by Bert Rodgers, Student of MSc Sustainable Aquaculture and Fisheries, University of Plymouth, UK
In the UK we have learned to see farmed landscapes as the ‘countryside’. The patchwork of green fields and accompanying livestock barns are postcard-ready vistas, familiar to us and part of a national identity. The thought of putting a fish pen or mussel line on a postcard, however, is probably a laughable idea to most. However, both images depict vital food production systems and should be judged on evidence-led portrayals, not on the false perceptions that pervade from the public observer. Such double standards must be addressed for consumers to gain a fair representation of production systems.
In a review of media samples from aquaculture-producing countries (Budhathoki et al., 2024), the UK was the only country in which negative articles exceeded positive ones (45 percent -ive, 33 percent +ive and 20 percent neutral from 2015 to 2023). UK aquaculture representation was focused on risk prevention with key negative themes of environmental impacts, sea lice, escapees and animal welfare concerns. Reflecting this increased scrutiny, the Global Salmon Initiative adopted a commitment to achieve 100 percent ASC certification across all member farms. Alongside accreditation, there have been reductions in antibiotic use, improved transparency, lower FIFO and FCR, as well as sustained economic growth for rural and coastal communities. However, the messaging that appears to be most relevant to producers is what consumers see on packaging – eco-friendly labels. But are these sufficiently communicating the positive messages of aquaculture?
This matters because consumers are having to navigate a crowded and confused market of sustainability labels, certifications and green claims. Altintzoglou et al. (2025) found that European consumer awareness of aquaculture production systems remains low, even when their attitudes are positive. Their study identified three consumers groups; trusting, unimpressed and uninformed. The uninformed group was the largest, making them the obvious targets for improved communication. However, they are understandably uninformed and I would advocate for continuing meaningful communication with those more likely to engage – namely the ‘foodies’ and ‘adventurous responsible’ groups as cited by Stancu et al. (2022). With improved understanding, hopefully the personal social connections made through these groups influence the uninformed that are not captured by conventional marketing.
With intense scrutiny comes opportunity. Public concern surrounding salmon farming has forced the industry into a level of monitoring that is not seen in other forms of farming. In Scotland, aquaculture data exists on a publicly accessible portal including information on environmental monitoring, escapees, emissions, biomass, treatments, leases, permit conditions and movement restrictions. This does not mean every farm performs excellently but rather provides the framework for a more transparent consumer relationship. Despite this progress, reducing mortality remains a key challenge for the industry.
In the UK, food security has long been treated as a matter of foremost importance and, since World War II, a measure of national resilience. In a recently destabilised global food landscape, this sentiment is still pertinent. National self-sufficiency has fallen from over 80 percent in the 1980s to 65 percent in 2024 (DEFRA, 2025). A growing population and lack of terrestrial space means the solution to improving self-sufficiency lies in offshore and inshore aquaculture. Currently the UK imports 90 percent of seafood consumed (DEFRA, 2024) and Scottish salmon is the UK’s top food export (Salmon Scotland, 2026). UK land is already heavily farmed – agriculture constitutes 69 percent of UK land area, making farmed landscapes the dominant landscape in the UK.
A 2012 survey by the University of Cambridge (n = 1736) found widespread affection for agriculture despite a surprising level of ignorance about the sector. Public estimate of land farmed nationally was 35 percent. Large numbers of people believed that farming is important for the economy, estimating farming constitutes 24 percent of GDP when at the time it was closer to 1.5 percent. Surprisingly, 75 percent of respondents said farming played an important role in protecting the environment. The author, a research assistant in rural affairs, states “most people’s hearts are in the right place even if they have some misconceptions about it.” If true, aquaculture should aim to win the hearts of the public because it seems to be where most people do their thinking.
As someone who is passionate about efficient, transparent use of resources to better protect the environment, I find it highly frustrating that cultural familiarity often outweighs environmental evidence. As well as industrial farming resulting in a monoculture of grasses, UK farmland birds have declined by 62 percent since 1970 (JNCC, 2025), UK pollinator distribution indicators were 23 percent lower in 2024 than in 1980 (JNCC, 2026). In 2024, diffuse pollution from agriculture impacted 40 percent of water bodies in England. Farming activities caused 74 serious pollution incidents, including 67 serious incidents to water.
Furthermore, of the targeted inspections at non-permitted farms, inspectors found non-compliance with environmental regulations in 51 percent of cases (EA, 2025). Comparable environmental performance in aquaculture would likely attract significant regulatory attention because impacts are generally easier to attribute to individual sites. As agricultural pollution is dispersed across catchments, soils and atmospheres, it makes it hard to scrutinise a specific farm. Terrestrial farmers are better protected because they commonly own the land they farm and therefore have associated rights. Agriculture carries the legacy of historical production priorities, whereas aquaculture has developed in an age of environmentalism. Historical practices and traditions are hard to correct whereas, because of present scrutiny, environmental protection has become traditional in aquaculture. This is a message that should be conveyed to the public, alongside the vast economic opportunities that aquaculture presents.
Equal scrutiny should exist for terrestrial farming systems and comparisons should be made using equal metrics including land use, feed conversion ratio, GHG emissions, welfare and mortality, economic value etc. Trust will be won by showing the evidence of benefits within aquaculture, explaining its system and asking to be judged by the same standards as land-based farming. The introduction of a public portal, with appropriate support available, that makes it mandatory for farmers to prove they are protecting the environment, would be a positive step forward. If the UK accepts farmed fields as part of the national landscape with its attached environmental baggage, hopefully, the public will learn to accept well-regulated aquaculture.
Aquaculture can contribute towards domestic supply significantly more than current public acceptance allows; a more balanced food production network may even positively contribute to terrestrial biodiversity gain by alleviating intensification. Low awareness and understanding are partly a product of negative coverage; I believe it responsible to point out this double standard and to advocate for fair representation for all food production systems. None are perfect, some are simply treated more generously than others. Progress aquaculture communication from green claims, be bold and build aquaculture teachings into everyday culture through youth societies, community shellfish projects, underwater live feeds, bio secure open days and seafood cooking in schools.
Aquaculture is a necessary part of a secure and sustainable food future in the UK and globally. If the above practices were adopted, perhaps one day the public may view a seascape of salmon farms and mussel lines in the same light as this green and pleasant land.
For references, contact editorial@perendale.co.uk
This article won the inaugural IAF Student Excellence Award, recognising exceptional originality, critical thinking and scientific communication in advancing sustainable aquaculture. The award is presented by International Aquafeed in collaboration with the University of Plymouth
Author Profile
Can you tell us a little about your journey into aquaculture and what inspired you to pursue this field?
My journey into aquaculture was driven by a desire to be part of something meaningful and, if possible, contribute to positive change. After working with Dartmoor National Park and Devon Wildlife Trust, I became increasingly interested in how we can protect landscapes while producing food responsibly. I recognised aquaculture as a growing sector that could strengthen UK food security while shifting some food production into marine environments, potentially freeing up terrestrial space for nature restoration and public access.
I wanted to better understand production systems, particularly how they can become more efficient, generate less waste and operate alongside environmental protection. Aquaculture combines my passion for the sea, food production and practical problem-solving. I also saw it as a sector full of opportunity, and that has already proved to be the case.
You are about to begin a placement year with two organisations in Scotland. What are you most looking forward to and what do you hope to gain from the experience?
I am thrilled to begin my career in aquaculture with two five-month placements, and I am very grateful to the University of Plymouth and Dr Katherine Herborn for making this opportunity possible. I will first be working with Landcatch at its salmon hatchery before joining Tritonia Scientific, a marine consultancy based near Oban. I feel fortunate to experience two very different parts of the aquaculture sector, and I hope they will provide a strong foundation for my career.
At Landcatch, I am looking forward to gaining practical experience in salmon husbandry while learning how a successful aquaculture business operates. Whether it involves egg incubation, nursery management or broodstock genetics, I expect the work to be both varied and rewarding. At Tritonia Scientific, I am excited to learn more about marine consultancy and underwater 3D photogrammetry. Understanding how these technologies are used to monitor and protect the marine environment closely aligns with my aspirations for the future, including supporting the achievement of BBNJ targets.
As someone entering the aquaculture industry, what motivates you to advocate for better public understanding of sustainable food production?
Before this year, I did not fully appreciate the influence consumers have on food production. I had assumed that retailers and producers largely determined what would succeed. I now realise that public awareness drives meaningful change, and that understanding food production systems is the first step towards making informed choices. Education has played a key role in improving sustainability and animal welfare standards, which is why I encourage people to learn more about aquaculture and support responsible production systems.
What motivates me most is the sense that many people have become disconnected from their food. It is easy to take what we have for granted. I find it inspiring to meet people who are passionate about where their food comes from and committed to producing it responsibly, benefiting not only the environment but also the food on our tables.
While researching and writing this article, was there a finding or insight that surprised you the most?
Although I was already aware of it, I was surprised by just how stark the contrast is between public perceptions of agriculture and aquaculture. I expected UK aquaculture to receive negative media coverage, as it often makes for easy headlines. However, I was surprised to learn that the UK was the only country in Budhathoki et al.’s (2024) study where negative articles outnumbered positive ones. It raises interesting questions about our attitudes as a nation.
What I found particularly striking was the 2012 University of Cambridge survey. The results were both baffling and revealing, highlighting how disconnected many people have become from food production. Aquaculture is often portrayed as intrusive industrial development, while agriculture is viewed simply as part of the countryside. That made me realise the issue is driven less by evidence than by cultural perception.
Your article highlights the importance of changing public perceptions. If you could introduce one initiative to help bridge the gap between consumers and aquaculture, what would it be and why?
I would introduce community aquaculture zones within National Marine Parks. This would reflect the ethos of terrestrial National Parks as living, working landscapes, bringing together aquaculture, environmental stewardship, education and recreation. As part of a university assignment, I explored the idea of installing retractable mussel and seaweed lines on breakwaters and harbour walls, removing the need to enter the water during harvesting. The real value, however, lies in accessibility. Aquaculture becomes something people can see, experience and understand rather than something they encounter only through labels or controversy.
Small-scale, well-managed community aquaculture could exist alongside activities such as swimming, diving and kayaking, allowing local communities to watch their food being produced. If people could help monitor mussel lines, record biodiversity benefits and take part in local harvests, they would be far more likely to see aquaculture as something that belongs within their community. Building that emotional connection is one of the sector’s greatest opportunities.
