Fisheries economics has recently earned a seat at the global fisheries governance table, with everything from subsidies, to high seas fisheries, to Indigenous rights, food security, and human rights now being open for global assessment. The papers in which these studies are housed are in high impact journals, are highly cited, and tend to get great media coverage, constituting the narratives of ‘global oceans’. While we agree that many fisheries economics issues are salient and, thus lend themselves to assessments above and beyond firm or national economics, we argue that we should be thinking of these things in an international/world wide context, piecing local, national, and regional cases together, rather than starting global. Part of the rationale for this is that decision-makers and journalists look at global maps of economics outputs and pick their part of the world to scrutinize, wondering what the global model means for their bay or port. Additionally, the rationale may reproduce unintended political elision that reinforces the discursive parameters of economic risks and social uncertainty without fields of reality. We introduce a perspective from political ecology, encouraging researchers and practitioners to develop critical perspectives on the global economics bandwagon, suggesting that it’s important to understand context-specific characteristics of the social and economic determinants that impact livelihoods, communities, industrial sectors, national policies, and historical contexts. We argue that this perspective can help us to move towards ‘implementation science’, whereby insights from fisheries economics can more easily be translated into policy change.