International Legal Responses for Protecting Fishers’ Fundamental Rights Impacted by a Changing Ocean

Climate change directly impacts the marine landscape where fishers operate. Most fishers rely on fishing for food, income an d/o r employmen t. A changing ocean can therefore significantly impact fisher s’ lives and hinder the full exercise of their rights of access to fisheries resources, rights to fish, to foo d, to wor k, to cultur e


The Meaning of 'A Changing Ocean' to Fishers
The impacts of climate change on marine capture fisheries is growing in attention,7 as is the vital role that healthy and sustainably managed fisheries play as part of the ocean-climate nexus through ocean carbon cycling.8 Considering the nexus between climate change and fisheries, changing oceanic conditions include impacts on the productivity and distribution of fish species, destruction of habitats, depletion of populations and shift in fish populations into deeper waters and towards the Poles.9 These negatively impact the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems and the services they provide, which are vital to support human rights. Fishers integrate complex socio-ecological systems, where fishers, living marine resources and the ocean interact, are concomitantly affected by climate change, and need to build resilience and adaptability to a changing ocean. The associated impacts on coastal environments as a result of climate change10 can lead to forced relocation and loss of properties, tools and facilities of fishers.11 Many if not all fishers depend on fishing for economic, social and cultural reasons, as fishing is a source of income, or job, and integrates their daily routines, cultural traditions and livelihoods. While the great majority12 of fishers work in the small-scale fisheries value chain,13 climate change is a global As opposed to large-scale industrial fishing. The differences between these two fisheries sectors greatly vary by country and locality, and there is no globally agreed definition of each of them. For a recent account on the matter of definition of small-scale fisheries, see H Smith and X Basurto, 'Defining small-scale fisheries and examining the role of science phenomenon that affects all fisheries, regardless of their size, with impacts on food security worldwide.14 The next subsections provide some reflections on the fundamental rights of fishers affected by a changing ocean, taking special account of small-scale fishers and other vulnerable groups.

Fishers' Fundamental Rights Affected by a Changing Ocean
If fishers can no longer fish in an area due to stocks moving to another fishing area, they cannot fully exercise their rights to secure access to fisheries resources and their rights to secure tenure in relation to fishing grounds at sea.15 As explained and argued elsewhere,16 for small-scale fishers dependent on fishing for their subsistence and livelihoods, the rights to fish and to secure marine tenure can be seen as a precondition for the realisation of multiple human rights.17 These include human rights explicitly recognised and affirmed Tenure rights in the context of small-scale fisheries belong to the persons entitled to use fisheries resources and fishing grounds pursuant to prescribed conditions. See  The exercise of the right to fish can be deeply rooted in the identity and life of certain fishers, such that fishing means customs, traditions, heritage and life to them.24 Consequently, being unable to exercise the right to fish due to a changing ocean can hinder the continuity of their daily customary practices, including passing on fishing knowledge and experiences among fishers and members of their communities across the generations. This means that the full exercise of fishers' right to participate in cultural life,25 is also at risk.
The possibility to fish in different areas or to diversify their catch, for example, depends on fishers' technical and financial capacities, and whether they have the appropriate vessels, gears and tools to adapt to different conditions.26 Small-scale fishers practicing hand fishing or using small canoes or non-motorised fishing boats, thus with limited fishing capacity, may also not be financially and culturally prepared to look for alternative livelihoods or a different occupation, which increases the challenges they already face.27 In connection with this, sea level rise and extreme weather events can put at risk the lives of fishers while at sea or on the coast. These environmental instabilities can decrease the ability of fishers to fully exercise their rights to 20 International life,28 to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health,29 and to an adequate standard of living.30 Fishing in other areas may depend on authorisation, or changes in existing fishing licences, imposing additional burdens on fishers.31 The urgent search for fisheries resources may consequently lead to more unsustainable fishing practices and put more pressure on the marine environment as competition increases for marine space and fisheries resources among fishers themselves and between fishers and users undertaking other activities in the maritime space.32 Consequently, different types of conflicts in fisheries and relating to fisheries may arise,33 alongside irresponsible fishing and a greater subjection to environmental disaster risks.34 These issues are closely linked and affect fishers' full exercise of their rights to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment,35 which, in turn, can no longer stably function in a changing ocean context.
While all fishers can be impacted by climate change, scientists have found that small-scale fishers 'may be even more vulnerable to environmental change than their industrial counterparts' .36 At the same time, dealing with historical which a system is susceptible to injury, damage or harm' .44 Ensuring climate change and associated risks are included in the design and implementation of management decisions in socio-ecological systems, such as fisheries, can reduce the vulnerability of the fisheries system and enhance sustainability.45 In many parts of the world, Indigenous peoples exercise fishing as part of their daily subsistence activities, customs, and traditional, spiritual and cultural practices.46 Fishing can be the differentiating factor that distinguishes between an Indigenous fisher belonging or not belonging to an Indigenous community.47 Specific international instruments, which affirm the fundamental rights of Indigenous peoples, include the Convention No. 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in independent countries (C-169),48 adopted under the auspices of the International Labour Organization (ILO), and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).49 For Indigenous fishers, a changing ocean may thus hinder the full exercise of multiple fundamental rights, such as the rights to practice and revitalise their cultural traditions and customs,50 to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally used coastal seas,51 and to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage and Ibid., Article 11(1). See also the right to life, physical integrity and security of person (Article 7(1)), the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies (Article 12(1)), the right to revitalise, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, oral traditions and philosophies (Article 13(1)), and the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their resources (Article 29(1)). 51 Ibid., Article 26(1).
The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 38 (2023) 1-29 traditional knowledge.52 The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) has consistently recognised 'fishing' as integrating the essential components of the culture of Indigenous communities, which is related to Indigenous fishers' right to culture.53 The IACtHR has also recognised 'fishing grounds' as part of their ancestral traditional lands, territories and resources (including lands adjacent to rivers), which is related to Indigenous fishers' right to property.54 Regarding women, who represent about 18 per cent of fishers globally,55 it is important to note that most do not directly engage in marine capture fisheries, but rather participate in fishing preparatory work, or work in the postharvesting processing sector.56 The rights of women affected by a changing ocean thus relate to the impossibility or struggle to continue their activities or work in support of fishing. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)57 protects women's rights generally and specifically requires States Parties to ensure women's participation in the formulation of climate change policies.58 Contributing to this treaty's evolutive interpretation, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which functions as CEDAW's monitoring body, has affirmed women and girls' rights to lead, participate and engage in decision-making in activities 52 Ibid., Article 31(1). 53 IACtHR ( relating to climate change,59 and Indigenous women and girls' rights to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, equal access to fisheries, and protection against discrimination and dispossession.60 Similarly, children fishing at sea or dependent on marine fisheries for their livelihoods can suffer the impacts of a changing ocean, hindering the full exercise of their fundamental rights.61 Having fewer children fishing at sea due to a changing ocean can promote greater engagement of child fishers with formal education at schools, and enhance education that can help them build their capacity to do other types of work and thus be less dependent on fishing.62 This is important in building the future generation of fishers, as fishers with higher education levels are able to cope and adapt to climate change impacts better.63 Children's involvement in fisheries may also mean a realisation of their rights to education and association with their own cultural identity and respect for the natural environment, thereby contributing to the transmission of intergenerational knowledge as a supplement to their mainstream education.64 Children's rights are provided in the Convention on the Rights of  The extent to which such child fishers would be able to fully enjoy their right to education would largely depend on the education system provided by the government or on the financial capacity of their families to ensure access to private education.  the Child (CRC).65 This treaty's monitoring body, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, recently adopted a new general comment on children's rights and the environment with a special focus on climate change, which clarifies the applicable principles and protection of human rights of children particularly relevant to the changing ocean context.66 Another vulnerable group in fisheries are impacted by a changing ocean is migrant fishworkers, including those migrating within a single country or to different countries,67 and fishworkers migrating from their State of nation ality to work on board a fishing vessel flying the flag of another State. Industrial large-scale fisheries largely rely on foreign migrant fishworkers,68 whose nationalities differ from that of the flagged fishing vessels on board of which they work. These fishworkers migrate from their homes and may spend weeks working and living on such fishing vessels. Studies have showcased their vulnerability to severe human rights abuses, such as trafficking and forced labour.69 A changing ocean, particularly impacts from extreme weather events, thus adds an additional stressor to the unsafe and poor working conditions of these migrant fishworkers, aggravating the conditions that put their lives at risk, and hindering their ability to fully exercise the foreseen fundamental rights. The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMW)70 is relevant to foreign fishworkers as it applies to a migrant worker, who is defined as 'a person who is to be engaged, is engaged, or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a State of which he or she is not a national' .71 Finally, peasants engaged in small-scale fishing and related activities, though primarily associated with rural areas, also operate in marine spaces.72 As advanced elsewhere,73 when applying a broad interpretation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP),74 which explicitly applies to small-scale fishers,75 one can find the rights of small-scale fishers affirmed therein as applicable to marine small-scale fishers. Differing from the Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustain able Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication (SSF Guidelines),76 which is not a human rights instrument but rather follows a human rights-based approach,77 the UNDROP explicitly affirms the fundamental rights of peasants and small-scale fishers, detailing their rights recognised in human rights treaties. In the changing ocean context, the UNDROP affirms the rights of peasants and small-scale fishers to 'contribute to the design and implementation of national and local climate change adaptation and mitigation policies, including through the use of practices and traditional knowledge' and have access to 'adequate [climate change and weather-related events] training suited to the specific agroecological, sociocultural and economic environments in which they find themselves' .78 71 Ibid., Articles 1, 2(2). 72 I Ertör, '"We are the oceans, we are the people!": Fisher people's struggles for blue justice' Based on this analysis of vulnerable groups in fisheries, the importance of using and interpreting international instruments that specifically apply to these vulnerable groups and affirm their fundamental rights is clear. These groups have faced several historical challenges, including poverty, dispossession, marginalisation from decision-making affecting them and lack of financial support. Therefore, the recognition of their traditional knowledge and practices, as well as the due consideration for inclusion of such knowledge systems into decision-making processes relating to climate change, are crucial to ensure that these groups contribute to preventing or avoiding greater impacts of a changing ocean. Scientists have recommended the adoption of principles of distributive justice and procedural justice so as to enable the participation of local communities and Indigenous peoples in the climate change regime's work,79 recognise their knowledge and perceptions of climate risk, and carry out climate action that addresses historical injustices against marginalised groups.80

States' Obligations and International Guidance for Protecting Fishers' Rights in the Changing Ocean Context
The protection of fishers' rights in a changing ocean relates to different international legal regimes, but here the focus is on the interactions of certain treaties and instruments under the law of the sea, international climate change law and international human rights law. There may be other relevant treaties and instruments, notably under international biodiversity law.81 Both the law of the sea and international climate change law are known to be traditionally not 'human rights-friendly' in the sense that these regimes are not particularly concerned with the protection of people,82 let alone their rights. The linkages between these regimes and human rights were created and developed through time. Nevertheless, interactions between human rights law and those two other regimes have occurred and continue to strengthen. This is largely in response to societal needs and the international community's growing awareness about the interconnections and interdependency between human rights and the environment, which culminated with the landmark recognition through the resolutions adopted by the Human Rights Council in 202183 and the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in 2022.84 Yet, this awareness took time, and the lack of reference to human rights and the protection of fishers' rights in the main law of the sea and climate change treaties is no surprise. As a consequence of the need for more interaction between these regimes and human rights, international legal scholarship has evolved towards addressing these regimes' interactions,85 often discussing their interplay with the biodiversity regime.86 This work is fundamental to clarifying the applicability of States' general human rights obligations in the fisheries context, with a view to protecting fishers' rights. In the next subsections the entry points in the law of the sea and climate change regimes, where the obligations of States thereunder can contribute to the protection of fishers' rights affirmed in the human rights treaties and elaborated in specific terms in non-binding instruments, are explored.

Linking Law of the Sea Obligations with the Protection of Fishers' Rights
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC)87 contains few provisions relevant to the protection of fishers' rights, as explained elsewhere.88 In the changing ocean context, the pertinence of the LOSC in protecting fishers' rights is twofold: ensuring activities in marine waters and land-based activities affecting marine waters are carried out sustainably, and preventing or tackling climate change impacts on the ocean in the first place. While the LOSC does not sufficiently address the sustainable development and environmental concerns that emerged after its negotiation,89 the treaty prescribes certain obligations that limit State Parties' discretion in the manner they can use and exploit ocean resources. Noteworthy examples are the provisions on total allowable catch and use of best scientific evidence for conservation and management of living resources in the exclusive economic zone,90 and on inter-State cooperation for the conservation and management of living resources of the high seas.91 Additionally, Part XII of the LOSC contains State Parties' general obligations to protect and preserve the marine environment, including their competence and power to enforce the necessary measures in their respective territorial sea and internal waters,92 and to prevent, reduce and control marine pollution. 93 International legal scholarship supports the assertion that States' obligations under Part XII of the LOSC include the duty to prevent the effects of climate  beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement).99 Additionally, the LOSC contains provisions referring to generally recommended international minimum standards, which can serve as the basis for other international guidance that can aid the interpretation and application of the Convention, arguably elaborating on obligations of States Parties to manage and conserve their domestic fish stocks.100 While the BBNJ Agreement is not yet in force, it is worth examining both agreements' contents to clarify the provisions which Parties to the UNFSA and future States Parties to the BBNJ Agreement are, and will be, bound to, and which can contribute to the protection of fishers' rights in a changing ocean context. Starting with the UNFSA, its relevance for the protection of fishers' rights is indirect and reflected in qualified language, in that it requires Parties to 'take into account the interests of artisanal and subsistence fishers' as a principle for the conservation and management of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks.101 The 'need to avoid adverse impact on, and ensure access to fisheries' by those fishers, as well as women fishworkers and Indigenous peoples, is also required for States Parties when giving effect to their duty to cooperate in the conservation and management of the stocks concerned.102 These provisions are as far as the UNFSA goes in drawing States Parties' attention to protect fishers, notably in respect of vulnerable groups.103 Additionally, the UNFSA can be considered relevant due to its precautionary approach, which is explicitly and widely adopted to protect living marine resources and preserve the marine environment,104 and the contributions that conservation and management of stocks can bring to strengthening the resilience of the environment, its habitats and ecosystems against the impacts of a changing ocean.105 For its part, the BBNJ Agreement contains certain provisions relevant to the protection of fishers' rights concerning their knowledge and culture, while also providing important considerations for climate change impacts on marine ecosystems. For instance, in its preamble, the BBNJ Agreement affirms the 'existing rights of Indigenous Peoples' pursuant to the UNDRIP, and of local communities, as well as the need to coherently and collaboratively address marine biodiversity loss and ecosystems degradation due to climate change impacts on marine ecosystems.106 The BBNJ Agreement's principles and approaches include the precautionary and ecosystem approaches, as well as an approach that builds ecosystem resilience, including to adverse effects of climate change, and the 'use of relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities' .107 Also important are the provisions for the establishment of area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment,108 because they contribute to strengthening the ocean's resilience to climate change and its capacity to absorb greenhouse gas emissions.
Whilst these are not in themselves human rights obligations, they do have direct consequences for the enjoyment of human rights, which has implications on States' obligations to protect said rights from interference. Although the specific human rights issues would not be addressed within the LOSC's realm of compulsory jurisdiction, the protection of human rights affected by a changing ocean could be sought from international human rights monitoring mechanisms, as explained further below, which individuals could have direct or indirect access to (for instance, through the UN Special Rapporteurs).
operations' . The UNFSA also aims at ensuring 'the long-term conservation and sustainable use of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks through effective imple mentation of the relevant provisions of the Convention' (Article 2). 106 It also exemplifies the climate change impacts, such as warming and ocean deoxygenation, as well as ocean acidification, pollution, including plastic pollution, and unsustainable use. See

Linking Climate Change Law Obligations with the Protection of Fishers' Rights
The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)109 contains no explicit mention of human rights,110 neither does the Kyoto Protocol.111 It took some years until the climate change regime began to interact with human rights and related issues. This interaction was largely promoted through the efforts of the Human Rights Council. Since 2008, it has raised awareness about the threats climate change poses to people and communities, and the need to connect climate change and human rights.112 Notably, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC, at its 16th meeting, in 2010, agreed that 'Parties should, in all climate change related actions, fully respect human rights' .113 However, human rights were not mentioned in subsequent COP resolutions,114 until COP21,115 and the Paris Agreement's preamble, which refers to the human rights to health, the rights of Indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations, the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity.116 Human rights references dissipated again from climate change debates in subsequent COPs,117 with references in specific contexts. 118 Notably, in COP23, in 2017, reference to human rights is found in a decision to adopt a gender action plan, to promote and consider obligations on human rights in a broader context, as well as gender equality.119 COP24, in 2018, mentioned human rights concerning the elaboration by Parties of laws and measures concerning displacement due to climate change. 120 The latest implementation plan adopted at COP27, in 2022, reproduces text from prev ious decisions at COP25 and COP26,121 and notably recommends that States Parties promote and consider their respective human rights obligations, explicitly including the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. 122 There is a vast body of scholarship on human rights and climate change.123 While one could take insights from this literature in their account of Indigenous peoples and local communities affected by climate change, the particularities faced by fishers in a changing ocean context merits special attention, as explored in this article. The references to human rights in the preamble of the Paris Agreement and in foreseen COP decisions should be read in conjunction with the references to ocean, biodiversity and ecosystems in the instruments and obligations under the law of the sea regime outlined above. The explicit mention of those terms is a recognition of the goods and services that marine ecosystems and their biodiversity provide, including fisheries, and the human rights of fishers, and it can be argued that the obligations that the The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 38 (2023) 1-29 Agreement lays out apply to the management and conservation of marine living resources. The Agreement contains a mix of country-based voluntary and binding provisions relating to Parties' contributions to achieving global goals set out in the Agreement on climate mitigation, adaptation and finance. Article 7 contains multiple provisions with the objective of realising the aim of increasing the ability of States Parties to adapt to climate change and fostering climate resilience in Article 2(1)(b).124 It is worth noting Article 7(5), which reiterates that 'adaptation action should follow a country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and fully transparent approach' considering vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems, and that such adaptation action 'should be based on and guided by the best available science' , including traditional, Indigenous and local knowledge systems. This is a key provision in support of fishers' participatory rights in the changing ocean context. In addition, specialised organisations of the United Nations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), are encouraged to support States Parties to implement the above actions, taking into account Article 7(5). In support of this endeavour, the FAO has made major contributions by including chapter 9 dedicated to climate change and disaster risk in the SSF Guidelines, as well as various other technical guidance documents which discuss climate change and fisheries in an adaptation context.125 It remains to be seen whether voluntary guidelines on climate change and fisheries will be developed by the FAO.
As seen above, human rights of fishers are affected by climate change, with its effects felt especially by coastal and Indigenous communities, with drastic effects on rights to life, health and property, for instance. 126 In this sense, scholars have drawn attention to the IPCC findings that climate change will have impacts on human life, especially those located in coastal communities and details the actions or measures that States should take to protect fishers' rights. This is known as systemic integration, pursuant to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,132 in the sense that treaty obligations should be read and implemented together, even if they belong to different treaties.133 This is key to painting the full picture of fishers' rights protection.
Let us look into some examples of specific obligations under those treaties which are particularly relevant to the changing ocean context. Under both the ICCPR and ICESCR, States Parties have the duty to undertake steps towards achieving the full realisation of the rights recognised under the Covenants, including by adoption of laws that give effect to such rights.134 ICCPR Parties also have the duty to ensure that individuals whose rights and freedoms are violated have an effective remedy and that such remedy is enforced. 135 The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which functions as the ICESCR's monitoring body, has highlighted that, when exercising appropriate measures to comply with the ICESCR, judicial remedies in respect of these rights may be one of the measures. 136 The Committee has also stated that 'a minimum core obligation to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least, minimum essential levels of each of the rights is incumbent upon every State party' .137 This minimum level is unclear and might change due to States' resource constraints. 138 The Human Rights Committee, which functions as the ICCPR's monitoring body, has adopted views on a few cases regarding the protection of fishers' rights.139 A landmark case for the protection of fisher's rights in a changing ocean is worth highlighting: the Human Rights Committee's views adopted in the case Daniel Billy et al. v. Australia, which discussed the protection of an Indigenous community in the Torres Islands against climate change impacts The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 38 (2023) 1-29 (i.e., sea level rise, flooding, coral bleaching, ocean acidification) and the violation of the Islanders' rights to culture and interferences with private life, family and homes. 140 The Committee found that such impacts 'could have been reasonably foreseen' by the State Party, given that Torres Islanders' claims date back to the 1990s.141 While Australia began to take adaptation measures (i.e., upgrading seawalls), the Committee considered the delay in taking such measures 'an inadequate response' . 142 The Committee concluded that there was a violation of Article 27 of the ICCPR given the State's party failure to adopt timely adequate adaptation measures to protect the authors' collective ability to maintain their traditional way of life, to transmit to their children and future generations their culture and traditions use of land and sea resources discloses a violation of the State party's positive obligation to protect the authors' right to enjoy their minority culture.143 The Human Rights Committee further noted the obligation of Australia to provide effective remedy, namely, full reparation to the individuals whose rights under the ICCPR were violated, provide adequate compensation, engage in meaningful consultation with the affected communities and conduct needs assessments, and take steps to prevent similar violations in the future.144 This is a ground-breaking decision and the first to link the failure of a developed State like Australia to take mitigation and adaptation measures to the rights of a small island State's nationals, taking into account their particular vulnerability as an Indigenous group. 145 In addition to the ICCPR and the ICESCR and their respective committees, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women has issued specific recommendations for States Parties to provide women and girls equal opportunities to lead, participate and engage in decision-making in activities relating to climate change,146 and to fully ensure Indigenous women and girls' rights to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, equal access to fisheries, and protection against discrimination and dispossession. 147 The Committee on the Rights of the Child has recently adopted general comments on children's rights and the environment with a special focus on climate change, and the Special Rapporteur procedures before the Human Rights Council also contribute to elucidate the protection of fishers' rights in a changing ocean context. The reports of the former Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment John Knox have clarified the relationship between human rights and the environment, including climate change's adverse effects on the enjoyment of human rights.148 While the connections made are generic, they are inherently related to the specific case of fishers, especially small-scale fishers and vulnerable groups. The former Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier De Schutter has also contributed to bridging human rights approaches to fisheries as essential for the recognition of fishers' fundamental rights. 149 By taking into account climate change effects, the Rapporteur concludes that States should 'generally strengthen measures to limit climate change' in view of fishers' right to food.150 This is a further example of how the UN system of human rights protection helps shed light on how human rights obligations and climate change effects interact.
The SSF Guidelines also provide recommendations for enhancing the recognition and sustainable development of and equitable treatment given by States and non-State actors to small-scale fishers.151 Based on the human rights-based approach, the ssf Guidelines link obligations that States Parties are bound under the nearly universally ratified core human rights treaties, and clarify recommendations that States and non-State actors should do to protect small-scale fishers.152 The SSF Guidelines establish the urgency in combating climate change in small-scale fisheries. States should take applicable measures for adaptation and mitigation of climate change through consultation with small-scale fishers, with special support available to vulnerable coastal communities.153 The ssf Guidelines call for integrated approaches to address climate change impacts on small-scale fisheries, such as disasters that can compromise livelihoods, and the impacts of climate change on harvest and post-harvest.154 Similar guidance can be found in the UNDROP, which also calls for the participation of peasants and small-scale fishers in the design and implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures, taking into account their traditional knowledge.155 UNDRIP, albeit not containing any specific provisions on climate change, affirms Indigenous peoples' right to participate in decision-making of matters which affect them, and calls on States to establish mechanisms to prevent and redress actions which cause displacement of Indigenous peoples. 156 Therefore, the protection of the fundamental rights of fishers in a changing ocean cannot be secured on the basis of a single legal regime, but rather the interpretation and use of different regimes, including (but not limited to) the law of the sea, climate law and human rights regimes in a mutually supportive manner. Such an approach can be used as a way of advancing the protection of fishers' rights adversely affected by a changing ocean.

Conclusion
Fragmentation in international law requires interpreting and using treaties, principles, approaches and non-binding instruments from different legal regimes in a systemic, integrated and mutually supportive manner. In examining the support of the human rights, law of the sea and climate change regimes to the protection of fishers in the changing ocean context, special account has been taken of small-scale fishers and other vulnerable groups. Current and future developments are and will show whether duty-bearers will take the necessary actions and measures to further such protection. Many possibilities exist to advance this protection, including, but not limited to, providing capacity development and awareness-raising by governments, international