Fig 1.
The 4Cs framework of human well-being.
(A) The 4Cs conceptual framework of human well-being defined by Breslow et al [12] decomposes well-being into four main constituents. Each “C” represents one of these constituents. Connections refer to being with others and the environment, Conditions refer to circumstances where human needs are met, Capabilities refer to factors enabling individuals and communities to act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and Cross-cutting domains refer to sustaining our collective satisfactory quality of life now and into the future. (B) The nested categories of the 4Cs framework composed of constituents, domains, attributes, and indicators. An example categorization of an indicator of fishery closures or delays is shown. Adapted from Breslow et al. [12].
Fig 2.
Number of publications included in the meta-analysis by year.
Number of publications included in the meta-analysis of HAB effects on human well-being in US West Coast fishing communities shown by the year that they were published.
Fig 3.
Number of indicators of HAB effects on human well-being measured across space and time.
Stacked bar chart of the number of indicators reported in (A) Washington, Oregon, and California, and (B) across years from 1990 through 2022 by constituent of the 4Cs framework for human well-being.
Fig 4.
Number of indicators of HAB effects on human well-being by data source and availability.
Number of indicators of HAB effects on human well-being within each constituent of the 4Cs framework by data source (academic researchers vs government agency) and data availability (regularly monitored vs inconsistently monitored). The number of indicators in each data source-availability category are also shown.
Fig 5.
Proportion of indicators of HAB effects on human well-being categorized to each constituent of the 4Cs framework that could/could not be considered in FRD and/or HHENS determinations.
Alluvial diagram showing the proportion of indicators of HAB effects on human well-being in each domain of the 4Cs framework that could/could not be considered in FRD and/or HHENS determinations. The number of indicators in each domain is indicated in parentheses. The colors of the lines represent the constituent of human well-being from the 4Cs framework to which the indicator was categorized.
Fig 6.
Indicators of HAB effects on human well-being that can be considered in FRD and HHENS determinations.
Indicators of HAB effects on human well-being that can be considered in FRD (white bars) and HHENS (black bars) determinations. The background shading represents the constituent of human well-being from the 4Cs framework to which the indicator was categorized.