Search

Accepted manuscript version, licensed CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Published version available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.02.022. 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 governance – a 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 gaps – not 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.

This article is a part of Arne Eides doctoral thesis. Available in Munin at http://hdl.handle.net/10037/2399 This paper investigates possible biological and economic effects of using marine sanctuaries as a management tool, employing cellular automata techniques to model biological growth and area distribution, assuming open access to the fish stock resources outside the protected area. The cellular automata model incorporates a fish harvest model based on standard assumptions. In agreement with previous studies this study confirms that large protected areas are necessary for significant impact on stock conservation, given standard assumptions. The conclusion may however not be equally unambiguous when employing more realistic scenarios, assuming non-uniform distribution of biomass and fishing effort. This study shows that significant stock conserving effects could be obtained even when less that 10% of the total distribution area of the stock is protected from fishing activities.