https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2056-4862
Figures
Abstract
Fisheries are recognized as important in Mozambique, yet they are increasingly threatened by over-exploitation and climate change. We collate and synthesize the available literature and data on marine fisheries in Mozambique; assess the status of the main fishery species/stocks; give an overview of current management of the fishery, and discuss planning for fisheries resilience in the face of climate change predictions. In Mozambique there is a heavy reliance on marine fisheries. From a food security and local economy perspective, the critical sector is the artisanal fisheries which comprises over 90% of the total landings and provides food and livelihood for millions of people, particularly in the coastal zone. Regarding economic value and earning foreign currency, the most valuable industrial / semi-industrial fisheries are the shallow-water shrimp, the deep-water crustacean and the rocky bottom demersal. Current stock assessment for these sectors indicates that the core stock species are fully- or over-exploited. Limited data are available for the artisanal fishery, but it is likely that the same status applies to this sector. Globally, well-managed fisheries have been among the most resilient to climate change—overall, fisheries best practices confer ecological resilience by providing a portfolio of options to fishers and a buffer against losing target stock. Ideally, best practices include scientifically-informed catch limits, accountability measures, regional flexibility in policy practices, protection of essential fish habitat (Marine Protected Areas), and effective monitoring, control and surveillance. Mozambique has a relatively well-managed industrial/semi-industrial fishery. However, the artisanal fishery, due to its spatial scattering, multi-gear and multi-species nature, presents a huge challenge. Facing the future with climate change will require increased attention to reduce stressors to the social–ecological systems in which fisheries exist and persist. Specific recommendations in this context are presented.
Citation: Mafuca JM, Mutombene RJ, Filipe O, Abdula S, Malauene BS, Dias N, et al. (2024) Planning for climate change resilience—Collation, update and assessment of Mozambique’s marine fisheries data and management. PLOS Clim 3(10): e0000494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494
Editor: Lin Liu, First Institute of Oceanography Ministry of Natural Resources, CHINA
Published: October 4, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Mafuca et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This paper was funded by a Newton Prize grant (project NP2020PB/100109). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
1. Introduction
Mozambique is a low-income, food-deficit country with a largely rural population; the total population is 33.83 million [1] with an annual growth rate since 2000 ranging from 2.73 to 2.96% [2]. It ranked 173 of 193 countries in the 2022 Human Development Index [3], and below 116 of 136 in the 2022 Global Hunger Index [4]. It is categorised as a ‘Least Developed Country’ by the United Nations [5]. Annual fish consumption per capita estimates range from 5–16 kg [6]. The artisanal fisheries play a critical role in food security and the local economy while the semi-industrial and industrial fisheries are an important component of GDP, with all marine fisheries contributing between USD 50 to 90 million per year between 2009 and 2020.
Mozambique has about 2700 km of coastline, the third longest coastline in Africa. It is rich in marine habitats, with mangroves, coral reefs, and seagrass beds supporting a variety of marine life. With an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extending to 200 nm offshore, this includes some 572000 km2 of marine waters. The country has 70000 km2 of continental shelf, being narrow in the northern and southern parts of the country and wide the central region, known as the Sofala Bank [7]. About 20% of the marine finfish species known to occur within Mozambique’s EEZ are of commercial importance [8] and are mostly located on the Sofala Bank and in the Delagoa Bight, the latter being a large embayment found in the south.
Climate change is impacting marine fisheries across the world’s tropical seas (e.g., [9]). Rising temperatures, reductions in primary production, deoxygenation, ocean acidification and species distribution shift are likely to result in significant changes to ecosystems and reductions in catches, with socio-economic impacts experienced around the world (e.g., [9–12]). The Western Indian Ocean (WIO), in particular, is undergoing remarkable change due to global warming, and is recognised to be one of the fastest warming regions in the global ocean [13–15]. To date, the only empirical assessment of climate change impacts on Mozambican fisheries was that on projected catches of the tuna Katsuwonus pelamis [16]. There are several Mozambique fisheries species which are vulnerable to climate change impacts [17]. A recent multi-species fish model study for the nearby Tanzania and Kenya predicted large reductions in average fish biomass over the 21st Century as effect of climate change [18]. When a warming ocean with declining fisheries is combined with rapid population growth, as in Mozambique—a serious situation in gross food insecurity is likely to develop. This is also true for other developing countries given the well-known socio-economic role that the artisanal fisheries play in coastal communities [19].
This paper offers a central base of information which, until now, has not been available to climate change strategists on fisheries and marine food security. This includes: (1) a description of the marine fisheries; (2) an update of data and catch trends in the fisheries; (3) an assessment of the current status of the main fishery species/stocks in Mozambique, (4) an overview of current management delegation and practices of the country’s marine fisheries which are scored to highlight efficiencies and (5) plan for fisheries resilience in the face of climate change predictions in Mozambique. Most of these data are not easily assessable and originate from FAO, IOTC, UN, World Bank, WIOFish databases and reports, including internal reports by the Instituto Oceanográfico de Moçambique (InOM; formerly the Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira, IIP). Data have been summarised in tables for convenient referral within the Special Issue. To access all this information and data, three in-person workshops were held in Mozambique. Importantly, Community Managed Fishing Areas and Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are included in the database as they become central mechanisms to help fend off the impacts of climate change. With oversight now available for the first time, we offer a number of recommendations in the final section of this paper that would assist policy makers in Mozambique to prepare for these inescapable impacts.
2. Overview
For management purposes, the fisheries of Mozambique are divided into four sectors: (1) artisanal (including subsistence), (2) semi-industrial, (3) industrial, and (4) sport/recreational.
The total reconstructed catch landings for the industrial, artisanal and subsistence fisheries indicate low values (50–60 000 t) in all sectors prior to 1960, but thereafter these escalated to reach some 200 000 t by 1980 (Fig 1A). The industrial sector peaks a little later around 1990. This rapid expansion in total reconstructed catch is not captured in the FAO reported catch data (blackline) because it mostly comes from the artisanal sector. Interestingly, there is a tapering in catch for all sectors between 1980–90 until early 2000s, reflected in both the reconstructed and the reported data by the FAO. The reconstructed catch show a relatively low and regular trend in the mid-2000s. It is clearly evident in the period from 2006 that catches in the artisanal fishery appear to have dramatically increased (Fig 1A). The reported catch, which now includes artisanal data also showed such sharp increase drive (Fig 1A). The reported data by the National Fisheries Research Institute (IIP) shows that the trend in the artisanal fisheries continued to increase (until the end of the time series in 2020) (Fig 1B; IIP annual report e.g., [20–23]). In contrast, the industrial and semi-industrial fisheries have experienced a decline in catch, although the pick of high caches verified for the industrial segment in 2018–2019 (Fig 1B; IIP annual report, [20–23]). Recreational catches are poorly monitored and generally not accounted in in the total reported catch.
Overview of Mozambique marine fisheries catch (t x 1000) (a) Reconstructed catches by fishing categories: Subsistence; artisanal; industrial, and corresponding aggregated landings reported by FAO (solid black line) between 1950 and 2018 (Sources: Sea Around Us [Vianna]) and (b) Catch by the artisanal, semi-industrial and industrial fisheries sector, between 2006 and 2020, according with the National Fisheries Research Institute annual reports.
Total capture production in 2020 (excluding the inland water small cichlid “kapenta” fishery of 11.300 t) was 310.039 t, with artisanal fisheries accounting for over 90% (Fig 1B; [23]).
The total number of gears used in the artisanal maritime fisheries (beach seine, gillnets, handline, small longlines and small purse seiners/ rignets) has increased 21% from the 2012 Census (45.805 gears) to the 2022 census (55.212 gears) [24]. Based on those figures we estimated the annual number of gears within the period between both frame surveys as illustrated in Fig 2. The Industrial fleet which typically operates with about 70 vessel in the last decade, registered and notable increase of about 65% in the number of licenses issued in 2018 and 2019. This peak was associated with the new investments in the sector, directed to exploit small pelagic fish using industrial pelagic trawlers (Fig 2).
The principal industrial and semi-industrial fisheries include the shallow water penaeid shrimps, the deep-water crustaceans (including deep water prawns, lobster, langostine and the pink geryon crab), the demersal rocky bottom linefish and the large pelagic (tuna and tuna like species) fisheries [8,23,25] (Fig 3). Industrial fisheries are mostly export-oriented and represent an important source of export income [23,25]. The artisanal fisheries operating near shore is multi-species catching a very significant portion of the coastal fishing resources (including small pelagic fish, soft bottom demersal fish, shrimps, swimming crabs, bivalves, octopus and others) for local consumption or sale, mostly on local markets.
Base layers used to create this map are Diva-GIS country outlines, administrative divisions and rivers in the public domain (https://www.diva-gis.org/gdata).
The overall marine artisanal fisheries sector provides employment to 400.000 people, including fishers using convectional gears, fish gathers, processors, traders, boat builders, net makers and suppliers of fishing equipment and materials [24] while the industrial and semi-industrial sector employs about 2500 people [20]. Thus artisanal fishing sector plays a significant role in food security and in the national economy.
2.1. Industrial fisheries
Industrial fisheries use motorised vessels that are over 20 m in length equipped with freezers to preserve the catch. They can operate continuously and stay at sea for months, and most of their catch is processed on board. The main gear used are mechanically advanced longline, gillnet and bottom trawl nets. The depths can range from 5–70 m for the shallow water shrimp fishery, and 200–800 m for the specialized deep-water crustaceous (including prawn) fishery. The total number of licenses fluctuated from 71 to 141 between the years 2009–2020 [25,26]. In 2020 there were 93 licenses, where shallow water shrimp fishery dominated with 34 licenses (S1 Table). Quelimane and Beira are the major fishing ports for the industrial fleet. Export masses of the different fisheries show the principal destinations for exports being China, Taiwan and the European Union (primarily Spain and Portugal) (S3 Table; [27]).
2.1.1. Sofala Bank shallow-water shrimp fishery.
Sofala Bank’s shrimp resources are composed of six native species: Penaeus indicus (white shrimp), Metapenaeus monoceros (brown shrimp), Penaeus monodon (Jumbo or Giant Tiger), Penaeus japonicus, Penaeus semisulcatus and Penaeus latisulcatus [28]. The white shrimp (Penaeus indicus) and the brown shrimp (Metapenaeus monoceros) are the two dominate species, representing approximately 80–90% of the total shrimps caught [28]. Since 2010, however, two invasive non-native species of penaeid shrimp (Metapenaeus dobsoni and Parapenaeopsis sculptilis) have been observed in the catch [29] and this has been attributed to either ballast water from commercial ships or abnormal sea currents that may have brought these species to the Mozambique Channel. Consequently, the idea that the non-native species can compete with the commercially important depleted native species is becoming a concern. Bycatch accounts for > 75% of the catch, with common species being Otolithes ruber (tigertooth croaker), Johnius dorsalis (small kob), Pomadasys kaakan (javelin grunter), and various cephalopods [28].
The main shallow-water industrial trawling areas are on the Sofala Bank fishing ground in central Mozambique (Figs 2 and 5). The maximum depth trawled is approximately 70 m, with the average between 15 and 30 m [28].
The industrial shallow water shrimp fishery catches and CPUE on Sofala Bank declined from 2006 to the historical low in 2012 (Fig 4). Since then, the catch has fluctuated. There was an increase in effort after the catch decline in 2012, and an increase in CPUE in 2017. However, this trended down again into 2020 (Fig 4). A longer data series from IIP [28] shows a general decline in both catch and CPUE in the industrial shallow water shrimp fishery over time.
2.1.2. Deep-water crustacean fishery.
Fishing for deep-sea crustaceans takes place in five fishing zones: (1) Sofala Bank, (2) Bazaruto A, (3) Bazaruto B, (4) Boa Paz and (5) Inhaca (Fig 5). The most important areas being Boa Paz and Inhaca (Fig 5) both in with highly productive Delagoa Bight [30,31].
Grey line in the shelf indicates the 50 m isobaths and the line offshore the outline the EEF. Base layers used to create this map are Diva-GIS country outlines, administrative divisions and rivers in the public domain (https://www.diva-gis.org/gdata).
The industrial fleet licensed to operate in this fishery ranged from 11 to 30 vessels between 2009 and 2020 [26]. This fleet has operated on the threshold of profitability due to external economic factors related, amongst others, to the market prices of deep-sea crustaceans and the cost of fuel [28].
There are four commercially important subgroups of deep-sea crustacean species: prawns, langoustines (Metanephrops mozambicus and Nephropsis stewarti) the deep-sea crab (Chaceon macphersoni), and the deep-sea spiny lobster (Palinurus delagoae). Large amounts of bycatch (~ 70%) are discarded–mainly fish, cephalopods, elasmobranchs, molluscs and other crustaceans with low commercial value. Only a few species are retained: Cubiceps whiteleggii (shadow driftfish), Chlorophthalmus agassizi (shortnose green eye) and Saurida lessepsianus (lessepsian lizardfish) [32]. Historically langoustines, deep-sea crab and deep-sea spiny lobster were considered bycatch of the deep-water prawn fishery. As these resources occur at quite different depths and can be targeted and managed separately, they have been reclassified as distinct target species by the new management plan approved in 2020.
2.1.2.1. Deep-water prawn (gamba). Deep-water prawn (gamba) fishing is carried out exclusively by an industrial fleet using bottom trawls. It is a multi-species fishery that takes place in the areas between 17°S and 26°30’S and at depths ranging from 350 (continental shelf break) to 800 m (continental slope), on sandy and muddy bottoms. Species captured are dominated primarily by Haliporoides triarthrus and Aristaeomorpha foleacea, but also include Aristeus antennatus, Aristeus virilis, Aristaeopsis edwardsiana, and Penaeopsis balsi [32].
Total catches of deep-water prawns declined from 3120 t in 1990 [33] to approximately 1,000 t in 2009, it then trended upwards until 2016 and has since declined to just under 1500 t (Fig 6). CPUE has shown a steady decline since 2012 (Fig 6).
2.1.2.2. Spiny lobster. The main lobster fishing areas are Bazaruto A, Bazaruto B and Boa Paz at depths between 150 and 400 m (Fig 4). Lobsters are caught with deep-sea prawn trawls or with longline traps. The 2018 total industrial catch of lobster, from all trawl gears, was 193 t. Catching lobster with traps was licensed from 1980 to 1999, 2009 to 2012 and 2014 to 2017, as part of an experimental fishery project. The target species is the spiny lobster, Palinurus delagoae. During these fishing periods the catches were ~50 t per year. The periods of interruption of activity were intended to allow stock to recover as there was evidence of overexploitation [32]. Longline trap fishing resumed in 2018.
2.1.2.3. Deep-sea crab. Deep-sea crabs are caught with deep-sea prawn trawls and experimental fishing using longline traps. Experimental fishing was carried out in the fishing areas of Inhaca, Boa Paz, Bazaruto A and B, and the Sofala Bank. The depths that showed the best results were between 400–500 m, with a smaller amount from 500–700 m [32]. Crab catches using deep-sea prawn trawls in the period 2014 to 2018 were about 200 t per year [32]. The crab species caught in nets and traps is primarily Chaceon macphersoni.
2.1.2.4. Langoustine. Langoustines also called lobster are caught with deep-sea prawn trawl nets in the Boa Paz and Bazaruto areas. This is a popular target crustacean due to its high commercial value. Information about langoustines is relatively sparse: they are known to occur in greater quantities at 350–450 m, with the catches being associated with the deep-sea prawn catches [32]. Dominant species are the African lobster (Metanephrops mozambicus) and Indian Ocean lobsterette (Nephropsis stewarti). The annual catches from 2014 to 2018 were ~200 tons per year [32].
2.1.3. Small pelagic trawl fishery.
The abundance of small pelagic fish in Mozambique has been recognised since the late 70’s based on information collated by research survey, primarily the Norwegian research vessel Dr Fridtjof Nansen operated under the UN FAO EAF-Nansen Programme in support to the Government of Mozambique, through the Oceanographic Institute of Mozambique (InOM, formerly the National Institute of Fisheries Research).
Small pelagic fish estimation has varied over time [20–22]. The average biomass during 1975–1980 being estimated at 340000 t, at that time, the composition of small pelagic species indicated a dominance of the sardine / anchovy group (65%) and mackerel species (35%). During the period between 1980 and 1990, the estimated biomass ranged between 100000 and 210000 t. In 2014, the estimated biomass on the Sofala Bank and South of the Save River areas was 165000 t, with the largest group consisting of mackerel species, dominated by barracudas and ribbonfish (70%). Recent estimation in 2018 indicate the standing biomass for small pelagics to be around 131000 t [20]. Based on these biomass fishing potential for small pelagic species has been estimated at 92000 t.
In the 70’s an industrial bottom trawl fishery emerged aimed at catching mackerel species on the Sofala Bank and Boa Paz areas. This fishery started in 1977 and in 1978 the production reached a peak of 17000 t. In subsequent years, the production of this fishery dropped to around 7000 t, accompanied by a reduction in the number of vessels. The discontinuation of this fishery was probably motivated by the sharp decrease in the average daily catch. For example, it was reported that Marbeira (a company that operated at the time) recorded an average daily catch of 2334 kg/day in 1986, and this decreased to 340 kg/day in 1990 [34].
After a long period of inactivity, an attempt was made by InOM to reactivate this fishery in 2018 with licensing 42 industrial vessels. However, no small pelagic species were reported in the catches and the fishery has been discontinued. InOM is currently reflecting on how the existing potential of small pelagics can be exploited with regards to selected species, fishing areas and technology. Given the spatial distributions of these resources, present-day thinking is to develop a semi-industrial fishery in the future.
2.1.4. Deep-water “cat” shark gillnet fishery.
The industrial deep-water shark gillnet fishery is authorised to operate north of 21°S, beyond 3 nm from the coast, at depths between 400–1500 m. The target sharks are: little gulper shark (Centrophorus uyato), leafscale gulper shark (C. squamosus), lowfin gulper shark (C. lusitanicus), smallfin gulper shark (C. moluccensis), longsnout dogfish (Deania quadrispinosa) and kitefin shark (Dalatias licha) [35]. Catches ranged from a maximum of 408 t in 2016 to a minimum of 269 t in 2019 [35].
2.1.5. Demersal linefish fishery.
The demersal line fishery occurs in three zones, represented by the industrial, semi-industrial, artisanal and recreational sectors. The semi-industrial and industrial fleets operate in the Boa Paz and Zavora in Bazaruto B (in southern zone or Zone C) and on the Sofala Bank (Zone B) [36] (Fig 7). Only a single industrial license has been issued in the last decade, in contrast to around 30 semi-industrial licenses, and consequently this sector is dominated by the semi-industrial fleet [26,37]. In Zone A (Fig 7), no semi-industrial and industrial fisheries operate because of the poor port and road infrastructure.
Dark line offshore outline the EEZ. Base layers used to create this map are Diva-GIS country outlines, administrative divisions and rivers in the public domain (https://www.diva-gis.org/gdata).
Demersal reef fish accessible to line fisheries include species from four dominant families, Lutjanidae, Sparidae, Serranidae and Lethrinidae (S4 Table). Members of these four families are represented along the entire coast and are associated with areas of rocky and coral reefs at depths ranging from 20–300 m [36,38]. However, the distribution of different species varies depending on the depth and zone along the coast [36–39].
Many of these species have life characteristics that make them vulnerable to overfishing, such as endemicity, slow growth, complex reproduction patterns, late maturity, aggregation, and sexual reversal [40]. This vulnerability is reflected in the decline in catches in the industrial and semi-industrial sectors [41], particularly in Zone C, where the fishing effort is higher than recommended in the 2014–2018 management plan [36,37]. Despite the considerable increase in fishing effort since 2004, as well as the expansion of fishing to the central zone (Zone B), catches have decreased since the mid-1990s [41] and have declined further in 2014 [36,37].
Exploitation levels in Zone A and B are still considered moderate, due to the large shelf/reef area available in Zone B and the relatively low level of fishing effort currently exerted by the artisanal fleet in Zone A [36–39].
On the oder handScomberomorus commerson (narrow-barred Spanish mackerel), although a pelagic species, is exploited as a profitable alternative by the industrial and semi-industrial line fleet, particularly in Zone C (16% of the total catch in the period 2007–2010 and 21% in the period 2011–2014) [39]. Some sand dwellers demersal fishes are commonly caught as bycatch of the prawn trawl mentioned above, sharks and rays are also an important part of the catches made by the different demersal line fishing sectors [36]. Refer to Section 3 for more details of the semi-industrial demersal fishery catch, effort and CPUE.
2.1.6. tuna fishery.
Historically, the tuna fleet in Mozambique was mainly foreign (Japanese, South Korean, Taiwanese, Mauritian and South African) and based on fishing agreements which allowed fleets to follow the tuna migrations [27,42]. In 2009, 111 licenses were issued to foreign fleets, but this decreased to 28 in 2018. The national industrial tuna fleet licensed two longline vessels in 2018. More recently (from 2020) no international tuna licenses were issued, and 16 licenses were issued to the National fleet [26].
Fishing gears, including longline and purse seine, are used in the EEZ of Mozambique. According to IOTC [42], the total catch of IOTC species (including non-tunas) within the Mozambique EEZ in 2018 was 7583 t, of which 37% came from the foreign fleet and 63% came from domestic fisheries–primarily artisanal-caught narrow-barred Spanish mackerel and kawakawa [42]. In 2018, the total catch of distant-water fishing nations, composed of 32 longliners and four purse seiners, was estimated at 2805 t. Yellowfin tuna represented 56% of the catch, followed by bigeye tuna (13%) and swordfish (7%). Shark species reported by this fleet represented about 1% of total catch, composed primarily of blue shark (Prionace glauca). The national industrial tuna fleet (2 vessels) produced a total catch of 135 t (3% of the total domestic production for IOTC species). Catch composition was dominated by yellowfin tuna (46%) and swordfish (34%), with smaller catches of bigeye tuna (6%) and dorado (Coryphaena hippurus) (6%).
Catches and CPUE have fluctuated considerably between 2006 and 2020, with a broad trend of decreasing catches and CPUE since 2008 (Fig 8) [27].
2.2. Semi-industrial fishery
The semi-industrial fishery uses motorized vessels 10–20 m in length that operate up to a week in coastal and oceanic The national industrial tuna fleet licensed two longline vessels which produced a total catch of 135 t (3% of the total domestic production for IOTC species). waters. Some vessels have freezers (refrigerated); others use ice. There are essentially two semi-industrial fisheries–one for trawling shallow-water shrimps and one for demersal linefish (S5 Table). In 2020, 34 shrimp vessels were licensed (31 refrigerated, 3 ice). The semi-industrial fishery for demersal linefish is active in the Inhaca and Boa Paz grounds (Zone C) and on the Sofala Bank (Zone B) (Fig 7, [36]), with 30 vessels licensed in 2020 [26].
2.2.1. Shallow-water shrimp fisher.
The semi-industrial fleet operates on the Sofala Bank primarily on the northern (Moma-Angoche) and to the south of Beira (Dondo to Machanga) and also in a small area in the Maputo Bay, while the industrial fleet operates in the central Sofala Bank zone [29,43,44].
Species targeted are the same as for the industrial fisheries (see section 2 for details). It is difficult to determine a clear trend in the Sofala Bank fishery as the catch data differ markedly between refrigerated and ice vessels. This may be due to the drastic reduction in the number of semi-industrial ice boats (effort) and the reduced availability of the resource owing to competition with artisanal fisheries in the area currently dedicated to semi-industrial ice fishing (south of Beira). Overall, the refrigerated vessels show a declining trend in CPUE and a major decline in catch in 2013 and 2014, before recovering in 2018 (Fig 9A). Vessels using ice have shown a marked decline in catch and CPUE from 2006 to 2020 (Fig 9B). In common with the industrial fisheries, bycatch accounts for more than 75% of the shallow water catch. The Maputo Bay fishery appears to have undergone a gradual decline (Fig 10).
Catch, effort and CPUE for the semi-industrial shrimp fishery on Sofala Bank for (a) refrigerated and (b) ice fleet (Source [23,27]).
2.2.2. Demersal linefish fishery.
The fishing gear and species targeted are the same as for the industrial fishery (see section 2 for details and Fig 7 for areas fished). 30 licenses were issued in 2020 [26]. The stock assessment reports for the period 2006 to 2020 indicated that there was a steep increase in fishing effort until 2015 [37,39]. This is associated with the expansion of fleet operations from the Southern region (Zone C) to the Sofala Bank area (Zone B) since 2003 [41], followed by a gradual reduction in the fishing effort from 2017 because of the implementation of the measures recommended in the 2014–2018 management plan [36]. In 2020, this was compounded by the impacts of Covid 19 on the fishery markets, particularly the tourism industry. From 2006 to 2020 there has been a continual decrease in CPUE (in the order of 60%), despite efforts made to stabilize the fishery since 2017 (Fig 11).
2.2.3. Pelagic/Tuna fishery.
The total catch of IOTC tuna and tuna-like species in the semi-industrial fishery (which is dominated by the narrow-barred Spanish mackerel) in 2018 was 90 t [42]. There is much variation in catch annually which is explained by the fact that the fishery targets demersal rocky bottom fish [37,39].
2.3. Artisanal fishery
Artisanal fisheries consist of individuals or small groups of fishers, with or without boats, with or without gear, operating subsistence or small-scale commercial fishing or harvesting using traditional or simple techniques. Administrative or community licensing/permit requirements are relatively simple for the artisanal fishery. Where available, the boats are less than 10 m in length and most use oars or sails, although a few have motors under 100 HP. The most common boats are dugout canoes called ‘chata’ and dhows. The gear, operated manually, includes beach seines, gillnets, mosquito nets (illegal but still widely used), handlines, fence traps (‘chicocota’) and baited traps (S6 Table, [45]). Without motors, they are generally limited to 24 hours of operation and to 3 nm from shore, and, with motors, to 12 nm from shore. This sector also includes harvesters of intertidal invertebrates and other resources, as well as divers who use harpoons. Preservation of catches is limited to ice, salt, smoking or drying.
There was a rapid growth of the artisanal fishery catch during this period 2009–2022 (Fig 12). Although catch data are available, there are limited or no published overall effort and CPUE data for the sub-sectors of the fishery except for that of the motorized closed-deck artisanal vessels that use ice and operate on Sofala Bank (Fig 13). Data show marked fluctuations and a clear downward trend in both catch and CPUE in the past six years from 2015 to 2019.
The artisanal fishery catch is dominated by fish category (marine and freshwater) which comprised over 90% of the total catch in 2020 (Fig 11). This is a multi-species fishery that can be broken into the following broad categories: sandy bottom demersal (including estuaries), rocky bottom demersal, small pelagic (including estuaries) and larger pelagic conducted over a wide area and at depths between 5–180 m. The primary gear types used included hook and line, longline, gillnets, seine nets and fyke. The dominant fish species caught, and gear used by zone show that there is considerable variation between and within zones (S7 Table).
The shallow water shrimp fishery is the second most important component of the artisanal fishery after marine fish on the Sofala Bank (Zone B), whilst cephalopods (octopus) are the second most important fishery in the north (Zone A) (Fig 13). A range of non-motorized wooden vessels <10 m in length is used to deploy a variety of nets to catch shallow-water shrimps, including seine nets and gill nets; nets may also be set without a boat (i.e., from the shore). There are also motorized vessels <10 m in length (so technically designated as artisanal) which trawl for shrimp. The artisanal seine net fishers are required to use 37 mm mesh, but they often use smaller sizes.
Artisanal harvesting of shrimp occurs in estuaries and shallow coastal waters including from beaches and on mud flats in close proximity to rivers, wherever they occur on the Mozambican coast [28]. In addition, fishing occurs in estuarine nursery areas where catches are mostly of juvenile shrimps and fishes before these can recruit to the offshore fishing areas. The dominant species targeted by the artisanal shrimp fishery is juvenile white shrimp (Penaeus indicus) which contributed about 55% to landed shrimp catches in 2018, brown shrimp (Metapenaeus monoceros, 15%), giant tiger or jumbo shrimp (Penaeus monodon, 13%) and one new invasive species (Parapenaeopsis sculptilis, 12%) [28]. The Tsivakihini paste shrimp (Acetes erythraeus) are caught using beach seine and fyke chicocota nets. Octopus species are targeted by divers using harpoons. Numerous species are captured, but the dominant catch is the big blue octopus (Octopus cyanea) (https://www.wiofish.org/).
The estimated catch of IOTC tuna and tuna-like species by the artisanal coastal fisheries in 2018 was 4513 t [42]. Catch composition was dominated by narrow-barred Spanish mackerel (37%) and by frigate and bullet tunas with 44%, followed by kawakawa (14%). Gear contribution analysis showed small purse seine (47%) and handline (32%) as the most important, followed by beach seine (12%) and gillnets (8%). Cabo Delgado, followed by Nampula and Inhambane, were the provinces with the highest diversity of species while other provinces caught mainly Narrow-barred Spanish mackerel [42].
The artisanal fishery also includes the following research designated categories (https://www.wiofish.org/). However, catch data are not available:
- Diving for lobster (Palinurus spp).
- Diving on seagrass beds for sea cucumber.
- Diving on seagrass beds for fish and octopus.
- Sandy and rocky shore gathering of clams, mussels and oysters.
- Traps for crabs (Scylla serrata, Portunus pelagicus).
- Basket traps for numerous species of fish, crab and shrimp.
- Staked traps targeting primarily shrimps with retained bycatch of fish and crabs.
2.4. Recreational and sport fishery
Recreational fishing effort has increased as a result of the rise in tourism and is reflected in the doubling of the number of licenses in the period 2009–2017, especially in Zone C where around 90% of the licenses are issued [36]. In 2019, 4500 licenses were issued for recreational and sport fishing [26,27]. Sport fishing targets large pelagic fishes such as tunas, billfishes and narrow-barred Spanish mackerel, while recreational fishing focuses on sandy and rocky bottom demersal fishes in addition to large pelagic fishes [36]. Limited catch data are available from catch records provided by fishing clubs, mainly in Maputo, as well as some biological data from sampling of landed catches during fishing competitions. These are available at https://www.wiofish.org/.
3. Status of some of the main fisheries
Detailed stock assessment for the key Mozambique target species are produced by InOM (previously IIP; e.g., [37,44]). Catch, effort and CPUE data, together with some biological data (size at maturity, growth), over a number of years have enabled to assess the status of the main target species and zones (Table 1).
This indicates that most of the species stock, i.e. 92% (22 of the total 24 stocks), has been assessed to be optimally or overexploited (Table 1). Only two species (one small pelagic and one large pelagic predator) are considered under-exploited (Table 1). In 2020, the fishing potential in Mozambique for all fisheries (including the freshwater Kapenta fisheries of 113999 t/y) was estimated at 305000–460000 t, and the total catch for the marine fisheries was 310039 t (Fig 2A; [26]). This corroborates the fisheries are fully exploited and there is limited scope for expansion. Furthermore, all three management plans, discussed in the next section, emphasize the need to decrease effort / catch.
Mozambique reports to the IOTC which conducts regional assessments of certain tuna and tuna-like species. Their status reports on the yellowfin tuna Thunnus albacares (the main target species for industrial fisheries in Mozambique) and narrow-barred Spanish mackerel Scomberomorus commerson (which is exploited by the industrial, semi-industrial and artisanal fisheries) indicate both to be overfished [50,51].
4. Management of Mozambique fisheries
4.1. Institutional oversight and legislation
Fisheries management in Mozambique is the responsibility of the Ministry of the Sea, Inland Waters and Fisheries (MIMAIP). MIMAIP’s role is to define fisheries policies and formulate guidelines, rules and regulations to plan, develop and manage national fisheries and aquaculture in the country. Fisheries management functions are the responsibility of the National Fisheries Administration (ADNAP) at MIMAIP. The Minister who oversees the fisheries portfolio may, in consultation with the National Fisheries Administration Commission (CNAP), an advisory body, determine other direct management measures on matters of interest to the management of fisheries resources. In the context of the sustainability of fisheries resources and fisheries management, measures include: Maximum number and dimensions of vessels to be licensed in a fishery; Fishing season–open and closed periods; Areas and depths with restrictions on fishing activity; Procedures for the preparation and review of fisheries development plans; and Other management measures for fishing or conservation of the aquatic environment.
The Fisheries Management Council, an advisory body to ADNAP, aims to facilitate coordination between the various entities that are part of the fisheries management sub-system. At the local level, the participatory management body is the Fisheries Co-Management Committee (CGP) which comprises the Fisheries Community Councils (CCP) and various stakeholder groups. It should be noted that MPAs are managed by the National Administration of Conservation Areas (ANAC) of the Ministry of Land and Environment (MTA).
The legislation underpinning fisheries management plans is Article 15 of Law No. 22/2013, of 10 November, in conjunction with Article 13 of the General Regulation of Maritime Fishing, approved by Decree No. 89/2020 of 8 of October.
The Fisheries Master Plan [52] has the following fisheries policy objectives: to ensure improvement of food security and nutrition derived from fish for the population; to improve living conditions of artisanal fishing communities; to increase production of fisheries to assist the achievement of national economic and social development; to increase the net contribution of the fisheries sector to the balance of payments of the country, and to ensure the sustainability of exploitation of resources and the preservation of the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems.
Further, Article 15 of the Fisheries Law (2013) which deals with fisheries management holds that government shall adopt management plans for existing or developing fisheries. Management plans shall take into account, inter alia: (a) management development objectives, accounting for biological, economic, social and environmental aspects; (b) a description of the fishery and its constituent species, their geographical location and fishing zones; (c) the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAF), including the life cycles of the fishery species and their exploitation strategies; (d) sustainability measures and access regimes, including catch and total allowable effort, and e) research activities, including monitoring and evaluation.
4.2. Data collection
Currently, data collection and management are stipulated by the Fisheries Master Plan 2010–19 [52]. This plan was formulated by the Directorate of Studies, Plans and Infrastructures (DEPI). Fisheries information is not collected by a single organisation—various organisations collect various types of data pertinent to fisheries management from different fisheries sectors (S8 Table). In the regional context for the Western Indian Ocean fisheries data and data management is described by [53].
All vessels operating in Mozambique waters are required to register with the National Marine Institute (INAMAR), although some smaller artisanal vessels may not adhere to this stipulation. If the vessel is to be used for fishing purposes, a second registration is required with National Fisheries Administration (ADNAP), and this includes all artisanal vessels. All subsistence fishers are required to register their fishing gears but only require licenses if they want to sell their catches.
Industrial and semi-industrial fisheries are required to record all fishing activities on hardcopy logbooks that are submitted to the appropriate agency at the end of each fishing trip. In addition, electronic catch reports are submitted at ten-day intervals for trips longer than ten days. An on-board observer program is operated by InOM in semi-industrial and industrial fisheries. Coverage depends on the fishery and conditions but the aim is for 5% or higher in the tuna fisheries. The observers collect data on species composition, lengths and weights, and, where possible on sex and maturity. While compliance officers do not meet every vessel discharging catches, between them and the port authorities, every vessel is inspected in some way. InOM staff members also occasionally meet the vessels, especially when fisheries are new or in experimental phases.
Artisanal fishers (without logbooks) are monitored through the National Artisanal Fisheries Sampling System (SNAPA) that uses a stratified method in which the sampling dates and landing sites are selected randomly. The system was initiated by IIP in 1998, and then incrementally rolled out to cover the entire coast over ten years. Since 2017, this has been transferred to the responsibility of the Directorate of Studies, Plans and Infrastructure (DEPI). There is ongoing discussion to reallocate this system to ADNAP but they would only collect and monitor catch and effort data, so InOM would still need to collect biological data. Artisanal catches are recorded per gear, and effort is captured as hours fished, number of crew and gear days. Catch composition data to species level (if possible) are collected at landing sites but DEPI aggregates some species when collating the data. For now, data are captured on paper datasheets but trials are underway to test the use of various smartphone applications which would make data collection systems more efficient. Some biological data are collected at landing sites along with the catch and effort data and analysed by InOM. All data are entered into a database system called Pescart. This database has become outdated and investigations are underway to establish if OPEN ARTFISH (Open Approaches, Rules and Techniques for Fisheries statistical monitoring) will be an appropriate substitute for Pescart. An area of concern, in this context, relates to the changeover from Pescart to the use of FAO’s OPENFISH to collect data which does not include biological information. Both these data sets are critical for good management of the artisanal fishery and processes need to be in place to ensure that both sets of data feed back into management plans.
National census on artisanal or small-scale fisheries–in addition to the routine catch monitoring, frame surveys approaches are conducted every five years along the entire Mozambique coastline to collect data on all fishing gears and vessels and the number of fishers at landing sites (e.g., [24]). The Provincial Directorate of Sea, Inland Waters and Fisheries (IDEPA) is responsible for conducting the Mozambique frame surveys. The last full census was conducted in 2017.
As in most countries globally, there are challenges and limitations to data collection in Mozambique. The main limitation is lack of funding for staff to adequately support the various monitoring systems, provide capacity development of field samplers at provincial levels and to provide basic necessities to enable samplers to carry out their duties. Further limitations include the use of outdated databases and the delay in incorporating modern technologies such as mobile phone applications for data collection.
Latest government regulations (Regulamento de Investigação e Pesquisa Científica Marinha -REICIM, Decree No. 30/2019 of 19 of April) stipulate that all data collected in Mozambique are the property of the government and require that all organisations, projects and students submit their data to InOM for curation. Organisations collecting da ta have first option to publish the data whereafter data may be requested for other research initiatives. An integrated database is being developed which will connect all the databases of the government institutes, ministries, etc. It will provide public access to all the metadata of these databases to enable anyone to view what data are available, and will list contact persons to whom to apply for access to the raw data.
There are four databases that provide regional fisheries data for the WIO. These are the FAO Global Capture Production dataset that collates data sent to the FAO by most countries of the world; the Sea Around Us dataset that takes the FAO data, adds data from published and grey literature and other studies, and reconstructs catches using various interpolation models; the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) dataset that has catch and effort for tuna, tuna-like and associated species submitted by WIO countries to the commission; and WIOFish (https://www.wiofish.org/) which collates individual fisheries data from eight countries in the WIO. The first two datasets provide coarsely aggregated data that cannot be assigned to individual fisheries. This is problematic as aggregated data introduce confusion into forecasting models as impacts such as over-fishing, pollution, etc. cannot be identified or separated from climate impacts. The IOTC dataset focuses mainly on the large pelagic fishes that are not as closely associated with the near-coast environment. The WIOFish database, particularly for Mozambique fisheries, provides time series of data at individual fishery levels for catch and effort that will be able to feed into the climate change models. Because WIOFish collates data at a regional scale it is also a powerful tool for fisheries management at the regional scale allowing comparisons of catches, effort and management strategies for similar fisheries in multiple countries.
4.3. Management plans
There are three fisheries management plans which have recently been developed or updated: shallow-water shrimp [28], deep-water crustaceans [32], and rocky bottom demersal fish [36].
The shallow-water shrimp fishery, the industrial and semi-industrial fleet are currently managed on an annual licensing basis following Total Allowable Effort (TAE) criteria [28]. These are allocated through total fleet trawl head rope length which is converted into fishing units (vessels). The maximum number of licenses (semi-industrial or industrial) is determined after analyzing recommendations from fisheries research as well as social, economic and political considerations. There are no fishing effort restrictions for artisanal fleets, although fishing licenses are required. There is a legal minimum size limit (diagonal width) of 55 mm for the cod-end mesh of industrial and semi-industrial trawls and 38 mm for the codend mesh of beach-seines, although these regulations are not always complied with by the artisanal sector. The semi/industrial sector may not operate within 3 nm of the coast to minimize conflict with the artisanal sector.
There is also the implementation of a closed season for the industrial and semi-industrial shallow-water fishery to protect the juvenile shrimps [29,44,54]. The seasonal closure was initially introduced for the industrial sector on the Sofala Bank in 1992 for a period of 2 months (January and February), later it was extended to include December (i.e. 3-months) in 1999, subsequently it was further extended in 2004 from mid-November (3.5-months), then in 2010 from mid-October (4.5-months), and currently since 2016 it covers approximately 6 months from mid-October to March [55].
In the case of the deep-water crustacean fishery (and other semi/industrial fisheries), a fishing license is required to engage in fishing activities [32]. Fishing rights are guaranteed for short-, medium- and long-term periods, depending on the vessel’s ownership, nationality of the workforce and onshore processing facilities. Vessels with fishing licenses are required to use a Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) device. There is a legal minimum size limit (diagonal width) of 50 mm for the mesh size of the codend for industrial trawls. Although TAE is the main management tool at present, the 2021–25 management plan raises the need to also evaluate the effectiveness of a Total Allowable Catch (TAC) approach. According to Article 15b, there is also a minimum depth limit restricting the deep-water crustacean fishery to operating below 350 m [32].
The rocky-bottom demersal industrial and semi-industrial fleets are currently managed according to Total Allowable Catch (TAC), allocated to each fishing zone based on the quota for the industrial fleet and the presence of the semi-industrial fleet [36]. The 2014–2018 Management Plan established effort limits for the industrial, semi-industrial (number of vessels) and artisanal (number of fishing gears) fleets for each of the 3 fishing zones (Zone A—1 industrial vessel, 10 semi-industrial vessels and 7276 handline gears for artisanal fishing; Zone B—1 industrial vessel, 12 semi-industrial vessels and 3386 handline gears for artisanal fishing‘ and Zone C—1 industrial vessel, 14 semi-industrial vessels and 3374 gears for artisanal fishing). For zone C, the minimum hook size was defined as 3/0. However, a challenge is to enforce these limits in particular for the artisanal fishing.
There are no fishing effort restrictions for the sport and recreational fisheries, but fishing licenses are required. Some fish species are prohibited from being caught by the recreational and sport sector and a limit on total numbers and maximum weights of fish that can be caught per fisherman is in place. There are MPAs where commercial fishing is prohibited (Ponta do Ouro Partial Marine Reserve; Quirimbas Biosphere Reserve and the Primeiras and Segundas Archipelago Reserve).
Although a number of additional fisheries management plans have been proposed, or are in the process of being prepared, there are no other formal plans at present.
4.4. Community fisheries councils and co-management
The prevailing approach to involving community in the governance of artisanal fisheries in Mozambique has been centred on Community Fisheries Councils (CCPs). In terms of draft PESPA II (2019–25) a CCP is a community-based organization that contributes to the participatory management of fisheries [26]. Its purpose is to ensure compliance with existing management measures and to assist in the management of fisheries conflicts. The CCPs are local bodies that are responsible for implementing enforcement and management actions, both in fishing areas in general, but also in LMMA’s and Fisheries community-managed areas that are described in Article 149. A CCP is governed by its own statutes, in particular it:
1. Supports local authorities responsible for fisheries administration in licensing and surveillance of fisheries; 2. Participates in the preparation of proposals and implementation of management measures in its geographical area of activity; 3. Participates in the implementation of fishing access and restriction mechanisms, number of fishermen, gear and others; 4. Alerts authorities responsible for fisheries administration to changes in fisheries resources or to the environment in their geographic area; and 5. Collaborates in the control and combating of marine and coastal pollution.
Complementing government-driven policies and projects, NGOs have also been active in Mozambique over the past 20 years in supporting artisanal fisheries co-management, in partnership with relevant national, provincial and district authorities.
4.5. Marine protected areas and locally managed marine areas
In addition to their core role in conservation of biodiversity, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been shown to be important tools in fisheries and ecosystem services management (e.g., [56–58]). In Mozambique, conservation areas are governed by the Law for the Protection, Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity (Law No. 5/2017 of 11 May), regulated by Decree No. 89/2017. The National Administration of Conservation Areas (ANAC), created by Decree No. 9/2013 of 10 April, is responsible for the strategic, political and operational activities of the Mozambique’s conservation areas. Through the Presidential Decree 2/2017 of 10 of July, the Ministry of Sea, Interior Waters and Fisheries was assigned the role of (a) proposing policies, legislation and strategies to the development of the marine conservation areas; and (b) ensuring the management of the marine conservation areas in liaison with the competent authorities.
Conservation areas in Mozambique are standardized into the following categories:
- Total conservation areas where the extraction of natural resources is not allowed. The relevant categories for the marine environment are: (i) Integral Nature Reserve, (ii) National Park and (iii) Cultural and Natural Monument.
- Conservation areas of sustainable use where a certain level of natural resource extraction is allowed, subject to a management plan. The relevant categories for the marine environment are: (i) Special Reserve, (ii) Environmental Protection Area, (iii) Community Conservation Area, (iv) Sanctuary, and (v) Municipal Ecological Park.
There are nine conservation areas covering the marine and coastal environment of Mozambique but only six can be categorised as MPAs: (1) Quirimbas National Park, (2) Bazaruto Archipelago National Park, (3) Sanctuary of Cabo de São Sebastião (adjacent to the Bazaruto Archipelago National Park), (4) Maputo National Park, formerly Ponta do Ouro Partial Marine Reserve, (5) Environmental Protection Area of the Archipelago of the Primeiras and Segundas Islands, and (6) Maputo Environmental Protection Area (incorporating the Ponta do Ouro Partial Marine Reserve and the Maputo Special Reserve on land). Other conservation areas along the coastline, which incorporate key wetland and coastal (as opposed to marine) features such as mangroves, estuaries and dunes, include the Marromeu Special Reserve, the Pomene Special Reserve and the Maputo Special Reserve (Table 2). At present only 2.2% of Mozambique’s EEZ is protected by MPAs that face considerable risks and threats [59].
An alternative to the top-down MPA approach is that of Locally Managed Marine Areas (LMMAs), or Territorial Use Rights for Fishing—TURF) (Área de Gestão Comunitária—AGC) which are gaining recognition globally, with studies showing successful implementation in South East Asia and the Pacific (see the Locally-Managed Marine Area Network, https://lmmanetwork.org/). Similar initiatives in Kenya [60] and Mozambique [61] have had varying degrees of success. MPAs and LMMAs have similar goals but an important difference between them is that the latter are established by local communities, with local ownership. LMMAs can, and often do, incorporate no-take areas, and there may also be restrictions on gear, species, or season to reduce pressure on stocks. While there have been early efforts at establishing LMMAs in Mozambique by establishing and involving CCPs ([61]; refer to section 7.4 for more detail on CCPs), these have yet to be formally recognized, and the requisite legal framework is still being developed.
4.6. Effective management score sheets for the Mozambique fisheries
WIOFish (https://www.wiofish.org) undertakes regular assessment of the management status of fisheries in the WIO, with scoring undertaken by local fisheries managers and scientists from each country. The self-scoring indicates that most aspects of the industrial and semi-industrial fishery sectors in Mozambique are relatively well managed; however, those in the artisanal sector appear to be weak (Fig 14).
Scoring criteria: 0 = None, 1 = Low, 2 = Average, 3 = High, 4 = Comprehensive.
5. Planning for climate change resilience
5.1. Challenges
Well-managed fisheries have been among the most resilient to climate change—fisheries best practices confer ecological resilience by maintaining healthy stock sizes, age structures and genetic diversity, as well as socioeconomic resilience, by providing a portfolio of options to fishers and a buffer against climate impacts [62–66]. Ideally, best practices include scientifically-informed catch limits, accountability measures, regional flexibility in policy practices, protection of essential fish habitat (MPAs) and effective monitoring, control and surveillance [62,63,67]. Although Mozambique has a relatively well managed industrial/semi-industrial fishery committed to the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries [28,32,36,68], it falls short of these ideals. The management of the artisanal fishery is weak, due to its complexity and people rely on it.
Of 40 species considered important to marine fisheries in Mozambique, 10, include fishes and crustaceans,are highly vulnerable to climate change [17]. 8 are only caught by artisanal fishers and the other 2 species by both the industrial and artisanal sectors. Thus, the artisanal sector, which contributes by far the most to catches and numbers of fishers as detailed above, is likely to be the most heavily affected by climate change. This sector is further challenged because management is weak, with poor monitoring, control and surveillance, and there is likely to be increased reliance on food production by this sector if, as predicted, agricultural output will be compromised by climate change [69].
The overall conclusion drawn from the reviews and the information presented in this paper is that the core response needed to achieve ‘climate change resilient fisheries’ in Mozambique is to do a much better job of addressing existing classic fishery management challenges, with explicit consideration of how climate change exacerbates them. Similarly, maintaining sustainable fisheries in the face of climate change will require increased attention to reducing all the stressors to the social–ecological systems in which fisheries exist and persist [62,63,67,70–72].
5.2. Recommendations
Based on the review presented here with regards to catch trends, status of the fish stocks, the current management status of the stocks, and implementation of ecosystem approach fisheries and biodiversity conservation policies and strategies, recommendations to enhance climate change resilience and adaptation in Mozambique fisheries management include:
Legislation and Strategic planning
- Review and update the existing Fisheries Master Plan dated 2010 to address climate change and ensure that it presents a comprehensive overview of how the national and local management plans for all fisheries are integrated and relate to each other.
- Ensure that the fisheries for small pelagic, demersal sandy bottom fishes and estuarine-dependent species are integrated into the overall framework.
- Review and ensure that climate change is taken into consideration in the recently completed and established National Management Plans for shallow-water shrimp, deep-water crustaceans and rocky bottom demersal:
- Complete the outstanding National Plan of Action for sharks conservation as well as whales, dugongs, turtles and dolphins.
- Revise and approve the Draft Mozambique strategy for fisheries adaptation under pressure from climate change and ensure it is informed by the above reviewed fishery plans and recommendations below.
Data collection, Statistics. Information and knowledge
- Review the changes over from Pescart to the use of FAO’s OPENFISH to collect data which does not include biological information and ensure that it does not compromise fisheries management in a time of rapid climate change.
- Review current data collection, storage, access and utilization in local fisheries management plans for the artisanal sector and ensure that it is fit for purpose and takes advantage of latest technological and electronic innovations appropriate for remote artisanal fisher populations.
- Foster international and regional cooperation and data sharing.
- Review methods for assessing stock status including exploring options for improving modelling capabilities.
- Obtain historical and projected trends in temperature and ecosystem components (nutrients, Primary Production) using accepted Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) models.
Improve Climate resilience
- Complete / initiate local artisanal fisheries management plans for existing Local Marine Management Areas (LMMAs)/ Community Fisheries Councils (CCPs).
- Build on the work implemented by MIMAIP [61] to facilitate effective CCPs and practical, workable LMMAs for artisanal fisheries, particularly where these overlap with MPAs.
- Educate / prepare fishing communities / Community Fisheries Councils (CCPs) on the possible impacts of climate change with regards to fisheries and environment, by preparing and disseminating specific education packages throughout the different strata of Mozambican society with emphasis on local coastal communities, including schools.
- Use all of the above to inform management and ensure that the fisheries catch remains at or below maximum sustainable yield (MSY).
- Conduct a vulnerability assessment of key / indicator species to climate change to inform management of fishery stocks.
- Model / obtain current and future biomass assessments of species and fisheries under various fishing scenarios.
- Identify underutilized fisheries and options for more effective use of by-catch / discards (applies primarily to industrial / semi-industrial fisheries as artisanal fisheries utilizes entire catch).
- Identify, assess and where feasible take proactive measures to reduce the impacts of other stressors to fisheries such as: loss of mangroves and seagrass, declining estuarine health/water quality, changes in river flow and nutrient loading, increased storm events, sea level rise and rapid population growth.
- Fast-track development of sustainable aquaculture in order to reduce pressure on wild stocks and increase food / protein to poor communities.
- Identify the effects of climate change on existing MPAs and critical habitats which support biodiversity and fisheries, as these may shift in terms of value, location and ecosystem role/ importance.
- Urgently implement the existing scenario for the expansion of the MPAs in order to improve conservation in Mozambique from the current 2.1% to 10% (SGD 14) and further to 30%, as recommended.
- Establish a multisector Climate Change and Fisheries (food security) Working Group to advise the government on matters pertaining to mitigation, adaptation and resilience creation in light of the impending crisis.
6. Conclusions
With the second longest coastline in Africa (2700 km) and two thirds of the population living near the ocean, our updated data confirms the heavy reliance of Mozambique on marine and coastal fisheries for the consumption of marine resources/food security, employment and foreign exchange generation. Economically, the most valuable fisheries are the shallow-water shrimp, the deep-water crustacean (primarily deep-water prawn and to a lesser extent lobster, langoustine and deep-water crab) and the rocky bottom demersal fisheries. But the critical sector for national food security and livelihoods is clearly the artisanal fishery which comprises over 90% of the total fish catch in Mozambique and provides critically needed protein for millions of people in the coastal zone. Catch statistics for the industrial/semi-industrial sector indicate the core stock species are fully- or over-exploited (i.e., 22 out of 24 fisheries with this status). Limited data are available for the artisanal fishery, but it is likely that the same status applies to this sector too.
With nearly all fisheries already stressed (artisanal, in particular)–as well as the rapid coastal population growth currently experienced in Mozambique of approaching 3% pa—it is highly likely that climate change will exacerbate the humanitarian crisis of food security in the future. Hence it is critical that this likely scenario is recognized and that a climate change/marine food security resilience strategy/plan is devised with haste. Central to this plan should be the strengthening of fisheries management, with a special focus on the artisanal fishery. Our score sheet analysis shows that, of the 14 elements needed for effective artisanal fisheries management, almost all are not presently implemented or are ineffective. This lack of proper management, in tandem with the rapidly increasing coastal population, will no doubt lead to the failure of the ocean to provide food security.
Given the seriousness of this situation, we recommend that a Climate Change and Fisheries (food security) Working Group be established in Mozambique to elevate this impending challenge, drive a remedial/adaptive national strategy, and direct much-needed research, monitoring and timely assessments.
Supporting information
S1 Table. Overview of main industrial fisheries.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Table. Industrial production per resource from 2006 to 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s002
(DOCX)
S3 Table. Export of the products of the different industrial fisheries 2005–2020.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s003
(DOCX)
S4 Table. Common reef fish in the demersal linefish fishery.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s004
(DOCX)
S6 Table. Overview of main artisanal sectors.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s006
(DOCX)
S7 Table. Artisanal catch by fishery and gear used.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s007
(DOCX)
S8 Table. Fisheries data collection in Mozambique: Institutions involved and categories of collected data.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000494.s008
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
This paper is one of several in a dedicated Special Issue (PLOS Climate) initiated to assist Mozambique in tackling climate change and its potential impacts on fisheries and marine food security.
This paper was a huge effort to collate and synthesize Mozambican fisheries data held by different government institutions including MIMAIP, ADNAP, IDEPA, and InOM. This has not been achieved before. The authors therefore wish to acknowledge all institutions that directly or indirectly availed their invaluable historical data that made this review possible. Similarly, in the context where formally published reports and articles are hard to find, we thank all technical staff from these and other institutions that made available all their written resources.
The paper is one of many results of the ongoing ReMoTurb project implemented by the Mozambique Oceanographic Institute (InOM) and the Nelson Mandela University of South Africa which aims at improving preparedness of Mozambique to climate change impacts. The project was made possible by a cooperation that was established between these two institutions; therefore, the authors are grateful to the leadership and stewardship of InOM and NMU.
References
- 1. Lipangue A, Malauene BS, Roberts MJ. Assessment of coastal communities’ vulnerability to climate change induced marine food (in)security in Mozambique. (Forthcoming in this issue—Under publication). PLOS Climate.
- 2.
Worldometer. Mozambique Population (Live). In: Worldmeter [Internet]. 2024 [cited 14 Sep 2024]. Available: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/mozambique-population/.
- 3.
UN. United Nations E-Government Knowledgebase. Mozambique. In: UN E-Government Knowledgebase [Internet]. 2024 [cited 14 Sep 2024]. Available: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Data/Country-Information/id/116-Mozambique.
- 4.
WFP. World Food Programme Mozambique Country Brief. In: WFP [Internet]. 2024 [cited 14 Sep 2024]. Available: https://www.wfp.org/countries/mozambique.
- 5.
UNCTAD. Fishery Exports and the Economic Development of Least Developed Countries: Bangladesh, Cambodia, the Comoros. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development; 2017.
- 6.
FAO. Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles: The Republic of Mozambique. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2019.
- 7.
FAO. Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles: National Fishery Sector Overview, the Republic of Mozambique. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2007.
- 8.
Doherty B., McBride M.M., Brito A.J., Le Manach F., Palha de Sousa L., Chauca I., et al. Marine fisheries in Mozambique: catches updated to 2010 and taxonomic disaggregation. Fisheries Centre Research Reports. British Columbia: University of British Columbia; 2015. pp. 67–81.
- 9. Lam VWY, Allison EH, Bell JD, Blythe J, Cheung WWL, Frölicher TL, et al. Climate change, tropical fisheries and prospects for sustainable development. Nat Rev Earth Environ. 2020;1: 440–454.
- 10. Barange M, Merino G, Blanchard JL, Scholtens J, Harle J, Allison EH, et al. Impacts of climate change on marine ecosystem production in societies dependent on fisheries. Nature Clim Change. 2014;4: 211–216.
- 11. Bryndum‐Buchholz A, Tittensor DP, Blanchard JL, Cheung WWL, Coll M, Galbraith ED, et al. Twenty‐first‐century climate change impacts on marine animal biomass and ecosystem structure across ocean basins. Global Change Biology. 2019;25: 459–472. pmid:30408274
- 12. Lotze HK, Tittensor DP, Bryndum-Buchholz A, Eddy TD, Cheung WWL, Galbraith ED, et al. Global ensemble projections reveal trophic amplification of ocean biomass declines with climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116: 12907–12912. pmid:31186360
- 13. Rao SA, Dhakate AR, Saha SK, Mahapatra S, Chaudhari HS, Pokhrel S, et al. Why is Indian Ocean warming consistently? Climatic Change. 2012;110: 709–719.
- 14. Roxy MK, Ritika K, Terray P, Masson S. The Curious Case of Indian Ocean Warming*,+. Journal of Climate. 2014;27: 8501–8509.
- 15. Roxy MK, Modi A, Murtugudde R, Valsala V, Panickal S, Prasanna Kumar S, et al. A reduction in marine primary productivity driven by rapid warming over the tropical Indian Ocean. Geophysical Research Letters. 2016;43: 826–833.
- 16. Nataniel A, Pennino MG, Lopez J, Soto M. Modelling the impacts of climate change on skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) in the Mozambique Channel. Fisheries Oceanography. 2022;31: 149–163.
- 17. Fennessy ST, Quick AJR, Mutombene RJ, Abdula S, Leong ER, Dias N, et al. A rapid approach to assessing the vulnerability of Mozambican fisheries’ species to climate change. Klecka J, editor. PLOS Clim. 2024;3: e0000372.
- 18. Wilson RJ, Sailley SF, Jacobs ZL, Kamau J, Mgeleka S, Okemwa GM, et al. Large projected reductions in marine fish biomass for Kenya and Tanzania in the absence of climate mitigation. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2021;215: 105921.
- 19. Béné C, Hersoug B, Allison EH. Not by Rent Alone: Analysing the Pro‐Poor Functions of Small‐Scale Fisheries in Developing Countries. Development Policy Review. 2010;28: 325–358.
- 20.
IIP. Relatório anual 2017. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2018.
- 21.
IIP. Relatório anual 2018. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2019.
- 22.
IIP. Relatório anual 2019. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2020.
- 23.
IIP. Relatório anual 2020. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2021.
- 24.
IDPPE. Censo da pesca artesanal 2012—Principais resultados. Maputo, Mozambique: Instituto de Desenvolvimento de Pesca de Pequena Escala, Ministério das Pescas; 2013.
- 25.
Van der Elst RP, Everett BI. Offshore fisheries of the Southwest Indian Ocean: their status and the impact on vulnerable species. Oceanographic Research Institute, Special Publication 10; 2015.
- 26.
MIMAIP. Boletim Estatístico da Pesca e Aquacultura 2009–2020. Maputo: Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2021.
- 27.
MIMAIP. Boletim Estatístico da Pesca e Aquacultura 2006–2017. Maputo: Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2019.
- 28.
MIMAIP. Management Plan for Shallow-Water Shrimp on Sofala Bank (PGP-CBS)– 2021–2025. Internal Report. Maputo: Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2020.
- 29.
Palha de Sousa L, Abdula S, Palha de Sousa B, Penn J. Assessment of the shallow water shrimp fishery of Sofala Bank, Mozambique 2014 (O camarao do Banco de Sofala 2014). Maputo, Mozambique: Investigational Report No33. Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2015.
- 30. Sá C, Leal MC, Silva A, Nordez S, André E, Paula J, et al. Variation of phytoplankton assemblages along the Mozambique coast as revealed by HPLC and microscopy. Journal of Sea Research. 2013;79: 1–11.
- 31. Huggett JA. Mesoscale distribution and community composition of zooplankton in the Mozambique Channel. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography. 2014;100: 119–135.
- 32.
MIMAIP. Management plan for Deep-Water Crustaceans (PGP-CP)– 2021–2025. Maputo: Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2020.
- 33.
Dias N., Zacarias L., Caramelo A.M. Análise de pescaria de gamba e prespectivas de gestão. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. (In Portuguese); 2011.
- 34.
Sousa MI, Gislason H. Pequenos peixes pelágicos. Maputo: Revista de Investigação pesqueira. Instituto de Desenvolvimento Pesqueiro; 1984 pp. 76–94. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/1834/32780.
- 35.
WIOFISH. Extract fisheries data. Mozambique. In: Western Indian Ocean Fisheries Database [Internet]. 2023 [cited 7 Sep 2023]. Available: https://www.wiofish.org/extract-fisheries-data.
- 36.
MIMAIP. Management plan for demersal rocky bottom fish (PGP-PDFR)– 2021–2025. Maputo: Internal Report, Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2020.
- 37.
Mutombene R.J., Chacate O.E., Chioze C., Malaune B.S., Mafuca JM. Avaliação do Estado de Exploração de Peixes Demersais Acessíveis à Pesca de Linha nas Águas Marítimas de Moçambique (2016–2020). Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2021. Available: https://www.proazul.gov.mz/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Aval.-dos-Recursos_Relatorio-de-Avaliacao-dos-Peixes-Demersasi-2016-2020.pdf.
- 38.
Mutombene R.J., Chacate O.E., Chioze C., Malaune B.S., Amoda C., Zacarias L., et al. Potencial de Pesca de Peixes de Fundos Rochosos nas Zonas Norte e Centro de Moçambique. Relatório Técnico no VII no âmbito do projecto Propesca. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2017.
- 39.
Mutombene R.J., Chacate O.E., Malaune B.S., Mafuca M.J. Avaliação do Estado de Exploração dos Peixes Acessíveis a Pesca Semi-industrial e Industrial de Linha em Moçambique 2011–2015. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2016. Available: https://www.proazul.gov.mz/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Aval.-dos-Recursos_Relatorio-de-Avaliacao-dos-Peixes-Demersasi-2016-2020.pdf.
- 40.
Mann B.Q. Southern African Marine Linefish Status Reports. Special publication. Oceanographic Research Institute; 2000.
- 41.
Torres R.G.A. Pesca á linha: Evolução no período 1986–2004. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2005.
- 42.
Wilson D. Mozambique National Report to the Scientific Committee of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, 2019-Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira. IOTC; 2019.
- 43.
Palha de Sousa L, Brito A, Abdula S, Penn J, Howell D. O Camarao do Banco de Sofala 2009. Maputo: Unpublished report Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira; 2009.
- 44.
Abdula S, Dias N, Inacio A, Morais E. A pescaria de Camarão no Banco de Sofala 2018. Maputo, Mozambique: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2019.
- 45. Samoilys MA, Osuka K, Mussa J, Rosendo S, Riddell M, Diade M, et al. An integrated assessment of coastal fisheries in Mozambique for conservation planning. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2019;182: 104924.
- 46.
MIMAIP. Boletim Estatístico da Pesca e Aquacultura. Maputo: Ministério do Mar Águas Interiores e Pesca (In Portuguese); 2022.
- 47.
Mutombene R.J., Inacio A, Ruvineco S., Mualeque DO, Morais E, Jamal G., et al. Avaliação do estado de exploração dos recursos acessíveis a pesca artesanal marinha na Província do Banco de Sofala (2010–2016). Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2019.
- 48.
Mutombene R.J., Mualeque DO, Mafuca JM, André E. Estado do Conhecimento sobre os Recursos Pesqueiros Acessíveis à Pesca Artesanal e Ecossistemas no Distrito de Pebane. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2021.
- 49.
Leong E, Samucidine K., Mutombene R.J. Estado do manancial da magumba na Baía de Maputo 2021. Maputo: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (In Portuguese); 2021.
- 50.
IOTC. Appendix 11 Executive Summary: Status of yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) in the Indian Ocean. IOTC; 2020.
- 51.
IOTC. Appendix 22: Status of narrow-barred Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus commerson) in the Indian Ocean. IOTC; 2020.
- 52.
República de Moçambique. Plano Director das Pescas, 2010–2019. Maputo: Ministério das Pescas; 2010. Available: https://www.mimaip.gov.mz/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/PDPII-Documento-para-o-CM-Final.pdf.
- 53.
Everett BI. Fisheries statistics and data management in the Western Indian Ocean. Consultancy report prepared for the South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Commission. WIOFC; 2021.
- 54.
Palha de Sousa L, Brito A, Abdula S, Howell D, Penn J. The shallow water shrimp at Sofala Bank Mozambique 2006. Maputo: Unpublished report Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira; 2006.
- 55. Malauene BS, Lett C, Marsac F, Roberts MJ, Brito A, Abdula S, et al. Spawning areas of two shallow-water penaeid shrimps (Penaeus indicus and Metapenaeus monoceros) on the Sofala Bank, Mozambique. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 2021;253: 107268.
- 56. Gaines SD, White C, Carr MH, Palumbi SR. Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107: 18286–18293. pmid:20200311
- 57. Kriegl M, Elías Ilosvay XE, Von Dorrien C, Oesterwind D. Marine Protected Areas: At the Crossroads of Nature Conservation and Fisheries Management. Front Mar Sci. 2021;8: 676264.
- 58. Marcos C, Díaz D, Fietz K, Forcada A, Ford A, García-Charton JA, et al. Reviewing the Ecosystem Services, Societal Goods, and Benefits of Marine Protected Areas. Front Mar Sci. 2021;8: 613819.
- 59.
WCS. Spatial Prioritization Analysis to support Marine Protected Area expansion in Mozambique. Maputo: Wildlife Conservation Society and National Institute for Fisheries Research; 2021.
- 60. Kawaka JA, Samoilys MA, Murunga M, Church J, Abunge C, Maina GW. Developing locally managed marine areas: Lessons learnt from Kenya. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2017;135: 1–10.
- 61.
World Bank. Fisheries co-management in Mozambique: lessons from the artisanal fisheries & climate change project (FISHCC) 2015–2019. Mapito; 2019.
- 62. Bell RJ, Odell J, Kirchner G, Lomonico S. Actions to Promote and Achieve Climate‐Ready Fisheries: Summary of Current Practice. Mar Coast Fish. 2020;12: 166–190.
- 63. Free CM, Thorson JT, Pinsky ML, Oken KL, Wiedenmann J, Jensen OP. Impacts of historical warming on marine fisheries production. Science. 2019;363: 979–983. pmid:30819962
- 64. Gaines SD, Costello C, Owashi B, Mangin T, Bone J, Molinos JG, et al. Improved fisheries management could offset many negative effects of climate change. Sci Adv. 2018;4: eaao1378. pmid:30167455
- 65. Punt AE, Butterworth DS, De Moor CL, De Oliveira JAA, Haddon M. Management strategy evaluation: best practices. Fish and Fisheries. 2016;17: 303–334.
- 66. Holsman KK, Hazen EL, Haynie A, Gourguet S, Hollowed A, Bograd SJ, et al. Towards climate resiliency in fisheries management. Anderson E, editor. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 2019; fsz031.
- 67.
Barange M, Bahri T, Beveridge MCM, Cochrane KL, Funge Smith S, Poulain F, editors. Impacts of climate change on fisheries and aquaculture: synthesis of current knowledge, adaptation and mitigation options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2018.
- 68.
FAO. The ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO tecnical guidelines for responsible fisheries. Rome: FAO; 2003.
- 69. Manuel L, Chiziane O, Mandhlate G, Hartley F, Tostão E. Impact of climate change on the agriculture sector and household welfare in Mozambique: an analysis based on a dynamic computable general equilibrium model. Climatic Change. 2021;167: 6.
- 70.
Comte A. Recent advances in climate change vulnerability/risk assessments in the fisheries and aquaculture sector. FAO; 2021. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb4585en
- 71. Tommasi D, Stock CA, Pegion K, Vecchi GA, Methot RD, Alexander MA, et al. Improved management of small pelagic fisheries through seasonal climate prediction. Ecological Applications. 2017;27: 378–388. pmid:28221708
- 72. Jacobs ZL, Yool A, Jebri F, Srokosz M, Van Gennip S, Kelly SJ, et al. Key climate change stressors of marine ecosystems along the path of the East African coastal current. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2021;208: 105627.