Aquaculture Europe 2026

September 28 - October 1, 2026

Ljubljana, Slovenia

Add To Calendar 30/09/2026 10:45:0030/09/2026 11:00:00Europe/ViennaAquaculture Europe 2026HOW FRAGMENTED EU GOVERNANCE AND LICENSING, ARE LOCKING AQUACULTURE INTO MONOCULTURESUrska 1The European Aquaculture Societywebmaster@aquaeas.orgfalseDD/MM/YYYYaaVZHLXMfzTRLzDrHmAi181982

HOW FRAGMENTED EU GOVERNANCE AND LICENSING, ARE LOCKING AQUACULTURE INTO MONOCULTURES

G.Ottaviani Aalmo1*, D. Delbare2, C.M.Messina3, A. Encendencia2, A. Santulli3, R. Pastres4, E. Demian5, S. Koulouri5, J.Johansen1

1 Division of Food Production and Society, Norwegian Instititute of Bioeconomy Research (NIBIO), Ås, Norway

2 Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), ILVO-marine, Jacobsenstraat 1, 8400 Oostende, Belgium

3 Laboratory of Marine Biochemistry and Ecotoxicology, Department of Earth and Marine Sciences DiSTeM, University of Palermo, Via Barlotta 4, 91100 Trapani, Italy

4 Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics (DAIS), University of Ca' Foscari, Via Torino 155, Venice Mestre, Italy; Bluefarm S.R.L, Via Delle Industrie 15, 30175, Venezia Marghera, Italy

5Athens University of Economics and Business 76 Patision Str. 10434 Athens; IOBE Foundation for Economic and Industrial Research 11 Tsami Karatasou Str. 11742 Athens

Email: giovanna.ottaviani.aalmo@nibio.no

 



Introduction

While aquaculture production is expanding globally, EU aquaculture output remains relatively stagnant and continues to cover only a limited share of domestic seafood demand (HUNTINGTON and CAPPELL 2026). At the same time, policy priorities increasingly emphasize diversification, particularly through low-trophic species and more resource-efficient production systems. However, this transition remains slow. We argue that this reflects a "diversification paradox": while policy ambition promotes diversification and sustainability, existing governance and permitting systems continue to favour established single-species production models (Chan, Cai et al. 2024, Lester, Gentry et al. 2024).

Materials and Methods

This contribution adopts a policy analysis perspective, examining how EU-level frameworks and their national implementation shape investment conditions in aquaculture. The analysis focuses on key regulatory domains affecting site development, environmental compliance, and market access, and explores how their interaction influences the feasibility of diversified production systems.

Results

The analysis reveals a severe structural mismatch: diversified, circular systems face significantly higher compliance burdens than traditional monocultures. A licensing architecture designed primarily for single species and linear outputs forces multi-species systems to undergo multiple parallel approvals. It also consistently treats valorised side-streams as regulatory "orphans" and introduces inconsistent interpretations across different jurisdictions (Alexander, Potts et al. 2015, Camarena-G��mez, L��hteenm��ki-Uutela et al. 2022). Empirical data indicates that this administrative complexity is worsening rather than improving, contributing to a 33% decline in new aquaculture licences and uneven processing times across Member States. Ultimately, these fragmented permitting structures increase investment risk and transaction costs, thereby locking the industry into established monoculture models that align more easily with existing regulatory pathways (Dixit and Pindyck 1994).

Discussion

EU aquaculture policy is currently advancing in ambition but failing in deployability, resulting in governance systems' coherence limitations (Huntington 2025). In order to overcome this structural bias, we need to go beyond calls for more innovation and implement "diversification ready" regulations to actively align benefits with circular ends; we need to improve policy coherence and reduce the degree of administrative uncertainty as essential conditions necessary for enabling the development of a more sustainable and resilient European aquaculture.

References

Alexander, K., T. Potts, S. Freeman, D. Israel, J. Johansen, D. Kletou, M. Meland, D. Pecorino, C. Rebours and M. Shorten (2015). "The implications of aquaculture policy and regulation for the development of integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in Europe." Aquaculture 443: 16-23.

Camarena-G��mez, M. T., A. L��hteenm��ki-Uutela and K. Spilling (2022). "Macroalgae production in Northern Europe: Business and government perspectives on how to regulate a novel blue bioeconomy." Aquaculture 560: 738434.

Chan, H. L., J. Cai and P. Leung (2024). "Aquaculture production and diversification: What causes what?" Aquaculture 583: 740626.

Dixit, A. K. and R. S. Pindyck (1994). Investment under uncertainty, Princeton university press.

Huntington, T. (2025). Mid-term assessment of the implementation of the 'Strategic guidelines for EU aquaculture' and the 'Multi-annual National Strategic Plans' for aquaculture. European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency Unit D3 — Sustainable Blue Economy European Commission

HUNTINGTON, T. and R. CAPPELL (2026). Assessing the impact of seafood imports on EU self-sufficiency. European Parliament, Policy Department for Regional Development, Agriculture and Fisheries. R. F. P. COMMITTEE. Brussels, European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries.

Lester, S. E., R. R. Gentry and H. E. Froehlich (2024). "The role of marine aquaculture in contributing to the diversity and stability of US seafood production." Marine Policy 160: 105994.