Prioritization of knowledge needs for sustainable aquaculture: a national and global perspective

Aquaculture is currently the fastest expanding global animal food production sector and is a key future contributor to food security. An increase in food security will be dependent upon the development and improvement of sustainable practices. A prioritization exercise was undertaken, focusing on the future knowledge needs to underpin UK sustainable aquaculture (both domestic and imported products) using a ‘task force’ group of 36 ‘practitioners’ and 12 ‘research scientists’ who have an active interest in sustainable aquaculture. A long list of 264 knowledge needs related to sustainable aquaculture was developed in conjunction with the task force. The long list was further refined through a three stage process of voting and scoring, including discussions of each knowledge need. The top 25 knowledge needs are presented, as scored separately by ‘practitioners’ or ‘research scientists’. There was similar agreement in priorities identified by these two groups. The priority knowledge needs will provide guidance to structure ongoing work to make science accessible to practitioners and help to prioritize future science policy needs and funding. The process of knowledge exchange, and the mechanisms by which this can be achieved, effectively emerged as the top priority for sustainable aquaculture. Viable alternatives to wild fish-based aquaculture feeds, resource constraints that will potentially limit expansion of aquaculture, sustainable offshore aquaculture and the treatment of sea lice also emerged as strong priorities. Although the exercise was focused on UK needs for sustainable aquaculture, many of the emergent issues are considered to have global application.

A thematic cost-benefit analysis of a marine protected area

The implementation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) is ultimately a social endeavour to sustain or improve human well-being via the conservation of marine ecosystems. The degree to which ecological gains are realised can depend upon how economic, ecological and social costs (negative impacts) and benefits (positive impacts) are included in the designation and management process. Without the support of key stakeholder groups whose user rights have been affected by the creation of an MPA, human impacts cannot be reduced. This study analyses a three year dataset to understand the themes associated with the economic, environmental and social costs and benefits of an MPA in Lyme Bay, United Kingdom (UK) following its establishment in 2008. Methodologically, the paper presents an ecosystem based management framework for analysing costs and benefits. Two hundred and forty one individuals were interviewed via questionnaire between 2008 and 2010 to determine perceptions and the level of support towards the MPA. Results reveal that despite the contentious manner in which this MPA was established, support for the MPA is strong amongst the majority of stakeholder groups. The level of support and the reasons given for support vary between stakeholder groups. Overall, the stakeholders perceive the social, economic and environmental benefits of the MPA to outweigh the perceived costs. There have been clear social costs of the MPA policy and these have been borne by mobile and static gear fishermen and charter boat operators. Local support for this MPA bodes well for the development of a network of MPAs around the UK coast under the United Kingdom Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. However, this initial optimism is at risk if stakeholder expectation is not managed and the management vacuum is not filled.