I have more feelings about the second story. I believe the power imbalance in fisheries management and the injustice caused by climate change is a fascinating case study. Regarding economic sustainability, fish as income will take precedence over biological sustainability. I believe that fisheries with high social satisfaction are less relevant to biological sustainability, which would create a paradoxical point of environmental injustice and social injustice. But there is an irony that social sustainability always takes precedence over achieving biological sustainability, and some institutions or scientists will wrongly place the responsibility of biological sustainability on individual fishermen. I think these discriminatory perspectives deviate from ecologically sustainable development approaches and lack consideration of the social impact of justice decisions.
I envision a world where justice enhances equity by rebalancing power and agency to the marginalized, as do natural resources. There is a close correlation between natural resources and society, which can be seen in the actions of fisheries and coastal animal protection. I personally agree that social and environmental justice outcomes require multiple perspectives that balance history, capital, and/or cultural dynamics to maintain a balance within the ecology.
I support transparency in public fisheries to identify illegally caught fish, as well as public pressure on politicians to improve policies to balance natural ecological equity, and there is a need for social scientists to propose standards of social responsibility to regulate and mediate human-nature harmony on an ethical level.