Science for sound government decision making!

Near the top among reasons given for the slow development of the US’s marine aquaculture industry is regulatory complexity, leading to a slow painful permitting process for new farms. Many scientists see the solutions to this issue as outside of their skill set.

On the contrary, the role of science in permitting is one of the great underdeveloped areas for the application of science and perhaps the key to rational science-informed government decision making. At the heart of the regulatory process for permitting new aquaculture sites is the Environmental Impact Statement, (EIS, or in some cases the Environmental Assessment) prescribed by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

This document attempts to review and apply the best available science from a range of scientific disciplines to satisfy the requirements of numerous laws for a given project. I have argued before that NEPA forces an ecosystem approach to aquaculture permitting by addressing requirement from numerous applicable federal laws in one document, however it also sets up a complex process that by its nature requires diverse specialized scientific expertise.

This diversity requires the writers of the EIS to consider best available science from disciplines as different as economics, engineering, oceanography, ecology, social sciences, genetics, epidemiology, health, spatial planning, nutrition, and many others. It also requires an understanding of risk and the ability to turn the vast universe of discipline specific science into a series of de facto combinations of risk assessments and best management practices.

Typically, these are complex documents and are done by specialists hired by the government (but often using the proponent’s money) for the purpose. Given the diversity of issues needing addressing, NEPA specialists are generalists regarding the various scientific disciplines but know what is needed for the EIS.

In addition, NEPA prescribes limits on how long the document can be, necessitating brevity for each topic especially for complex permits. In other areas of government decision making (including fisheries management), special issue-specific scientific documents generically called Science Advice and supporting models fill the gap between the universe of science and the application to decision making.

These documents and models directly support the authors of EISs and project proponents. NOAA recently published a few science advice products for this purpose, and more are in the works, however the need is still great for targeted advice documents. Good recent examples of recent science advice products are the two Aquaculture Opportunity Area Atlases published in 2022 (Gulf of Mexico and Southern California), however there are a diversity of others covering specific issues.

US law applies special requirements to this type of scientific product which has recently been reviewed in an Aquaculture Science Advice Handbook. There is a role for government and non-government scientists to focus their expertise on science advice, and we challenge you to consider applying your skills to help address regulatory needs.  For more information come to my talk on Sunday afternoon at the 2023 Aquaculture America meeting in New Orleans!