Sustainable Agriculture Lesson: Aquaculture Scenarios

As preparation for class, have learners read Gephart et al. (2020), paying particular attention to the highlighted sections and the discussion of each of the four aquaculture scenarios. Learners should also preview the USDA website devoted to aquaculture, including the eight “Mission Areas” detailed in blue boxes toward the bottom of the page. These Mission Areas will help them find directives and resources for particular stakeholders or personae (listed under step #3 below).

 (10 min.) After the “Hook” above, review the reading using the lesson PPT slides below.

(5 min.) Next, the class will adopt specific personae to explore the needs and priorities of diverse stakeholders in the development of global aquaculture. Divide learners into four groups/personae of 3–4 students each (in large gatherings, there may be multiples of each group):

(15 min.) Groups should first discuss the goals, challenges, and ideal scenarios for their assigned persona to adopt an aquaculture strategy. They may research the technological possibilities for aquaculture on land and in sea pens. (Note: Skip to the tables on this website and bypass the intro. paragraphs, for the most useful information.) They may research appropriate species to cultivate in various climates and pen setups, including their economic and nutritional values. The USDA website devoted to aquaculture and the information from the “Hook” (Monterey Bay sustainability ratings) may also be valuable here.

(5 min.) Then, once they have gathered information on the technology and species they want to select for their aquaculture operations, groups should decide which of the four scenarios presented in the Gephart et al. paper (Aqua Nationalism, Aquatic Chicken, Food Sovereignty, or Blue Internationalism) will help them achieve their goals and adequately account for their specific challenges, as outlined in the previous step. For instance, while all groups should keep environmental sustainability as a priority, they also need to think about how heavily to weigh economic considerations and how that could affect the overall balance of priorities, and therefore, scenario selection.

(10 min.) Each group should now prepare a short oral presentation to profile their persona’s work by the year 2030, as it relates to their technology, species, and scenario choices. 

Note: Instructors may choose to limit the time commitment by having each group present informally in this meeting, without visuals. Or, instructors may dedicate more time to formal presentations by giving the rest of this time to group coordination. If the latter, this lesson will extend into the next session.

(25 min.) In the short version, each group now has 5 minutes to present their 2030 persona scenario; a lightning session of 2 minutes of questions from other participants will follow. In the longer version, the remaining 25 minutes goes into the development of the detailed group presentation. The next class is devoted to 10-15 minute formal presentations by each group, followed by 5 minutes of questions.

Instructors will summarize the technology, species, and considerations of each persona’s scenarios, including Q&A from the class conversation on an online discussion board after class. As homework, have learners evaluate how successfully each group has balanced their sometimes competing, sometimes symbiotic priorities as it pertains to their particular persona. Evaluative criteria may include: economic viability, environmental sustainability, proficiency in animal husbandry, nutritional adequacy, and climate resiliency.