Aquaculture is a major contributor to global food production, but has attracted considerable controversy. Disagreements over the social and ecological impacts of aquaculture (positive and negative) have hindered further expansion of aquaculture production, particularly in wealthy democratic countries. This article presents findings from a series of workshops bringing international aquaculture scholars together from the natural and social sciences to examine and compare social-ecological challenges facing aquaculture development in five nations: Canada, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. This multinational comparison provides unique insights into common and particular challenges in aquaculture governancea dimension that is missing in current literature about the industry. A political ecology framework from the environmental social sciences is used to examine how natural and human phenomena interact to shape these challenges and frame the conflicts that often result. The analysis reveals a wide range of social-ecological factors limiting aquaculture expansion in the five countries, including access to suitable environments, interactions with other sectors, and policy and regulatory gapsnot only with respect to aquaculture, but also on related issues such as marine spatial planning and the involvement of indigenous peoples in decision-making. The findings provide preliminary guidance for future policy development and comparative aquaculture research. IntroductionAquaculture, the farming of aquatic animals and plants for private harvest, has grown substantially in recent decades and now plays a major role in the global food system. Like landbased agriculture, aquaculture takes multiple forms, from the small-scale stocking of ponds with herbivorous fish for local consumption, to the industrial-scale production of high-value species such as salmon, shrimp, and shellfish for international markets (FAO 2016). Global aquaculture production has grown at rapid rate, from 32 million tonnes in 2000 to 77 million tonnes in 2015 (Zhou 2017). With this growth have come new social and ecological challenges. In developing regions where small-scale freshwater aquaculture is common, issues such as landscape change, water quality, deforestation, and loss of wetlands have been identified as key problems (Bush and Marschke 2014). In wealthier countries, controversy has emerged over impacts on wild stocks and species, degradation of habitat, rural futures and economic restructuring, and legal and moral rights to aquatic spaces and resources (Young and Matthews 2010). These challenges
Since the 1990s, substantial efforts have been invested in Local Ecological Knowledge (LEK) research, but LEK has only been applied in western fisheries and resource management to a limited extent. The attempts to link LEK to model-based fish stock assessment seem to have failed largely because the format of LEK does not fit into the models currently in use. However, LEK is still relevant for natural resource management. This article approaches LEK from a different position, not as knowledge about fish stocks but as a constituent in the creation of coastal space as a management object. Through the description of procedures and practices for collection, mapping and authorisation of LEK in Norway, the article illustrates how LEK can potentially become a central element in fisheries and coastal management by using the construction of coastal space as a core management object. As the article will show, the translation of users' experiences into formal knowledge (LEK) about specific activities in certain localities imbues the coastal space with formerly unknown properties and contributes to turning it into a more complex management object. Thus, the article illustrates that LEK becomes relevant for management when it is presented in a format that fits into the frames of reference used in coastal zone management.Keywords: Local ecological knowledge; Fishers' knowledge; Multiple objects; Coastal space Local knowledge -knowledge about what?Our story starts during the winter fishery for North East Arctic cod (Gadus morhua) a on a fishing ground outside Senja in Northern Norway in 2011 (Figure 1, Area 1), on board a 15 meter long gillnetter with two men fishing on this particular fishing ground for their first time. During participant observation, we could observe and experience how they struggled to learn how to fish in a new area. When a string of nets was hauled, as a newcomer to the ground, the skipper had to decide whether to set again in the same position or start looking for a new place to deploy the gear. Based on the size of the catch, information he had obtained from the old-timers on shore, advice from other skippers fishing in the same area and his own interpretation of the relationship between an unfamiliar bottom, unfamiliar currents and fish behaviour, this was like trial fishing, and he had to discuss with his crew before he made a final decision. The skipper had more than 30 years of fishing experience from the fishing grounds around the Lofoten Islands, where he actually knew the waters intimately (Figure 1, Area 2). In 2007 and 2009, we conducted fieldwork on board this vessel when the
Increasing pressures on the coastal zone calls for new approaches to its governance. The ecosystem services (ES) concept has been presented as a solution for more integrated and ecosystem-based management, providing tools to categorise knowledge on ecosystems, the services they provide, and their value. This paper offers an analysis of the introduction of the ES concept into Norwegian coastal spatial planning as a new governance approach. The study is based on document analysis of relevant legal and policy documents, such as white papers, parliamentary bills, official reports, acts and regulations. Through this process this study finds that only incremental changes have been made to integrate the ES concept into the governance of the coastal zone. ES terms and methods to apply the concept in day-to-day governance have not yet been provided. The multilevel and multiscale governance system is not structured to accommodate such an intersectoral and interdisciplinary approach. The municipal planning system could however be well suited, in particular the strategic environmental assessments. The municipalities act like an integrating body, where the trade-offs between different uses or non-uses of natural resources are considered before making decisions. There is, however, a need for adapted knowledge databases, clarification of methods and training for the municipalities to be able to take on this task. If the government intends to introduce ES based management in Norway, a first step would be to designate the appropriate authority to facilitate a process of relevant authorities across sectors and/or levels to take on this task and to develop guidelines for municipal planners. The experience from Norway therefore shows that without a decision on how the concept should be implemented and who should provide the necessary tools for practitioners to apply, the ES concept will not be effectively integrated into the governance system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.