Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33199697›Full record

ReviewNature communications2020

Farming fish in the sea will not nourish the world.

Ben Belton, David C Little, Wenbo Zhang, Peter Edwards, Michael Skladany, Shakuntala H Thilsted

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Seafood for thought.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025
    Article
  11. Valorization of Invasive Aquatic Weed (Aquaculture nutrition · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Feeding the future global population.Nature communications · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ben BeltonDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. beltonbe@msu.edu.
David C LittleInstitute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Wenbo ZhangCollege of Fisheries and Life Science, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai, 201306, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3765-3980
Peter EdwardsSchool of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Khlong Luang, Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Michael SkladanyDepartment of Criminology, Anthropology, and Sociology, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Shakuntala H ThilstedWorldFish, Bayan Lepas, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent literature on marine fish farming brands it as potentially compatible with sustainable resource use, conservation, and human nutrition goals, and aligns with the emerging policy discourse of 'blue growth'. We advance a two-pronged critique. First, contemporary narratives tend to overstate marine finfish aquaculture's potential to deliver food security and environmental sustainability. Second, they often align with efforts to enclose maritime space that could facilitate its allocation to extractive industries and conservation interests and exclude fishers. Policies and investments that seek to increase the availability and accessibility of affordable and sustainable farmed aquatic foods should focus on freshwater aquaculture.

Identifiers

PMID33199697
PMCPMC7669870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.