Rebecca R. Gentry

Citizen science as an approach for overcoming insufficient monitoring and inadequate stakeholder buy-in in adaptive management: criteria and evidence

Adaptive management is broadly recognized as critical for managing natural resources, yet in practice it often fails to achieve intended results for two main reasons: insufficient monitoring and inadequate stakeholder buy-in. Citizen science is gaining momentum as an approach that can inform natural resource management and has some promise for solving the problems faced by adaptive management. Based on adaptive management literature, we developed a set of criteria for successfully addressing monitoring and stakeholder related failures in adaptive management and then used these criteria to evaluate 83 citizen science case studies from peer-reviewed literature. The results suggest that citizen science can be a cost-effective method to collect essential monitoring information and can also produce the high levels of citizen engagement that are vital to the adaptive management learning process. The analysis also provides a set of recommendations for citizen science program design that addresses spatial and temporal scale, data quality, costs, and effective incentives to facilitate participation and integration of findings into adaptive management.

Mapping the global potential for marine aquaculture

Marine aquaculture presents an opportunity for increasing seafood production in the face of growing demand for marine protein and limited scope for expanding wild fishery harvests. However, the global capacity for increased aquaculture production from the ocean and the relative productivity potential across countries are unknown. Here, we map the biological production potential for marine aquaculture across the globe using an innovative approach that draws from physiology, allometry and growth theory. Even after applying substantial constraints based on existing ocean uses and limitations, we find vast areas in nearly every coastal country that are suitable for aquaculture. The development potential far exceeds the space required to meet foreseeable seafood demand; indeed, the current total landings of all wild-capture fisheries could be produced using less than 0.015% of the global ocean area. This analysis demonstrates that suitable space is unlikely to limit marine aquaculture development and highlights the role that other factors, such as economics and governance, play in shaping growth trajectories. We suggest that the vast amount of space suitable for marine aquaculture presents an opportunity for countries to develop aquaculture in a way that aligns with their economic, environmental and social objectives.Marine aquaculture has the potential to improve food security. A global analysis shows that space in coastal areas is unlikely to limit the potential for aquaculture.

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

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.

Offshore aquaculture: Spatial planning principles for sustainable development

Abstract Marine aquaculture is expanding into deeper offshore environments in response to growing consumer demand for seafood, improved technology, and limited potential to increase wild fisheries catches. Sustainable development of aquaculture will require quantification and minimization of its impacts on other ocean‐based activities and the environment through scientifically informed spatial planning. However, the scientific literature currently provides limited direct guidance for such planning. Here, we employ an ecological lens and synthesize a broad multidisciplinary literature to provide insight into the interactions between offshore aquaculture and the surrounding environment across a spectrum of spatial scales. While important information gaps remain, we find that there is sufficient research for informed decisions about the effects of aquaculture siting to achieve a sustainable offshore aquaculture industry that complements other uses of the marine environment.

Offshore Aquaculture: I Know It When I See It

Offshore aquaculture is increasingly viewed as a mechanism to meet growing protein demand for seafood, while minimizing adverse consequences on the environment and other uses in the oceans. However, despite growing interest in offshore aquaculture, there appears to be no consensus as to what measures commonly define an offshore site or how effects of offshore aquaculture – relative to more nearshore practices – are assessed. This lack of agreement on what constitutes offshore aquaculture has the potential to convolute communication, create uncertainty in regulatory processes, and impede understanding of the ecological implications of offshore farming. To begin addressing these issues, we reviewed and analyzed biologically-focused primary and gray literature (Ntotal = 70) that categorize and quantify characteristics of offshore aquaculture from around the world. We found that many ‘offshore’ descriptions are relatively close to shore (< 3 nm) and significantly shallower (minimum depth ≤ 30 m) than may be assumed. We also uncovered an overall lack of consistent reporting of even the most common location-focused metrics (distance from shore, depth, current), a dearth of impact related studies (n = 17), and narrow scope of the studies themselves (i.e., 82% nutrient pollution). Of the finite subset of articles that investigated negative ecological impacts of offshore aquaculture, we found the probability of any measurable impact from an offshore farm appears to significantly decrease with distance from the farm (probability of measurable response at 90 m ± SE = 0.01 ± 0.03). Such general, but informative points of reference could be more robustly quantified with better systematic and standardized reporting of physical farm characteristics and a broader scope of ecological investigation into the effects of marine aquaculture. With offshore aquaculture still in its infancy, consistent metrics are needed for a comparable framework to guide sustainable offshore aquaculture research and development globally.

Comparative terrestrial feed and land use of an aquaculture-dominant world

Significance Studies are revealing the potential benefits of shifting human diets away from meat and toward other protein sources, including seafood. The majority of seafood is now, and for the foreseeable future, farmed (i.e., aquaculture). As the fastest-growing food sector, fed aquaculture species increasingly rely on terrestrial-sourced feed crops, but the comparative impact of aquaculture versus livestock on associated feed and land use is unclear––especially if human diets shift. Based on global production data, feed use trends, and human consumption patterns, we simulate how feed-crop and land use may increase by midcentury, but demonstrate that millions of tonnes of crops and hectares could be spared for most, but not all, countries worldwide in an aquaculture-dominant future. Reducing food production pressures on the environment while feeding an ever-growing human population is one of the grand challenges facing humanity. The magnitude of environmental impacts from food production, largely around land use, has motivated evaluation of the environmental and health benefits of shifting diets, typically away from meat toward other sources, including seafood. However, total global catch of wild seafood has remained relatively unchanged for the last two decades, suggesting increased demand for seafood will mostly have to rely on aquaculture (i.e., aquatic farming). Increasingly, cultivated aquatic species depend on feed inputs from agricultural sources, raising concerns around further straining crops and land use for feed. However, the relative impact and potential of aquaculture remains unclear. Here we simulate how different forms of aquaculture contribute and compare with feed and land use of terrestrial meat production and how spatial patterns might change by midcentury if diets move toward more cultured seafood and less meat. Using country-level aquatic and terrestrial data, we show that aquaculture requires less feed crops and land, even if over one-third of protein production comes from aquaculture by 2050. However, feed and land-sparing benefits are spatially heterogeneous, driven by differing patterns of production, trade, and feed composition. Ultimately, our study highlights the future potential and uncertainties of considering aquaculture in the portfolio of sustainability solutions around one of the largest anthropogenic impacts on the planet.

Marine spatial planning makes room for offshore aquaculture in crowded coastal waters

Marine spatial planning (MSP) seeks to reduce conflicts and environmental impacts, and promote sustainable use of marine ecosystems. Existing MSP approaches have successfully determined how to achieve target levels of ocean area for particular uses while minimizing costs and impacts, but they do not provide a framework that derives analytical solutions in order to co-ordinate siting of multiple uses while balancing the effects of planning on each sector in the system. We develop such a framework for guiding offshore aquaculture (bivalve, finfish, and kelp farming) development in relation to existing sectors and environmental concerns (wild-capture fisheries, viewshed quality, benthic pollution, and disease spread) in California, USA. We identify > 250,000 MSP solutions that generate significant seafood supply and billions of dollars in revenue with minimal impacts (often < 1%) on existing sectors and the environment. We filter solutions to identify candidate locations for high-value, low-impact aquaculture development. Finally, we confirm the expectation of substantial value of our framework over conventional planning focused on maximizing individual objectives.Marine spatial planning is used to co-ordinate multiple ocean uses, and is frequently informed by tradeoffs and composite metrics. Here, Lester et al. introduce an approach that plans for multiple uses simultaneously whilst balancing individual objectives, using a case study of aquaculture development in California.

Global change in marine aquaculture production potential under climate change

Climate change is an immediate and future threat to food security globally. The consequences for fisheries and agriculture production potential are well studied, yet the possible outcomes for aquaculture (that is, aquatic farming)—one of the fastest growing food sectors on the planet—remain a major gap in scientific understanding. With over one-third of aquaculture produced in marine waters and this proportion increasing, it is critical to anticipate new opportunities and challenges in marine production under climate change. Here, we model and map the effect of warming ocean conditions (Representative Concentration Pathway scenario 8.5) on marine aquaculture production potential over the next century, based on thermal tolerance and growth data of 180 cultured finfish and bivalve species. We find heterogeneous patterns of gains and losses, but an overall greater probability of declines worldwide. Accounting for multiple drivers of species growth, including shifts in temperature, chlorophyll and ocean acidification, reveals potentially greater declines in bivalve aquaculture compared with finfish production. This study addresses a missing component in food security research and sustainable development planning by identifying regions that will face potentially greater climate change challenges and resilience with regards to marine aquaculture in the coming decades. Understanding the scale and magnitude of future increases and reductions in aquaculture potential is critical for designing effective and efficient use and protection of the oceans, and ultimately for feeding the planet sustainably.Marine aquaculture is a rapidly growing global source of food, but is likely to be affected by climate change. Here, the effect of warming oceans on the production potential of 180 cultured finfish and bivalve species is mapped over the next century.