The use of data for health and welfare management of farmed salmons in Norway, Scotland, and Ireland

Data-driven solutions can support stakeholders’ decision-making when managing health and welfare in Atlantic salmon production. While many different types of data are being collected, knowledge about stakeholders’ use and needs regarding this data and data tools in their day-to-day work is limited. The current study explores the status quo of using data and data tools in salmon health management and needs of the stakeholders. Fourteen focus group discussions and three in-depth interviews were completed and analysed in Norway, Scotland and Ireland with salmon production managers, health experts and health inspectors from government and certification bodies (N = 44). Results showed that the participants valued the role that reliable data can play in salmon health management. Factors that influence data utilisation for decision-making were identified using the data lifecycle concept (i.e., the flow from collection to analysis and sharing). Generally, stakeholders preferred timely, ideally automatically recorded, standardised and high-quality data and wished for a tool that offers convenient access to data and facilitates data search and compilation. Furthermore, the comfort with which stakeholders use data tools varied, ranging from some stakeholders welcoming support from decision support tools to others preferring to rely mostly on their personal experience when analysing data. While some data sharing is mandatory (e.g., reporting of mortality from industry to authorities), the participants reported other forms of data sharing (e.g., informal exchange of information, not data, across companies). Lack of contextual factors contributes to a hesitancy to share data (e.g., lack of perceived benefits and fear over potential misuse). In Norway, stakeholders were more open to share data between the salmon industry and authorities. Being used to reporting more data, combined with operating in a larger industry where individual farms are not easy to single out from aggregated statistics, may have contributed to gaining trust among participants in Norway. However, in all three countries, some participants were reluctant to share data with the public or tied it to preconditions (e.g., ensuring it was presented in the right context, with explanations on the background for mortality), while others highlighted positive effects of sharing data, such as benchmarking and increased focus on preventive measures. Addressing barriers to data and data tool utilisation provides valuable insights that could benefit salmon health management and sustainability of the sector.