Development of a framework and toolbox for measuring and evaluating ecosystem interactions of seaweed aquaculture

Tonk, Linda; I., Onderz. Form.; Jansen, H.M.; Poelman, M.; Nauta, R.W.; Jak, R.G.; Tamis, J.E.; Jongbloed, R.H.; Wias,; D., Onderz. Form.

doi:10.18174/553741

Cited by 5 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A structured strategy for scoping is key, which is currently lacking. The present study therefore addresses the following main research question: How should a framework for assessing ecosystem services be designed for the seaweed cultivation case from Tonk et al (2021), where positive indirect effects of human activities are present? The focus of the present report is thus on the evaluation of study designs and corresponding methodological strategies for achieving a comprehensive assessment of ecosystem services.…”

Section: Problem Definition and Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A case-study is required as a starting point and to formulate a research question. The case-study is used as a practical example to test the approach developed in the present study, the case study is based on principles first developed in the Aquacross project and further applied in the study of Tonk et al, 2021. The case study entails seaweed cultivation as an activity to evaluate affected ESs.…”

Section: Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The scales were defined based on the design choices made in a small initial set of ecosystem services assessment frameworks (Potschin & Haines-Young, 2011;de Vries et al, 2012;Borgwardt et al (2019); Everard and Waters, 2013;Robinson et al 2014;Culhane et al, 2018;Hasselström et al 2018;Schep, IJntema & van Beukering, 2021), environmental impact assessments (Knights et al, 2015;Judd, Backhaus & Goodsir, 2015;Tamis et al, 2015;Piet et al, 2017a;2017b;Borgwardt et al, 2019;Tonk et al 2021) and, finally, classification schemes in both Ecosystem Services (Potschin et al, 2018;MEA) and environmental impacts (AQUACROSS classification: Borgwardt et al, 2019). The full 'Rubric' containing all identified choices made explicit and the scales to score the choices by is added in Appendix 1.…”

Section: Description Of the Rubricmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a previous effort a conceptual framework to map potential ecosystem impacts caused by seaweed farms was developed based on a DPSIR (driver, pressure, state, impact, response) approach to describe the activities related to seaweed farming (drivers) and the potential impacts that apply to the different ecosystem components involved (Tonk et al, 2021). A case study of 500 km 2 seaweed cultivation area assumed evenly spread over offshore windfarm (OWF) areas in the Dutch part of the North Sea (NCP, Dutch continental shelf) was used to prioritize risks and identify knowledge gaps based on a combination of expert judgement and available data (Tonk et al, 2021). The 631 impact chains were used in the risk assessment based on expert judgement of six aspects of risk (spatial extent, dispersal, frequency, persistence, severity and resilience) to identify knowledge gaps.…”

Section: Case Study: Seaweed Cultivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In its current form the rubric approach shows promise, but is not yet able to fully support study design choices for evaluating ecosystem services from the seaweed cultivation case from Tonk et al (2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Capturing complex ecosystem services evaluation with rubrics : A case-study of seaweed cultivation

IJntema¹,

Vries²,

Lansbergen³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Problem Definition and Research Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Outlinementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Description Of the Rubricmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Case Study: Seaweed Cultivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Capturing complex ecosystem services evaluation with rubrics : A case-study of seaweed cultivation

IJntema¹,

Vries²,

Lansbergen³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning to discuss safety within the European seaweed aquaculture sector

van den Burg,

Koch,

Banach

et al. 2023

Aquacult Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seaweed is seen as a promising future source of biomass, and significant efforts are taken to upscale seaweed aquaculture production in Europe. Despite regulatory frameworks for food safety, environmental safety, and occupational health and safety applicable to seaweed production, a major barrier to upscaling production is the lack of commonly accepted, uniform frameworks for safety assessment. As a consequence, efforts to deal with food safety, environmental safety, and occupational health and safety are fragmented. Based on a literature review and consultations with stakeholders, this paper introduces a generic protocol on how to approach safety of the production of seaweed. A prototype version of the generic protocol was evaluated in a practical setting in Norway. Results show that a consistent, structured approach to safety makes it possible to identify hazards and prioritize and collect data on key hazards. The protocol facilitated a sector discussion on safety, providing a shared discourse to talk about safety. It must be acknowledged that the farming and processing practices and the location of cultivation strongly influence which hazards are most relevant. The protocol succeeded in bringing focus to data collection, putting effort into the analysis of hazards considered most relevant in a practical setting.

show abstract

A review of data collection methods used to monitor the associations of wild species with marine aquaculture sites

English,

Lawrence,

McKindsey

et al. 2024

Reviews in Aquaculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquaculture contributes a significant portion of the global aquatic biomass destined for human consumption. Bivalve and marine finfish aquaculture operations require sea‐based farm sites that result in considerable interactions with the natural environment. The addition of feed waste and physical structures (e.g., net pens and longline mussel culture) can provide an attractive artificial reef for many species and studies have shown both positive and negative effects on the surrounding ecosystem due to wild species interactions with aquaculture sites. Assessing these interactions can be complex, depending on the local ecosystem, and several monitoring techniques have been used to accurately determine associations of wild finfish and decapods to marine farms. In this review, we assessed the main methods used to monitor aquaculture‐ecosystem interactions. The advantages and disadvantages of each technique are discussed and suggestions to mitigate shortfalls for future studies are outlined. It was evident that combining methodologies should be prioritised to lessen the impact of identified weaknesses of any given approach. Designing studies with complementary approaches may help attain robust data that can be used to further understand aquaculture‐ecosystem interactions and the underlying proximate mechanisms.

show abstract

Development of a framework and toolbox for measuring and evaluating ecosystem interactions of seaweed aquaculture

Abstract: Wageningen Marine Research provides no printed copies of reports Wageningen Marine Research is ISO 9001:2015 certified.

Cited by 5 publications

References 53 publications

Capturing complex ecosystem services evaluation with rubrics : A case-study of seaweed cultivation

Capturing complex ecosystem services evaluation with rubrics : A case-study of seaweed cultivation

Learning to discuss safety within the European seaweed aquaculture sector

A review of data collection methods used to monitor the associations of wild species with marine aquaculture sites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About