THE GOVERNMENTAL VIEW ON CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT VS USE OF INVASIVE SPECIES - How attitudes and risk perception compare to the impact of Magallana gigas aquaculture on the Swedish West Coast

Abstract

Political institutions are facing new challenges in marine governance with the spread of alien invasive species, which are one of the largest causes of biodiversity loss. One of the biggest issues in management is the lack of funding and methods for conservation projects. A preventative tool that is used in its place is the Precautionary Principle, which inhibits activities that could have an impact on the environment. But it also creates an exaggerated risk perception of invasive species, and in combination with outdated legislation prevents effective management. A case study was done on triploid Magallana Gigas on the Swedish West Coast where relative impact from the reproduction of the species in aquaculture was compared to the reproduction in the wild diploid populations. Coastal municipalities and County Administrative Boards were interviewed to evaluate their attitude and risk perception toward Magallana Gigas, and to evaluate if their management approach is in conflict with their sustainable development goals. The results showed that a triploid aquaculture would have a very small reproductive contribution of 0.000 to 0.021% to the wild diploid population, if placed in an area where the species is already established. It was also revealed that while opinions differed, the majority of the respondents were against the use of the species commercially, and were sceptical towards compensation to allow the activity, despite the impact being very low. The conclusion is that despite having a small impact, political institutions will likely not consider utilizing the species for management approaches to engage industry actors, due to the precautionary principle, and in turn limits conservation alternatives, as well as puts Sweden's aquaculture development at a disadvantage.