Seeing shellfish from the seashore: The importance of values and place in perceptions of aquaculture and marine social–ecological system interactions

Murray, Grant; D’Anna, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.09.005

Cited by 45 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From the public comments we evaluated, we found development plans (especially offshore), not policy, garnered the most negative criticism from citizens and environmentalists. This suggest a level of ‘not in my backyard’ (NIMBY) perspective, where local proximity to marine aquaculture development appears to increase negative impressions [55,56]. Although NIMBYism should not diminish the importance of addressing such perceived or real concerns [23,57–59], it does create economic and seafood transparency tradeoffs with most of developed nations’ seafood not being sourced from their respective countries [3].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Froehlich¹,

Gentry²,

Rust³

et al. 2017

PLoS ONE

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquaculture is developing rapidly at a global scale and sustainable practices are an essential part of meeting the protein requirements of the ballooning human population. Locating aquaculture offshore is one strategy that may help address some issues related to nearshore development. However, offshore production is nascent and distinctions between the types of aquatic farming may not be fully understood by the public–important for collaboration, research, and development. Here we evaluate and report, to our knowledge, the first multinational quantification of the relative sentiments and opinions of the public around distinct forms of aquaculture. Using thousands of newspaper headlines (Ntotal = 1,596) from developed (no. countries = 26) and developing (42) nations, ranging over periods of 1984 to 2015, we found an expanding positive trend of general ‘aquaculture’ coverage, while ‘marine’ and ‘offshore’ appeared more negative. Overall, developing regions published proportionally more positive than negative headlines than developed countries. As case studies, government collected public comments (Ntotal = 1,585) from the United States of America (USA) and New Zealand mirrored the media sentiments; offshore perception being particularly negative in the USA. We also found public sentiment may be influenced by local environmental disasters not directly related to aquaculture (e.g., oil spills). Both countries voiced concern over environmental impacts, but the concerns tended to be more generalized, rather than targeted issues. Two factors that could be inhibiting informed discussion and decisions about offshore aquaculture are lack of applicable knowledge and actual local development issues. Better communication and investigation of the real versus perceived impacts of aquaculture could aid in clarifying the debate about aquaculture, and help support future sustainable growth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Froehlich¹,

Gentry²,

Rust³

et al. 2017

PLoS ONE

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study was conducted within Baynes Sound, which is a 20 km long body of water located on the east coast of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada, that consists of open shoreline, estuaries, inshore marshes, protected bays, and forests (Jamieson et al, 2001;Murray & D'Anna, 2015; Figure 1). Water circulation is primarily north to south due to flood and ebb tides and the wind-influenced currents (Jamieson et al, 2001).…”

Section: Study Sitementioning

confidence: 99%

Community assessment techniques and the implications for rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers

Cox

Black

Filip

et al. 2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diversity estimates play a key role in ecological assessments. Species richness and abundance are commonly used to generate complex diversity indices that are dependent on the quality of these estimates. As such, there is a long‐standing interest in the development of monitoring techniques, their ability to adequately assess species diversity, and the implications for generated indices. To determine the ability of substratum community assessment methods to capture species diversity, we evaluated four methods: photo quadrat, point intercept, random subsampling, and full quadrat assessments. Species density, abundance, richness, Shannon diversity, and Simpson diversity were then calculated for each method. We then conducted a method validation at a subset of locations to serve as an indication for how well each method captured the totality of the diversity present. Density, richness, Shannon diversity, and Simpson diversity estimates varied between methods, despite assessments occurring at the same locations, with photo quadrats detecting the lowest estimates and full quadrat assessments the highest. Abundance estimates were consistent among methods. Sample‐based rarefaction and extrapolation curves indicated that differences between Hill numbers (richness, Shannon diversity, and Simpson diversity) were significant in the majority of cases, and coverage‐based rarefaction and extrapolation curves confirmed that these dissimilarities were due to differences between the methods, not the sample completeness. Method validation highlighted the inability of the tested methods to capture the totality of the diversity present, while further supporting the notion of extrapolating abundances. Our results highlight the need for consistency across research methods, the advantages of utilizing multiple diversity indices, and potential concerns and considerations when comparing data from multiple sources.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the increasing use of genetic modification in many forms of aquaculture, such as to create a faster-growing salmon or a triploid (sterile) oyster, can prompt the type of "dread" risk perceptions among public audiences-that is, elevated concern associated with perceived attributes of the hazard, such as lack of control or inequitable distribution of risks and benefits (Slovic, 1987)-associated with other GM foods [e.g., Frewer et al (2002), Schlag (2011), Fabiansson and Fabiansson (2016), Kaptan et al (2016)]. In some regions, stakeholders have challenged the siting of aquaculture operations for disrupting "lived experience, " including access to coastal recreational areas, commercial fishing grounds, or the esthetic qualities of a place (e.g., scenic views) (D' Anna and Murray and D' Anna, 2015). At the same time, however, individuals may recognize the benefits posed by aquaculture, such as the provision of local jobs, or the creation of affordable protein (Mazur and Curtis, 2006;Schlag and Ystgaard, 2013;D' Anna and Murray, 2015).…”

Section: Public Perception Of Aquaculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Of Sea Lice and Superfood: A Comparison of Regional and National News Media Coverage of Aquaculture

Rickard

Feldpausch-Parker

2016

Front. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seeing shellfish from the seashore: The importance of values and place in perceptions of aquaculture and marine social–ecological system interactions

Cited by 45 publications

References 27 publications

Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Community assessment techniques and the implications for rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers

Of Sea Lice and Superfood: A Comparison of Regional and National News Media Coverage of Aquaculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About