That more groups are articulating these three performance dimensions is a recognition that
the sustainability of fish stocks, fishing industries, and fishing communities are interrelated,and that none can provide benefits without the others. The Rockefeller Foundation [17] concludes
strategies focusing on “replenishment of fish stocks or conservation of marine biodiversity”
have not supported “the success of the industry and as a critical link to poverty
alleviation” in the long term, instead arguing for a “holistic approach” that incorporates economic
and community outcomes. The Prince’s Charities note that “the fishing sector’s economic,
environmental and social health can only be guaranteed if we view it in an holistic and
integrated way” ([18] p. 4). The Blue Ribbon Panel [15] emphasizes that “a multidimensional
indicator system ...needs to be designed as an integral part of the measurement process.” Assessing
progress toward these three dimensions of sustainability requires understanding the
linkages within the social-ecological systems. Tracking and monitoring only ecosystem-related
outcomes and performance is insufficient for understanding economic and community benefits.
However, there is a lack of standard frameworks to measure outcomes on non-biological
dimensions; instead, process implementation or adoption of community approaches to implementing
ecological measures often serves as a proxy for advancing social goals (e.g., [19–21]).