Exploring community-based marine aquaculture as a coastal resource management opportunity in Nova Scotia, Canada

Global trends show that aquaculture is increasing steadily as one of the fastest growing food production sectors (FAO 2016)—a phenomenon that has been commonly referred to as the “Blue Revolution” (Krause et al. 2015). Marine aquaculture contributes to approximately one-third of world fisheries and aquaculture production (FAO 2018) and takes place mainly in coastal areas (Le Gouvello et al. 2017), presenting socio-economic development opportunities for resource dependant rural coastal communities (Bailey 2008; Burns et al. 2014; Pelletier et al. 2016). However, because marine aquaculture sites are located in shared ocean spaces, there are many users and potentially conflicting opinions on how to manage the farming activity (Murray and D’Anna 2015; Armitage et al. 2017). Additionally, aquaculture has not always been developed sustainably and, in some cases, has resulted in environmental degradation and “ocean grabbing” (Bennett et al. 2015; Belton 2016). Coastal communities are thereby challenged to plan and manage aquaculture development in a way that supports societal needs and well-being, without threatening the ability for current and future generations to benefit from the marine environment. Yet communities are also beholden to operate under the regulatory authority of multiple jurisdictions, including both the provincial and federal governments. Furthermore, as Canada continues to move towards reconciliation and recognition of the rights of Indigenous Peoples (via mechanisms like the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the resulting private members bill currently with the Canadian Senate), communities will need to work with Indigenous peoples on natural resource projects that take place in Indigenous territories.

How can, or should, communities approach aquaculture development? The ecosystem approach to aquaculture (EAA), which has been recommended by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) to help facilitate sustainable aquaculture development worldwide, may offer one potential approach. It is guided by three key principles, suggesting that aquaculture development should: (i) not threaten ecosystem function and service, (ii) support human well-being and equity, and (iii) be developed through a multi-sectoral or integrated approach (FAO 2010). Furthermore, with stakeholder participation being a critical component of the strategy, it has been suggested that the EAA may improve social acceptability of aquaculture and reduce user conflict (FAO 2010). Yet the operationalization of the EAA has proven to be a challenge, as much of the focus has been on addressing the technical and biological aspects of aquaculture development instead of social concerns (Costa-Pierce 2010). This has led to a “people–policy gap” in aquaculture development, meaning there is a need to better involve people in the design and management of operations (Krause et al. 2015). Community-based management, which engages communities in planning and decision-making for shared, or common pool, resources (Fernandez-Gimenez 2008) may be one option that could help fill this gap.

Community-based management initiatives have been applied worldwide in many sectors (e.g., forestry, fisheries, agriculture, protected areas), including several studies on freshwater and marine aquaculture activities (see for example, Saphakdy et al. 2009; Rougier et al. 2013; Ateweberhan et al. 2014; Galappaththi and Berkes 2014; Todinanahary et al. 2017). Most aquaculture-related community-based initiatives have been carried out in developing countries as a way to support rural economic development and enhance livelihoods (Armitage 2005; Blythe et al. 2017). However, some successful community-based initiatives have been launched in developed countries. The most iconic example in Atlantic Canada is the We’koqma’q First Nation trout farm. Although the co-management model of this farm has changed over time, it is grounded on a community-based initiative, and the revenue of the operation is re-invested in the community (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency 2018). Given the potential to bring equity, inclusivity, and sustainability to resource management, community-based marine aquaculture (CBMA) could have potential to support the social dimensions of the EAA, and consequently could be an approach for future aquaculture developments.

Inherent challenges involved with CBMA must also be acknowledged, since coastal resource management is already complex and “local communities” are not the homogenous entities they can oftentimes be depicted as (Weinstein et al. 2007; Billé 2008; Madden and McQuinn 2015). In addition, community-based projects could adopt very different operational and regulatory models (Lane and McDonald 2005), which could affect the effectiveness of a CBMA initiative. Moreover, the general understanding of community-based management depends on local context and perceptions (Armitage 2005; Gruber 2010; Beyerl et al. 2016). Consequently, it cannot be assumed that a community-based management model is applicable for all communities. Context-specific research is required to determine suitability and achieve long-term effectiveness (Diana et al. 2013; Krause et al. 2015; Bennett 2016; Beyerl et al. 2016). Should there be interest in CBMA to facilitate aquaculture development, there is a need for improved understanding of its applicability for different locations and contexts.

The scope of this research is to explore the opportunity for nonfinfish CBMA in Nova Scotia (NS), Canada, by examining various stakeholder perspectives (provincial government, municipal government, industry, and academia). The selection of these stakeholder groups aimed to cover a variety of perspectives on CBMA, and a formal comparison among them was not intended. Interviews with these stakeholder groups involved with aquaculture research and development help to conceptualize CBMA as a possible coastal resource management strategy that could facilitate increased future aquaculture development and support an EAA. It is important to reiterate that this study does not aim to explore the viability of CBMA in a specific location, which would require engagement with community members and other relevant stakeholders such as fishers as well as with rightsholders such as the relevant Mi’kmaw bands or larger regional groups (such as the Atlantic Policy Congress of First Nations Chiefs). Nova Scotia was selected as an approriate study area because it has potential for increased marine aquaculture that is supported by provincial government, a populated coastline with many small coastal communities, and a need for rural economic development (Province of Nova Scotia 2009a; Ivany et al. 2014; NS Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016). Opportunities for cultivation of commercial shellfish and (or) seaweed species were of specific focus for this research. Although shellfish and seaweed farming can be technologically demanding, it is generally accepted that these forms of aquaculture involve lower input systems and use more simplistic gear in comparison to finfish aquaculture (Petersen et al. 2010; Kim et al. 2017). Given that CBMA could follow different operational and regulatory models, with different degrees of community involvement, it was assumed that the focus on shellfish and seaweeds could minimize risk and decrease complexity for communities to start-up. With the aquaculture industry on a path for growth in NS and worldwide, this research examines CBMA as a possible opportunity to support sustainable development by integrating local communities into the aquaculture development and management process.

In this section we summarize the major findings of this study around key topics and discuss these results in light of the literature, providing examples to position the potential of CBMA in NS in the larger context of the EAA.

This exploratory research has compiled the opinions and perspectives from select participants with in-depth knowledge about nonfinfish aquaculture and community-based management regarding the potential of CBMA in NS. Accordingly, this study lays the foundation for better understanding CBMA as a coastal resource management opportunity in the context of future aquaculture development in NS. The findings presented in this article demonstrate interest and potential for CBMA to help grow the nonfinfish aquaculture industry in an innovative way in NS, while also supporting social and ecological sustainability goals inherent in the EAA. The involvement of community members in planning and operation of aquaculture could help to remove barriers to access, allowing for people to gain more of a connection with their seafood and become educated on sustainable aquaculture practices much like trends in oyster gardening or terrestrial community gardens. Because of continued interest in moving aquaculture offshore, to minimize environmental effects while increasing production (Buck and Langan 2017), it may be even more important than ever to explicitly consider and prioritize aquaculture closer to home, where a connection between food production and consumption can remain strong.

Several steps toward implementation of CBMA and possible operational models were identified to help guide future efforts; however, further research may also be needed to include other stakeholder and rightsholder perspectives, examine potential examples of CBMA already operating in the province, determine other suitable areas and interested communities, and provide resources that can help to facilitate CBMA development by minimizing risks and maximizing beneficial outcomes. If governments and communities gain interest in pursuing nonfinfish CBMA development and take steps toward piloting projects, efforts must proceed with caution due to the challenges involved with collaborative coastal resource management (e.g., the need for a strong commitment, and a sound operational plan). In other words, the adoption of a community-based initiative does not necessarily guarantee the success of the operation. Furthermore, simply because an aquaculture development may be community-based does not necessarily mean it is more sustainable; therefore, continued evaluation and monitoring of socio-economic and environmental impacts of initiatives should be required. Although the focus for this article was on nonfinfish aquaculture in NS, research of this kind becomes increasingly important nationally and internationally due to the projected continued growth of the aquaculture industry. This phenomenon necessitates proactive strategies such as CBMA that can achieve a dual mandate to support the EAA in sustainable aquaculture development, while also enhancing livelihoods for people in coastal communities.

We would like to thank the interviewees who graciously lent their time and expertise to further knowledge on this topic. We would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers who contributed to improve the manuscript. Jessica Bradford would also like to recognize support from the Douglas M. Johnston – MASC Scholarship in Marine Affairs, the Charles Labatiuk Scholarship from Nature Canada, NSERC Discovery Grant to Ramón Filgueira, and the many crowdfunders who contributed to her master’s degree funding.