The fish scales of justice: the influence of perceived justice on social license to operate for aquaculture development

Abstract

Cultivating seafood in water environments, global aquaculture production is on the rise. As the sector grows, however, so too do challenges in securing the necessary social license to operate (SLO): ongoing approval from various stakeholders. Previous research in both risk communication and SLO suggests that perceived justice plays a foundational role in establishing legitimacy and subsequent public acceptance and approval. Yet, gaps in our understanding of both justice and SLO – as well as the relationships between these concepts – remain. In this study, we approach SLO as a stage model, applying a four-factor model of justice (including interpersonal, procedural, distributive, and informational justice) to examine whether – and if so, how – justice factors and their associated rules may be differently salient at SLO stages among stakeholders associated with siting land-based recirculating aquaculture facilities in three U.S. communities. Results of qualitative in-depth interviews with stakeholders at each site (n = 55) demonstrate how various justice rules are distinctly embedded in certain SLO stages, and that such rules may function as stage shift factors, moving communities toward granting or withholding social license for these projects. Theoretical and practical implications of this research are presented.

Keywords:

• Justice
• fairness
• risk communication
• aquaculture
• public engagement
• qualitative methods

Acknowledgements

The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Sea Grant College Program, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Commerce, nor any of the other listed organizations. The authors thank the individuals in Maine and California who graciously agreed to speak with us as part of this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Risk researchers often examine public engagement in relation to factors variously called fairness or justice. Although the terms have often been used interchangeably, scholars have more recently called for their differentiation. They propose that justice rules refer to normative standards in a decision context; when these rules are perceived to be disrupted by discrepant actions, fairness assessments are triggered (Colquitt and Rodell 2015; Cropanzano and Ambrose, 2015; Fortin et al. 2020). Thus, fairness occurs after the application or disruption of justice rules, representing an overall perception of appropriateness (Colquitt and Rodell, 2015; Melkonian, Soenen, and Ambrose 2016).

2 Due to the difficulty in recruiting an equally broad swath of stakeholders for interviews in Homestead, Florida (FL), we chose to exclude this site from the present analysis. Further, the ME and CA sites represent proposed facilities, whereas FL is presently in operation – another justification for its exclusion.

3 Although many interviewees self-identified principally with one designation, such identities were not mutually exclusive; for example, participation in municipal government was often not a primary occupation.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Sea Grant College under grant #NA19OAR4170327.