dive is competition-the struggle among organisms for the same limited resources in an ecosystem. Competition can happen between members of the same species (intraspecific competition) and between different species (interspecific competition). An example of interspecific competition in the ocean is the relationship between corals and sponges. Sponges are very abundant in coral reefs. If they become too successful, however, they take needed food and other resources from the corals that make up the reef. Sponges may outcompete corals for resources in the short term, but if too many corals die, the reef itself becomes damaged. This is bad for the sponges, which may themselves begin to die off until the reef is balanced again.

Symbiotic relationships can be useful measures of an ecosystem's health. For example, large tracts of coral reefs are severely damaged or dead because of recent increases in ocean temperature due to climate change. The temperature increase induces coral to expel the algae that live mutualistically within them. Without their algae, the coral turn white and die. This loss of symbiosis is an early sign of declining coral health and speaks to the importance not only of studying symbiosis within marine environments, but also of examining the negative impacts that humans can have on these interactions. In the words of National Geographic Explorer Sylvia Earle: "We need to respect the oceans and take care of them as if our lives depend on it. Because they do."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Symbiosis is a term describing any relationship or interaction between two dissimilar organisms. The specific kind of symbiosis depends on whether either or both organisms benefit from the relationship.

# data[].attributes.body
The unique way certain marine animals, like the narwhal, engage in moments of stillness in their harsh environments illustrates how rest and recuperation are not signs of weakness, but necessary components of survival and strength.

"rest is resistance and sleep is political. Systemic nightmares threaten our sleep," (Gumbs 88).

In a world that often pushes us to keep working nonstop, rest becomes a form of resistance. Just like animals need rest to survive, humans also need rest to stay healthy and fight against systems that demand too much from us.

Rest is important for recovery, strength, and survival. It's not about being lazy or weak, it's about taking care of ourselves so we can keep going. Just like marine animals find strength in stillness, we need to honor the power of rest in our own lives.

# data[].attributes.body
The communication methods of humpback whales, whose songs resonate through the vast oceans, demonstrate the importance of listening deeply to both the environment and to each other in building a more connected, empathetic world.

We can apply the communication of humpback whales to our own lives by focusing on really listening to others and our surroundings. Just like whales use their songs to connect over long distances, we can listen carefully to understand people better and build stronger relationships. Paying attention to what others need and how they feel helps us be more connected and empathetic. By listening deeply, we can create a more compassionate and supportive world.

# data[].attributes.body
The growth patterns of coral reefs, which take time to mature and evolve in stages, reflect how human progress and personal growth often happen in non-linear ways, requiring patience and the acceptance of gradual development over time.

Acknowledging the changing climate and its destruction to the earth and marine life not only reflects non-linear healing but also a large systemic problem that needs collective help.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Healing is Not a Linear Process — Yew Tree Integrated Healing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There is a myth that trauma recovery and healing happens over time. The truth is it happens in a spiral, in seasons. The time spent in liminal void spaces is when we integrate and it’s just as important as the time we spend doing the active healing work.