MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping the global co-location potential of offshore wind energy and aquaculture production

2025· article· en· W4408182433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jackson Stockbridge, Christopher J. Brown, Caitlin D. Kuempel

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean & Coastal Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffshore wind powerProduction (economics)Environmental scienceSubmarine pipelineRenewable energyAquacultureFisheryWind powerEnvironmental resource managementOceanographyBusinessGeologyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Co-location of offshore industries has potential to mitigate the growing congestion in the oceans and support the use of ocean resources for ecologically sustainable economic growth and improved livelihoods (i.e., the blue economy). Despite the benefits, questions remain over the feasibility of co-location due to regulatory and financial risk concerns. Here, we combine existing data on aquaculture production potential and wind energy production potential to map co-location potential for offshore wind and aquaculture (finfish, bivalve, and seaweed) globally. We then incorporate an existing index of each country's blue economy development capacity to assess areas with the greatest opportunity for co-location. Finally, we assess co-location potential in the Bass Strait, Australia to show how our approach can inform regional-level planning. We found potential for co-location across 395,042 km 2 of Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) globally for bivalves, 1,337,874 km 2 for finfish, and 1,143,643 km 2 for seaweed across 97 countries. Argentina, Australia, and Russia had the largest potential area for co-location, while Uruguay, Lithuania, and Belgium had the largest proportion of their EEZ. Denmark, Canada, and Finland had the largest proportion of potential area for co-location and highest capacity for blue economy development, signifying potential opportunities to be leaders in co-location implementation. Finally, the Bass Strait had high co-location potential for offshore wind and finfish aquaculture, but less for seaweed and bivalve production. Our research provides a high-level assessment of co-location across scales that can be used to streamline planning efforts, capitalise on potential opportunities, reduce risks, and facilitate blue economic growth. • Nearly 3 million km 2 of ocean space is suitable for co-location of wind and aquaculture (finfish, bivalves and seaweed). • Over 95 countries have suitable area for co-location of these two industries. • Many countries with high co-location potential face social and economic barriers to development • We demonstrate how to downscale our approach using a case study in the Bass Strait to inform future planning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOcean & Coastal ManagementSame topicCoastal and Marine ManagementFrench-language works237,207