COMPETITIVENESS OF U.S. AQUACULTURE WITHIN THE CURRENT U.S. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Increased attention has been paid in recent years to both positive and negative effects of increasing numbers of regulations on businesses in the United States. The decline in U.S. aquaculture has been attributed in part to increasing volumes of imports and high feed prices. However, there is increasing concern that the U.S. regulatory environment, as compared to that of international competitors, may also have contributed to this decline. More than 1,300 laws apply to U.S. aquaculture and even though the majority has been issued by individual states and apply only to specific types of aquaculture businesses in that state, the cumulative regulatory burden has increased over time. Major compliance categories include: 1) environmental management; 2) food safety; 3) legal and labor standards; 4) interstate transport of aquatic products; 5) fish health; and 6) culture of commercially harvested species. A substantial portion of the regulatory burden is the managerial and labor time spent on compliance in addition to the direct cost increases. The streamlined one-stop process adopted in Norway appears to have allowed growth of aquaculture within a comprehensive regulatory framework, yet the lack of such a streamlined approach in the United States appears to have contributed to the decline of existing industries and to serve as a deterrent to investment in newly emerging technologies. Favorable regulatory environments in countries that export to the U.S. contrast sharply with the increasingly inefficient, cumbersome and/or restrictive U.S. environment. Such disparities have created competitive disadvantages for U.S. producers. Attention is needed by policy makers to search for streamlining mechanisms and by the scientific community to address the growing competitive disadvantage to U.S. aquaculture to respond to increased global demand for farmed seafood.