8.3 Current Knowledge on Socio-economic Effects
of Offshore Aquaculture
Having briefly presented the general types of socio-economic effects of aquaculture,
we will review the current knowledge of the socio-economic effects of offshore
aquaculture. Hereby we specifically review existing, rather limited, knowledge on
the socio-economic dimensions of offshore multi-use. However, we believe that it is
likely not be a very large difference of the socio-economic categories mentioned
above pertaining to the relevant aspects for offshore aquaculture in a multi-use
setting.
For instance, summarizing several stakeholder analyses for offshore aquaculture,
Krause et al. (2003, 2011) and Wever et al. (2015) showed that there are different types
of actors involved in the offshore realm than in near-shore areas. Due to this, different
types of conflicts, limitations and potential alliances surface. These root in the essential
differences in the origin, context and dynamics of near-shore—versus offshore resource
uses. For instance, the near-shore areas in Germany have been subject to a long history
of traditional uses through heterogeneous stakeholder groups from the local to national
level (e.g. local fisheries communities, tourism industry, port developers, military, etc.),
in which traditional user patterns emerged over a long time frame. In contrast, the
offshore areas have only recently experienced conflict. This can be attributed to the
relatively recent technological advancements in shipping and platform technology, both
of which have been driven by capital-strong stakeholders that operate internationally.
Whereas there is a well-established organizational structure present among the stakeholders in the near-shore areas in terms of social capital and trust, as well as tested
modes of conduct and social networks, these are lacking in the offshore area. Indeed,
for the latter, a high political representation by stakeholders is observed, that possess
some degree of “client” mentality towards decision-makers in the offshore realm. It
implies in this context that financial powerful and political influential «newcomers»,
such as offshore wind farm operators, effect the political and economic environment in
providing favorable operation conditions (Krause et al. 2011; Griffin et al. 2015).
These fundamental differences between the different stakeholders in near-shore
and offshore waters make a streamlined approach to multiple use or conflict
management difficult. The results of the survey of stakeholders in Krause et al.
(2011) indicate the importance of the social context for how various
mariculture-wind farm integration processes go forward, specifically regarding the
various forms of ownership and management such a venture might take.
Thus, the effects covered in the offshore aquaculture studies mentioned above
pertain mainly to the socio-economic typology realms of Attitudes to and perceptions of aquaculture and its effects, the Effects on the wider economic and innovation system as well as on the Organization of and participation in planning for
aquaculture and, closely related to these, the Effects on cultural fabric and other
social aspects.
174
G. Krause and E. Mikkelsen
of Offshore Aquaculture
Having briefly presented the general types of socio-economic effects of aquaculture,
we will review the current knowledge of the socio-economic effects of offshore
aquaculture. Hereby we specifically review existing, rather limited, knowledge on
the socio-economic dimensions of offshore multi-use. However, we believe that it is
likely not be a very large difference of the socio-economic categories mentioned
above pertaining to the relevant aspects for offshore aquaculture in a multi-use
setting.
For instance, summarizing several stakeholder analyses for offshore aquaculture,
Krause et al. (2003, 2011) and Wever et al. (2015) showed that there are different types
of actors involved in the offshore realm than in near-shore areas. Due to this, different
types of conflicts, limitations and potential alliances surface. These root in the essential
differences in the origin, context and dynamics of near-shore—versus offshore resource
uses. For instance, the near-shore areas in Germany have been subject to a long history
of traditional uses through heterogeneous stakeholder groups from the local to national
level (e.g. local fisheries communities, tourism industry, port developers, military, etc.),
in which traditional user patterns emerged over a long time frame. In contrast, the
offshore areas have only recently experienced conflict. This can be attributed to the
relatively recent technological advancements in shipping and platform technology, both
of which have been driven by capital-strong stakeholders that operate internationally.
Whereas there is a well-established organizational structure present among the stakeholders in the near-shore areas in terms of social capital and trust, as well as tested
modes of conduct and social networks, these are lacking in the offshore area. Indeed,
for the latter, a high political representation by stakeholders is observed, that possess
some degree of “client” mentality towards decision-makers in the offshore realm. It
implies in this context that financial powerful and political influential «newcomers»,
such as offshore wind farm operators, effect the political and economic environment in
providing favorable operation conditions (Krause et al. 2011; Griffin et al. 2015).
These fundamental differences between the different stakeholders in near-shore
and offshore waters make a streamlined approach to multiple use or conflict
management difficult. The results of the survey of stakeholders in Krause et al.
(2011) indicate the importance of the social context for how various
mariculture-wind farm integration processes go forward, specifically regarding the
various forms of ownership and management such a venture might take.
Thus, the effects covered in the offshore aquaculture studies mentioned above
pertain mainly to the socio-economic typology realms of Attitudes to and perceptions of aquaculture and its effects, the Effects on the wider economic and innovation system as well as on the Organization of and participation in planning for
aquaculture and, closely related to these, the Effects on cultural fabric and other
social aspects.
174
G. Krause and E. Mikkelsen