Ocean Accounting and the Blue/Ocean Economy

Governments usually come to ocean accounting with a question rather than a method: how much of the national economy depends on the ocean, who earns from it, and whether that earning is drawing down the assets it rests on. This Circular is the entry point to Section 1. It sets out what ocean accounts can tell a government about its ocean economy, in what terms, and where each answer is produced.

Much of the difficulty at this stage is not technical. Ocean economic activity is described in at least four vocabularies — ocean economy, marine economy, blue economy and sustainable ocean economy — used interchangeably in public but meaning different things in an account, and national programmes draw the boundary of that activity differently, for reasons that are largely legitimate. A figure compiled on one set of choices and quoted under another will not carry the weight later placed on it; where that has happened, the remedy is documentation rather than withdrawal.

After reading this Circular, you will be able to say which term fits a given policy purpose, tell a measured ocean economy aggregate from a blue economy commitment, find which account and which indicator answer a question you are being asked, and put a short set of questions to any published figure before it appears in a submission.

The account behind these answers is TG-3.3 Economic Activity Relevant to the Ocean; the indicators derived from it are TG-2.5 Structure and Function of the Ocean Economy; the individual decisions are the other circulars of Section 1.

This Circular assumes familiarity with:

• TG-0.1 General Introduction to Ocean Accounts, for the conceptual framework, the account types referred to throughout, and the case for ocean accounts in general
• TG-0.2 Overview of Relevant Statistical Standards, for the statistical standards that govern what an account may assert

TG-3.3 and TG-2.5 are referred to throughout and are useful alongside this Circular, though neither is a prerequisite. Readers new to the publication may prefer to begin with TG-0.5 Navigating the Technical Guidance, which sets out reading pathways by role.

3.1 Why this is difficult before it is technical

The measurement problem in this Circular is usually met in a particular moment: a budget hearing at which an allocation to ocean management has to be defended with a number; a development finance institution asking what a blue bond’s proceeds will be measured against; a development plan that has already adopted a blue economy target; a report against SDG 14. In each, a figure is required faster than an account can be compiled, and something is usually to hand. Two features of the field make that figure harder to rely on than it appears.

The vocabulary is split along a line worth naming. Statistical agencies name a measured baseline, whilst development bodies name an aspiration. Both usages are established and neither is wrong, but they are not interchangeable, and a document that moves between them without saying so is claiming more than it has measured. Section 3.2 sets out the terms and what each commits a publisher to.

Scope varies between countries, for good reasons. A review of 35 national ocean account definitions identified over 50 candidate industries, with inclusion rates ranging from 96 per cent for commercial fishing to under 10 per cent for specialised services. The spread reflects differences in economic composition, data availability and policy purpose, which is why this guidance documents the choices made in each case and does not prescribe one. It does mean that two published national figures are rarely measuring the same thing. Section 3.6 sets out how three programmes have drawn the line.

Statistical agencies (OECD, NOAA) use ocean economy, and nationally marine economy, for the measured baseline of all ocean-related activity. Development bodies (World Bank, UN) use blue economy or sustainable ocean economy for a framework that couples growth with environmental stewardship and social equity. Where a figure compiled as an ocean economy aggregate is published as a blue economy figure, the label claims more than the evidence behind it: the account has not tested sustainability, equity or inclusion, and the blue economy term asserts all three. Table 1 sets out the distinctions adopted across this Technical Guidance.

Table 1: Terms describing ocean and coastal economic activity

Two of these are not separate accounting boundaries and should not be treated as such. Marine economy is a national realisation of the ocean economy concept, and new blue economy is an emphasis within the blue economy. Neither implies a different table.

The disclosure rule. A published ocean economy account should state which term it uses and the definitional source for that term. Cross-country comparison is not otherwise interpretable, and the accounting framework in TG-3.3 can accommodate different definitional choices provided the scope and boundaries adopted are documented. The term is part of the metadata, not a title.

3.3 What ocean accounts can and cannot certify

The distinction between the two vocabularies has a precise consequence for what a government may assert on the strength of its accounts.

What the accounts support. Compiled under TG-3.3 and presented under TG-2.5, an ocean economy account supports statements about ocean economy gross value added, employment, exports and gross fixed capital formation on an SNA basis; net ocean GVA after the depletion of marine natural resources; and the volume of finance classified as sustainable ocean finance under TG-2.6 and tagged under TG-1.12.

Table 2 routes each recurring question to the account that produces the evidence, the indicator that presents it, and the circular covering the decision that uses it.

Table 2: Ocean economy policy questions, and where each is answered

The indicator in the third column is available only where the account in the second has been compiled. Where it has not, the position to state is that the figure is not yet available. A number drawn from another source is not the indicator it stands in for, and the difference is ordinarily found by the reader who checks it. TG-0.8 Implementation Readiness sets out the capability each column assumes.

How much has to be built. Where a country already has functioning national accounts and business statistics, a first ocean economy aggregate is largely a rearrangement of data the statistical office holds: the thematic account disaggregates existing national accounts, and does not create a new collection, whilst TG-0.8 Section 3.2 treats this as the recommended entry point in that situation. Extending the boundary to ecosystem service values is a different proposition, and belongs to a later phase. Countries with limited statistical infrastructure have other entry points, and TG-0.8 Section 3.2 routes between them.

Who has to be involved. The aggregate is compiled by the national statistical office, but two of the decisions behind it are not statistical. The boundary — which industries count, and how far inland — is a policy choice with distributional consequences, properly settled with the ministries whose sectors it includes or excludes (TG-3.3 Section 3.2). Classifying expenditure as ocean-related is a change to a finance ministry’s own systems (TG-1.12). TG-0.8 Section 3.5 sets out institutional arrangements for that division of work.

3.6 How national programmes have drawn the line

There is no single agreed scope for the ocean economy. The sectors consistently included across national programmes are living resources, minerals and oil and gas, marine construction, tourism and recreation, shipbuilding and repair, marine energy, marine research and education, government and public administration, and marine services. Beyond that core, programmes differ. Table 3 sets out three, and the reason each differs.

Table 3: Three national approaches to ocean economy scope

The classification structure a country selects should reflect its economic composition, data availability and policy goals, consistent with the principles of national accounting. The consequence to draw is not that one of these is correct: it is that the metadata is what makes a published figure readable, not the figure. Two countries reporting the same ocean share of GDP on different scopes have not reported the same thing.

A country benchmarking its own approach has two standing international comparators: the European Commission’s annual EU Blue Economy Report, which measures ocean economy sectors across EU member states using Eurostat structural business statistics, and the OECD’s work on ocean economy measurement. The framework in TG-3.3 remains the primary methodological reference for this Technical Guidance.

3.7 Reading an ocean economy number

A reader handed a published ocean economy figure — in a budget submission, a development plan, an investment prospectus or a press release — can establish the following before citing it. This is the reader’s counterpart to the metadata requirements a compiler satisfies under TG-3.3.

Many countries already have a published ocean or blue economy figure in a plan, a prospectus or a ministerial statement, compiled before any of this was settled. Such a figure does not have to be withdrawn. It has to be documented: run it against the checklist, record what can be established and what cannot, and state the term and boundary it was compiled on when the figure is next used. Most national programmes begin from exactly that position.

This Circular has been approved for public circulation and comment by the GOAP Technical Experts Group in accordance with the Circular Publication Procedure.

Authors: [To be confirmed]

Reviewers: [To be confirmed]