Photo by Josiah Nicklas

International governance frameworks are poorly equipped to deal with the combined threat that ocean acidification poses to global food security, according to a new study led by researchers at the UCL Energy Institute, launched during the Our Ocean Conference in Mombasa. The research, published in Environmental Research: Food Systems, maps the international governance landscape for both ocean acidification and “blue food” security, and finds that despite substantial overlap between the two policy areas, they are rarely addressed together.

Why it matters

Blue foods, fish, shellfish and algae sourced from marine and freshwater environments, provide essential nutrients to millions of people, with global consumption having grown more than fivefold over the past 60 years. Ocean acidification, driven primarily by rising CO₂ emissions, is already harming shellfish aquaculture and fisheries, degrading coral reef ecosystems and altering the nutritional quality and safety of seafood. The study notes that communities in the Global South, which rely most heavily on blue foods for daily protein, face the greatest risks from acidification, yet receive the least research attention and policy support.

Annika Frosch, lead author and Research Fellow at the UCL Energy Institute’s Shipping and Oceans Research Group, said: “Without coordinated action across climate and food systems, the growing impacts of ocean acidification will continue to undermine fisheries and aquaculture that underpin global nutrition and livelihoods.”

Where the gaps lie

Using a structured review of international governance literature, the researchers identified thirteen policy domains relevant to blue food security and ten relevant to ocean acidification, seven of which overlap, including fisheries and aquaculture, biodiversity, climate change and land-based pollution. Despite this overlap, the study found that most international actors and instruments treat the two issues separately. Examining the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the researchers found that the FAO lacks an explicit mandate to govern ocean acidification, with the issue typically appearing as one item in a longer list of climate stressors rather than as a distinct threat to food security. The UNFCCC, meanwhile, addresses ocean acidification only indirectly through its broader CO₂ mitigation goals; neither the convention nor the Paris Agreement names it explicitly, and food security, while referenced in UNFCCC objectives, is not linked to acidification even in documents that mention both.

Keiko Nomura, co-author and Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Colorado Boulder, said: “Our findings suggest that ocean acidification remains more visible in scientific discussions than in international policy frameworks. Bridging this science-policy divide could help improve governance of climate risks to blue food systems.” The study describes this as a “troubling asymmetry,” whereby blue food security tends to receive legal and political recognition, while ocean acidification remains largely confined to scientific discussion.

What the researchers are calling for

The paper sets out a series of recommendations for policymakers, including strengthening FAO instruments to treat ocean acidification as a distinct climate-related stressor to fisheries and aquaculture, backed by binding policies and vulnerability thresholds for key species; developing a dedicated ocean acidification workstream under the UNFCCC; incentivising countries to include acidification monitoring and adaptation measures in their Nationally Determined Contributions; and creating formal institutional links between climate bodies and marine science and fisheries organisations, modelled on the joint capacity-building programme used by the three Rio Conventions.

Inken Dressler, co-author and European Programme Lead at the International Alliance to Combat Ocean Acidification (OA Alliance), said: “The siloed recognition and approach to ocean acidification and blue food security hinders effective governance of both issues. To bridge this gap, closer cooperation between existing frameworks such as the UNFCCC and FAO must be achieved.”

Where it’s working better

The researchers point to some Pacific Island nations, including Fiji and the Solomon Islands, as already leading the wayby integrating ocean acidification into their national climate strategies and fisheries management plans, offering a model for what more coherent governance elsewhere could look like.

The study accompanies a new book by Dr Frosch, Navigating the Souring Seas: The Global Experimentalist Governance of Ocean Acidification, which traces how ocean acidification is being addressed at the global level through interview-based case studies of the OA Alliance and the International Maritime Organization.