Study: Norway’s salmon rules criticised for loopholes and weak enforcement
A new study from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) has found broad agreement among stakeholders that Norway’s salmon farming regulations are not working as intended.
The paper, Plague or cholera? Stakeholder perspectives on Norwegian salmon farming regulations, was written by Juliana Figueira Haugen with NTNU professor Jon Olaf Olaussen and published in Marine Policy. Haugen interviewed 23 informants from industry, authorities, environmental groups, fishermen and independent experts.
Traffic light system under criticism
The strongest concerns were directed at the government’s traffic light system, which regulates growth according to salmon lice impacts on wild fish. Informants argued that escapes, nutrient discharges, fish mortality and disease are ignored, while lice remain the sole criterion.
“The biggest problem is that the system is based on salmon lice as the only factor,” Haugen said. “Many of our informants believe that escapes, mortality, discharges of nutrients and diseases must be included.”
The study also drew attention to farmed fish welfare. In 2024, 57.8 million salmon died during the sea phase, equal to a mortality rate of 15.4 percent. Rates ranged from 4.1 percent to more than 24 percent depending on the site. Mortality among cleaner fish used to combat lice was even higher.
Some stakeholders said such losses would not be tolerated in other livestock industries, while others questioned why high mortality still coincides with strong profits.
Weak enforcement
The researchers found that the framework depends heavily on industry self-reporting, with limited ability for regulators to verify lice counts, stock levels and escapes. “We actually have a billion-dollar industry with a large environmental footprint that is managed in this way,” Olaussen said.
Proposals for a tax on lost fish and a quota system for lice larvae emissions were dropped during the Storting’s June debate on the government’s aquaculture white paper. The outcome left few new measures in place, with further committee reviews now planned.
Haugen said the aim of the study was not to provide solutions but to capture perspectives that could help “increase awareness, deeper insight, bridge-building and dialogue” as regulations are developed.
