Conflict and alignment on aquaculture among Californian communities

Expanding sustainable aquaculture, particularly marine aquaculture, has been increasingly discussed as a pathway for meeting growing seafood demands while reducing the environmental cost of production, including within the United States. California, the state with the largest economy, population, and seafood demand, plays a large role in the domestic seafood landscape and is currently re-evaluating policy and practices toward sustainable aquaculture through the development of a state Aquaculture Action Plan (AAP). To inform the development of the plan, we surveyed California interest groups and community members with association or knowledge of marine aquaculture to understand sentiment around current and future aquaculture in the state, both positive and negative. Specifically, we conducted surveys and a scenario exercise with a representative focus group ("in-person" group) and a broader community of others engaged in marine aquaculture ("survey" group). Participants spanned aquaculturists, commercial fishers, government agency representatives, environmental NGO advocates, academics and tribal members. We found people generally preferred California farms to focus on expanding seaweed and bivalve production, and not land-based finfish or crustaceans; simultaneously, people tended to show a strong preference for local production to fill the seafood production-consumption gap in the state. Notably, the preference of our respondents for the type of seafood to be farmed is in conflict with broader consumer preferences, as California residents (and the U.S generally) predominantly consume shrimp and fish. In support of the broader sentiment of developing locally accessible seafood, both groups expressed a strong preference for increased production to be from small farms and distributed locally. Adoption of local aquaculture products would likely be facilitated by programs that increase traceability and labeling of seafood within the state. We found consensus among groups that aquaculture is important in the state and national seafood sector now and will become more important in the future. Finally, there was strong preference in our study against reliance on foreign imports, a mismatch with the current trade landscape. In sum, our work highlights areas of alignment and contention within key interest groups for the future direction of and vision for marine aquaculture in California. California may be at an inflection point for marine aquaculture, and the success or failure of efforts to expand aquaculture will likely rest on how well policy can respond to the input and preferences of key communities and interest groups.