Achieving consensus on current and future priorities for farmed fish welfare: a case study from the UK
- PMID: 20407821
- DOI: 10.1007/s10695-010-9399-2
Achieving consensus on current and future priorities for farmed fish welfare: a case study from the UK
Abstract
The welfare of farmed fish has attracted attention in recent years, which has resulted in notable changes within the aquaculture industry. However, a lack of communication between stakeholders and opposing ethical views are perceived as barriers to achieving consensus on how to improve farmed fish welfare. To address these issues, we developed an interactive approach that could be used during stakeholder meetings to (1) improve communication between different stakeholder groups, (2) build consensus on priorities for farmed fish welfare and (3) establish mechanisms to address welfare priorities. We then applied this approach during a meeting of stakeholders to identify current and future priorities for farmed fish welfare in the UK. During the meeting in the UK, stakeholders initially identified 32 areas that they felt were in need of development for future improvements in farmed fish welfare. These were further refined via peer review and discussion to the seven most important "priority" areas. Establishing a "better understanding of what good fish welfare is" emerged as the highest priority area for farmed fish welfare. The second highest priority area was "the need for welfare monitoring and documentation systems", with mortality recording proposed as an example. The other five priority areas were "[improved understanding of] the role of genetic selection in producing fish suited to the farming environment", "a need for integration and application of behavioural and physiological measures", "the need for a more liberal regime in Europe for introducing new medicines", "a need to address the issues of training existing and new workers within the industry", and "ensuring best practise in aquaculture is followed by individual businesses". Feedback from attendees, and the meeting outputs, indicated that the approach had been successful in improving communication between stakeholders and in achieving consensus on the priorities for farmed fish welfare. The approach therefore proved highly beneficial for future improvements in fish welfare in the UK.
Similar articles
-
Defining, assessing and promoting the welfare of farmed fish.Rev Sci Tech. 2014 Apr;33(1):233-44. doi: 10.20506/rst.33.1.2286. Rev Sci Tech. 2014. PMID: 25000796
-
Safeguarding the many guises of farmed fish welfare.Dis Aquat Organ. 2007 May 4;75(2):173-82. doi: 10.3354/dao075173. Dis Aquat Organ. 2007. PMID: 17578257 Review.
-
Fish welfare assurance system: initial steps to set up an effective tool to safeguard and monitor farmed fish welfare at a company level.Fish Physiol Biochem. 2012 Feb;38(1):243-57. doi: 10.1007/s10695-011-9596-7. Epub 2012 Jan 26. Fish Physiol Biochem. 2012. PMID: 22278705
-
Surveying the welfare of farmed fish species on a global scale through the fair-fish database.J Fish Biol. 2024 Sep;105(3):960-974. doi: 10.1111/jfb.15846. Epub 2024 Jun 25. J Fish Biol. 2024. PMID: 38924085
-
Farmed fish welfare research status in Latin America: A review.J Fish Biol. 2025 Feb;106(2):125-137. doi: 10.1111/jfb.15854. Epub 2024 Jul 15. J Fish Biol. 2025. PMID: 39009502 Review.
Cited by
-
Mortality and fish welfare.Fish Physiol Biochem. 2012 Feb;38(1):189-99. doi: 10.1007/s10695-011-9547-3. Epub 2011 Sep 16. Fish Physiol Biochem. 2012. PMID: 21922247 Review.
References
-
- Anim Welf. 1999;8(4):381-90 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources