OA and Fisheries Management

TG-1.5 Section 1: Using Ocean Accounts in Decision-Making Applied Draft

Circular ID	TG-1.5
Version	7.0
Badge	Applied
Status	Draft
Last Updated	May 2026

1. Outcome

1This Circular provides guidance on using Ocean Accounts to inform fisheries management decisions. Ocean Accounts provide a structured framework for integrating fisheries stock assessment data with economic performance indicators and sustainability metrics. The integrated data support evidence-based decision-making that balances extraction with ecosystem health.

2The guidance addresses the practical integration of biological stock assessment data with asset accounts, approaches to valuing fish stocks, methods for deriving economic performance indicators for the fisheries sector, and the calculation of sustainability indicators aligned with international targets including SDG 14.4¹¹.

3Decision use cases: Ocean Accounts for fisheries support four management functions. First, quota setting using asset account depletion data: physical asset accounts tracking biomass, natural growth, and extraction enable managers to assess whether current catch levels exceed sustainable yield. That comparison provides an objective basis for setting Total Allowable Catch (TAC) quotas. Second, MSY verification: comparing stock biomass estimates to BMSY benchmarks derived from stock assessments enables verification that fisheries management plans are achieving their stated objectives of maintaining stocks at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Third, subsidy reform using flow accounts: flow accounts for fisheries subsidies linked to stock status indicators reveal whether government support is contributing to overcapacity and overfishing or promoting sustainable practices, and the results inform policy design aligned with SDG 14.6. Fourth, SDG 14.4 reporting: asset accounts provide the direct inputs for SDG indicator 14.4.1 (proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels), so that international reporting is grounded in national accounting data. These use cases connect directly to the policy frameworks described in TG-1.1 OA and National Budget Processes, where fisheries depletion costs are integrated into natural capital budgeting.

4Downward connections to accounts, indicators, and data: The policy decisions supported by this Circular depend on three accounting structures. Fish stock asset accounts (see TG-3.1 Asset Accounts) track biomass, natural growth, extraction, and depletion in physical and monetary terms. The resulting entries are the data infrastructure for sustainable yield management. Flow accounts for fish harvest (see TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy) record gross catch, landings, and discards, whereby catch statistics can be reconciled with stock assessments and fishing impacts analysed across the supply chain. Ecosystem condition indicators (see TG-2.1 Biophysical Indicators) for fish nursery habitats such as mangroves, seagrass meadows, and estuaries link habitat health to fisheries productivity, where ecosystem degradation affects the regenerative capacity of fish stocks. These three layers (asset stocks, flow accounts, and condition indicators) form an integrated information system through which Ocean Accounts translate biological stock assessment science into policy-relevant insights.

2. Requirements

• 1TG-0.1 General Introduction

2Related Circulars:

• 3TG-3.1 Asset Accounts — General methodology for physical and monetary asset accounts
• 4TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy — Treatment of fish harvest as natural resource input
• 5TG-3.9 Aquaculture — Distinguishing cultivated from natural aquatic resources
• 6TG-6.7 Fisheries Accounting: Integrating Stock Assessment — Detailed thematic methodology for linking stock assessment to accounts

3. Guidance Material

3.1 Fisheries in the Ocean Accounting Framework

3.1.1 Classification of Aquatic Resources

1Aquatic resources are classified within the SEEA Central Framework as one of five categories of natural resources that comprise natural capital². The classification distinguishes between:

2Cultivated aquatic resources include all aquatic organisms produced within aquaculture facilities where there is active management over growth and regeneration. Farming implies intervention in the rearing process to enhance production, such as regular stocking, feeding, and protection from predators, as well as individual or corporate ownership of the stock being cultivated³. Cultivated aquatic resources are further divided into:

• 3Resources held for harvest (treated as inventories)
• 4Breeding stock (treated as fixed assets)

5For detailed guidance on aquaculture accounting, see TG-3.9 Aquaculture.

6Natural aquatic resources comprise wild fish stocks, crustaceans, molluscs, marine mammals, and other aquatic organisms that are harvested through capture fishing operations where growth and regeneration occur naturally without direct management by institutional units⁴. Natural aquatic resources are considered natural biological resources and are classified as non-produced non-financial assets.

7The distinction between cultivated and natural resources determines the accounting treatment. The growth of cultivated aquatic resources in aquaculture facilities is treated as a process of production that falls within the SNA production boundary. In contrast, wild capture fisheries target natural biological resources that are outside the production boundary until harvest, and are therefore subject to depletion accounting when extraction exceeds sustainable yield⁵. The harvest of wild fish represents a flow from the environment to the economy, as described in TG-3.2 Flows from Environment to Economy.

3.1.2 Spatial Scope and Jurisdictional Boundaries

1For accounting purposes, aquatic resources are attributed to a country based on their location within that country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) throughout their life cycles, covering both marine and inland waters⁶. The legal framework for defining these boundaries is provided by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which establishes that coastal States have sovereign rights over the natural resources of their EEZ extending up to 200 nautical miles from their baselines⁷.

2Migrating and straddling fish stocks present particular measurement challenges. Such stocks are considered to belong to a country during the period when they inhabit its EEZ. When exploitation control has been established through international agreements that define a country’s access rights to shared resources, that portion of the stock can be attributed to the country⁸. The Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of UNCLOS relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries provide the legal framework for managing these shared resources⁹.

3Where a stock migrates in and out of the EEZ within the accounting year, biomass attribution should follow the country’s agreed RFMO allocation share where a formal allocation exists. Where no formal allocation exists, the preferred default is to attribute biomass in proportion to the estimated stock fraction present within the EEZ at the mid-year survey date. Compilers should document the method chosen in account metadata and flag the risk of double-counting when multiple countries account for the same stock. Adjustments to allocation shares over time should be recorded as reclassifications in the asset account rather than as physical changes¹⁰.

4Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) coordinate the management of shared and straddling stocks, and their outputs serve as data sources for compiling national accounts. Several RFMOs are relevant in the Asia-Pacific region. The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) manages highly migratory tuna and billfish stocks across the western and central Pacific, and maintains detailed catch, effort, and stock assessment databases that member States can use to populate their asset accounts. The Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) performs a similar function for tuna and tuna-like species in the Indian Ocean. The Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) manages the single global stock of southern bluefin tuna and provides allocation-based data useful for attributing shared stocks to individual countries. Countries participating in these organisations should use RFMO stock assessment outputs as primary inputs when compiling aquatic resource asset accounts, supplementing national data where domestic assessments are unavailable¹¹.

3.1.3 Species Classification

1The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Information System (ASFIS) provides a standard species classification containing over 11,500 species. ASFIS is linked to the International Standard Classification for Aquatic Animals and Plants (ISCAAP), which divides commercial species into 50 groups based on taxonomic, ecological, and economic characteristics¹². For accounting purposes, aquatic resources can be grouped into nine divisions:

1. 2Freshwater fishes
2. 3Diadromous fishes (species migrating between fresh and salt water)
3. 4Marine fishes
4. 5Crustaceans
5. 6Molluscs
6. 7Whales, seals and other aquatic mammals
7. 8Miscellaneous aquatic animals
8. 9Miscellaneous aquatic animal products
9. 10Aquatic plants

3.2 Stock Assessment Integration

1For detailed methodology on linking stock assessment models to accounting structures, see TG-6.7 Fisheries Accounting: Integrating Stock Assessment.

3.2.1 Physical Asset Accounts for Aquatic Resources

1The account structure follows TG-3.1 Asset Accounts, and the fisheries-specific entries are detailed in the table below¹³:

Account Entry	Description
Opening stock	Total biomass at start of accounting period
Additions to stock
Growth in stock	Natural increase in biomass (reproduction and growth)
Upward reappraisals	Revisions due to improved measurement or model updates
Reclassifications	Transfers from cultivated to natural (e.g., ranching releases)
Reductions due to extraction
Gross catch/harvest	Total extraction during period (including discards)
Other changes in volume
Normal losses	Natural mortality, predation
Catastrophic losses	Disease outbreaks, environmental disasters, harmful algal blooms
Uncompensated seizure	Illegal fishing by non-residents
Downward reappraisals	Revisions due to improved measurement or model updates
Reclassifications	Transfers between categories (e.g., escapes from aquaculture)
Closing stock	Total biomass at end of accounting period

2Following SEEA CF Table 5.22, extraction flows (gross catch/harvest) are shown separately from “other changes in volume” (natural mortality, catastrophic losses, uncompensated seizures, reappraisals, and reclassifications). This separation reflects the conceptual distinction between human-driven removals that enter the production account and stock-biological or institutional changes that do not. Only extraction flows enter the depletion test in Section 3.2.3, and natural mortality does not constitute depletion. Units of measurement should be consistent across all entries, typically tonnes of live weight biomass. Conversion factors may be needed when data are available in different units (numbers of fish, processed weight)¹⁴.

3.2.2 Stock Assessment Methods

1Fishery biologists employ various methods to estimate absolute stock size, including:

2Virtual Population Analysis (VPA): A mathematical reconstruction of fish population dynamics based on age-structured catch data, using known catch numbers and estimated natural mortality to work backward through time and estimate historical population sizes¹⁵.

3Tag-recapture analysis: Physical or electronic tagging of individuals followed by recapture to estimate population size based on the proportion of tagged fish in subsequent catches¹⁶.

4Acoustic and trawl surveys: Direct measurement using echo-sounders, trawl surveys, or visual observation (including drone and satellite-based observation for surface species) to estimate biomass within surveyed areas, extrapolated to the full stock range¹⁷.

5Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE): When absolute stock size estimates are unavailable, CPUE provides an index of relative abundance. The ratio of catch to effort (fishing days, gear deployed, vessel power) serves as a proxy indicator of stock density, though this approach requires careful adjustment for changes in technology, fleet composition, and management arrangements¹⁸. Changes in model parameters should be recorded as reappraisals in the asset accounts to distinguish methodological revisions from actual physical changes in stock size¹⁹.

6Countries with limited capacity for full stock assessments can still compile informative aquatic resource accounts by adopting a tiered approach to data requirements. At the most basic level (Tier 1), countries can use catch time series combined with CPUE indices to derive relative abundance trends, which support qualitative assessments of whether stocks are increasing, stable, or declining. At an intermediate level (Tier 2), surplus production models such as the Schaefer model can be fitted to catch and effort data to generate estimates of maximum sustainable yield and current biomass relative to B_MSY, without requiring age-structured data. At the most detailed level (Tier 3), full age-structured or length-based assessments provide absolute biomass estimates and fishing mortality rates. Countries should aim to compile accounts at the highest tier supported by their data, whilst recognising that even Tier 1 accounts, when consistently maintained over time, provide information on stock trajectories and can flag potential sustainability concerns²⁰.

7The following table maps each tier to the physical asset account entries it can support. Entries marked “proxy” require an indicative estimate rather than a model-based value. Entries marked “omit (document)” should be left blank with an explanatory metadata note.

8Table 3.2.2: Tier-to-account-entry mapping for physical asset accounts

Account Entry	Tier 1 (CPUE index)	Tier 2 (Surplus production)	Tier 3 (Age-structured)
Opening stock (absolute tonnes)	Omit (document)	Computable	Computable
Natural growth	Proxy (CPUE trend)	Computable	Computable
Gross catch/harvest	Computable	Computable	Computable
Normal losses (natural mortality)	Omit (document)	Proxy	Computable
Uncompensated seizure (IUU)	Proxy	Proxy	Proxy
Closing stock (absolute tonnes)	Omit (document)	Computable	Computable
Sustainable yield	Omit (document)	Computable	Computable
B/B_MSY ratio	Qualitative only	Computable	Computable
Depletion (tonnes)	Qualitative signal only	Computable	Computable

9At Tier 1, accounts can still support directional judgements (improving/stable/declining) useful for flagging potential sustainability concerns, even without absolute biomass estimates.

3.2.3 Sustainable Yield and Depletion

1The concept linking stock assessment to accounting is sustainable yield, defined as “the surplus or excess of animals or plants that may be removed from a population without affecting the capacity of the population to regenerate itself” (SEEA CF para 5.82)²¹. For any given population, if extraction is less than sustainable yield, no depletion should be recorded. Depletion occurs only when extraction exceeds sustainable yield, representing a genuine reduction in the asset base.

2The sustainable yield concept derives from population biology models that relate harvest to stock size. At low population sizes, little surplus is available for harvest because absolute reproduction is limited. At high population sizes approaching carrying capacity, surplus is also limited, as density-dependent factors reduce reproduction. Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) occurs at intermediate population levels where the combination of population size and per-capita reproduction generates the largest surplus²².

3Many fisheries management systems use precautionary reference points that provide a buffer below MSY to account for uncertainty in stock assessments and environmental variability. These include F_0.1 (fishing mortality at which the slope of the yield-per-recruit curve is 10% of the slope at the origin) and B_lim (limit reference point for biomass below which recruitment may be impaired)²³.

4Depletion of natural aquatic resources, in physical terms, equals total removals less sustainable yield, where total removals comprise gross catch (including discards), resident illegal or unreported catch, and non-resident illegal extraction (see Section 3.6.3 for the treatment of IUU components). Since population dynamics are modelled with uncertainty, year-to-year variation between estimated sustainable yield and actual growth must be expected. Depletion should be recorded whenever total removals exceed sustainable yield as estimated in the current-year stock assessment. No separate threshold for “normal variation” is applied, because the sustainable yield estimate already incorporates expected biological variability²⁴.

5Climate change is altering fish stock productivity, distribution, and recruitment patterns, which has direct implications for the calculation of sustainable yield in asset accounts. As ocean temperatures shift, species ranges are moving poleward and productivity regimes are changing. The carrying capacity of particular marine areas may increase or decrease. Sustainable yield therefore varies over time and should be recalculated periodically to reflect current environmental conditions. When compiling accounts, compilers should use the most recent stock assessment outputs, which may incorporate environmental covariates such as sea surface temperature and ocean productivity indices. Where formal stock assessments are not updated frequently, compilers should document the environmental assumptions underlying existing sustainable yield estimates and note any known environmental shifts that may affect their validity. Adjustments to reference points (such as recalculating B_MSY or F_MSY under changed productivity assumptions) should be recorded as reappraisals in the asset account rather than as physical changes in stock size, which maintains the integrity of the accounting framework²⁵.

3.3 Economic Performance Indicators

1For guidance on ocean economy measurement, see TG-2.5 Ocean Economy Structure.

3.3.1 Production and Value Added

1The primary economic indicators derive from supply and use accounts that record the output of fisheries industries. Key measures include:

2Gross output: The total value of fish and fishery products produced, valued at basic prices (excluding taxes on products)²⁶.

3Intermediate consumption: The value of goods and services used as inputs in fishing operations, including fuel, gear, bait, ice, and vessel maintenance.

4Gross value added (GVA): The difference between gross output and intermediate consumption, representing the contribution of the fisheries sector to GDP.

5Net value added: GVA less consumption of fixed capital (depreciation of vessels and equipment) and, following the 2025 SNA treatment, less depletion of natural fish stocks²⁷.

6These measures can be compiled for the fisheries sector as a whole or disaggregated by:

• 7Type of fishing (commercial, artisanal/small-scale, recreational, subsistence)
• 8Fishing method or gear type (trawl, purse seine, longline, gillnet, etc.)
• 9Target species or species groups
• 10Geographic area or fishing ground
• 11Enterprise size (by vessel tonnage, crew size, or revenue)

3.3.2 Employment Indicators

1Employment in fisheries covers diverse working arrangements, including large commercial operations and small-scale artisanal fishing. Key employment indicators include:

• 2Number of persons engaged in fishing activity
• 3Full-time equivalent (FTE) employment
• 4Employment by gender, age, and other demographic characteristics
• 5Compensation of employees in the fisheries sector
• 6Mixed income of owner-operators and unincorporated fishing enterprises

7Employment data should distinguish between employment in capture fisheries and employment in aquaculture, and may further distinguish processing and marketing activities within the broader fisheries value chain²⁸.

8Small-scale fisheries employ an estimated 90 per cent of the world’s capture fishers and fish workers, yet these workers are frequently undercounted in official labour statistics because many operate informally, seasonally, or on a part-time basis²⁹. To improve coverage, countries should consider supplementing standard labour force surveys with targeted approaches. These include (1) adding fisheries-specific modules to household surveys that capture seasonal and part-time fishing activity, (2) conducting frame surveys at landing sites and fishing communities to enumerate active fishers, vessels, and gear, (3) using key-informant interviews in coastal and riparian communities to validate administrative records, and (4) cross-referencing vessel and licence registries with labour market data where registration systems exist. Where direct survey coverage remains limited, proxy estimation methods (applying average crew sizes to registered vessel counts, or using per-capita fish consumption to estimate subsistence harvesting effort) can provide reasonable orders of magnitude. Countries participating in the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics (GSARS) may draw on its guidelines for designing cost-effective fisheries employment surveys³⁰.

3.3.3 Trade and International Flows

1Fisheries are a globally traded commodity with substantial international flows. Relevant trade indicators include:

• 2Exports and imports of fish and fishery products (volume and value)
• 3Trade balance in fishery products
• 4Main trading partners and export markets
• 5Foreign direct investment in the fishing sector

6For countries whose residents harvest fish from other countries’ EEZs, the accounting must carefully distinguish between: (a) catches from national aquatic resources regardless of who harvests them, and (b) catches by national fishing operations regardless of where they fish³¹. This distinction is essential for correctly measuring changes in national aquatic resource stocks versus national fishing industry output.

3.4 Sustainability Indicators

3.4.1 Stock Status Indicators

1Physical asset accounts provide the foundation for key stock status indicators:

2Stock biomass relative to reference points: Comparing current estimated biomass (B) to biological reference points such as:

• 3B_MSY: Biomass at which MSY is achieved
• 4B_0: Unfished (virgin) biomass
• 5B_lim: Limit reference point below which recruitment is impaired

6Fishing mortality relative to reference points: Comparing current fishing mortality rate (F) to:

• 7F_MSY: Fishing mortality that produces MSY
• 8F_0.1: Precautionary proxy for F_MSY
• 9F_lim: Limit above which stock decline is expected

10Proportion of stocks within biologically sustainable levels: SDG indicator 14.4.1 measures the percentage of fish stocks that are within biologically sustainable levels, defined as stocks with abundance at or above the level that can produce MSY³².

3.4.2 Depletion-Adjusted Income Measures

1The 2025 SNA now treats depletion of natural resources as a cost of production alongside depreciation, which gives greater prominence to net income measures that account for the using up of natural capital (SNA 2025 Annex 4, para A4.59)³³. Countries that have not yet transitioned to SNA 2025 can compile depletion-adjusted income measures as supplementary or satellite account entries consistent with SNA 2008. The SEEA Central Framework provides a version-neutral basis for these calculations (SEEA CF Section 5.8). That basis allows countries at any stage of SNA transition to produce depletion-adjusted indicators. For fisheries, this means:

2Net fishing income: Gross value added from fishing less the value of depletion. This measure reflects the genuine contribution of fisheries to national income after accounting for any reduction in the fish stock asset.

3Sustainable net income: Income that could be earned indefinitely if harvesting were limited to sustainable yield levels. Operationally, sustainable net income can be approximated as: SNI = GVA × (SY / gross catch), where SY is the sustainable yield at current biomass and gross catch is actual extraction for the period. This scaling approach assumes that costs and revenues are proportional to catch volume. Where unit cost data are available, a more precise formulation is: SNI = SY × (average price per tonne − average cost per tonne). For a numerical illustration, see the companion monetary example in Step 1b of Section 3.5.2. More detailed methodology, including treatment of multi-species fisheries and long-run price assumptions, is covered in TG-6.7 Fisheries Accounting: Integrating Stock Assessment.

4When depletion occurs (extraction exceeds sustainable yield), the difference between gross income and sustainable net income represents income generated by depleting capital rather than genuine sustainable returns.

3.4.3 SDG 14 Alignment

1Ocean Accounts support monitoring of several SDG 14 targets related to fisheries³⁴:

2SDG 14.4: “By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics.”

• 3Indicator 14.4.1: Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels
• 4Asset accounts directly provide data on stock status relative to MSY benchmarks. SDG 14.4.1 uses an unweighted stock-count method: each assessed stock is counted equally, and the indicator equals the number of stocks at or above B_MSY divided by the total number of assessed stocks. Where a country’s fisheries data are already disaggregated by species or stock in pre-existing fisheries data systems, those disaggregated stock records feed directly into the count without further aggregation. Compilers should follow FAO’s indicator methodology note (FAO 2020, footnote 34) for official SDG reporting. Alternative weightings by catch volume or landed value may be informative for national monitoring purposes but should not replace the FAO unweighted method for official SDG submissions.

5SDG 14.6: “By 2020, prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and refrain from introducing new such subsidies.”

• 6Environmental subsidy accounts can track government support to the fisheries sector
• 7Analysis can assess whether subsidies enhance or undermine sustainability

8SDG 14.7: “By 2030, increase the economic benefits to small island developing States and least developed countries from the sustainable use of marine resources, including through sustainable management of fisheries, aquaculture and tourism.”

• 9Indicator 14.7.1: Sustainable fisheries as a proportion of GDP in small island developing States, least developed countries and all countries
• 10Directly derived from economic accounts measuring fisheries GVA

11SDG 14.b: “Provide access for small-scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets.”

• 12Indicator 14.b.1: Degree of application of a legal/regulatory/policy/institutional framework which recognizes and protects access rights for small-scale fisheries
• 13Disaggregated accounts can track the distribution of fisheries benefits across scales of operation

3.5 Practical Applications

3.5.1 Informing Total Allowable Catch Decisions

1Fisheries managers commonly set Total Allowable Catch (TAC) limits based on biological stock assessments. Ocean Accounts enhance this process by:

• 2Providing a systematic framework for recording and updating stock information
• 3Enabling comparison of catch levels against sustainable yield benchmarks
• 4Tracking the cumulative impact of harvesting decisions on stock levels over time
• 5Integrating economic information to assess the costs and benefits of different TAC options³⁵

6The following decision framework illustrates how data from physical asset accounts and stock assessments can be combined to guide TAC decisions. By cross-referencing the current stock status (expressed as the ratio of biomass to the biomass at maximum sustainable yield, B/B_MSY) with recorded catch relative to sustainable yield (SY), managers can identify the appropriate management response. Figure 1.5.1 presents this as a two-by-two matrix. Each combination of stock status and catch level maps to one of four management outcomes and routes to its corresponding physical- and monetary-asset account entries.

Figure 1.5.1 Stock status crossed with catch relative to sustainable yield yields four management outcomes linked to physical and monetary asset entries. [a] Cell shade = intervention urgency (ordinal, not quantitative). [b] Dashed edge = monitoring feedback. Source: TG-1.5 draft v6, Section 3.5, Table 3.5.1 (four-outcome stock × catch matrix). Adapted from: SEEA EA 2024 §6.32-6.45 (fisheries asset accounts); FAO SOFIA 2024 stock-status reporting categories.

7Table 3.5.1: Sustainable yield decision framework for fisheries management

Stock Status (B/B_MSY)	Catch Relative to SY	Depletion Recorded	Management Implication
>= 1.0 (healthy)	Catch <= SY	No	Maintain current TAC
>= 1.0 (healthy)	Catch > SY	Yes	Reduce TAC
< 1.0 (depleted)	Catch <= current SY	No	Stock stabilises at current level; active rebuilding requires catch below SY
< 1.0 (depleted)	Catch > current SY	Yes	Urgent TAC reduction

8This decision matrix translates accounting outputs into management guidance. When a stock is healthy (B >= B_MSY) and catch does not exceed sustainable yield, no depletion is recorded and the current TAC can be maintained. When catch exceeds sustainable yield even for a healthy stock, depletion is recorded in the asset account, and the TAC should be reduced to prevent the stock from falling below its MSY benchmark. For depleted stocks, even catch levels at the current (reduced) sustainable yield merely stabilise the stock at its depleted level rather than rebuilding it. Active rebuilding requires catch below sustainable yield. Catch exceeding sustainable yield for a depleted stock represents the most urgent case for TAC reduction. Managers should interpret these categories in conjunction with the precautionary reference points discussed in Section 3.2.3 and with due regard for uncertainty in stock assessment estimates³⁶.

9Estimating current SY for depleted stocks: For the two depleted rows in Table 3.5.1 (B/B_MSY < 1.0), “current SY” is the sustainable yield at the stock’s actual (reduced) biomass, which is lower than MSY. The method for estimating this value depends on the data tier in use. At Tier 1, use the Schaefer model approximation: SY_current = MSY × (B/B_MSY). This approximation assumes a symmetric production curve and should be treated as indicative only. At Tier 2 and above, the surplus production or age-structured model used in the stock assessment will directly provide a current-biomass-conditional yield estimate, and the Schaefer approximation should not be substituted in these cases. Reference the Tier 2 surplus production model guidance in Section 3.2.2 as the appropriate tool for Tier 2+ calculations.

3.5.2 Worked Example: Using Asset Account Data to Inform Quota Decisions

1This worked example demonstrates how a fisheries management agency can use asset account data to assess stock status and adjust Total Allowable Catch quotas, using synthetic data for a hypothetical coastal demersal fishery.

2Scenario description: The Coastal Demersal Fishery Management Authority oversees a commercially important snapper species within the national EEZ. The fishery is managed using annual TAC quotas allocated through an Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ) system. Stock assessment scientists conduct annual assessments using age-structured models calibrated to catch data, fishery-independent trawl surveys, and commercial CPUE indices. The authority compiles physical asset accounts for the snapper stock, integrated with the stock assessment process.

3Step 1: Compile physical asset account

4The authority compiled the following physical asset account for snapper stock for the accounting year 2024, based on the 2024 stock assessment:

Account Entry	Value (tonnes)	Data Source
Opening stock (1 Jan 2024)	48,000	Stock assessment biomass estimate
Additions to stock
Natural growth (recruitment + growth)	9,200	Stock assessment recruitment and growth models
Upward reappraisals	0	No model revisions this year
Total additions	9,200
Reductions in stock
Gross catch (commercial fisheries)	10,500	Verified landing records + discard estimates
Normal losses (natural mortality)	5,800	Stock assessment natural mortality estimate
Catastrophic losses	0	No mass mortality events recorded
Uncompensated seizure (IUU fishing)	300	Surveillance-based IUU estimate
Total reductions	16,600
Closing stock (31 Dec 2024)	40,600	Stock assessment biomass estimate
Derived measures
Sustainable yield at current biomass	8,500	Estimated from surplus production curve at B = 40,600t
B_MSY (reference biomass)	55,000	Stock assessment MSY reference point
B/B_MSY ratio	0.74	40,600 / 55,000
Total removals (gross catch + IUU)	10,800	10,500 + 300
Depletion (total removals - sustainable yield)	2,300	10,800 - 8,500

5Note: Sustainable yield is stock-dependent and varies with biomass. At the current depleted biomass of 40,600 tonnes (B/B_MSY = 0.74), the estimated sustainable yield of 8,500 tonnes represents the harvestable surplus above natural mortality: the quantity that can be removed by human harvest without reducing stock biomass below its current level. Depletion is therefore measured as total removals (gross catch plus all IUU extraction, whether by residents or non-residents) minus that harvestable surplus: 10,800 - 8,500 = 2,300 tonnes. Natural mortality of 5,800 tonnes is recorded separately in the reductions block as a stock-biological process distinct from the harvest-based depletion test, and it does not enter the depletion calculation. As the stock rebuilds toward B_MSY, sustainable yield will increase toward its maximum.

6Step 1b: Compile monetary asset account

7Using a unit resource rent approach (SEEA CF paras 5.441-5.452), the authority monetises the physical account. All figures are illustrative.

Monetary Account Entry	Basis	Value (USD)
Average landed price	USD 1,200/tonne	—
Average extraction cost (incl. normal profit)	USD 800/tonne	—
Unit resource rent	1,200 − 800	USD 400/tonne
Opening stock value	48,000t × USD 400	USD 19,200,000
Closing stock value	40,600t × USD 400	USD 16,240,000
Depletion value	2,300t × USD 400	USD 920,000
GVA from fishing	10,500t × (1,200 − 800) × adj.	USD 4,200,000 (approx.)
Net fishing income (GVA − depletion)	4,200,000 − 920,000	USD 3,280,000
Sustainable net income (GVA × SY/gross catch)	4,200,000 × (8,500/10,500)	USD 3,400,000 (approx.)

8The depletion value of USD 920,000 represents stock capital eroded in 2024. Net fishing income of USD 3,280,000 is the sector’s genuine contribution to national income after accounting for this capital drawdown. These monetary measures provide the inputs for depletion-adjusted GDP as described in Section 3.4.2.

9Step 2: Assess stock status against decision framework

10The authority applies the decision framework from Table 3.5.1:

• 11Stock status: B/B_MSY = 0.74, indicating the stock is below MSY benchmark (depleted)
• 12Catch relative to sustainable yield: Total removals (10,800) > sustainable yield (8,500), so depletion is recorded (2,300 tonnes)
• 13Decision category: ”< 1.0 (depleted)” AND “Catch > current SY” → Urgent TAC reduction

14Step 3: Calculate TAC adjustment

15The management authority determines that the TAC should be reduced to allow stock rebuilding. Two scenarios are considered:

16Scenario A: Reduce catch to current sustainable yield level

• 17Set TAC for 2025 at 8,500 tonnes (equal to current sustainable yield at present biomass)
• 18This prevents further depletion but does not actively rebuild the stock
• 19At this catch level, stock biomass would stabilise near the current level (approximately 40,600 tonnes), remaining below B_MSY

20Scenario B: Reduce catch below sustainable yield to enable rebuilding

• 21Set TAC for 2025 at 7,000 tonnes (below sustainable yield by 1,500 tonnes)
• 22Stock expected to increase by approximately 1,500 tonnes per year
• 23Rebuilding target: return to B_MSY (55,000 tonnes) within 10 years
• 24Required annual rebuilding increment: (55,000 - 40,600) / 10 = 1,440 tonnes/year
• 25TAC of 7,000 tonnes achieves this rebuilding trajectory

26The authority selects Scenario B, setting the 2025 TAC at 7,000 tonnes, representing a 33% reduction from 2024 gross catch.

27Step 4: Communicate decision using asset account framework

28The authority publishes the decision with the following justification, grounded in asset accounting concepts:

“The 2024 physical asset account for snapper stock records closing biomass of 40,600 tonnes, 26% below the B_MSY reference level of 55,000 tonnes. Total removals of 10,800 tonnes (gross catch 10,500 plus IUU 300) exceeded sustainable yield of 8,500 tonnes, resulting in depletion of 2,300 tonnes of stock capital. To reverse this trajectory and rebuild the stock asset to sustainable levels within 10 years, the 2025 Total Allowable Catch is set at 7,000 tonnes. This reduction allows net stock growth of approximately 1,500 tonnes per year. Continued monitoring through annual asset accounts will track rebuilding progress, and the TAC will be adjusted as the stock approaches the MSY target.”

29Step 5: Monitor rebuilding through subsequent accounts

30Monitoring actions for each assessment tier are set out in Table 3.5.1.

3.5.3 Evaluating Fisheries Subsidies

1Governments provide various forms of support to fisheries, including fuel subsidies and vessel construction programmes. Ocean Accounts enable systematic assessment of:

• 2The magnitude and composition of fisheries subsidies
• 3Whether subsidies enhance capacity (potentially harmful) or improve sustainability (beneficial)
• 4The distributional effects of subsidies across different types of fishing operations
• 5Alignment with international commitments under SDG 14.6 and WTO fisheries subsidies disciplines³⁷

3.5.4 Assessing Recovery Programs

1For depleted stocks, recovery programmes aim to rebuild populations to sustainable levels. Ocean Accounts support:

• 2Baseline measurement of stock status at programme initiation
• 3Tracking of stock recovery through periodic asset accounts
• 4Assessment of economic impacts during rebuilding periods (short-term costs)
• 5Evaluation of long-term benefits from restored sustainable harvesting³⁸

3.5.5 Quota Valuation and Management

1Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) are an increasingly common approach to fisheries management. When quotas are freely traded, their market prices can inform the valuation of fish stocks³⁹. Ocean Accounts support:

• 2Recording quota values as assets (permits to use environmental assets under SEEA CF para 4.178)
• 3Tracking changes in quota values over time
• 4Distinguishing between the value of quotas and the value of underlying fish stocks
• 5Assessing the equity implications of quota allocation systems

6When using ITQ market prices to estimate the value of fish stock assets, compilers should be aware that quota prices may not fully reflect the underlying resource value. Quota markets are often thin (few transactions), geographically segmented, and subject to regulatory constraints on ownership concentration and foreign participation that can distort prices. In addition, quota prices reflect private expectations of future harvesting returns, which may diverge from the social value of the resource. Where quota markets exist, their prices can serve as a useful cross-check against net present value estimates derived from resource rent approaches. The primary reference for ITQ treatment as environmental assets is SEEA CF paras 4.178-4.180, which establish the asset classification for permits to use environmental assets. The valuation method (resource rent and net present value approaches) is provided in SEEA CF paras 5.441-5.452. Quota prices should not be treated as the sole basis for monetary asset valuation without careful assessment of market conditions⁴⁰.

3.5.6 Climate Change Adaptation

1Climate change is affecting fish stock distribution, productivity, and sustainable yield levels. Ocean Accounts can support climate adaptation by:

• 2Tracking shifts in stock distribution across spatial accounting units
• 3Monitoring changes in condition indicators that may signal climate impacts
• 4Adjusting sustainable yield estimates to account for changing environmental conditions
• 5Informing adaptive management responses to climate-driven changes⁴¹

3.5.7 Community-level Fishery Accounting

1The ocean accounting framework can be applied at both national and community scale to capture the economic contributions of small-scale and subsistence fishing that are often missed in standard economic surveys. The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) developed survey tools and toolkits examining subsistence and recreational supply of ocean-related natural inputs relevant to small-scale fisheries, with a focus on understanding how coastal communities depend on and contribute to ocean resources⁴². In a complementary effort, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) undertook community-level fisheries accounting work in Baja California, Mexico. That work demonstrated that accounting principles derived from the SEEA Central Framework and Ocean Accounts methodology could be operationalised at local scales to inform cooperative fisheries management.

2These initiatives illustrated that structured accounting approaches can render visible the economic value of artisanal and subsistence catches: value that conventional national accounts frequently undercount or omit entirely. By capturing household-level resource flows and linking them to ecosystem condition indicators, community-scale accounts provide a bridge between national statistical frameworks and local management needs. The IIED/EDF framework (2015-2019) remains the most recent published methodology at the time of writing, and no formal superseding guidance has been published.

Case illustration: Community Fishery Accounts in Baja California (2015—2019)

Work by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) on survey methodologies and toolkits for small-scale fisheries, together with efforts by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) beginning in 2015 in Baja California, Mexico, demonstrated that ocean accounting frameworks can be applied at the community scale. The EDF programme compiled fishery accounts for remote fishing villages, capturing the economic contributions of small-scale and subsistence fishing that are typically missed in standard economic surveys. These efforts highlight the potential for community-level accounts to complement national-level compilations, particularly for capturing non-market and subsistence ocean economy contributions⁴³.

3.6 Data Sources and Compilation Considerations

3.6.1 Primary Data Sources

1Compilation of fisheries accounts typically draws on:

2Catch and landing statistics: Recorded by fisheries agencies, port authorities, or fish market operators. FAO collects and publishes global capture and aquaculture production data annually through FishStatJ (www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj) ⁴⁴. FishStatJ covers capture production and aquaculture output for over 200 countries and territories, disaggregated by species group and FAO major fishing area, with time series typically updated annually with a one- to two-year lag. The database is the primary global benchmark for national catch reconciliation and is freely downloadable as a desktop application. Key limitations include: (a) data are reported at country level on the basis of declared landings and may not reflect unreported or illegal catch; (b) discards are not included in standard production tables and must be estimated separately using observer or logbook data; and (c) government subsidies to the sector are not captured within FishStatJ and require separate compilation from national budget sources or the OECD Fisheries Support Estimate database.

3Stock assessment reports: Produced by national fisheries research institutions, regional fisheries management organisations (e.g., WCPFC, IOTC, CCSBT for tuna), or international bodies. The RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database provides standardised stock assessment outputs.

4Vessel and licence registries: Providing data on fishing capacity, effort, and fleet composition.

5Economic surveys: Dedicated fisheries economic surveys or general business surveys covering fishing enterprises.

6Trade statistics: Customs data on fish imports and exports, compiled according to the Harmonized System (HS) commodity classification.

7Employment surveys: Labour force surveys or dedicated fisheries employment surveys.

3.6.2 Intergovernmental Fisheries Data Sources

1Intergovernmental organisations collect and harmonise fisheries data across countries. Key active sources and initiatives relevant to compiling ocean accounts for fisheries are summarised in Table 3.6.1 below⁴⁵.

2Table 3.6.1: Intergovernmental fisheries data sources and initiatives

Source	Description
Coordinating Working Party on Fishery Statistics (CWP)	Coordinates global fishery statistical programmes and maintains standards for fishery data collection, processing, and dissemination.
Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA)	Comprehensive bibliographic database covering aquatic science and fisheries literature.
Fisheries and Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS)	A global partnership that provides access to information on the status and trends of marine resources and fisheries.
FishStatJ	FAO software for retrieving, analysing, and disseminating fishery and aquaculture statistical time series.
GLOBEFISH	FAO programme providing analysis and information on world fish trade, including market trends and price data.

3.6.3 Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing

1IUU fishing presents measurement challenges. The accounting treatment differs depending on whether the illegal catch is by residents or non-residents, and compilers must apply these treatments separately.

2Illegal catches by residents (domestic IUU) are still treated as production by the national fishing industry regardless of legality, per SEEA CF para 5.435. They are recorded as gross catch/extraction in the physical asset account and as output in the production account. Residence, not legality, determines the production boundary. Where domestic IUU can be estimated, it should be added to reported landings in the gross catch row of the asset account.

3Illegal catches by non-residents are recorded as “uncompensated seizures” in the asset account (a separate reductions line), distinguishing them from production by the country’s nationals. These represent a transfer of natural capital to foreign operators without compensation, per SEEA CF para 5.436.

4Following these accounting principles, illegal catches by residents should still be recorded as production with income accruing to the fisher⁴⁶. The practical implication: resident IUU must be included in the gross catch figure that flows into the depletion calculation, whilst non-resident IUU appears in the separate “uncompensated seizure” line as shown in the worked example in Section 3.5.2.

5Estimates of IUU fishing are inherently uncertain but important for understanding true extraction levels and their impact on stock sustainability. Global IUU catch has been estimated at 11—26 million tonnes annually (Agnew et al., 2009), with wide regional variation.

6Countries should develop national IUU estimation approaches appropriate to their data environment and fishery characteristics. Commonly used methods include (1) comparison of reported landings with independent estimates of total removals derived from port sampling, at-sea observer programmes, or vessel monitoring system (VMS) data, (2) stock assessment-based back-calculation, in which the difference between model-estimated total removals and reported catch provides an implied IUU component, (3) trade-based analysis, comparing declared domestic landings with apparent consumption (production plus imports minus exports) to identify discrepancies, and (4) aerial and satellite surveillance data, which can detect unreported fishing activity by matching vessel positions with licence registers. Regardless of the method chosen, IUU estimates should be presented with explicit uncertainty bounds and documented in the metadata accompanying the accounts. Where multiple methods yield different estimates, compilers should report a range and indicate the preferred central estimate⁴⁷.

3.6.4 Subsistence and Recreational Fishing

1Fisheries accounts should encompass all harvesting activity, not only commercial operations. Subsistence fishing for household consumption represents production for own final use. Recreational fishing, whilst not undertaken for commercial purposes, still removes fish from stocks and should be recorded⁴⁸.

2These non-commercial catches may require special estimation approaches based on:

• 3Household surveys with questions on fishing activity and consumption
• 4Recreational fishing licence data (where licensing exists)
• 5Creel surveys at popular fishing locations
• 6Proxy indicators based on boat ownership or coastal population

7Small-scale and subsistence fisheries are of particular importance in developing countries and in many GOAP member countries in the Asia-Pacific region, where they may represent a substantial proportion of total catch and provide essential food security and livelihoods for coastal communities. In several Pacific Island States, for example, subsistence and artisanal catches may equal or exceed commercial catches in volume, yet remain largely unreported. Countries compiling fisheries accounts should assess the relative importance of non-commercial catches in their national context and allocate survey resources accordingly. Where full survey programmes are not feasible, countries may consider periodic benchmark surveys at representative landing sites combined with extrapolation methods, integration of fisheries questions into existing multi-purpose household surveys (such as Household Income and Expenditure Surveys), and use of food balance sheet data and per-capita fish consumption estimates to cross-check catch figures. The FAO Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries provide an international framework that can inform the design of data collection strategies for this sector⁴⁹.

4. Acknowledgements

1Authors: [To be confirmed]

2Reviewers: [To be confirmed]

5. References

Footnotes

1. 1

   United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1. Target 14.4. ↩ ↩²

2. 2

   United Nations. (2025). System of National Accounts 2025. Chapter 35. ↩

3. 3

   FAO. (2008). Glossary of Aquaculture. Rome. Available from: https://www.fao.org/fishery/glossary/en ↩

4. 4

   United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.24. ↩

5. 5

   United Nations. (2025). SNA 2025. Annex 4, Para A4.59. ↩

6. 6

   United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.398. ↩

7. 7

   United Nations. (1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Part V: Exclusive Economic Zone. ↩

8. 8

   United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.399-5.400. ↩

9. 9

   United Nations. (2004). Agreement relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. Treaty Series, vol. 2167, No. 37924; FAO. (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome. ↩

10. 10

    Preferred default attribution method for straddling stocks where no formal RFMO allocation exists: proportion of estimated stock biomass within the EEZ at the mid-year survey date. Method should be documented in account metadata. ↩

11. 11

    WCPFC. (2004). Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean. Available from: www.wcpfc.int; IOTC. (1996). Agreement for the Establishment of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Available from: www.iotc.org; CCSBT. (1994). Convention for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. Available from: www.ccsbt.org ↩

12. 12

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.404. See also FAO CWP Handbook: www.fao.org/fishery/cwp ↩

13. 13

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Table 5.22. ↩

14. 14

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.414. ↩

15. 15

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.423. ↩

16. 16

    Ibid. ↩

17. 17

    Ibid. ↩

18. 18

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.425. ↩

19. 19

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.424. ↩

20. 20

    Hilborn, R. & Walters, C.J. (1992). Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment: Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty. Chapman and Hall, New York; FAO. (2018). Guidelines for the routine collection of capture fishery data. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 382 Rev. 1. ↩

21. 21

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.82. ↩

22. 22

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.83-5.84 and Figure 5.2. ↩

23. 23

    Caddy, J.F. & Mahon, R. (1995). Reference points for fisheries management. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 347. Rome. ↩

24. 24

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.431-5.432. ↩

25. 25

    Cheung, W.W.L., et al. (2010). Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. Global Change Biology, 16(1), 24-35; Free, C.M., et al. (2019). Impacts of historical warming on marine fisheries production. Science, 363(6430), 979-983. ↩

26. 26

    United Nations. (2025). SNA 2025. Chapter 6. ↩

27. 27

    United Nations. (2025). SNA 2025. Annex 4, Para A4.59. ↩

28. 28

    FAO & UN. (2020). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (SEEA AFF). Rome. doi.org/10.4060/ca7735en ↩

29. 29

    FAO. (2015). Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication. Rome; World Bank. (2012). Hidden Harvest: The Global Contribution of Capture Fisheries. Washington, DC. ↩

30. 30

    FAO. (2017). Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics (GSARS): Strategic Plan 2020-2025. Rome. Available from: www.gsars.org ↩

31. 31

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.433-5.434. ↩

32. 32

    FAO. (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Indicator 14.4.1 methodology. Rome. ↩

33. 33

    United Nations. (2025). SNA 2025. Annex 4, Para A4.59. ↩

34. 34

    United Nations. (2015). 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Goal 14 targets and indicators. ↩

35. 35

    Fenichel, E.P., et al. (2020). Modifying national accounts for sustainable ocean development. Nature Sustainability, 3, 889-895. ↩

36. 36

    Adapted from the SEEA Central Framework depletion accounting methodology (SEEA CF para 5.431-5.432) and standard fisheries management reference point framework. See also: Punt, A.E., et al. (2016). Management strategy evaluation: best practices. Fish and Fisheries, 17(2), 303-334. ↩

37. 37

    Sumaila, U.R., et al. (2019). Updated estimates and analysis of global fisheries subsidies. Marine Policy, 109, 103695. ↩

38. 38

    Hilborn, R. & Ovando, D. (2014). Reflections on the success of traditional fisheries management. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 71(5), 1040-1046. ↩

39. 39

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.444-5.452. ↩

40. 40

    Newell, R.G., et al. (2005). Fishing quota markets. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 49(3), 437-462; Arnason, R. (2012). Property rights in fisheries: how much can Individual Transferable Quotas accomplish? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 6(2), 217-236. ↩

41. 41

    Cheung, W.W.L., et al. (2010). Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. Global Change Biology, 16(1), 24-35. ↩

42. 42

    IIED & EDF. (2018). Community-level fisheries accounting: survey tools and approaches for small-scale fisheries in Baja California, Mexico. International Institute for Environment and Development, London; Environmental Defense Fund, New York. ↩

43. 43

    IIED. (2019). Small-scale fisheries and the ocean economy. IIED Issue Paper. London; EDF. (2017). Community fishery accounts for Baja California fishing villages: methodology and findings. Environmental Defense Fund, New York. ↩

44. 44

    FAO. FishStatJ Database. Available from: www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj ↩

45. 45

    FAO. Coordinating Working Party on Fishery Statistics (CWP). Available from: www.fao.org/fishery/cwp; FAO. Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA). Available from: www.fao.org/fishery/asfa; FAO. Fisheries and Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS). Available from: firms.fao.org; FAO. GLOBEFISH. Available from: www.fao.org/in-action/globefish ↩

46. 46

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.435-5.436. ↩

47. 47

    Agnew, D.J., et al. (2009). Estimating the worldwide extent of illegal fishing. PLoS ONE, 4(2), e4570; Pauly, D. & Zeller, D. (2016). Catch reconstructions reveal that global marine fisheries catches are higher than reported and declining. Nature Communications, 7, 10244. ↩

48. 48

    United Nations et al. (2014). SEEA Central Framework. Para 5.427. ↩

49. 49

    FAO. (2015). Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication. Rome; SPC. (2008). A community-based ecosystem approach to fisheries management: guidelines for Pacific Island Countries. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea. ↩