Research

INTRODUCTION

The 2012 “Rio +20” United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) marked a turning point in the popularization of the emerging blue economy concept (Pauly 2010). Coastal countries successfully integrated “blue economy” as part of the growing global international “green economy” agenda. Since then, the blue economy has been widely adopted by major international institutions as a conceptual framework for their ocean-related activities (World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017).

Although there are competing and sometimes conflicting definitions (Voyer et al. 2018), the European Union Blue Economy Observatory includes a diverse range of industries and sectors under the umbrella of the blue economy, such as blue technology, coastal tourism, desalination, marine infrastructure and robotics, marine living resources, marine non-living resources, marine renewable energy, marine defense, maritime transport, ocean energy, port activities, blue research and innovation, and shipbuilding and repair (European Commission 2023a).

However, the blue economy is not merely a collection of industries or sector activities. Since its international political popularization, it has emphasized the need to move beyond business as usual and adopt more sustainable practices (Potgieter 2018, European Commission 2021, Youssef 2023). This, in turn, requires evaluating these multiple transitions in a complex and integrated manner, from a sustainability development perspective.

Evaluating the success of the blue economy

Over the past 50 years, a global multifactorial ecological crisis has emerged, in addition to the ongoing societal duty of meeting the basic needs of millions of people worldwide. The increasing use of materials by the social metabolism (Fischer-Kowalski 1998, Fischer-Kowalski and Hüttler 1998, United Nations Environment Programme et al. 2019) and the resulting pollution has led to global environmental change. The marine ecosystems are not an exception, and the old concept of the ocean as an endless wealth of marine resources has evolved to the perception that there is no place in the ocean where human impacts cannot be noticed (Halpern et al. 2008, 2019, Díaz et al. 2019).

Among other social actors, economists and relevant political organizations are rethinking what the best possible economic indicators and goals are, in order to move toward sustainability while ensuring that all relevant stakeholders have appropriate information to support their decision-making processes in coherence with the societal challenges of the 21st century (European Commission 2009, OECD 2011). However, measuring the success of a sectorial transition is challenging, and requires suitable and accessible indicators.

In the context of the European blue economy, the challenge of finding new indicators beyond the growth paradigm (D’Alisa et al. 2015, Jackson 2017, Hadjimichael 2018, Stiglitz et al. 2018, Ertör and Hadjimichael 2020, Bennett et al. 2021) is explicit in the new EU sustainable blue economy strategy “Transforming the EU’s Blue Economy for a Sustainable Future” (European Commission 2021), which states, “We need to shift the focus from “blue growth” to a sustainable blue economy.” If this is the case, what are then the new indicators to be used? The current overall indicators used in the blue economy observatory and the blue economy report (European Commission et al. 2022, European Commission 2023b) are focused in monetary indicators (GVA, Turnover, Gross Operative surplus, net investment) and employment indicators (persons employed, average remuneration per employee). In some areas, but not all, they also include some production indicators, such as fished tons, energy production, or the volume of transported containers. In contrast, the use of ecological indicators in the European blue economy evaluation system (European Commission et al. 2022) adopts an approach based in the marine accounting system, trying to measure the environmental status of marine ecosystems and the ecosystem services, in line with the idea of having a triple bottom line perspective of blue activities (Slaper and Hall 2011). However, currently, there is no comprehensive, acknowledged sectorial indicator framework that aligns with the shift from “blue growth” to a sustainable blue economy. This framework should be useful for the different blue economic sectors and easily recognizable by non-marine experts, while also aiding decision makers in aligning the economy with societal objectives (United Nations 2015, United Nations Environment Programme 2021). To make progress toward this goal, exploring innovative approaches beyond existing marine indicator frameworks can be a valuable strategy.

An alternative to evaluate the success of the economy: the “doughnut economy” framework

Since 2012, with the publication of Kate Raworth’s groundbreaking work A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can we Live within the Doughnut? (Raworth 2012), and particularly in the last five years since the release of her book Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist (Raworth 2017), the doughnut approach to the economy has gained momentum in economic and sustainability analyses. Because of its simplicity and holistic vision, it is now used at a broad range of scales, from the international to the local levels (DEAL 2022, Fang 2022, Fanning et al. 2022).

The core of the doughnut framework consists of two concentric rings (Fig. 1): the inner ring represents the basic needs social foundation, derived from the social priorities agreed upon in the Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations 2015), ensuring that no one falls short on life’s essentials, while the outer ring represents the ecological ceiling, based in the planetary boundaries framework (Steffen et al. 2015). The doughnut-shaped space between these two boundaries represents an ecologically safe and socially just space where societies should aim to be (Raworth 2017), serving as an alternative to the GDP growth-oriented economic goal.

The doughnut analysis has been developed in very few sectorial perspectives such as tourism, city water management, or mobility (Valencia Lenero 2021, Dillman et al. 2023, Hartman and Heslinga 2023). In the marine context, the planetary boundaries analysis has been explored (Nash et al. 2017), and the first attempts to link the doughnut economy framework with marine ecosystem services have been published (Cook et al. 2023), but the doughnut approach has not been applied yet from a sectorial perspective.

A natural starting point for the development of the doughnut approach within the blue economy is the fisheries sector. Its economic significance and long history of ecosystem-based fisheries management studies (Costanza et al. 1998, Pauly et al. 2002, Pikitch et al. 2004, Link 2010, Christensen and Maclean 2011) have delved not only into the dynamics of individual species but also the entire ecosystem, trophic relationships, energy flows, environmental factors, and human impacts (Botsford et al. 1997, Duda and Sherman 2002, Cury et al. 2003, 2008). Additionally, it is an area where there remains a need to develop further human-related indicators (Hornborg et al. 2019), and integrate these indicators into a comprehensive framework that can be easily understood by a diverse range of stakeholders, including those who are not specialists in fisheries.

In this context, we explore the potential of applying the doughnut economy perspective in the fishing industry through a specific case study: the purse-seiners economic sector in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Finally, we reflect on the advantages and limitations of using this perspective in relation to the goals of the blue economy while also discussing its potential application in other sectors within the blue economy.

METHODS

Study area and fisheries characteristics

The Mediterranean basin is especially complex in terms of marine uses and ecological situation. It is one of most densely populated areas in the world, with high biological diversity and a long history of human activity (Coll et al. 2010, Lotze et al. 2011). It includes 21 modern countries with very different (and sometimes conflicting) socioeconomic and cultural traits, as well as some of the most renowned marine tourist destinations in the world. Moreover, it is an area of significant political interest for the development of the blue economy. As part of the European Commission's blue economy initiatives, a specific “Initiative for the sustainable development of the blue economy in the western Mediterranean” has been launched in partnership with the Union for the Mediterranean since 2017 (European Commission 2017).

According to the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean Sea (GFCM), 90% of fish stocks in the Mediterranean are outside biologically sustainable limits (FAO 2022). Fisheries are putting a severe burden on Mediterranean marine ecosystems, and are making inhabiting communities more sensitive to the current climate crisis (Berkeley et al. 2004, Ottersen et al. 2006, Ramírez et al. 2021). However, fisheries also constitute an important socioeconomic sector: they are a major food source and provide employment and economic benefits to those engaged in the activity. Fisheries in the region deserve, therefore, an urgent transition toward sustainability.

Within the Mediterranean Spanish fishing sector, purse seiners represent a significant economic activity. As of 2021, the purse-seiners fleet accounted for only 8.7% of the Spanish Mediterranean vessels, and has significantly decreased in the last decade (Fig. 2). However, they contributed 21% of the gross value added, 29% of full-time equivalent jobs (MAPA 2021), and provided 53% of the total Spanish Mediterranean landings in weight. This fleet targets small pelagic fish, mainly European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) and European sardine (Sardina pilchardus). Besides their commercial value, these species play a relevant ecological role within marine communities, and have suffered severe population declines over the last decades, mostly attributed to the combined effects of climate impacts and fishing pressure (Coll et al. 2019, Pennino et al. 2019, Saraux et al. 2019, Ramírez et al. 2021).

In 2022, the purse seiner fishing sector in the Spanish Mediterranean consisted of 121 vessels distributed in three coastal regions (from “North to South”): 61 in Catalonia, 38 in Valencia, and 21 in Murcia. Each vessel usually has a crew of 10 fishers, who return daily to harbor to sell the landings in fresh form, mainly to wholesalers and retail chains that sell the product mostly in the national fresh market (Ortega Cerdà and Coll 2022).

Doughnut adaptation

Planetary boundaries in the doughnut framework were initially established from a global systems analysis (Steffen 2022). Downsizing the doughnut perspective to a lower scale is not straightforward because the translation of limits is not linear (Turner and Wills 2022). Therefore, specific ecological analysis should be applied to target a regional, local, or sectorial perspective. The same logic applies to the social perspective.

According to the existing doughnut literature, downscaling exercises should adhere to the social and environmental rings with a safe space in between, and the dimensions and indicators used should be contextual (Raworth et al. 2020, Fang 2022, Fanning et al. 2022, Warnecke 2023). There is no standard method for their selection, but since it is a nested approach in all cases, indicators should always encompass both local and global scale perspectives (Raworth et al. 2020).

In our case we defined eight dimensions (Fig. 3) and 26 indicators that are relevant in the studied area (Table 1). In the ecological ceiling ring, we structured the information in four dimensions: the state and pressures of both key species, and the state and pressures on the ecosystems. In the social foundation ring we defined four dimensions: business viability, resilience, social livelihood, and governance and market relations (Fig. 3). Details of the indicators calculations and their justification can be found in the Appendix 1 Tables S1 and S2. In all dimensions, we combined a sectorial and regional/global perspective (Appendix 1 Table S3).

Our indicators selection was based on four main criteria: relevance, alignment with the doughnut economy framework, robustness, and availability. We used the most recent data available for each indicator.

Relevance for stakeholders and alignment with the doughnut framework are ensured by incorporating local knowledge into the indicator selection process, as well as including both ecological ceilings and social foundations indicators from both local and global perspectives, in line with the recommendations of Raworth et al. (2020). The dimensions and indicators have been chosen to address the primary concerns of fisheries, scientists, NGOs, and regional public administration. These selections were made through a comprehensive review of existing literature and active participation in numerous research projects in the area. These projects involved multiple field research activities and stakeholder engagement processes (Coll and Bellido 2020, Coll et al. 2020).

Robustness and availability are ensured by choosing indicators that have already been used and regularly reported by the Spanish Government and international institutions, such as the GFCM and the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), in the context of specific fisheries evaluation frameworks; have been previously used in peer-review literature; or are regularly provided by well-known international institutions (IUCN, EUMOFA, SABI). Appendix 1 Tables S1 and S2 provide details on the sources of each indicator.

Regarding the calculation of indicators, we followed similar studies (O’Neill et al. 2018, Fanning et al. 2022), and whenever possible, we present ecological and social indicators using the latest data available relative to their respective reference values (i.e., social boundaries that ensure the fulfillment of the basics social needs or ecological thresholds that should not be overshot). Reference values (Appendix 1 Tables S1 and S2) were defined using a conservative, risk-averse approach, considering the vulnerable situation of the fleet and ecosystem, following the same approach as the original planetary boundaries framework (Rockström et al. 2009). For indicators without clear absolute reference values (6 out of 26), we used trend analysis, presenting the indicator relative to the average of the longest available serial data. Regarding the ecological indicators, when the reference value was 0 (four indicators), we shifted the baseline to 1 to facilitate comparison with the remaining ecological indicators. The data sources, detailed calculation methodology, reference values, and the used temporal serial data can be found in Appendix 1 Tables S1 and S2.

Results presentation

Regarding results presentation, the sustainability border for ecological indicators is set on the outer dark green ring (Fig. 4). Ecological overshoots are represented by red columns that start from the outer green ring and extend to the outer boundary of the figure. An outer dotted ring corresponds to a value of 2 for the indicator, which indicates a doubling of the reference value. Indicators with values below the reference value, which are in the sustainable space, are shown as white columns that start from the outer dark green ring and pass through the green ring of the sustainable space.

On the other hand, the social indicators have their reference value within the internal green ring. Social deficits are depicted by red columns originating from the inner side of the internal dark green ring, where all the indicators attain a value of 1, and these columns extend toward the center of the figure. If any indicator lacks a red column, it is considered to be meeting its minimum social foundation level. The central dot-point ring displays a value of 0 for the indicator. Grey columns represent the lack of sufficient historical records to establish either an absolute reference value or a trend analysis, and yellow dots shows that the value varies by region in the studied area.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The doughnut assessment presents a comprehensive view of the activity of Spanish purse-seiners in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea (see Fig. 4 and Appendix 1 Tables S1 and S2 for detailed data). Our results suggest that the current situation is in many aspects far from being in a secure space, ecologically safe, or socially just (Fig. 4). The resulting doughnut portrait can help explain the evolution on the number of purse-seine vessels in the area, with a decrease of 20% in the last 10 years (Fig. 2). It is coherent with the justification of the recently approved “Spanish Mediterranean purse seiners sustainability management plan” (MAPA 2023a) that considers that urgent action needs to be deployed in this fishing sector.

From the business perspective, most of the purse-seiner activity is working with smaller profitability than other small and medium business in the region (Indicator S1: 64%), so external investment is not easy to gather. Moreover, 25% (Indicator S2) of the analyzed fleet did work in 2021 with negative profitability, which may lead to viability problems at midterm if the situation does not change. This information points to the idea that the sector is not stabilized, and some subsegments may be in important difficulties in the years to come if changes do not occur.

The targeted species and ecosystem indicators are coherent with previous studies that have shown in general negative trends in both the main commercial species of the fishing sector, European anchovy and European sardine, as well as the ecosystem where they live (Indicators E 1–11,13,14). Significant changes in biomass, abundance, growth patterns, age structure, and body condition have been recorded, mostly showing declining trends due to the isolated or combined effects of different drivers such as fishing pressure, environmental changes, and lower quality or quantity of food availability (Coll et al. 2019, Lloret-Lloret et al. 2022).

It is also worth noting that anchovy stocks are in a better state than sardine stocks. According to the latest evaluation by the Working Group on Stock Assessment of Small Pelagic Species (WGSASP), anchovy is considered to be sustainably exploited (Indicator S6). On the other hand, sardine reports record a low biomass compared to historical information (Coll and Bellido 2020), and high overfishing levels (2.28 F/Fmsy). However, projections show that anchovy distributions may decline at the end of the 21 century because of climate change (Pennino et al. 2020a).

Some of the ecosystem pressures that are affecting the health status are also showing negative trends, including some long-term anthropologically driven processes such as changes in sea surface temperature (Fernández-Corredor et al. 2021) and reductions in the number of days with optimal spawning conditions for anchovies (Ramírez et al. 2021, Ouled-Cheikh et al. 2022; Indicator E 9,10), as well as the presence of plastics in the guts of small pelagic fish (Compa et al. 2018, Pennino et al. 2020b; Indicator E7, E8).

When considering the implications on a global scale, it is worth mentioning that Spanish per capita fish consumption remains much higher than the world average (Indicator E12) while its self-sufficiency rate in 2020 was 49% (EUMOFA 2023), so it relies significantly on imports. However, it is important to highlight that the fuel efficiency of Mediterranean pure-seiners is much better than the average Spanish Mediterranean fleets, especially when compared to bottom trawling (Muñoz et al. 2023; Indicator E11).

In relation to the social dimension, although the grey column in the “buyer’s concentration” indicator (Fig. 4) represents the lack of sufficient historical records to establish either an absolute reference value or a tendency analysis, it is remarkable that the concentration of buyers is high, with five buyers in Catalonia and Valencia accounting for more than 50% of all purse seiner captures in 2021 (Ortega Cerdà and Coll 2022). Data collection only began in 2021, and in the near future, a tendency approach can be applied to analyze the trend of this indicator. The red column with yellow dots in the “representation of purse-seiners in regional fishermen sectorial representative bodies” indicator shows that the value varies by region, with proportional representation in Catalonia and no representation in Valencia and Murcia.

Fisheries transition

The doughnut approach is a flexible non-sectorial specific framework that can be used in the different blue economy activities supporting multi-sectorial discussion processes. It provides a holistic view of the analyzed sector and the ecosystem where it interacts, and adds to other already existing specific sectorial holistic indicator approaches, such as, for example, in the fisheries case Anderson et al. (2015) or Carpenter et al. (2021), and those linked with ecosystem fisheries assessments (Bundy et al. 2012, Shin et al. 2012, Kleisner et al. 2013, Fu et al. 2019, Lockerbie et al. 2020), or the information provided regularly in specific reports by institutions such as the STECF.

Our case study shows that the doughnut approach can be a useful information framework to discuss fisheries transition in line with the blue economy objectives. Although the purse-seiner fishing pressure indicators show that total fishing pressure should decrease, it is important to note that in coherence with an Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Approach, the ecosystem status indicators of the doughnut suggest that improvement should not only focus on the stock itself but also on improving the whole ecosystem, where key ecological processes supporting the targeted species take place. Some measures could lead to win-win situations if they embrace multiple objectives, such as establishing areas where fisheries and climate change strategies go hand in hand (Pennino et al. 2019, Ramírez et al. 2021) or protecting nursery areas and addressing interactions with other fisheries that damage the key anchovy and sardine essential fish habitats (Tugores et al. 2011, Giannoulaki et al. 2013).

It is important to note that the profit margin indicator shows that the economic strategy of most businesses in the fishing sector is based on small margins (Indicator S3: 69% of the analyzed businesses have less than a 3% margin) and big catch volumes. This strategy makes the sector fragile in case of cost increases or volume fluctuations, whether they are natural or management-driven. Therefore, structured fish management processes that may reduce fishing catches would be more readily embraced if they are accompanied by strategies that increase profit margins, to prevent an increase in the number of businesses with negative economic profitability. Another potential strategy involves increasing public subsidies, similar to what has recently been approved by the Spanish Government, to promote the expansion of temporary cessation of activities aimed at supporting sardine recovery (MAPA 2023b).

Currently, significant catch volumes of sardine and anchovy are below the size of maturity and the minimum conservation reference size, therefore, these were immature and small-sized individuals that had not bred yet (Coll and Bellido 2020, ICATMAR 2021). Selective output fishing strategies, such as increasing the minimum size of fish allowed to be sold, in addition to a global catch decrease, may help to recover the ecosystem functioning while minimizing the impact on economic profitability, because the margin of selling bigger fish is higher because fish commercial categories are used in local auctions. An increase of the minimum conservation size has been recently approved in the new “Spanish Mediterranean purse seiners sustainability management plan” (MAPA 2023a).

Another strategy to increase profit margin could be to try to increase the seller’s negotiation capacity. However, given the high concentration of buyers in the region (Ortega Cerdà and Coll 2022, Ortega Cerdà et al. 2023), and the fact that most buyers purchase from other national and international markets, increasing the bargaining power of sellers in the purse-seiner fishery is more challenging than in other fisheries where buyer concentration is lower. An alternative could be for sellers to negotiate collectively, through guilds or producer organizations, to create high-volume seller agreements in some of the biggest ports (such as the already existing example in Tarragona, which allows fishers to know how much they will be paid before going to fish), or by jointly negotiating through multi-harbor fishers’ producer organizations.

A third option to increase the profit margin would be to process part of the catch. Although there are important fish processors in the area, they mostly use sardine and anchovy from the Atlantic because they consider the size of the Mediterranean fish as not sufficient and the volume fluctuations are too high, which is a common problem with other Mediterranean fish products that retailers also address (Ortega Cerdà and Coll 2022, Gómez et al. 2023). Nevertheless, some studies have been carried out to develop new products adapted to the local catch (Calle and Elsa 2021). A qualitative improvement in the status of the landed species may be key to successful transition processes.

The necessary transition to achieve a sustainable sector is not solely a technical or financial issue; it also requires sufficient social capabilities to lead and manage the process, taking into consideration the social context where it would occur. In this regard, there are several indicators that should be considered. First, as we can see in the doughnut indicators, the purse-seiner fishing community has a disproportionate number of male fishers over 40 years of age with low levels of basic education (Indicators S 6–8); it is not surprising then that the government promotes the incorporation of young fishers (MAPA 2023c).

Second, the difficult ecological and economic situation has resulted in low wages for workers who spend more than 8 hours at sea at night. Indicators show that a significant portion of purse-seiner fisher workers are paid less than the average wage in Spain, with some receiving only minimum wage (Indicator S5). Additionally, the traditional shared remuneration system does not include fixed salaries, as owners pay based on the economic results obtained in the period, usually on a weekly or biweekly basis (Guillen et al. 2015). Consequently, there is a high degree of weekly income uncertainty and fluctuations. Potential measures to reduce uncertainty for workers, such as introducing monthly assured fixed salaries with bonuses based on economic results, have not been implemented in this fishery. As a result, there are currently difficulties in finding fishers, and the fleet is increasingly attracting the most vulnerable sectors of society with fewer job opportunities, particularly non-EU citizens that are not present in the sectoral executive committees of the fisheries decision-making institutions (Indicator S12). Official data from 2019 shows that 20.2% of Mediterranean crew members were non-EU citizens (MAPA 2020), while the number of fishers in the community has decreased by 11% compared to the previous three-year average (Indicator S4). From a technical resilience perspective, indicators show that a significant portion of the Mediterranean fleet is aging (Indicator S9), resulting in decreased technical resilience. The demand for public funds to construct new purse seiners and/or modernize the existing fleet is a contentious issue among purse-seine fishers in the Spanish Mediterranean fleet (Ortega et al. 2023).

The social, ecological, and economic conditions integrated under the doughnut approach suggest that any isolated fisheries management measures are unlikely to be sufficient to achieve a secure and ecologically safe space that is also socially just. Our assessment indicates the need for urgent action and an overarching transition plan that requires an ecosystem-based fishery management plan, together with a commercial and a social plan.

Limitations

In terms of data availability and analytical limitations, it is important to acknowledge that it is not always feasible to establish absolute thresholds for all the indicators. In cases related to economic and social factors (such as return on equity, profit margin, fishers’ wages, education, and vessel age), we have adopted the comparative advantage economic theory and benchmarked them against other regions or economic activities with which they compete. These indicators are crucial for describing the short-term relative attractiveness and competitiveness of the fisheries sector.

Regarding ecological ceilings (fuel intensity and fish consumption), instead of using zero values as targets—which is not currently achievable with current technology for the former, and significantly deviates from current social trends for the latter—we have taken a short-term approach. We have used the average oil consumption by the Spanish fleet as a reference value, once again employing the comparative advantage economic perspective, and the world average consumption. It is worth noting that this choice can be replaced by setting zero as the ultimate target if desired.

CONCLUSIONS

The doughnut approach was applied for the first time to the fisheries sector, with a focus on purse-seiners in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. The study found that this approach was useful in providing valuable information to support the transition of fisheries toward becoming a sustainable blue economy.

The doughnut perspective offers a comprehensive, flexible, and holistic approach based on multiple values that are easy to understand and can be easily incorporated into a cohesive narrative of transitioning to a “safe and just space for humanity.” This approach can also be extended to other blue economy sectors, which is an especially noteworthy feature in a context of expanding marine economic activities, and can help to avoid the sometimes conflictual narrative of environment versus economy, as well as the less objective-oriented sustainability narrative that considers the social, environmental, and economic perspectives in isolation. Such approaches are often found in marine political discussions. The doughnut approach can facilitate dialogue between different stakeholders, including decision makers and managers, media, researchers, and NGOs.

Using an “out of the fisheries box” framework can also facilitate the participation of fisheries experts, enabling them to use a common “framework language” in the broader discussions about the socioeconomic and ecological changes that are needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals in the context of the blue economy. And vice versa, it provides non-fisheries experts a way of understanding what is happening in fisheries.

Nonetheless, our approach has also limitations. It does not show the linkages and dependencies between the indicators, so it needs to be completed with other tools to properly evaluate trade-offs between management scenarios. There are also technical difficulties. For example, it is not always easy to “translate” the selected ecological and social indicators into the “basic needs and ecological ceilings” framework. This is mainly due to the fact that establishing reference values to compare the current status is not always possible. When instead of using reference values, historical data series is used, we should be careful because we may be hiding shifting baseline tendencies (Pauly 1995), so whenever possible the use of fix reference values is preferable. Finally, further testing of this framework in a temporal context remains to be done, as well as reflecting on how to account for different fleet segments (e.g., purse seiners, bottom trawlers, artisanal fleet), the trade-offs that arise between them, and the interaction between fisheries and other blue economy activities such as offshore energy production, or transport. This is crucial for transitioning toward an ecosystem-based fisheries management approach.

Unsurprisingly, there exists tension between the utilization of general frameworks and sector-specific nuances, as well as between global assessments and regional specifics. The doughnut approach offers a common and adaptable foundational structure that must be customized for specific sectors and regions, rooted in local knowledge and perspectives (Raworth 2017, Raworth et al. 2020). Because of its novelty, it is still too early to determine the extent to which common standard basic indicators will be embraced in these analyses (Warnecke 2023). This case study represents an initial contribution to its potential application in a blue economy sector, with the recognition that it should be further enriched by future studies in other sectors and fisheries. Despite these limitations, this study demonstrates how the doughnut perspective can offer useful insights for fisheries transition toward becoming a sustainable blue economic sector. We believe that the flexible and adaptable doughnut approach can provide a good discussion framework to the broader conversation around what constitutes a successful and sustainable blue economy. Drawing from this experience, we propose that similar approaches could be applied to other sectors within the blue economy, making this an intriguing avenue for future research.

LITERATURE CITED

Anderson, J. L., C. M. Anderson, J. Chu, J. Meredith, F. Asche, G. Sylvia, M. D. Smith, D. Anggraeni, R. Arthur, A. Guttormsen, J. K. McCluney, T. Ward, W. Akpalu, H. Eggert, J. Flores, M. A. Freeman, D. S. Holland, G. Knapp, M. Kobayashi, S. Larkin, K. MacLauchlin, K. Schnier, M. Soboil, S. Tveteras, H. Uchida, and D. Valderrama. 2015. The fishery performance indicators: a management tool for triple bottom line outcomes. PLoS ONE 10(5): e0122809. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122809

Bennett, N. J., A. Schuhbauer, D. Skerritt, and N. Ebrahim. 2021. Socio-economic monitoring and evaluation in fisheries. Fisheries Research 239:105934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2021.105934

Berkeley, S. A., M. A. Hixon, R. J. Larson, and M. S. Love. 2004. Fisheries sustainability via protection of age structure and spatial distribution of fish populations. Fisheries 29(8):23-32. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(2004)29[23:FSVPOA]2.0.CO;2

Botsford, L. W., J. C. Castilla, and C. H. Peterson. 1997. The management of fisheries and marine ecosystems. Science 277(5325):509-515. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5325.509

Bundy, A., M. Coll, L. J. Shannon, and Y. J. Shin. 2012. Global assessments of the status of marine exploited ecosystems and their management: what more is needed? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4(3):292-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.05.003

Calle, C. B. i., and L. F. Elsa. 2021. Valorització del peix blau per a la millora de la competitivitat del sector pesquer. TECA: Tecnologia i Ciència dels Aliments 20(20):65-67.

Carpenter, G., J. Innes, S. Mardle, A. Johnson, A. Leroy, and L. Milo-Dale. 2021. Socio-economic impacts of the EU Common Fisheries Policy - an evaluation of the European Union fishing fleet and options for the future. WWF, Brussels, Belgium.

Christensen, V., and J. Maclean, editors. 2011. Ecosystem approaches to fisheries: a global perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511920943

Coll, M., M. Albo-Puigserver, J. Navarro, I. Palomera, and J. Dambacher. 2019. Who is to blame? Plausible pressures on small pelagic fish population changes in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 617-618:277-294. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12591

Coll, M., and J. Bellido. 2020. SPELMED, evaluation of the population status and specific management alternatives for the small pelagic fish stocks in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

Coll, M., C. Piroddi, J. Steenbeek, K. Kaschner, F. B. R. Lasram, J. Aguzzi, E. Ballesteros, C. N. Bianchi, J. Corbera, T. Dailianis, R. Danovaro, M. Estrada, C. Froglia, B. S. Galil, J. M. Gasol, R. Gertwage, J. Gil, F. Guilhaumon, K. Kesner-Reyes, M. S. Kitsos, A. Koukouras, N. Lampadariou, E. Laxamana, C. M. L. F. de la Cuadra, H. K. Lotze, D. Martin, D. Mouillot, D. Oro, S. Raicevich, J. Rius-Barile, J. I. Saiz-Salinas, C. S. Vicente, S. Somot, J. Templado, X. Turon, D. Vafidis, R. Villanueva, and E. Voultsiadou. 2010. The biodiversity of the Mediterranean Sea: estimates, patterns, and threats. PLoS ONE 5(8):e11842. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011842

Coll, M., M. A. Puigserver, J. Giménez, E. L. Lloret, and J. Dambacher. 2020. Socio-ecological analysis of the pelagic system of the northwest Mediterranean Sea, focusing on the dynamics of small pelagic fish. Institute of Marine Science (ICM-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain.

Compa, M., A. Ventero, M. Iglesias, and S. Deudero. 2018. Ingestion of microplastics and natural fibres in Sardina pilchardus (Walbaum, 1792) and Engraulis encrasicolus (Linnaeus, 1758) along the Spanish Mediterranean coast. Marine Pollution Bulletin 128:89-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.01.009

Cook, D., B. Davíðsdóttir, and L. Malinauskaite. 2023. The role of ecosystem services in the doughnut economy - the example of whale ecosystem services in Disko Bay, Greenland. Ecosystem Services 63:101552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101552

Costanza, R., F. Andrade, P. Antunes, M. van den Belt, D. Boersma, D. F. Boesch, F. Catarino, S. Hanna, K. Limburg, B. Low, M. Molitor, J. G. Pereira, S. Rayner, R. Santos, J. Wilson, and M. Young. 1998. Principles for sustainable governance of the oceans. Science 281(5374):198-199. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5374.198

Cury, P. M., L. Shannon, and S. YunneJai. 2003. The functioning of marine ecosystems: a fisheries perspective. Pages 103-123 in M. Sinclair and G. Valdimarsson, editors. Responsible fisheries in the marine ecosystem. CABI, Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851996332.0103

Cury, P. M., Y. J. Shin, B. Planque, J. M. Durant, J. M. Fromentin, S. Kramer-Schadt, N. C. Stenseth, M. Travers, and V. Grimm. 2008. Ecosystem oceanography for global change in fisheries. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23(6):338-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.02.005

D’Alisa, G., F. Demaria, and G. Kallis, editors. 2015. Degrowth: a vocabulary for a new era. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203796146

DEAL. 2022. Doughnut Economics Action Lab. https://doughnuteconomics.org/

Díaz, S., J. Settele, E. S. Brondízio, H. T. Ngo, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, A. G. Lucas, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian, G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, S. Polasky, A. Purvis, J. Razzaque, B. Reyers, R. R. Chowdhury, Y. J. Shin, I. Visseren-Hamakers, K. J. Willis, and C. N. Zayas. 2019. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366:6471. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax3100

Dillman, K. J., J. Heinonen, and B. Davíðsdóttir. 2023. A development of intergenerational sustainability indicators and thresholds for mobility system provisioning: a socio-ecological framework in the context of strong sustainability. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators 18:100240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2023.100240

Duda, A. M., and K. Sherman. 2002. A new imperative for improving management of large marine ecosystems. Ocean & Coastal Management 45(11-12):797-833. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0964-5691(02)00107-2

Ertör, I., and M. Hadjimichael. 2020. Editorial: Blue degrowth and the politics of the sea: rethinking the blue economy. Sustainability Science 15(1):1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00772-y

European Commission. 2009. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. GDP and beyond: measuring progress in a changing world. COM (2009) 433. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0433:FIN:EN:PDF

European Commission. 2017. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Initiative for the sustainable development of the blue economy in the western Mediterranean. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2021. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a new approach for a sustainable blue economy in the EU Transforming the EU’s Blue Economy for a Sustainable Future. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.

European Commission. 2023a. EU blue economy sectors. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. https://blue-economy-observatory.ec.europa.eu/eu-blue-economy-sectors_en

European Commission. 2023b. Blue economy indicators. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. https://blue-economy-observatory.ec.europa.eu/blue-economy-indicators_en

European Commission, A. Addamo, A. Calvo Santos, J. Guillén, S. Neehus, A. Peralta Baptista, S. Quatrini, T. Telsnig, and G. Petrucco. 2022. The EU blue economy report 2022. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

European Market Observatory for Fisheries and Aquaculture (EUMOFA). 2023. Country profile Spain. EUMOFA, Brussels, Belgium.

Fang, K. 2022. Moving away from sustainability. Nature Research 5:5-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00802-7

Fanning, A. L., D. W. O’Neill, J. Hickel, and N. Roux. 2022. The social shortfall and ecological overshoot of nations. Nature Sustainability 5(1):26-36. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00799-z

Fernández-Corredor, E., M. Albo-Puigserver, M. G. Pennino, J. M. Bellido, and M. Coll. 2021. Influence of environmental factors on different life stages of European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) and European sardine (Sardina pilchardus) from the Mediterranean Sea: a literature review. Regional Studies in Marine Science 41:101606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2020.101606

Fischer-Kowalski, M. 1998. Society’s metabolism. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2(1):61-78. https://doi.org/10.1162/jiec.1998.2.1.61

Fischer-Kowalski, M., and W. Hüttler. 1998. Society’s metabolism. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2(4):107-136. https://doi.org/10.1162/jiec.1998.2.4.107

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2022. The state of Mediterranean and Black Sea fisheries 2022. General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, FAO, Rome, Italy.

Fu, C., Y. Xu, A. Bundy, A. Grüss, M. Coll, J. J. Heymans, E. A. Fulton, L. Shannon, G. Halouani, L. Velez, E. Akoğlu, C. P. Lynam, and Y. J. Shin. 2019. Making ecological indicators management ready: assessing the specificity, sensitivity, and threshold response of ecological indicators. Ecological Indicators 105:16-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.05.055

Giannoulaki, M., M. Iglesias, M. P. Tugores, A. Bonanno, B. Patti, A. De Felice, I. Leonori, J. L. Bigot, V. Tičina, M. M. Pyrounaki, K. Tsagarakis, A. Machias, S. Somarakis, E. Schismenou, E. Quinci, G. Basilone, A. Cuttitta, F. Campanella, J. Miquel, D. Oñate, D. Roos, and V. Valavanis. 2013. Characterizing the potential habitat of European anchovy Engraulis encrasicolus in the Mediterranean Sea, at different life stages. Fisheries Oceanography 22(2):69-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/fog.12005

Gómez, S., B. Patraca, and J. L. Molina. 2023. Improving seafood systems with social network analysis: the case of cuttlefish marketing in Catalonia. Marine Policy 150:105517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105517

Guillen, J., C. Macher, M. Merzéréaud, J. Boncoeur, and O. Guyader. 2015. Effects of the share remuneration system on fisheries management targets and rent distribution. Marine Resource Economics 30(2):123-138. https://doi.org/10.1086/679970

Hadjimichael, M. 2018. A call for a blue degrowth: unravelling the European Union’s fisheries and maritime policies. Marine Policy 94:158-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.05.007

Halpern, B. S., M. Frazier, J. Afflerbach, J. S. Lowndes, F. Micheli, C. O’Hara, C. Scarborough, and K. A. Selkoe. 2019. Recent pace of change in human impact on the world’s ocean. Scientific Reports 9:11609. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47201-9

Halpern, B. S., S. Walbridge, K. A. Selkoe, C. v. Kappel, F. Micheli, C. D’Agrosa, J. F. Bruno, K. S. Casey, C. Ebert, H. E. Fox, R. Fujita, D. Heinemann, H. S. Lenihan, E. M. P. Madin, M. T. Perry, E. R. Selig, M. Spalding, R. Steneck, and R. Watson. 2008. A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319(5865):948-952. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1149345

Hartman, S., and J. H. Heslinga. 2023. The Doughnut Destination: applying Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economy perspective to rethink tourism destination management. Journal of Tourism Futures 9(2):279-284. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-01-2022-0017

Hornborg, S., I. van Putten, C. Novaglio, E. A. Fulton, J. L. Blanchard, É. Plagányi, C. Bulman, and K. Sainsbury. 2019. Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires broader performance indicators for the human dimension. Marine Policy 108:103639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103639

Institut Català de Recerca per a la Governança del Mar (ICATMAR). 2021. State of Fisheries in Catalonia 2020. Part 1: Methods and Results (ICATMAR, 21-02). ICATMAR, Barcelona, Spain.

Jackson, T. 2017. Prosperity without growth: foundations for the economy of tomorrow. Second edition. Routledge, Abingdon, UK.

Kleisner, K. M., C. Longo, M. Coll, B. S. Halpern, D. Hardy, S. K. Katona, F. Le Manach, D. Pauly, A. A. Rosenberg, J. F. Samhouri, C. Scarborough, U. Rashid Sumaila, R. Watson, and D. Zeller. 2013. Exploring patterns of seafood provision revealed in the global ocean health index. Ambio 42(8):910-922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-013-0447-x

Link, J. S. 2010. Ecosystem-based fisheries management: confronting trade-offs. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Lloret-Lloret, E., M. Albo-Puigserver, J. Giménez, J. Navarro, M. G. Pennino, J. Steenbeek, J. M. Bellido, and M. Coll. 2022. Small pelagic fish fitness relates to local environmental conditions and trophic variables. Progress in Oceanography 202:102745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2022.102745

Lockerbie, E. M., L. Shannon, C. P. Lynam, M. Coll, and A. Jarre. 2020. A comparative framework to support an ecosystem approach to fisheries in a global context. Ecology and Society 25(2):16. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11508-250216

Lotze, H. K., M. Coll, and J. A. Dunne. 2011. Historical changes in marine resources, food-web structure and ecosystem functioning in the Adriatic Sea, Mediterranean. Ecosystems 14(2):198-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-010-9404-8

Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA). 2020. Encuesta económica de la pesca marítima 2020.

Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA). 2021. Encuesta económica de la pesca marítima 2021. Madrid.

Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA). 2023a. Plan de gestión para la pesca con artes de cerco en el subcaladero Mediterráneo. MAPA, Madrid, Spain.

Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA). 2023b. El Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación refuerza la protección de la sardina en el Mediterráneo. MAPA, Madrid, Spain. https://www.mapa.gob.es/es/prensa/ultimas-noticias/el-ministerio-de-agricultura-pesca-y-alimentaci%C3%B3n-refuerza-la-protecci%C3%B3n-de-la-sardina-en-el-mediterr%C3%A1neo/tcm:30-661760

Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (MAPA). 2023c. Relevo generacional. MAPA, Madrid, Spain. https://www.mapa.gob.es/es/pesca/temas/relevo-generacional/

Muñoz, M., A. Reul, B. Guijarro, and M. Hidalgo. 2023. Carbon footprint, economic benefits and sustainable fishing: lessons for the future from the Western Mediterranean. Science of The Total Environment 865:160783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160783

Nash, K. L., C. Cvitanovic, E. A. Fulton, B. S. Halpern, E. J. Milner-Gulland, R. A. Watson, and J. L. Blanchard. 2017. Planetary boundaries for a blue planet. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1(11):1625-1634. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0319-z

O’Neill, D. W., A. L. Fanning, W. F. Lamb, and J. K. Steinberger. 2018. A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nature Sustainability 1(2):88-95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0021-4

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2011. Better life initiative: measuring well-being and progress. OECD, Paris, France. https://www.oecd.org/wise/better-life-initiative.htm

Ortega, M., S. Mohamed, E. Carbonell, M. D. Castro-Cadenas, L. Espasandín, E. Fernández-Corredor, J. Giménez, E. Lloret-Lloret, F. Ramírez, V. Sbragaglia, and M. Coll. 2023. Conocimiento local de la flota de cerco de Castellón e identificación de especies vulnerables. El proyecto SEINE-ETP. Pages47-53 in J. L. Lizaso, editor. Foro Científico de la pesca española en el Mediterráneo. Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.

Ortega Cerdà, M., and M. Coll. 2022. ¿Quién compra el pescado en las lonjas catalanas? : Informe científico-técnico. CSIC - Instituto de Ciencias del Mar (ICM), Barcelona, Spain.

Ortega Cerdà, M., M. Coll, and B. Guijarro. 2023. ¿Quién compra el pescado en Mallorca? Similitudes y diferencias con Cataluña. CSIC - Institut de Ciències del Mar, Barcelona, andf CSIC - Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Madrid, Spain.

Ottersen, G., D. O. Hjermann, and N. C. Stenseth. 2006. Changes in spawning stock structure strengthen the link between climate and recruitment in a heavily fished cod (Gadus morhua) stock. Fisheries Oceanography 15(3):230-243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2419.2006.00404.x

Ouled-Cheikh, J., M. Coll, L. Cardona, J. Steenbeek, and F. Ramírez. 2022. Fisheries-enhanced pressure on Mediterranean regions and pelagic species already impacted by climate change. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene 10(1):00028. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2022.00028

Pauly, D. 1995. Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 10(10):430. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(00)89171-5

Pauly, D., V. Christensen, S. Guénette, T. J. Pitcher, U. R. Sumaila, C. J. Walters, R. Watson, and D. Zeller. 2002. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418(6898):689-695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01017

Pauly, G. 2010. The blue economy: 10 years, 100 innovations, 100 million jobs. Report to the Club of Rome. Paradigm, Taos, New Mexico, USA.

Pennino, M. G., E. Bachiller, E. Lloret-Lloret, M. Albo-Puigserver, A. Esteban, A. Jadaud, J. M. Bellido, and M. Coll. 2020a. Ingestion of microplastics and occurrence of parasite association in Mediterranean anchovy and sardine. Marine Pollution Bulletin 158:111399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111399

Pennino, M. G., M. Coll, M. Albo-Puigserver, E. Fernández-Corredor, J. Steenbeek, A. Giráldez, M. González, A. Esteban, and J. M. Bellido. 2020b. Current and future influence of environmental factors on small pelagic fish distributions in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Frontiers in Marine Science 7:622. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00622

Pennino, M. G., R. Vilela, and J. M. Bellido. 2019. Effects of environmental data temporal resolution on the performance of species distribution models. Journal of Marine Systems 189:78-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2018.10.001

Pikitch, E. K., C. Santora, E. A. Babcock, A. Bakun, R. Bonfil, D. O. Conover, P. Dayton, P. Doukakis, D. Fluharty, B. Heneman, E. D. Houde, J. Link, P. A. Livingston, M. Mangel, M. K. McAllister, J. Pope, and K. J. Sainsbury. 2004. Ecosystem-based fishery management. Science 305(5682):346-347. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1098222

Potgieter, T. 2018. Oceans economy, blue economy, and security: notes on the South African potential and developments. Journal of the Indian Ocean Region 14(1):49-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2018.1410962

Ramírez, F., M. G. Pennino, M. Albo-Puigserver, J. Steenbeek, J. M. Bellido, and M. Coll. 2021. SOS small pelagics: a safe operating space for small pelagic fish in the western Mediterranean Sea. Science of the Total Environment 756:144002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144002

Raworth, K. 2012. A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the doughnut? First edition. Oxfam International, London, UK.

Raworth, K. 2017. Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. Random House Business Books, London, UK.

Raworth, K., J. Benyus, A. Fanning, O. Krestyaninova, J. Dwyer, N. Hagerman Miller, and F. Eriksson. 2020. Creating city portraits. A methodological guide from The Thriving Cities Initiative. Doughnut Economics Action Lab, Biomimicry 3.8, C40 Cities, and Circle Economy, Oxford, UK.

Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. Persson, F. S. Chapin III, E. F. Lambin, T. M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, C. Folke, H. J. Schellnhuber, B. Nykvist, C. A. de Wit, T. Hughes, S. van der Leeuw, H. Rodhe, S. Sörlin, P. K. Snyder, R. Costanza, U. Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R. W. Corell, V. J. Fabry, J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, P. Crutzen, and J. A. Foley. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461(7263):472-475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a

Saraux, C., E. van Beveren, P. Brosset, Q. Queiros, J. H. Bourdeix, G. Dutto, E. Gasset, C. Jac, S. Bonhommeau, and J. M. Fromentin. 2019. Small pelagic fish dynamics: a review of mechanisms in the Gulf of Lions. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 159:52-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr2.2018.02.010

Shin, Y. J., A. Bundy, L. J. Shannon, J. L. Blanchard, R. Chuenpagdee, M. Coll, B. Knight, C. Lynam, G. Piet, A. J. Richardson, and the IndiSeas Working Group. 2012. Global in scope and regionally rich: an IndiSeas workshop helps shape the future of marine ecosystem indicators. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 22(3):835-845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-012-9252-z

Slaper, T., and T. Hall. 2011. The triple bottom line: what is it and how does it work? Indiana Business Review Spring 86(1):4-8.

Steffen, W. 2022. Planetary boundaries: 2022 update with Professor Will Steffen. Video. Greenprints Exchange Workshop Series, Australia. https://youtu.be/B1vSWPsjknI?feature=shared

Steffen, W., K. Richardson, J. Rockström, S. E. Cornell, I. Fetzer, E. M. Bennett, R. Biggs, S. R. Carpenter, W. De Vries, C. A. De Wit, C. Folke, D. Gerten, J. Heinke, G. M. Mace, L. M. Persson, V. Ramanathan, B. Reyers, and S. Sörlin. 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347(6223). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

Stiglitz, J. E., J.-P. Fitoussi, and M. Durand. 2018. Beyond GDP. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307292-en

Tugores, P., M. Giannoulaki, M. Iglesias, A. Bonanno, V. Tičina, I. Leonori, A. Machias, K. Tsagarakis, N. Díaz, A. Giráldez, B. Patti, A. De Felice, G. Basilone, and V. Valavanis. 2011. Habitat suitability modelling for sardine Sardina pilchardus in a highly diverse ecosystem: the Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 443:181-205. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09366

Turner, R. A., and J. Wills. 2022. Downscaling doughnut economics for sustainability governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 56:101180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101180

United Nations. 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembly of the United Nations, New York, New York, USA.

United Nations Environment Programme. 2021. The use of natural resources in the economy: a global manual on economy wide material flow accounting. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

United Nations Environment Programme, B. Oberle, S. Bringezu, S. Hatfield-Dodds, S. Hellweg, H. Schandl, J. Clement, L. Cabernard, N. Che, D. Chen, H. Droz-, P. Ekins, M. Fischer-kowalski, M. Flörke, S. Frank, A. Froemelt, A. Geschke, M. Haupt, P. Havlik, M. Lenzen, M. Lieber, B. Liu, Y. Lu, J. Mehr, A. Miatto, D. Newth, C. Oberschelp, M. Obersteiner, S. Pfster, E. Piccoli, R. Schaldach, T. Sonderegger, A. Sudheshwar, H. Tanikawa, V. der Voet, C. Walker, J. West, Z. Wang, B. Zhu, P. Bifani, I. Convery, S. Cornell, R. Dellink, F. Eboli, S. E. Jouini, C. Ge, R. S. de Groot, and J. Kaviti. 2019. Global resources outlook: a report of the International Resource Panel. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

Valencia Lenero, E. 2021. Finding a safe and just space for water use in Mexico City: an evaluation of Mexico City’s water public policies with doughnut economic sustainability transitions criteria. Thesis. The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Voyer, M., G. Quirk, A. McIlgorm, and K. Azmi. 2018. Shades of blue: what do competing interpretations of the Blue Economy mean for oceans governance? Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 20(5):595-616. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1473153

Warnecke, T. 2023. Operationalizing the doughnut economy: an institutional perspective. Journal of Economic Issues 57(2):643-653. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2023.2202570

World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2017. Blue economy Increasing long-term benefits of the sustainable use of marine resources for small island developing states and coastal least developed countries. World Bank and United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Washington, D.C., USA.

Youssef, M. 2023. Blue economy literature review. International Journal of Business and Management 18(3):12-18. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v18n3p12

Copyright © 2024 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. You may share and adapt the work provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license.