Bill Overview
Title: SEAfood Act
Description: SEAfood Act This bill addresses the development and production of aquaculture in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. For example, the bill requires the Government Accountability Office to produce a report that examines aquaculture permitting, monitoring, and regulations during the 15-year period prior to the enactment of the bill. Additionally, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine must complete a study to develop the scientific basis for efficient and effective regulation of offshore aquaculture. Further, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration must (1) establish an assessment program to evaluate offshore aquaculture, including the development of performance standards for offshore aquaculture operations; and (2) establish the Aquaculture Centers of Excellence program to award grants to assist certain institution in establishing or enhancing an aquaculture curriculum for undergraduate or graduate courses of study.
Sponsors: Rep. Lowenthal, Alan S. [D-CA-47]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by the aquaculture industry
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The aquaculture industry directly involves seafood production, employment, and related economic activities.
- The bill promotes the development of aquaculture in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, implying a direct impact on U.S. aquaculture operators and businesses.
- Educational institutions, particularly those offering or planning to offer aquaculture-related courses, will be affected by the new Aquaculture Centers of Excellence program.
- Consumer markets, both in the U.S. and globally, may be impacted by changes to the supply and sustainability of seafood due to enhanced aquaculture activities.
Reasoning
- This simulation focuses on individuals directly involved in aquaculture, including operators, workers, educators, students, and consumers impacted by the bill. I've included a range of perspectives, from urban to rural, young to senior, and diverse occupational roles, to reflect the diverse impacts of such a policy.
- The aquaculture industry in the U.S. is not uniformly distributed, with certain states having more concentrated activities; thus, the impact of the SEAfood Act is expected to be regionally varied, suggesting more significant changes in wellbeing for those directly involved in related activities.
- With the allotted budget for the policy, the initial impact would likely be focused on enhancing regulatory frameworks, providing educational grants, and the preliminary setup of evaluation programs, with long-term outcomes in sustainability and economic benefits.
- Given the scale of potential indirect jobs linked to the industry, I have factored in interviews of individuals from these roles, but with a lower expected impact, as direct involvement is a smaller proportion of the population impacted.
- A significant limitation is that 10 interviews cannot capture the full spectrum of impacts across all sectors involved in aquaculture, but general trends and significant examples can be extrapolated.
Simulated Interviews
Lobster Fisher (Maine)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SEAfood Act could significantly regulate practices, and I'm concerned about how new permits might increase operational costs.
- If the policy ensures better sustainability of resources, it could benefit our business in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Marine Biologist (California)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about the research funding this could bring to our university, especially for aquaculture innovation.
- The Act will potentially boost scientific understanding and offer our graduates more job opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Aquaculture Technician (Washington)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SEAfood Act might help solidify our business with clearer guidelines and standards.
- I hope it opens up more job stability and career growth options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Seafood Distributor (Louisiana)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While aquaculture developments could stabilize seafood supplies, initial regulatory changes might disrupt current supply patterns.
- I am cautiously optimistic but wary of increasing costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Retired Educator (Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of efforts that bolster environmental protections and education.
- Hope this policy inspires younger generations to get involved with ocean sciences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Restaurant Owner (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If aquaculture increases supply, it could reduce costs and allow for better price stability for my business.
- Sustainability is important for customer satisfaction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Student (Oregon)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope to see more aquaculture courses and job opportunities by the time I graduate.
- Looking forward to the internship opportunities that might come from better-funded programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Indigenous Activist (Alaska)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Provisions of the SEAfood Act may threaten traditional fishing practices, which concerns me.
- However, if managed correctly, it could support sustainable practices that we advocate for.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Policy Analyst (Massachusetts)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a promising move, focusing on science-based policies could help balance economic and environmental needs.
- Regulations that enhance sustainability would be a step in the right direction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Consumer (New York)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More accessible and sustainable seafood would be a great outcome from this policy.
- I am concerned about price and quality, but increased regulation may address these issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 3: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 5: $35000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $40000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Implementation success dependent on inter-agency coordination.
- Long-term environmental impacts need careful monitoring.
- Balancing economic growth with ecological sustainability is critical.