重建鱼类通道优先考虑人类营养结果。

IF 3 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Nicolette Duncan, Ana Horta, John Conallin, Tim Marsden, Abigail J Lynch, Ivor Stuart
{"title":"重建鱼类通道优先考虑人类营养结果。","authors":"Nicolette Duncan, Ana Horta, John Conallin, Tim Marsden, Abigail J Lynch, Ivor Stuart","doi":"10.1007/s00267-025-02271-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Water control infrastructure forms barriers that fragment river habitats, reducing aquatic biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides. Irrigation infrastructure, for example, although implemented to support food production, highlights problematic trade-offs against wild food systems like inland fisheries which are a critical food resource for tens of millions of people, particularly in tropical countries. To reduce fragmentation at a broad range of barriers, fish passage technology is sometimes implemented to support migrating fish, aided by frameworks designed to prioritize barriers for remediation. This study critically evaluated 93 fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks globally to explore how they could strategically guide fish passage investments in tropical contexts and identify criteria relevant to delivering on nutrition security outcomes. Results showed prioritization frameworks were ill-equipped to support the broader human development goals that may drive fish passage investments in tropical countries, such as supporting human nutrition under United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2: Zero Hunger. Tropical contexts were underrepresented despite substantial recent fish passage investment, whereas temperate and conservation focused frameworks, particularly from North America, dominated. These findings prompt reflection on the inherent biases in fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks and criteria. Improving understanding of and collaboration with local partners to integrate SDG 2 into future prioritization frameworks could improve fish passage infrastructure and help support better nutrition and food production for communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":543,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reframing Fish Passage Prioritization for Human Nutrition Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Nicolette Duncan, Ana Horta, John Conallin, Tim Marsden, Abigail J Lynch, Ivor Stuart\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00267-025-02271-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Water control infrastructure forms barriers that fragment river habitats, reducing aquatic biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides. Irrigation infrastructure, for example, although implemented to support food production, highlights problematic trade-offs against wild food systems like inland fisheries which are a critical food resource for tens of millions of people, particularly in tropical countries. To reduce fragmentation at a broad range of barriers, fish passage technology is sometimes implemented to support migrating fish, aided by frameworks designed to prioritize barriers for remediation. This study critically evaluated 93 fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks globally to explore how they could strategically guide fish passage investments in tropical contexts and identify criteria relevant to delivering on nutrition security outcomes. Results showed prioritization frameworks were ill-equipped to support the broader human development goals that may drive fish passage investments in tropical countries, such as supporting human nutrition under United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2: Zero Hunger. Tropical contexts were underrepresented despite substantial recent fish passage investment, whereas temperate and conservation focused frameworks, particularly from North America, dominated. These findings prompt reflection on the inherent biases in fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks and criteria. Improving understanding of and collaboration with local partners to integrate SDG 2 into future prioritization frameworks could improve fish passage infrastructure and help support better nutrition and food production for communities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":543,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-025-02271-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-025-02271-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

治水基础设施形成的障碍破坏了河流栖息地,减少了水生生物多样性及其提供的生态系统服务。例如,灌溉基础设施虽然是为了支持粮食生产而实施的,但却突出了与内陆渔业等野生粮食系统相权衡的问题,而内陆渔业是数千万人的重要粮食资源,特别是在热带国家。为了减少大范围屏障的破碎化,有时会实施鱼类通道技术来支持洄游鱼类,并辅以设计优先修复屏障的框架。本研究对全球93个鱼类通道屏障优先排序框架进行了批判性评估,以探索它们如何从战略上指导热带环境下的鱼类通道投资,并确定与实现营养安全成果相关的标准。结果显示,优先排序框架不足以支持可能推动热带国家鱼类通道投资的更广泛的人类发展目标,例如根据联合国可持续发展目标2:零饥饿支持人类营养。尽管最近进行了大量的鱼类通道投资,但热带环境的代表性不足,而温带和以保护为重点的框架,特别是来自北美的框架占主导地位。这些发现促使人们反思鱼类通道屏障优先排序框架和标准的固有偏见。增进对当地伙伴的理解并与之合作,将可持续发展目标2纳入未来的优先事项框架,可以改善鱼类通道基础设施,并有助于为社区提供更好的营养和粮食生产。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reframing Fish Passage Prioritization for Human Nutrition Outcomes.

Water control infrastructure forms barriers that fragment river habitats, reducing aquatic biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides. Irrigation infrastructure, for example, although implemented to support food production, highlights problematic trade-offs against wild food systems like inland fisheries which are a critical food resource for tens of millions of people, particularly in tropical countries. To reduce fragmentation at a broad range of barriers, fish passage technology is sometimes implemented to support migrating fish, aided by frameworks designed to prioritize barriers for remediation. This study critically evaluated 93 fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks globally to explore how they could strategically guide fish passage investments in tropical contexts and identify criteria relevant to delivering on nutrition security outcomes. Results showed prioritization frameworks were ill-equipped to support the broader human development goals that may drive fish passage investments in tropical countries, such as supporting human nutrition under United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2: Zero Hunger. Tropical contexts were underrepresented despite substantial recent fish passage investment, whereas temperate and conservation focused frameworks, particularly from North America, dominated. These findings prompt reflection on the inherent biases in fish passage barrier prioritization frameworks and criteria. Improving understanding of and collaboration with local partners to integrate SDG 2 into future prioritization frameworks could improve fish passage infrastructure and help support better nutrition and food production for communities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Management
Environmental Management 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Management offers research and opinions on use and conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards, spanning the field of environmental management without regard to traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal aims to improve communication, making ideas and results from any field available to practitioners from other backgrounds. Contributions are drawn from biology, botany, chemistry, climatology, ecology, ecological economics, environmental engineering, fisheries, environmental law, forest sciences, geosciences, information science, public affairs, public health, toxicology, zoology and more. As the principal user of nature, humanity is responsible for ensuring that its environmental impacts are benign rather than catastrophic. Environmental Management presents the work of academic researchers and professionals outside universities, including those in business, government, research establishments, and public interest groups, presenting a wide spectrum of viewpoints and approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信