Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) systems integrate the cultivation of species from different trophic levels. Uneaten feed, solid wastes, and dissolved nutrients are turned into harvestable and healthy food, making IMTA a driver for ecologically sustainable aquaculture. Its wider sustainability potentials arise from social, environmental, and economic sustainability enhancement options. Biological and economic outcomes are promising, while social equity and acceptance remain to be further investigated in the context of the long-term viability of aquaculture. Sustainable coastal and marine aquaculture development requires a holistic approach that involves social/cultural, economic, as well as environmental sustainability. This article examines IMTA as a pathway to socially, environmentally, and economically sustainable development. We collate evidence that shows that IMTA can minimize the negative environmental effects of aquaculture, assist local economies, and boost competitiveness and long-term economic viability. Available analyses of socio-economic and cost-effectiveness reveal positive prospects for IMTA systems, through product diversification, faster production cycles, and IMTA product prices and show a divergence between financial returns at the level of the entrepreneurial unit and economic returns at the macro level, which inhibits the uptake of IMTA. We conclude that the lack of governance analysis or inappropriateness of institutional development, in terms of aquaculture governance and management laws and regulations, is at the core of the hitherto weak engagement with IMTA. Unsuitable policies, regulations, and public and private sector decision policies and implementation, underlined by the scarcity of analyses of aquaculture governance institutions, are part of the reason for this. The evidence we have aggregated indicates that the relative scarcity of commercially successful coastal IMTA undertakings is not so much an intrinsic feature of the IMTA approach but is likely to have been generated by missing or inappropriate governance structures and procedures in the coastal realm.

Partelow, S., M. Glaser, S. Solano Arce, R. Sá Leitão Barboza, and A. Schlüter. 2018. Mangroves, fishers, and the struggle for adaptive comanagement: applying the social-ecological systems framework to a marine extractive reserve (RESEX) in Brazil. Ecology and Society 23(3):19. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10269-230319

This study focuses on understanding stakeholder perceptions in environmental governance and management. Based on an application of the net-mapping method as the main approach for a comparative analysis of local ecosystem users’ perceptions, this research elucidates subjective local realities of fishers and tourism operators in two study sites of the governance system of a marine protected area in Northeast Brazil. The findings showed that fishers and tourism operators see themselves as part of specific webs of social relations with associated power asymmetries. The perceived governance interaction networks varied between stakeholder groups, since they see reef governance in relation to their own interests and vulnerabilities. These variations in perception set the scene for different actions. The results of this comparative study show that where ecosystem users perceived the environmental rule system to be equitable and legitimate, its implementation was enhanced, where they did not, it was fraught with difficulties. This points to the potential for applying a systematic approach for differentiating perceptions, and their change over time, as behavioural drivers to strengthen future sustainability research. The article concludes with reflections on net-mapping as a tool for analysing perceptions on environmental governance.

Strong resilience of a system usually enables the protection of a status quo. Most resilience studies assume that resilience-building is the central objective of sustainability work. Even though transformation has become a central theme in development and social-ecological debates, questions surrounding the weakening resilience of undesired system states are rarely analyzed. We suggest that resilience studies not only serve to protect systems and feedbacks we want to maintain, but may also help to understand and overcome chronic, undesirable,—and thus wicked—resilience. This contribution focuses on reef fisheries in the Spermonde Island Archipelago in Indonesia, based on social and ecological studies between 2004 and 2016. We identify a number of interlocking wickedly resilient vicious cycles as predominant drivers of the impoverishment of fishing households and the overexploited, polluted and degraded state of the coral reefs that fishers' livelihoods depend on. We argue that, more often than not in the Anthropocene, breaking resilience has a central role in the pursuit of sustainable human-nature relations. Therefore, the link between the resilience and the transformation debates needs to be much more explicitly made. Breaking interlocking, wicked resilience at multiple levels is needed to move toward sustainable human-nature relations from the local to the global level. There are lacunae in debate, literature, and research practice as to when, where and how wicked resilience might need to be weakened. A more complete resilience lens is particularly needed under Anthropocene conditions to support the unmaking of chronically resilient, anthropogenic systems.

A growing number of global ocean conflict studies over the last decade have set out to advance sustainability in the Anthropocene. Many of these research projects use multiple case studies to extract lessons for wider contexts. The methods used by these studies, and the extent to which their results have validity beyond the individual case study, often remain unclear. This paper explores the challenges in performing cross-case analysis within what we denote as case-based globally focussed sustainability projects (CB-GSPs) and indicates solutions by combining information from semi-structured interviews with leading scientists from eight CB-GSPs. We identify six distinct challenges that are common across these studies with regard to generating actionable knowledge through cross-case analysis. Based on these findings, we propose a set of best practice recommendations for scientists, project partners, and funders to co-produce actionable knowledge for global projects on ocean conflict.