The operationalisation of sustainability: Sustainable aquaculture production as defined by certification schemes

Sustainability certification has become an increasingly important feature in aquaculture production, leading to a multitude of schemes with various criteria. However, the large number of schemes and the complexity of the standards creates confusion with respect to which sustainability objectives are targeted. As a result, what is meant by ‘sustainability’ is unclear. In this paper, we examine the operationalisation of the concept from the vantage point of the certifying authorities, who devise standards and grant or withhold certification of compliance. We map the criteria of eight widely-used certification schemes using the four domains of the Wheel of Sustainability, a reference model designed to encompass a comprehensive understanding of sustainability. We show that, overall, the sustainability certifications have an overwhelming focus on environmental and governance indicators, and only display scattered attempts at addressing cultural and economic issues. The strong focus on governance indicators is, to a large degree, due to their role in implementing and legitimising the environmental indicators. The strong bias implies that these certification schemes predominantly focus on the environmental domain and do not address sustainability as a whole, nor do they complement each other. Sustainability is by definition and by necessity a comprehensive concept, but if the cultural and economic issues are to be addressed in aquaculture, the scope of certification schemes must be expanded. The Wheel of Sustainability can serve as a valid lexicon and asset to guide such efforts.publishedVersio

Social license to operate for aquaculture – A cross-country comparison

Salmon aquaculture production has grown considerably in recent years, and parallel to this growth public interest in production and product has also increased. In most salmon producing countries there have been reports of both public dismay and support for the industry. In this paper we investigate and compare public perceptions, understood as to what degree the industry has a social license to operate, across three countries. In Tasmania (AU), Iceland and Norway, the salmon aquaculture industry has a varying foothold, something which is also reflected in public perceptions. An outline of the three contextual settings is therefore provided. We undertook surveys using a standardized questionnaire which was distributed to respondent panels in the three countries. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The findings show some similarities and notably mostly differences between the respondent groups. A comparative approach as reported here requires understanding of contextual factors to offer explanatory power to the analysis. The results from the comparative survey is therefore discussed in light of the various contextual settings. We found that many respondents are supportive of the aquaculture industry in their respective countries (Iceland less so), but that there is something amiss, which the respondents feel is not achieved. While support is related to industry contributions of food production, employment, and business activity, the respondents also report acceptance of the industry and view the industry to be important. However, the respondents are less supportive of the industry with regards to sustainability, industry regulation, and distribution of economic benefits. We suggest that efforts to increase societal support for aquaculture must be adapted and related to the contextual environment the industry operates in, both locally and nationally. A pivotal element in this context is the public's knowledge of the industry, which is deemed important for their assessment of perceived advantages and challenges posed by the industry on both local and national level, and the necessary trade-offs between them in forming a supportive or critical opinion

Factors associated with involuntary admissions among patients with substance use disorders and comorbidity: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To investigate factors associated with involuntary admissions to hospital pursuant to a social services act of patients with substance use disorder by comparing the socio-demographic characteristics, substance use, and psychiatric comorbidities with voluntarily admitted patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This cross-sectional study compared two groups admitted to combined substance use disorder and psychiatry wards. Sixty-five patients were involuntarily admitted pursuant to the Social Services Act and 137 were voluntarily admitted. The International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems was used for diagnostic purposes regarding substance use disorders, type and severity of psychiatric problems, and level of functioning. Socio-demographic variables were measured using the European Addiction Severity Index, and the Symptom Checklist-90-R instruments were used to evaluate the range of psychological problems and psychopathological symptoms. Logistic regression was performed to investigate the relationship between involuntary admissions and patients characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients who had been involuntarily admitted were more likely to be females, had utilized public welfare services more often, presented more severe substance use patterns, and had a history of more frequent visits to physicians for somatic complaints in the last 6 months, they also had fewer comorbid mental disorders. Still, considerable burdens of comorbid substance use disorders and mental disorders were observed both among involuntary and voluntary admitted patients.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>More attention is required for involuntarily admitted patients in order to meet the needs associated with complex and mixed disorders. In addition, treatment centers should offer diagnostic options and therapy regarding substance use, psychiatric and somatic disorders.</p