Factory-made or farm fresh? Measuring U.S. support for aquaculture as a food technology

Fish Tales: How Narrative Modality, Emotion, and Transportation Influence Support for Sustainable Aquaculture

“…Using a scale from 1 = extremely unlikely to 7 = extremely likely , we used five items to measure participants’ support for marine aquaculture research, support for operations in the United States and operations outside of the United States, as well as intention to purchase aquaculture products (Rickard et al, 2020). Due to high reliability and unidimensionality, these items were averaged into an index for support ( M = 4.74, SD = 1.29, α = .91).…”

“…While unfamiliar to many Americans (Rickard et al, 2020; Runge et al, 2021), aquaculture, or the production of finfish, shellfish, and sea vegetables in water environments, contributes more than 50% of all seafood consumed globally (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2020). Because the United States relies heavily on importing seafood, aquaculture advocates suggest that increasing domestic production can both minimize the “seafood trade deficit” (NOAA, 2016) and reduce pressure on wild fisheries (Hixon, 2014); however, certain types of aquaculture production, such as raising salmon in ocean net pens, have raised environmental and human health concerns, including elevated levels of pesticides and heavy metals in effluent runoff and harvested fish (Diana, 2009; Hites et al, 2004; Schlag, 2010).…”

“…In addition to exploring potential effects of narrative medium, the present study also integrates recent applied social science research highlighting risk-benefit perceptions as particularly important to explaining public support for aquaculture products and policies, at least in a Western cultural context. Though the topic may be unfamiliar to many audiences, North American (D’Anna & Murray, 2015; Hall & Amberg, 2013; Rickard, et al, 2018; Rickard et al, 2020; Witzling et al, 2020) and European (Feucht & Zander, 2015; Schlag & Ystgaard, 2013) audiences appear to harbor at least some concern for possible negative impacts of aquaculture, but they also recognize possible environmental and economic benefits at the community and national levels posed by the industry. These risk-benefit perceptions, in turn, account for a considerable amount of variance in general support for aquaculture (Rickard et al, 2020).…”

“…That is, decisions about how and where to grow seafood (and which kind(s) of seafood) inherently involve value-laden decisions at the individual, community, and societal levels (Hanes, 2018; Johnson & Hanes, 2017). At the same time, the topic is novel to many Americans, suggesting that perceptions of its risks and benefits may stem more from evaluation of information sources, rather than knowledge of “objective” risk (Rickard et al, 2020; Runge et al, 2021). For these reasons, we see a unique opportunity to examine narrative effects in this context.…”

“…The present study addresses the impact of narrative persuasion by considering a contemporary science communication issue in which both human health and environmental risks are salient—namely, sustainable aquaculture production in the United States. While unfamiliar to many Americans (Rickard et al, 2018; Rickard et al, 2020; Witzling et al, 2020), aquaculture is on the rise and is increasingly touted as a way to reduce our reliance on imported seafood (and its related greenhouse gas emissions), while safeguarding wild fisheries. Like its land-based analogue, sustainable aquaculture practices broadly consider both ecological and social “carrying capacity” (Smaal & Van Duren, 2019); for instance, salmon farmers not only attempt to limit the chemical inputs (e.g., antibiotics) given to their fish but also consider how their farming operation may affect the “lived experience” (e.g., sights and smells) of surrounding coastal communities (e.g., D’Anna & Murray, 2015).…”