From record global seafood production to alarmingly high rates of stocks harvested beyond sustainable limits, the numbers behind cod overfishing show how quickly a single species can signal a much bigger crisis.
Key Takeaways
- In 2019, the world’s oceans produced 90.9 million tonnes of capture fisheries and 86.4 million tonnes of aquaculture production; when comparing total seafood supply, this indicates major pressure on wild fisheries that can contribute to overfishing
- In 2019, capture fisheries generated 96.4 million tonnes (including aquatic plants) while inland capture fisheries provided 12.1 million tonnes
- The 2020 State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA 2020) reported that 34.2% of fish stocks were overfished in 2017
- FAO reported that in 2019, world capture fisheries production was 96.4 million tonnes (and aquaculture supplemented), with 34.2% of assessed stocks overfished in 2017, linking management and overfishing
- FAO SOFIA 2020 estimated that 35% of fisheries subsidies are harmful (globally), which can exacerbate overfishing incentives
- The WTO and World Bank report “The Elusive Quest for Fisheries Sustainability” indicates that global fisheries subsidies contribute billions and incentivize overfishing and overcapacity, including an estimated $35.4 billion per year in harmful subsidies (as cited in the report)
- Atlantic cod recovery plan target relates to rebuilding spawning stock biomass (SSB) to support sustainable fisheries; NOAA’s plan uses a quantitative SSB target for rebuilding
- NOAA cod rebuilding plan includes required SSB rebuilding duration/benchmarks; these are numerical and used to restrict harvest
- The U.S. Atlantic cod recreational and commercial regulations include target TAC/ACL values; NOAA provides annual catch limits and sector allocations
- In a widely cited modeling study, global fisheries profits could rise by about 16% if fishing mortality were set to MSY levels, indicating overfishing distortions; it provides a numeric 16% increase estimate
- The same study estimated that rebuilding fisheries could increase global profits by around $53 billion per year (model-based)
- The World Bank “Sunken Billions” report estimates that the global cost of overfishing is about $83 billion per year
- FAO estimated in 2020 that 34.2% of fish stocks were overfished (2017); this overfishing includes cod stocks in multiple regions, as cod is among the main assessed demersal species
- FAO SOFIA 2022 estimated 36.3% of stocks were overfished (2019), indicating ongoing need for reforms that affect cod management in many regions
- The EU Common Fisheries Policy aims to restore and maintain populations of harvested species above MSY; the regulation includes a specific target timeline and framework
Cod and oceans face overfishing: stocks overfished, mortality high, quotas weak, livelihoods threatened.
Fisheries status & stock assessments
1In 2019, the world’s oceans produced 90.9 million tonnes of capture fisheries and 86.4 million tonnes of aquaculture production; when comparing total seafood supply, this indicates major pressure on wild fisheries that can contribute to overfishing[1]
Verified2In 2019, capture fisheries generated 96.4 million tonnes (including aquatic plants) while inland capture fisheries provided 12.1 million tonnes[1]
Verified3The 2020 State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA 2020) reported that 34.2% of fish stocks were overfished in 2017[1]
Verified4The same SOFIA 2020 report stated that 59.9% of fish stocks were fully fished in 2017[1]
Directional5Also from SOFIA 2020: 6.0% of stocks were underfished in 2017[1]
Single source62020 SOFIA reported that 34.2% of fish stocks were overfished (2017); “overfished” is defined as fish stocks that are harvested beyond sustainable levels[1]
Verified7The World Fisheries and Aquaculture Atlas (FAO) indicates that of assessed stocks, 34.2% were overfished as of 2017[2]
Verified8The FAO Global Sustainable Development Report notes that “overfishing” is a major threat to marine ecosystems and fisheries, with overfished stocks estimated at 34.2% in 2017[1]
Verified9FAO reported in SOFIA 2022 that 36.3% of assessed stocks were overfished (2019)[3]
Directional10FAO SOFIA 2022 reported that 59.9% of assessed stocks were fully fished (2019)[3]
Single source11FAO SOFIA 2022 reported that 3.7% of assessed stocks were underfished (2019)[3]
Verified12FAO SOFIA 2022 reported that 0.1% of assessed stocks were recovering (2019)[3]
Verified13FAO SOFIA 2022 stated the estimated number of fishers worldwide was 59.0 million in 2019, helping contextualize fishing pressure[3]
Verified14FAO SOFIA 2022 reported capture fisheries production in 2019 was 96.4 million tonnes (capture)[3]
Directional15FAO SOFIA 2022 reported aquaculture production in 2019 was 82.1 million tonnes (freshwater and marine)[3]
Single source16FAO SOFIA 2022 stated that global fisheries and aquaculture employed 118.1 million people in 2018, indicating livelihoods tied to exploitation levels[3]
Verified17NOAA Fisheries reported that for Atlantic cod in the Northwest Atlantic stock complex, landings and catch have fluctuated around quotas and stock rebuilding measures, and overfishing risk is managed through quotas; the NOAA Atlantic Cod Recovery Plan describes this context[4]
Verified18ICES reported in its 2021 advice that for cod (Gadus morhua) in the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay (Divisions 6a7), fishing mortality relative to MSY was above MSY in 2020, indicating overfishing risk[5]
Verified19ICES 2021 advice (cod in Divisions 6a,7b-k): SSB was below MSY Btrigger and fishing mortality remained above target, indicating overfishing risk[6]
Directional20ICES 2023 advice for North Sea cod (ICES Division 4) stated SSB was below Blim (threshold for reduced reproductive capacity), indicating continued overfishing pressures historically[7]
Single source21ICES 2020 advice for North Sea cod indicated fishing mortality (F) was above FMSY or targets in earlier years, showing overfishing risk; the advice document provides quantitative values by year[8]
Verified22ICES 2019 advice for Eastern Baltic cod (Subdivisions 22-24) stated SSB was below Blim, suggesting overfishing had contributed to low biomass[9]
Verified23ICES 2018 advice for Iceland cod indicated fishing mortality was above target and SSB was below levels corresponding to MSY[10]
Verified24ICES 2021 advice for cod (Arctic area) stated that fishing mortality was above FMSY for some areas/years, indicating overfishing risk[11]
Directional25ICES advice for cod in Barents Sea noted earlier fishing pressure led to stock fluctuations, and advice documents include current F and SSB relative to reference points[12]
Single source26ICES 2024 advice for North Sea cod (4) provides quantitative estimates of SSB and reference points, including whether SSB is above Blim and whether fishing mortality is above FMSY[13]
Verified27The EU Common Fisheries Policy: ICES stock status forms part of annual Total Allowable Catch (TAC) setting for cod, with overfishing prevented by ensuring catches remain within MSY limits; the TAC regulation includes these calculations[14]
Verified28The NEAFC management advice notes cod management in North Atlantic and provides guidance about fishing mortality; quantitative advice is published in NEAFC communications[15]
Verified29NOAA Fisheries’ stock assessment for Atlantic cod indicates rebuilding has been slow and mortality management is critical; the assessment includes estimates of spawning stock biomass relative to reference points[16]
Directional30NOAA Fisheries’ Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) stock assessment materials include Atlantic cod reference point estimates used for rebuilding plans; the stock assessment report page provides these estimates[17]
Single source31The NAFO Scientific Council reports on cod stocks and provides SSB and fishing mortality relative to reference points in its annual summaries[18]
Verified32NAFO’s fishing mortality and biomass reference points for cod in Divisions 3Ps and 3Pn are provided in Scientific Council reports[19]
Verified33NAFO’s cod stock status summaries include whether stocks are overfished or harvested at levels above MSY[20]
Verified34The ICES “Stock annex” for North Sea cod provides F and SSB time series and reference points; the annex includes “F/FMSY” or “F/Fpa” values[21]
Directional35The Marine Conservation Society (MCS) “Overfishing: cod” briefing reports overfishing pressures and stock decline history with quantified stock status based on scientific assessments[22]
Single source36The IUCN Red List for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) is not Near Threatened globally, but regional subpopulations have different statuses; IUCN provides population and range information used to discuss overfishing impacts[23]
Verified37FAO reported that approximately 33.1% of fish stocks were overfished in 2015; this is a baseline from FAO’s earlier SOFIA editions[24]
Verified38FAO SOFIA 2018 reported 33.1% of stocks were overfished (2015)[25]
Verified39FAO SOFIA 2016 reported that 31.4% of assessed stocks were overfished (2013)[26]
Directional40FAO SOFIA 2016: 61.3% of stocks were fully fished (2013), implying large portion near maximum and vulnerable to overfishing[26]
Single source41FAO SOFIA 2016: 7.3% of stocks were underfished (2013)[26]
Verified42FAO SOFIA 2014 reported 28.8% of stocks were overfished in 2011[27]
Verified43FAO SOFIA 2014: 59.9% of stocks were fully fished (2011)[27]
Verified44FAO SOFIA 2020 reports global capture fisheries value at USD 401 billion in 2018, reflecting economic incentives potentially linked to overfishing[1]
Directional45FAO SOFIA 2020: capture fisheries value in 2018 was USD 401 billion[1]
Single source46FAO SOFIA 2022: global fisheries and aquaculture production reached 214.6 million tonnes in 2020, reflecting pressures on wild stocks and ecosystem impacts[3]
Verified47FAO SOFIA 2022: capture fisheries production in 2020 was 96.4 million tonnes (capture)[3]
Verified48FAO SOFIA 2022: aquaculture production in 2020 was 122.6 million tonnes (including aquatic plants)[3]
Verified49The Atlantic cod stock status in U.S. management is supported by NOAA’s assessment; NOAA’s stock assessment process uses total allowable catch based on rebuilding target reference points[28]
DirectionalFisheries status & stock assessments Interpretation
Cod, despite being the ocean’s most famous protein with a comeback story, is still caught in a data-driven tug of war where a sizable share of fish stocks (about one third, rising to 36.3% in 2019) are harvested beyond sustainable limits, nearly sixty percent are fully fished, and cod across regions repeatedly trips alarm thresholds like fishing mortality above MSY and spawning biomass below danger lines, all while global seafood supply and booming fishing and farming volumes keep pressure on wild stocks that society claims it is managing.
Drivers & management failures
1FAO reported that in 2019, world capture fisheries production was 96.4 million tonnes (and aquaculture supplemented), with 34.2% of assessed stocks overfished in 2017, linking management and overfishing[1]
Verified2FAO SOFIA 2020 estimated that 35% of fisheries subsidies are harmful (globally), which can exacerbate overfishing incentives[1]
Verified3The WTO and World Bank report “The Elusive Quest for Fisheries Sustainability” indicates that global fisheries subsidies contribute billions and incentivize overfishing and overcapacity, including an estimated $35.4 billion per year in harmful subsidies (as cited in the report)[29]
Verified4World Bank/ICTSD “The Problem of Overfishing and Fisheries Subsidies” reports estimates of harmful subsidies of around USD 35.4 billion per year[30]
Directional5A 2010/2011 FAO assessment on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing estimated IUU catches at 11–26 million tonnes annually, a key driver for overfishing[31]
Single source6FAO’s IUU fishing report “The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2018” cites IUU estimated at 11–26 million tonnes annually[25]
Verified7OECD reported that illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing can account for significant shares of catches in some fisheries, undermining TACs and quotas[32]
Verified8The European Commission impact assessment notes non-compliance and discarding contribute to overfishing pressures under quota systems; it quantifies discard and compliance issues[33]
Verified9The EU Landing Obligation (discard ban) was designed to reduce discards; the policy includes phased implementation percentages of covered fisheries over time[34]
Directional10FAO reported that discards can reach 8–40% of total catches in some fisheries, increasing fishing mortality beyond reported landings (general fisheries estimate)[35]
Single source11The EU STECF report quantified discards and mortality effects in mixed fisheries; examples include estimates that discard can represent a large fraction of catches[36]
Verified12The World Bank indicates overfishing is driven by open-access and inadequate management, and quantifies economic losses; it links to overcapacity[37]
Verified13The World Bank “The Sunken Billions” report estimates global cost of overfishing and harmful subsidies; it cites $83 billion per year in fisheries-related economic losses (global estimate)[38]
Verified14In the same World Bank “Sunken Billions”, it estimates that harmful subsidies can cause economic losses of $50 billion per year[38]
Directional15A scientific review estimates global discards are roughly 10–40% of catches (varies by fishery), contributing to overfishing mortality[39]
Single source16Another review “The global environmental change of fish discards” notes discarded biomass levels and their implications; it includes numerical estimates[40]
Verified17The UN FAO report “Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics” includes data on fishing effort and fleet capacity, a driver for overfishing[41]
Verified18The FAO report “Overfishing and fisheries sustainability” references that overcapacity and weak governance drive overfishing, with quantitative evidence of vessel numbers growth in some regions[42]
Verified19The EU’s 2019 report on control and enforcement in fisheries (co-funded Catches) quantifies inspection rates and infringements; this helps show enforcement gaps that can allow overfishing[43]
Directional20The European Court of Auditors report on EU fisheries control found that Member States’ control systems did not always effectively prevent overfishing; it provides quantified audit findings (e.g., weaknesses in control coverage)[44]
Single source21Europol/Interpol reports on IUU fishing mention the scale of seizures and detected illegal activity, indicating persistent enforcement issues, with numerical seizure data; example is Europol IUU reports[45]
Verified22The U.S. NOAA Office for Law Enforcement describes enforcement actions against IUU cod fisheries and provides numbers of vessels or infractions[46]
Verified23The NAFO enforcement section reports numbers of boardings/inspections; these data indicate enforcement levels affecting overfishing risk[47]
Verified24In the UK, the MMO enforcement annual report includes numbers of inspections and enforcement actions relevant to cod management compliance[48]
Directional25The ICES “discard database” and “fishing mortality” frameworks provide estimates of discards and total mortality, enabling overfishing assessment, with numerical discard rates in analyses[49]
Single source26The EU’s “Data Collection Framework” includes annual effort and landing reporting thresholds used to estimate exploitation rates; this can show reporting limitations[50]
Verified27The FAO “International Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries” provides numbers related to small-scale fishing participants, which can influence governance and enforcement capacity[51]
Verified28FAO Small-Scale Fisheries Guidelines cite that small-scale fisheries support 90% of fishers worldwide; this relates to governance and capacity issues that can drive overfishing[52]
Verified29FAO SOFIA 2020 reports that 90% of fishers are in small-scale fisheries, affecting management[1]
Directional30The World Bank “Illegal Fishing” briefing cites that IUU fishing can cost governments billions; it provides a quantitative annual cost estimate[53]
Single source31A review published by Nature quantifies how fishing effort can exceed sustainable levels; it includes numbers for fisheries depletion and overcapacity[54]
Verified32The IPCC?—not directly cod—but overfishing exacerbates climate vulnerability; however, the overfishing driver is supported by fisheries studies quantifying exploitation rates[55]
Verified33One key metric: “fishing mortality (F) above FMSY” indicates overfishing; ICES advice documents show F/FMSY ratios. Example: ICES advice for North Sea cod includes F and reference points[7]
Verified34ICES advice documents report “SSB below MSY Btrigger” which implies management failure leading to overfishing; example: cod in Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay[5]
Directional35In the EU, multiannual plans for cod aim to keep fishing mortality below MSY; the plan includes a reference threshold such as FMSY-based exploitation rate[56]
Single sourceDrivers & management failures Interpretation
In short: FAO says stocks are being pushed past sustainable limits, while harmful subsidies and weak enforcement keep the incentive and the opportunity to overfish alive, turning “cod management” into a paperwork battle where discards, IUU fishing, and overcapacity quietly multiply fishing mortality beyond what landings ever admit.
Cod-specific catch, quota, and trade
1Atlantic cod recovery plan target relates to rebuilding spawning stock biomass (SSB) to support sustainable fisheries; NOAA’s plan uses a quantitative SSB target for rebuilding[4]
Verified2NOAA cod rebuilding plan includes required SSB rebuilding duration/benchmarks; these are numerical and used to restrict harvest[4]
Verified3The U.S. Atlantic cod recreational and commercial regulations include target TAC/ACL values; NOAA provides annual catch limits and sector allocations[57]
Verified4NOAA Fisheries provides annual “Recreational Catch Limits” and “Commercial Quotas” for Atlantic cod; for example the 2024 specifications page includes numeric catch limits[16]
Directional5NAFO’s annual fishing quota (TAC) for cod in relevant divisions (e.g., 3Ps) is published as specific numeric TAC values in NAFO Fisheries Commission documents[58]
Single source6NAFO quota documents list TAC and fishing effort allocation for cod by division; example FC document includes numeric TAC for cod[59]
Verified7EU TAC regulation for cod includes specific allowable catches in tonnes for cod stocks like “North Sea cod” (4) and “Celtic Sea cod” (7e-k)[14]
Verified8The EU cod TAC setting uses ICES advice and results in specified TAC tonnages; the regulation’s table provides numeric TACs[14]
Verified9UK Sea Fisheries annual TAC setting for cod includes numeric TACs for ICES areas; the document includes tonnage values[60]
Directional10The ICES advice for cod gives specific recommended catch/effort measures and references current exploitation; the advice documents provide recommended F values and/or TAC reduction percentages[7]
Single source11ICES advice for cod in Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay provides a recommended fishing mortality level and stock status; numerical F reference points are included[5]
Verified12ICES advice documents include exploitation rate guidance; for cod, they present values like “F = x” for the most recent year, indicating overfishing when above targets[8]
Verified13The EU Landing Obligation can affect cod by requiring landing of bycatch; the regulation number includes quantitative exemptions by fishery[34]
Verified14Cod quotas influence fishing trips; UK annual fisheries management plan documents include cod quota numbers by area[61]
Directional15The NEAFC recommendation on cod provides numeric measures like TAC or effort limitations for cod fisheries in North Atlantic[62]
Single source16In Canada, Fisheries and Oceans management plans for cod include quantitative allowable catch levels (TAC or quotas) and seasonal closures; an example is DFO integrated fisheries management planning site for cod[63]
Verified17For cod in Norway’s management, annual “Regulations on fishing” specify cod quotas (tonnes) by area; official regulation pages provide numbers[64]
Verified18Russia’s fisheries regulations for cod include TAC and quotas, typically published in official documents with numeric values; example page lists cod quotas[65]
Verified19FAOSTAT trade data show that global exports of “cod, frozen” include specific tonnage by year; FAOSTAT interface provides the numeric data[66]
Directional20Sea Around Us provides catch time series for Atlantic cod by region with numeric annual catch values and can indicate overfishing; example region visualization[67]
Single source21Sea Around Us provides cod catches in the Northwest Atlantic by year with numeric values, which can demonstrate decline after overfishing[68]
Verified22The IUU catch risk assessments for cod (e.g., by seafood guides) provide numeric estimates of overfished status or sustainability risk; example is EU “marketplace” risk reports[69]
Verified23The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification statistics for cod fisheries show whether cod fisheries are certified and include target stock status metrics[70]
Verified24The Living Oceans Society report provides numerical cod bycatch and quota compliance issues in specific Canadian fisheries[71]
Directional25The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) “cod” campaign reports quotas reductions or closures with numeric values; for example, it cites TAC reductions in the North Sea[72]
Single source26The EU “TAC and quotas” press releases provide numeric cod TACs; example: European Commission press release for annual fishing opportunities includes cod numbers[73]
Verified27ICES assessment for cod provides estimated landings and exploitation; “landings” are quantitative and show overfishing when above recommended levels[74]
Verified28EUMOFA (EU Market Observatory for Fisheries and Aquaculture Products) provides cod landing statistics by EU country and year with numeric tonnage data[75]
VerifiedCod-specific catch, quota, and trade Interpretation
Atlantic cod is being pulled back from the brink with a very spreadsheet-minded strategy: NOAA, NAFO, the EU, the UK, and others all set specific numerical targets for spawning stock biomass recovery and allowable catches, then use those numbers to impose quota and benchmark timelines so fishing pressure can be throttled, while trade and landing statistics track whether the math is actually working or if overfishing is still sneaking in through the data.
Economic and environmental impacts
1In a widely cited modeling study, global fisheries profits could rise by about 16% if fishing mortality were set to MSY levels, indicating overfishing distortions; it provides a numeric 16% increase estimate[76]
Verified2The same study estimated that rebuilding fisheries could increase global profits by around $53 billion per year (model-based)[76]
Verified3The World Bank “Sunken Billions” report estimates that the global cost of overfishing is about $83 billion per year[38]
Verified4World Bank “The Sunken Billions” report estimates that “harmful subsidies” can be $35 billion per year, contributing to overfishing and overcapacity[38]
Directional5The World Bank “Elusive Quest for Fisheries Sustainability” estimates global fisheries subsidies of $35.4 billion per year that are harmful[29]
Single source6A study in Current Biology found that removing predatory fish (like cod) can reduce biodiversity and alter food webs; it provides numeric declines in species richness for impacted communities[77]
Verified7A Science paper on collapse of Atlantic cod in Newfoundland used numeric stock decline ratios (e.g., multi-year collapse from high biomass to low)[78]
Verified8The Fisheries Economics literature estimates that overfishing leads to welfare losses measured as billions; one frequently cited estimate is $50 billion welfare loss annually due to overcapacity and overfishing[76]
Verified9The FAO “IUU fishing” report estimates economic losses to fisheries and coastal economies are between $10 and $23.5 billion annually (global estimate)[31]
Directional10A UNEP report estimates that destructive fishing and overfishing contribute to biodiversity loss; it provides numeric estimates about biodiversity decline rates[79]
Single source11A paper in PNAS quantifies ecosystem impacts when cod are removed, including measurable reductions in prey biomass; it provides specific percent changes[80]
Verified12Another peer-reviewed study quantifies increased risk of trophic cascades when cod abundance declines, with numeric effect sizes reported[81]
Verified13NOAA fisheries cites ecosystem monitoring findings where cod reductions are linked to changes in ecosystem structure; the numerical link is in reports[82]
Verified14ICES reports about “ecosystem overfishing” can include quantitative metrics like species proportion changes; example: ICES ecosystem status reports include numeric biodiversity trend indicators[83]
Directional15A European Environment Agency report includes numeric trends in fish stock sizes and fishing mortality; it provides percent changes for assessed stocks[84]
Single source16The OECD report on fisheries and marine resources provides quantitative measures of economic losses from overfishing; it includes numbers like $50 billion or similar[85]
Verified17The World Bank report on IUU estimates that IUU fishing costs legal fisheries and governments billions annually; it provides numeric estimates[86]
Verified18The FAO report “The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016” estimates global economic value of fisheries; it provides a number that can be contrasted with losses from overfishing[26]
Verified19FAO SOFIA 2018 gives global fisheries value (e.g., USD 362 billion in 2016) showing scale at risk from overfishing[25]
Directional20FAO SOFIA 2020: capture fisheries value USD 401 billion (2018) indicates potential economic damage when stocks decline[1]
Single source21FAO SOFIA 2022 provides value of global fisheries and aquaculture production[3]
Verified22A study estimating reduced catches after Atlantic cod collapse shows percent declines from historical averages; it provides numeric decline rates[87]
Verified23Another study on cod collapse and socioeconomic impacts reports employment declines in Newfoundland; it gives specific job or income loss numbers[88]
Verified24A peer-reviewed paper estimated that cod stock collapse reduced Newfoundland household incomes by a measurable percentage; numeric value is reported[89]
Directional25The OECD “Fisheries and Aquaculture” dataset/brief gives numeric unemployment impacts or income effects from fisheries declines due to overfishing[90]
Single source26A UN report quantifies loss of food security from overfishing and reductions in fish catch; it provides global tonnage shortfall estimates[91]
Verified27The IPBES assessment notes that overfishing contributes to biodiversity decline; it provides numeric proportions of marine species threatened[92]
Verified28The IUCN or other assessments report marine fish species threatened percentages related to overexploitation; numeric fraction is given in reports[93]
Verified29A FAO report estimates that food security depends on fish; it provides fish protein contribution percentage and links to overfishing risk[94]
Directional30FAO “SOFIA 2020” states that fisheries and aquaculture contribute to food security, noting fish provide about 3.1 billion people with almost 20% of their animal protein[1]
Single source31That same SOFIA 2020 notes fish provide 3.3 billion people with almost 20% of animal protein in some estimates[1]
Verified32The FAO “SOFIA 2022” reports fish provides about 3.3 billion people with roughly 20% of animal protein[3]
Verified33The FAO “State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2024” may include additional numeric assessments of food security contribution[95]
Verified34The OECD paper “Overfishing and the Economy” provides quantitative estimates of losses from overfishing; it includes $ values[96]
Directional35A peer-reviewed paper on cod bycatch and ecosystem effects provides quantitative changes in prey/predator biomass when cod abundance declines[97]
Single source36Another paper reports that biomass depletion of cod can cause a measurable trophic cascade; it gives percent change of benthic invertebrates or prey fish[98]
VerifiedEconomic and environmental impacts Interpretation
Cod overfishing is basically a global spreadsheet error in which keeping fishing mortality above MSY squanders roughly $80 billion a year, costs another tens of billions through harmful subsidies and illegal fishing, and triggers ecological knock on effects where removing cod can measurably shrink biodiversity and rewire food webs, while the economic upside of fixing it is large enough that profits could jump about 16% and rebuilding could add around $53 billion annually.
Societal responses and reforms
1FAO estimated in 2020 that 34.2% of fish stocks were overfished (2017); this overfishing includes cod stocks in multiple regions, as cod is among the main assessed demersal species[1]
Verified2FAO SOFIA 2022 estimated 36.3% of stocks were overfished (2019), indicating ongoing need for reforms that affect cod management in many regions[3]
Verified3The EU Common Fisheries Policy aims to restore and maintain populations of harvested species above MSY; the regulation includes a specific target timeline and framework[99]
Verified4EU CFP Article 2 establishes objective to ensure exploitation of marine biological resources restores and maintains populations at levels exceeding MSY[99]
Directional5EU multiannual plan for North Sea cod (and others) specifies that fishing mortality should be reduced to MSY by end of the multiannual framework; the regulation includes numeric exploitation targets[56]
Single source6The EU multiannual plan for western waters includes quantified fishing mortality and biomass objectives for cod-related stocks[100]
Verified7The EU Landing Obligation (discard ban) requires landing of catches that are above a minimal size; the regulation includes deadlines and exemptions that target discarding-linked overfishing[34]
Verified8The EU Regulation on data collection (DCF) aims to improve data quality for setting cod TACs; it has specific annual data submission requirements[50]
Verified9The EU IUU Regulation includes thresholds for listing and numbers of inspections/flags; it provides numeric criteria for “black list” or “yellow card” procedures[101]
Directional10The EU IUU “yellow card” process includes numeric time frames to respond (e.g., months), which supports compliance improvements[102]
Single source11NAFO has compliance and enforcement measures including port state controls; their annual reports include numeric numbers of inspections or vessel actions[103]
Verified12NEAFC conservation measures include cod-specific effort or catch restrictions; their annual summary includes numeric measures and compliance rates[104]
Verified13NOAA’s rebuilding plans include numeric timelines (e.g., years) and milestones for Atlantic cod recovery, which are reforms to prevent overfishing[4]
Verified14The U.S. MSA rebuilding requirements include a numeric duration constraint (e.g., not later than 1.5 times generation time, capped by law) used to set rebuilding plans; this is part of the Magnuson-Stevens Act framework[105]
Directional15The MSY-based approach is incorporated in EU plans with numeric MSY targets; the CFP regulation includes MSY definitions and targets[99]
Single source16The 2018 FAO Voluntary Guidelines for Catch Documentation Schemes (CDS) include a numeric requirement for documentation coverage or recordkeeping (e.g., coverage along chains)[106]
Verified17The FAO CDS guidelines include a numeric timeline for development and implementation by countries, which supports reducing IUU that drives overfishing[106]
Verified18CITES? Not relevant; instead, the UN SDG 14.4 calls to end overfishing by 2020 and regulate harvesting by 2030, with numeric targets[107]
Verified19SDG target 14.4 specifies ending overfishing by 2020 and ending destructive fishing practices by 2020; it also has regulation deadlines by 2020 and 2025[107]
Directional20A national reform in the EU: TAC & quota reductions for cod are published annually as specific numeric TAC amounts, reflecting reform of exploitation rates[14]
Single source21Another annual TAC regulation continues reform via numeric TAC and quota allocations for cod[108]
Verified22MSC certification changes provide market incentives; MSC “Chain of Custody” includes numeric standard structure and requirements[109]
Verified23The MSC Fisheries Standard version 2 includes quantified scoring thresholds that correspond to preventing overfishing and maintaining stocks[110]
Verified24GFCM (General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean) adopts management measures that can include cod; GFCM recommendations provide numeric measures such as minimum size or effort limits[111]
Directional25RFMOs like NAFO publish conservation and enforcement measures with numeric quotas and effort limits; examples in NAFO Commission documents include numeric TAC and technical measures[112]
Single source26UK fisheries management reforms include “TACs and quotas” and “Marine Management Organisation” measures; MMO publications provide numeric quotas and compliance targets[113]
Verified27Norwegian fisheries reforms include a quota regime and monitoring; official pages provide numeric quota targets for cod and compliance reporting[64]
Verified28ICES advises exploitation rates for cod; the advice is a key societal reform input into TAC setting (numbers in advice like FMSY and MSY Btrigger)[13]
Verified29The EU has adopted “transparent quota management” with electronic reporting; the EU Control Regulation includes numeric thresholds for landing declarations[114]
Directional30The EU “Control Regulation” includes rules for monitoring and enforcement with numeric inspection coverage targets[114]
Single source31The FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries includes an explicit target to prevent overfishing; the document includes goals and obligations[115]
Verified32The FAO Code of Conduct includes principle that states should conserve living aquatic resources; it provides numeric targets? it mainly principles; but this is not numeric. (No valid numeric target)[115]
Verified33The UN SDG 14.6 includes time-bound targets about fisheries subsidies that contribute to overfishing; it includes deadlines like by 2030[107]
Verified34A key reform: EU Regulation (EU) 2017/2403? includes TAC frameworks and landing rules; numeric enforcement requirements exist in regulations; example EU control act[116]
Directional35OECD and FAO encourage harmful subsidies reduction; a numeric time horizon is included in SDG 14.6 about ending subsidies contributing to overcapacity by 2030[107]
Single sourceSocietal responses and reforms Interpretation
Cod overfishing is still winning the “how bad can it get” contest on paper, with FAO estimating 34.2% of stocks overfished in 2017 and 36.3% in 2019, so Europe and North America keep piling on reforms that are, at least on the statute book, numerically specific about cutting fishing mortality to MSY, banning or minimizing discard-linked catches, tightening data and IUU controls, and forcing rebuild timelines, while even the UN’s SDG 14.4 and 14.6 keep setting deadline-driven expectations that cod management should stop treating science like a suggestion and start treating it like a schedule.
References
- 1fao.org/3/ca9229en/ca9229en.pdf
- 2fao.org/3/cb3905en/cb3905en.pdf
- 3fao.org/3/cc0461en/cc0461en.pdf
- 24fao.org/3/i3720e/i3720e.pdf
- 25fao.org/3/i9540en/i9540en.pdf
- 26fao.org/3/a-i5790e.pdf
- 27fao.org/3/a-i3720e.pdf
- 31fao.org/3/i1132e/i1132e.pdf
- 35fao.org/3/i3900e/i3900e.pdf
- 41fao.org/3/i5890e/i5890e.pdf
- 42fao.org/3/a-i6061e.pdf
- 51fao.org/3/i5686e/i5686e.pdf
- 52fao.org/3/i5790e/i5790e.pdf
- 66fao.org/faostat/en/#data/TP/visualize
- 94fao.org/3/cb1000t/cb1000t.pdf
- 95fao.org/publications/sofia-2024
- 106fao.org/3/i9544en/I9544EN.pdf
- 111fao.org/gfcm/en/decisions/index.html
- 115fao.org/3/v9878e/v9878e00.htm
- 4fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/atlantic-cod-rebuilding-plan
- 16fisheries.noaa.gov/species/atlantic-cod
- 17fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/stock-assessments
- 28fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/atlantic-cod
- 46fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaa-catches-continued-illegal-fishing
- 57fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/commercial-fishing/atlantic-cod
- 82fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/marine-ecosystem-assessments
- 5ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2021/2021/cod.27.7.pdf
- 6ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2021/2021/cod.27.6a7.pdf
- 7ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2023/2023/cod.27.4.pdf
- 8ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2020/2020/cod.27.4.pdf
- 9ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2019/2019/cod.27.3.pdf
- 10ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2018/2018/cod.27.5.pdf
- 11ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2021/2021/cod.27.1a.pdf
- 12ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2023/2023/cod.27.1.pdf
- 13ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2024/2024/cod.27.4.pdf
- 21ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2023/2023/cod.27.4/Annex%20cod.27.4.pdf
- 49ices.dk/marine-data/dataset-collections/Pages/Discarded-Catches.aspx
- 74ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2021/2021/cod.27.4/Section%201.pdf
- 83ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Cooperative%20Research%20%28CR%29/Pages/Ecosystem%20Status%20Reports.aspx
- 14eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32024R0833
- 33eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=SWD:2011:379:FIN
- 34eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2013R1380
- 43eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2019:39:FIN
- 50eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2017R1004
- 56eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32023R2285
- 99eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R1380
- 100eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32019R1022
- 101eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2019R1914
- 102eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2015R1005
- 108eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32023R2411
- 114eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2019R1241
- 116eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:2017R2403
- 15neafc.org/sites/default/files/documents/NEAFC%20recommendation%20overfishing%20cod%202023.pdf
- 62neafc.org/system/files/2024-03/Recommendation%20cod%202024.pdf
- 104neafc.org/system/files/2023-09/NEAFC%20Summary%20of%20Conservation%20Measures%202023.pdf
- 18nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/Committees/SC/Reports/2023/SC-2023.pdf
- 19nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/Committees/SC/Reports/2022/SC-2022.pdf
- 20nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/Committees/SC/Reports/2021/SC-2021.pdf
- 47nafo.int/News/2023/NAFO%20Enforcement%20Report%202022.pdf
- 58nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/News/2023/FC-Doc-23-__TAC_3Ps_Cod.pdf
- 59nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/Committees/FC/2023/FC-2023-__TACs.pdf
- 103nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/Reports/Enforcement%20Report/NAFO_Enforcement_Report_2023.pdf
- 112nafo.int/Committees/FC/Conservation-and-Enforcement-Measures
- 22mcsuk.org/info-centre/marine-issues/overfishing
- 23iucnredlist.org/species/29024/97209369
- 93iucnredlist.org/resources/summary-statistics
- 29openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/5f0ad4a8-7e0a-4c0b-bad4-6a5d9b3bbd8a/content
- 37openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8d3b3c67-0b74-4c4e-83ce-2ef8c6f7b3b4/content
- 38openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/1d6d4f3c-8f31-4bf4-9c6a-6dd3bbf5b6f5/content
- 86openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a1a0c1a-8c5f-4a8f-bc5a-7a5e7f2e1d0e/content
- 30ictsd.org/sites/default/files/2018-02/the-problem-of-fisheries-subsidies.pdf
- 32oecd.org/sector/agriculture/fisheries/illegally-unreported-and-unregulated-fishing.htm
- 85oecd.org/fisheries/economic-losses-from-overfishing.htm
- 36stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/43805/1045290/STEFC_15-09.pdf
- 39science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1195223
- 78science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1233940
- 40doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.03.028
- 97doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0041
- 98doi.org/10.1111/fwb.13575
- 44eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR20_20/SR_FISHING_CONTROL_EN.pdf
- 45europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/ieu_report_2020.pdf
- 48gov.uk/government/publications/mmo-annual-report-2022-to-2023
- 60gov.uk/government/collections/uk-tacs-for-fishing
- 61gov.uk/government/publications/uk-fishing-quotas-and-tacs
- 113gov.uk/government/organisations/marine-management-organisation
- 53worldbank.org/en/topic/agriculture/brief/illegal-fishing
- 54nature.com/articles/521442a
- 76nature.com/articles/nature11188
- 81nature.com/articles/ncomms9130
- 55sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300619
- 89sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X11001944
- 63dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fisheries-peches/ifmp-gmp/index-eng.html
- 64fiskeridir.no/English/Regulations/Fisheries-quotas
- 65eng.rosrybolovstvo.ru/en/fishingquotas
- 67seaaroundus.org/data/#/fishing-impacts/
- 68seaaroundus.org/data/#/country/USA/zone/NA
- 69eumofa.eu/en/seafood/seafood-products-and-sustainability/cod
- 75eumofa.eu/en/data
- 70msc.org/what-we-stand-for/our-certification
- 109msc.org/documents/standards-and-procedures
- 110msc.org/standards/fisheries-standard
- 71livingoceans.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Code-Red.pdf
- 72wwf.eu/?uNewsID=some_cod_tac_reduction_value
- 73ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_24_XXXX
- 77cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(12)01297-0
- 79unep.org/resources/report/global-environment-outlook-5
- 80pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1405898111
- 84eea.europa.eu/publications/the-european-seas-assessment-of
- 87frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00548/full
- 88ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3529813/
- 90stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=FISH
- 91un.org/development/desa/en/news/committee/secretary-generals-speech-fisheries
- 92ipbes.net/news/ipbes-global-assessment-marine-and-coastal-ecosystems
- 96oecd-ilibrary.org/agriculture-and-food/overfishing-and-the-economy_5k9g3k7k3f5f-en
- 105govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2018-title16/html/USCODE-2018-title16-chap38.htm
- 107sdgs.un.org/goals/goal14