A. Relevance and sustainability context
A.1 Policy relevance
Environmental footprints help to uncover the impacts of German consumption that are “hidden” by global trade and the spatial distance to the point of production. They also allow comparisons between countries on a per capita basis. In this sense, specific footprints deliver information on the distribution of specific global environmental burden, in particular to provide quantitative indicators underpinning discussions of responsibility, overconsumption and fair shares. For the German bioeconomy, the driving question is: to what extent is wild fish catch required for consumption (and exports).
The wild fish footprint quantifies how much wild fish must be caught worldwide to cover consumption (and exports) in Germany. The material flows of wild fish catch are – compared to the quantities in agriculture and forestry – of rather small magnitudes. Therefore, the assessment of own footprint indicators for wild fish catch and/or the broader view on all types of aquatic biomass (including also mollusks, crustaceans and aquatic plants) assures visibility and allows to address the specific concerns about globally endangered fish populations in a targeted way.
The indicator is of interest to environmental and agricultural ministries at federal level. It is a sustainability indicator for the bioeconomy and the green transition.
A.2 Sustainability and / or comparative evaluation options
Different types of comparisons help put the scale of German footprints into perspective. That said, a target range for quantifying sustainable consumption levels requires society-wide discourse, prioritisation, acceptance and decision making, in light of best available scientific evidence. Multiple types of comparisons can be made, including:
- Degree of self-sufficiency by comparing German wild fish catch and the wild fish footprint: If footprint exceeds domestic catch, Germany is a net importer of wild fish.
- International comparison by comparing the German footprint with the global average or footprints from other countries.
- The wild fish footprint can also be calculated for all other countries and the global level with the same database and approach. This ensures international comparability.
B. Data availability
B.1 Stage of development
It is a semi-established / new indicator because while the application to the bioeconomy is new to official monitoring (but established in projects), similar indicators area already published by Destatis and EU bioeconomy monitoring building on UNEP, https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/bioeconomy/monitoring_en
B.2 Data sources
GLORIA v.60 (https://ielab.info/labs/ielab-gloria) is used for the MRIO (multi-regional input-output)-based assessment of material flows. FAOSTAT (https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/FBS) is used for addition, evaluation and update of satellite data in the GLORIA database.
B.3 Coverage over time and replicability
Data is available for 2000-2024 on an annual basis. Replicability is with GLORIA v.60 database plus some additional sources plus script from GWS. About every to every second year, the underlying GLORIA database is updated. Since the relations don't change significantly that quickly, an update every 2-4 years should be sufficient.
B.4 Coverage across scales and sectors; compatibility
Breakdown of countries/regions is possible.
C. Considerations for operationalization
C.1 Feasibility: Fit for monitoring
The indicator is fit for monitoring. It has been included in different Bioeconomy Monitoring Reports (2024, 2021), but only as part of the (agriculture) biomass footprint.
C.2 Institutions
GWS
C.3 Future prospects
GWS can update the indicator quite easily once the GLORIA database is updated.
C.4 Costs, considerations and reproducibility
Information avaiable per request.
C.5 Potential for automation
Semi-automation might be feasible, but considerable expert input will remain.
C.6 Presentation options and breakdown / sub-indicator needs
By countries/regions (origin of the wild fish).
C.7 Potential for scenario integration
Has already been included in scenarios for the Bioeconomy Monitoring Report (2024).
C.8 Interlinkages and alignment with other monitoring activities
Other indicators such as agriculture biomass footprint, timber footprint and climate footprint are calculated with the same database.