Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) demands collective action to reduce and mitigate its threats. The Quadripartite collaboration of the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) has led development and implementation of National Action Plans (NAPs) that describe approaches each country will take to tackle AMR. All antimicrobial users and sectors should be included, and the Quadripartite encourages a One Health approach. Aquaculture has received mixed coverage in NAPs: Here, we argue why aquaculture requires special consideration. Aquaculture is a diverse, global collection of industries and activities, with heterogeneity in systems and species greatly exceeding terrestrial food-animal production, with products traded internationally in huge volumes. Almost 6 % of global total antibiotic usage is estimated to be applied in aquaculture, with per-biomass quantities in some species exceeding usage in human and terrestrial food-animals. The watery nature of aquaculture interconnects it with other One Health compartments: humans, other animals and the wider environment. Rapid industry growth challenges relatively detached stakeholders such as regulators and NAP creators to remain abreast of changing practices, whilst support capabilities and capacity, e.g., health services, typically lag behind growing needs. To integrate aquaculture effectively into next-generation NAPs, ensuring policies cover the One Health spectrum, NAP creators need to recognise the diversity of aquaculture and initiate engagement across associated value chains, especially health service providers. Disentangling the industry can assist formulation of realistic policies for heterogenous contexts and identify pathways to implementation. Resource allocation must be appropriate and include relevant government departments, whilst improved ways to track and monitor AMR, including those international activities that impact AMR domestically, through suitable data collection are key to monitoring and evaluating policies. Better NAPs are crucial to addressing AMR and this coordinated global approach provides our best opportunity for success.

The intensification of aquaculture industries around the globe has led to increased susceptibility and exposure to diseases. To ensure the well-being of animals and the profitability of the industry, many aquaculture farms resort to antibiotic treatments. However, with the increasing presence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), it has become important to regulate and limit the use of antibiotics, especially in animal production and regarding the antibiotics that are deemed as critically important for human health by the World Health Organization (WHO). This review describes how AMR mitigation strategies have developed over time in international settings and how they relate to aquaculture. Furthermore, we analyzed how different countries and regions abide by these statutes, as well as the antibiotic standards from a selection of certification schemes. Our results show that the role of aquaculture has been inexplicitly addressed in international guidance documents and that there is a need to further increase the activities of aquaculture operations in combating AMR, with an emphasis on alternatives to antibiotic use. We also found that most countries and regions allow the highest priority-, or critically important antibiotics in aquaculture, which could have detrimental effects on animal, environmental, and public health. As a result, most countries fail to comply with the recommendations and standards set by international organizations and certification schemes.

Aquaculture is one of the most diverse food-producing industries and is suggested as a key solution to a growing global food demand. It has been argued that aquaculture has the potential to expand sustainably in most parts of the world, especially in the EU where consumption far out weighs production. This positive view surrounding aquaculture’s growth emphasizes its positive social and ecological effects. These include the generation of rural employment opportunities and the production of nutrient-dense food with negligible or even beneficial environmental effects (e.g. nutrient sequestration). However, for the industry to fulfil this potential, it needs informed governance structures and policies about social-ecological systems that are sensitive to local issues and conditions but also linked to the wider transnational/global context. This thesis provides empirical insight into how different levels of governance and policy interact and the ‘sustainability aquaculture development’ that different actors advocate. By using the Social-Ecological Systems (SES) approach as the theoretical foundation, combined with discourse and policy analyses, this thesis delves into how sustainability is framed in different aquaculture governance settings to give nuanced insights into varied sustainability discourses. This includes examining some of the most influential governing actors in the global North, ranging from intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) like the EU and UN to states and certification organizations.

Based on academic and international governing goals for expanding aquaculture sustainably through multi-stakeholder engagements, and the rapid expansion of Atlantic salmon production, this thesis analyzes how alternative influential governance regimes, like certification programs, compare in terms of environmental stringency with the national regulatory standards of the largest salmon-producing states. One region of interest in this thesis is the Nordics where aquaculture production is unevenly distributed. Norway is one of the most prominent global aquaculture production countries; other states such as Iceland are growing rapidly while countries around the Baltic Sea have very little production. Aquaculture in the Nordics is mostly centered around resource-intensive species with a high market value like Atlantic salmon. Continuing with the ambition to use multi-stakeholder engagements, this thesis also provides empirical insight into how policies and legislation are formed to promote aquaculture. Finally, based on global and regional recognition that food production needs to decrease its dependence on antibiotics, this thesis looks at how some of the most impactful aquaculture markets globally regulate antibiotics usage in aquaculture operations.

This thesis contributes by developing a conceptual framework to examine how different aspects of sustainability are aspired to and pursued in different aquaculture governance arrangements and settings. Through the application of this framework, the thesis develops critical insights into how governing actors frame sustainable aquaculture, identifying dissonances and synergies between international and national ambitions and making suggestions for how aquaculture sustainability can be improved.

In this paper, we critically analyze how sustainability is considered in aquaculture policies and strategies using the Nordic countries as a case. The strong versus weak sustainability concepts are used to define and clarify what sustainability aspects are central to each state. To illustrate these concepts further, we draw on and modify four mainstream environmental discourses defined by John Dryzek and apply them to the strong and weak sustainability dichotomy to help categorize how environmental sustainability is portrayed in Nordic aquaculture policies and strategies. Subsequently we apply the characteristics of the concepts to aquaculture and sustainability in the Nordic countries. This allows us to identify each state's depiction of sustainable aquaculture, compare these to one another and assess where the Nordic states position themselves regarding sustainability and aquaculture. Our findings show that the policies emphasize technological advancements, intensification, and economic growth, which correlates with weak sustainability. Environmental sustainability receives a significant role in the documents too but does not seem to trump increased intensification or profitability. All policies are heavily focused on fed aquaculture and in order to reduce negative impacts from aquaculture there is a need to incorporate key elements of strong sustainability in policies, including measures to reduce impacts from pollution and the spread of pathogens, use of high-grade food resources and energy consumption. This to transform the industry to sustainability rather than just making it less unsustainable.

The COVID-19 global pandemic has had severe, unpredictable and synchronous impacts on all levels of perishable food supply chains (PFSC), across multiple sectors and spatial scales. Aquaculture plays a vital and rapidly expanding role in food security, in some cases overtaking wild caught fisheries in the production of high quality animal protein in this PFSC. We performed a rapid global assessment to evaluate the effects of the COVID19 pandemic and related emerging control measures on the aquaculture supply chain. Socio-economic effects of the pandemic were analysed by surveying the perceptions of stakeholders, who were asked to describe potential supply-side disruption, vulnerabilities and resilience patterns along the production pipeline with four main supply chain components: a) hatchery, b) production/processing, c) distribution/logistics and d) market. We also assessed different farming strategies, comparing land-vs. sea-based systems; extensive vs. intensive methods; and with and without integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, IMTA. In addition to evaluating levels and sources of economic distress, interviewees were asked to identify mitigation solutions adopted at local / internal (i.e., farm site) scales, and to express their preference on national / external scale mitigation measures among a set of a priori options. Survey responses identified the potential causes of disruption, ripple effects, sources of food insecurity, and socio-economic conflicts. They also pointed to various levels of mitigation strategies. The collated evidence represents a first baseline useful to address future disaster-driven responses, to reinforce the resilience of the sector and to facilitate the design reconstruction plans and mitigation measures, such as financial aid strategies.

The rapid, global spread of COVID-19, and the measures intended to limit or slow its propagation, are having major impacts on diverse sectors of society. Notably, these impacts are occurring in the context of other anthropogenic-driven threats including global climate change. Both anthropogenic stressors and the COVID-19 pandemic represent significant economic challenges to aquaculture systems across the globe, threatening the supply chain of one of the most important sources of animal protein, with potential disproportionate impacts on vulnerable communities. A web survey was conducted in 47 countries in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess how aquaculture activities have been affected by the pandemic, and to explore how these impacts compare to those from climate change. A positive correlation between the effects of the two categories of drivers was detected, but analysis suggests that the pandemic and the anthropogenic stressors affect different parts of the supply chain. The immediate measurable reported losses varied with aquaculture typology (land vs. marine, and intensive vs. extensive). A comparably lower impact on farmers reporting the use of integrated multitrophic aquaculture (IMTA) methods suggests that IMTA might enhance resilience to multiple stressors by providing different market options under the COVID-19 pandemic. Results emphasize the importance of assessing detrimental effects of COVID-19 under a multiple stressor lens, focusing on areas that have already locally experienced economic loss due to anthropogenic stressors in the last decade. Holistic policies that simultaneously address other ongoing anthropogenic stressors, rather than focusing solely on the acute impacts of COVID-19, are needed to maximize the long-term resilience of the aquaculture sector.

Farmed salmon has become an important export commodity for many countries and regions. The expanding salmon aquaculture industry has, due to its rapid increase, resulted in environmental concerns, most notably relating to the interaction with wildlife, effects of effluents and discharges in local ecosystems, in some regions overuse of antibiotics and development of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) and high dependence on fish resources in feeds. As a response to these concerns, the industry has strengthened their efforts to improve practices and private led sustainability initiatives, including certification and eco-labelling, has become increasingly important. This study examines the differences between salmon farming governance policies in the four largest salmon producing regions; Norway, Chile, Scotland (UK) and British Columbia (Canada) and the Aquaculture Stewardship Council's (ASC) salmon standard. The purpose of the study is to clarify how the standard from a well-established eco-certification program compares to national or regional conventional standards, using additionality as measuring method. The paper concludes that at present the ASC standard has mainly three strong advantages over existing regional/national standards and these relate to; escape numbers allowed, antibiotic usage and fish resources in feed. Changing these three main divergences in the national/regional regulations would significantly improve some of the main sustainability issues with uncertified salmon farming. The study also finds that the potential additionality of the ASC standard can differ between regions, with the highest difference in Chile and lowest in Norway.