Search

Acceptance by, and cooperation with relevant stakeholders in developing new sustainability initiatives when they are generally perceived as positive, is one of the keys for successful implementation of such new sustainability initiatives later on. It is remarkable, however, that ample literature exists about involving stakeholders in research projects focusing on problems with diverging views (controversy) around facts and values (wicked problems), but there is very little literature addressing whether and how to involve relevant stakeholders in case of initiatives where diverging norms and values do not play a (substantial) role, like in sustainability assessment for a future seaweed industry. This perspectives paper addresses that gap, and explores how to design such sustainability assessment, illustrated by how stakeholder interaction influenced the assessment and its results for a future seaweed industry in Sweden, followed by a discussion whether and how a similar approach may benefit sustainability assessment of other non-wicked sustainability initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Special attention has been paid to sustainable macroalgae cultivation in Europe. The question on where suitable cultivation areas lie, without conflicting with current marine socio-economic activities and respecting the environment, remains a great challenge. Considering 13 criteria critical to seaweed farming such as depth, shipping traffic, and distance to ports, this paper aimed to identify suitable and sustainable offshore areas on the West Coast of Sweden for the cultivation of the Sugar Kelp, Saccharina latissima. An integrated approach with the tools geographic information systems (GIS) and multi-criteria analysis (MCA) was used to aggregate the criteria by means of Boolean and weighted linear combination (WLC) techniques. The Boolean method singled out 544 km2 as suitable, whereas the WLC method indicated 475 km2 as highly suitable. Both techniques complement each other in finding optimal sites. Furthermore, the integrated models excelled in providing an overview for effective spatial decision-making that fosters sustainable development of macroalgae cultivations within marine and coastal systems. Highlights: To the authors' knowledge no study on seaweed aquaculture site selection has been conducted using such a range of criteria with the purpose of including sustainability aspects within a comparative GIS-MCDA. The large areas identified on the West Coast of Sweden as suitable highlight the potential of this new industry and the complexity of associated marine spatial planning. Boolean and weighted linear combination methods were applied and compared, providing valuable insights in the selection of methods for spatial decision-making support. These insights should support a more sustainable development of macroalgae cultivation in the region, as well as a more resilient marine spatial planning process for blue growth strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study examines the governance of low trophic species mariculture (LTM) using Sweden as a case study. LTM, involving species such as seaweeds and mollusks, offers ecosystem services and nutritious foods. Despite its potential to contribute to blue growth and Sustainable Development Goals, LTM development in the EU and OECD countries has stagnated. A framework for mapping governance elements (institutions, structures, and processes) and analyzing governance objective (effective, equitable, responsive, and robust) was combined with surveys addressed to the private entrepreneurs in the sector. Analysis reveals ineffective institutions due to lack of updated legislation and guidance, resulting in ambiguous interpretations. Governance structures include multiple decision-making bodies without a clear coordination agency. Licensing processes were lengthy and costly for the private entrepreneurs, and the outcomes were uncertain. To support Sweden's blue bioeconomy, LTM governance requires policy integration, clearer direction, coordinated decision-making, and mechanisms for conflict resolution and learning., (© 2024. The Author(s).)