Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70269369

Opportunities to better integrate inland fish and fisheries in multilateral environmental agreements

Abstract

Inland fish and fisheries are globally important to environmental function and human services, yet their persistent lack of recognition in global agreements, especially multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), may hinder progress towards biodiversity conservation and human well-being. The connection between inland fish, fisheries, and their ecosystems means that addressing the needs of fish directly offers opportunities to meet multiple global commitments and provide indicators of progress towards many global goals. In this perspective, we highlight opportunities to better integrate inland fish and fisheries into MEAs, specifically the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Convention on Wetlands (commonly known as the Ramsar Convention), Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and World Heritage Convention (WHC). Greater attention on inland fish and fisheries through MEAs could help ensure more holistic planning, investment, and conservation of these important fish and fisheries, their biodiversity, the essential resources they provision, and the environments they inhabit.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Abigail J. Lynch, Devin Bartley, Beard, Gabriel Borba, Steven J. Cooke, Ian G. Cowx, Vittoria Elliott, Holly Susan Embke, Edith Gondwe, Zeb Hogan, Jonathan G. Low, Jamie Madden, Sui C. Phang, Emma D. Rice, Nicholas A. Sievert, Gretchen L. Stokes, Leonard Akwany, Edward H. Allison, Robert Arlinghaus, Robert I. Arthur, Vidyadhar Atkore, Mahatub Khan Badhon, Claudio Baigun, Jill Brooks, Leandro Castello, Somvilay Chanthalounnavong, Seila Chea, Soksan Chhorn, Michael S. Cooperman, Kim Crisafi, James Dalton, Caitlin Doughty, Jason Earl, Wasseem E. Emam, Rebecca L. Flitcroft, Daria Gundermann, Henry H. Hansen, Ian Harrison, Kathy Hughes, Külli Kangur, Ted Lawrence, Roman Lyach, Bonnie Jean Evaline Myers, Muruganandam Muthiah, Nguyen Thi Kim Quyen, Vivian M. Nguyen, Elizabeth A. Nyboer, Julian D. Olden, Craig P. Paukert, Morgan L. Piczak, Yasmín Quintana, Vu Dang Ha Quyen, Shehu Latunji Akintola, Roshani Shrestha, Sokmoly Uon, Sophorn Uy, Cassie M. VanWynen. 2025-07-18. Opportunities to better integrate inland fish and fisheries in multilateral environmental agreements. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104089

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature

Linking science with action affords a prime opportunity to leverage greater societal impact from research and increase the use of evidence in decision-making. Success in these areas depends critically upon processes of producing and mobilizing knowledge, as well as supporting and making decisions. For decades, scholars have idealized and described these social processes in different ways, resulting in numerous assumptions that now variously guide engagements at the interface of science and society. We systematically catalog these assumptions based on prior research on the science-policy interface, and further distill them into a set of 26 claims. We then elicit expert perspectives (n = 16) about these claims to assess the extent to which they are accurate or merit further examination. Out of this process, we construct a research agenda to motivate future scientific research on actionable knowledge, prioritizing areas that experts identified as critical gaps in understanding of the science-society interface. The resulting agenda focuses on how to define success, support intermediaries, build trust, and evaluate the importance of consensus and its alternatives – all in the diverse contexts of science-society-decision-making interactions. We further raise questions about the centrality of knowledge in these interactions, discussing how a governance lens might be generative of efforts to support more equitable processes and outcomes. We offer these suggestions with hopes of furthering the science of actionable knowledge as a transdisciplinary area of inquiry.

Environmental Science & Policy