Sequentially Conditioned Screening for Marine Aquaculture Siting in Contested Tropical Coastal Waters: Framework Formulation and a Worked Example
Copyright © 2026 M. Muktiarni, Isma Widiaty, Lilis Widaningsih, Cica Yulia. Published by Nan Yang Academy of Sciences Pte. Ltd.
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
Abstract
Marine aquaculture siting in tropical coastal waters is usually treated as a scoring problem: criteria are weighted, cells are ranked, and constraints enter as low scores that a high score elsewhere can offset. Where the sea is already allocated to tourism, conservation, shipping and customary fishing, this treatment misrepresents the decision, because prior claims are not weak preferences. This paper formulates a screening framework built on the opposite premise. Six stages are applied in sequence, each operating only on what survives the stage above it: biophysical suitability by weighted overlay; a spatial union of non-compensatory exclusions; an operational feasibility screen; a nitrogen and phosphorus mass balance that sets a production ceiling; system-specific discounted cash-flow analysis at scales appropriate to each technology; and a composite evaluation reported under four weighting schemes. The framework is specified completely by ten governing equations, four pairwise comparison matrices with consistency ratios between 0.017 and 0.026, membership functions for every criterion, and a sixteen-parameter mass-balance set and is demonstrated through a worked example for a stipulated four-zone tropical island setting of 9,184 km2. In the demonstration, 68.6% of the evaluated area is biophysically suitable; exclusions and the operational screen remove a further 3,456 km2, and 31.0% remains developable; two-thirds of the excluded area is attributable to competing use rather than to biophysical unsuitability. Nitrogen binds in only one of the four zones, and the two-dimensional composite ranks the zones identically at first and last place under every weighting scheme tested, with only the middle two positions being weighting-dependent. The worked example uses stipulated geometry and stated parameter values throughout and is not an assessment of any actual location.
Keywords: Aquaculture Site Selection, Marine Spatial Planning, Carrying Capacity, Non-Compensatory Screening, Multi-Criteria Evaluation, Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture
References
[1] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2026. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2026: Blue Transformation: Turning Vision into Impact. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4060/cd8357en
[2] Barange, M., Bahri, T., Beveridge, M.C.M., et al. (Eds.), 2018. Impacts of Climate Change on Fisheries and Aquaculture: Synthesis of Current Knowledge, Adaptation and Mitigation Options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy.
[3] Boyd, C.E., D'Abramo, L.R., Glencross, B.D., et al., 2020. Achieving sustainable aquaculture: Historical and current perspectives and future needs and challenges. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. 51(3), 578–633. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jwas.12714
[4] Liyanwala, A., Horn, S., Buck, B.H., 2026. Site selection for aquaculture of extractive species in open ocean environments: A systematic review with focus on ecological carrying capacity. Frontiers in Aquaculture. 5, 1852458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/faquc.2026.1852458
[5] Chentouf, S., Sebbah, B., Bahousse, E.H., et al., 2023. GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) methods for aquaculture site selection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 12(10), 439. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi12100439
[6] Khanjani, M.H., Mohammadi, A., Emerenciano, M.G.C., 2024. Water quality in biofloc technology (BFT): An applied review for an evolving aquaculture. Aquaculture International. 32(7), 9321–9374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-024-01618-w
[7] Fisher, J., Angel, D., Callier, M., et al., 2023. Ecological carrying capacity in mariculture: Consideration and application in geographic strategies and policy. Marine Policy. 150, 105516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105516
[8] Fourdain, L., Forcada, A., Sánchez-Jerez, P., et al., 2026. From proxy to practice: GIS-based evaluation of production carrying capacity in pre-selected allocated zones for aquaculture. Aquaculture. 612(Part 1), 743134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2025.743134
[9] Correia, M., Azevedo, I.C., Peres, H., et al., 2020. Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture: A laboratory and hands-on experimental activity to promote environmental sustainability awareness and value of aquaculture products. Frontiers in Marine Science. 7, 156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00156
[10] Van Lavieren, H., Klaus, R., 2013. An effective regional Marine Protected Area network for the ROPME Sea Area: Unrealistic vision or realistic possibility? Marine Pollution Bulletin. 72(2), 389–405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.09.004
[11] Świąder, M., Szewrański, S., Kazak, J.K., 2020. Environmental carrying capacity assessment—The policy instrument and tool for sustainable spatial management. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 8, 579838. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.579838
[12] Stelzenmüller, V., Gimpel, A., Gopnik, M., et al., 2017. Aquaculture site-selection and marine spatial planning: The roles of GIS-based tools and models. In: Buck, B.H., Langan, R. (Eds.). Aquaculture Perspective of Multi-Use Sites in the Open Ocean: The Untapped Potential for Marine Resources in the Anthropocene. Springer: Cham, Switzerland. pp. 131–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51159-7_6
[13] Silva, C., Ferreira, J.G., Bricker, S.B., et al., 2011. Site selection for shellfish aquaculture by means of GIS and farm-scale models, with an emphasis on data-poor environments. Aquaculture. 318(3–4), 444–457. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2011.05.033
[14] Saaty, T.L., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 1(1), 83–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
[15] Gentry, R.R., Lester, S.E., Kappel, C.V., et al., 2017. Offshore aquaculture: Spatial planning principles for sustainable development. Ecology and Evolution. 7(2), 733–743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2637
[16] Largo, D.B., Fukami, K., Nishijima, T., et al., 1995. Laboratory-induced development of the ice-ice disease of the farmed red algae Kappaphycus alvarezii and Eucheuma denticulatum (Solieriaceae, Gigartinales, Rhodophyta). Journal of Applied Phycology. 7(6), 539–543. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00003940
[17] Ishaq, A., Said, M.I.M., Azman, S.B., et al., 2024. Utilization of microbial fuel cells as a dual approach for landfill leachate treatment and power production: A review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 31(29), 41683–41733. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-30841-w
[18] Halim, A., Loneragan, N.R., Wiryawan, B., et al., 2020. Transforming traditional management into contemporary territorial-based fisheries management rights for small-scale fisheries in Indonesia. Marine Policy. 116, 103923. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103923
[19] Islam, M.S., 2005. Nitrogen and phosphorus budget in coastal and marine cage aquaculture and impacts of effluent loading on ecosystem: Review and analysis towards model development. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 50(1), 48–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.08.008
[20] Lupatsch, I., Kissil, G.W., 1998. Predicting aquaculture waste from gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) culture using a nutritional approach. Aquatic Living Resources. 11(4), 265–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0990-7440(98)80010-7
[21] Bouwman, A.F., Beusen, A.H.W., Overbeek, C.C., et al., 2013. Hindcasts and future projections of global inland and coastal nitrogen and phosphorus loads due to finfish aquaculture. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 21(2), 112–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10641262.2013.790340
[22] Bouwman, A.F., Pawłowski, M., Liu, C., et al., 2011. Global hindcasts and future projections of coastal nitrogen and phosphorus loads due to shellfish and seaweed aquaculture. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 19(4), 331–357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10641262.2011.603849
[23] Emerenciano, M., Gaxiola, G., Cuzon, G., 2013. Biofloc technology (BFT): A review for aquaculture application and animal food industry. In: Matovic, M.D. (Ed.). Biomass Now—Cultivation and Utilization. InTech: Rijeka, Croatia. pp. 301–328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/53902
[24] Weitzman, J., Filgueira, R., 2020. The evolution and application of carrying capacity in aquaculture: Towards a research agenda. Reviews in Aquaculture. 12(3), 1297–1322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12383
[25] Gowen, R.J., Bradbury, N.B., 1987. The ecological impact of salmonid farming in coastal waters: A review. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review. 25, 563–575.
[26] Cromey, C.J., Nickell, T.D., Black, K.D., 2002. DEPOMOD—modelling the deposition and biological effects of waste solids from marine cage farms. Aquaculture. 214(1–4), 211–239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(02)00368-X
[27] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), European Union (EU), European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC), 2008. Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD Publishing: Paris, France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264043466-en
[28] Galparsoro, I., Murillas, A., Pinarbasi, K., et al., 2020. Global stakeholder vision for ecosystem-based marine aquaculture expansion from coastal to offshore areas. Reviews in Aquaculture. 12(4), 2061–2079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12422
[29] Campbell, L.M., Fairbanks, L., Murray, G., et al., 2021. From Blue Economy to Blue Communities: Reorienting aquaculture expansion for community wellbeing. Marine Policy. 124, 104361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104361
[30] Krause, G., Brugere, C., Diedrich, A., et al., 2015. A revolution without people? Closing the people–policy gap in aquaculture development. Aquaculture. 447, 44–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2015.02.009
[31] Lyons, M.B., Murray, N.J., Kennedy, E.V., et al., 2024. New global area estimates for coral reefs from high-resolution mapping. Cell Reports Sustainability. 1(2), 100015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2024.100015
[32] Falconer, L., Cutajar, K., Krupandan, A., et al., 2023. Planning and licensing for marine aquaculture. Reviews in Aquaculture. 15(4), 1374–1404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12783
[33] Fox, C., Webb, C., Grant, J., et al., 2023. Measuring and modelling the dispersal of salmon farm organic waste over sandy sediments. Aquaculture Environment Interactions. 15, 251–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/aei00464
[34] Pérez Agúndez, J.A., Filgueira, R., Ahmed, N., et al., 2025. Strengthening policy action to tackle social acceptability issues in European aquaculture. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 82(7), fsaf100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaf100
[35] Lucas, L.V., Brown, C.J., Robertson, D.M., et al., 2025. Gaps in water quality modeling of hydrologic systems. Water. 17(8), 1200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/w17081200