Sustainable Aquaculture Innovation Cluster (SAIC): business and regulatory impact assessment 2026

Annex A: Anticipated impacts by option

1. Do nothing

Intended positive impacts:

• No additional public expenditure
• Avoids governance or organisational complexity
• Intended negative impacts:
• Continuation of fragmented support for aquaculture
• Limited coordination between industry and academia
• Reduced productivity and international competitiveness

Unintended positive impacts:

• None identified

Unintended negative impacts:

• Risks of Scotland falling behind international competitors
• Missed opportunities for sustainable growth and innovation

Mitigation actions:

• N/A

2. Constitute a new independent legal entity (Option B – preferred)

Intended positive impacts:

• Coordinated national approach to innovation
• Increased investment and risk sharing in R&D
• Stronger collaboration between academia and industry
• Improved sustainability and productivity

Intended negative impacts:

• Initial set‑up costs and administrative overhead
• Potential concentration of benefits among better‑resourced firms

Unintended positive impacts:

• Spillover benefits to related sectors (marine technology, environmental services)
• Strengthened international profile of Scottish aquaculture

Unintended negative impacts:

• Risk of geographic or sectoral inequities if participation is uneven
• Potential overlap with existing funding bodies

Mitigation actions:

• Transparent, open and competitive funding processes
• Inclusive engagement to encourage island‑based businesses

3. SAIC functions assumed by the University of Stirling (UoS)

Intended positive impacts:

• Leverages existing academic expertise
• Some coordination between industry and academia

Intended negative impacts:

• Limited independence could constrain flexibility
• Risk of conflicts with university priorities
• Smaller reach to industry

Unintended positive impacts:

• Enhanced academic–industry collaboration with UoS

Unintended negative impacts:

• Perceived bias towards UoS projects
• Other institutions may be disadvantaged

Mitigation actions:

• Transparent funding and project selection
• Engagement with wider sector beyond UoS

4. New host academic body

Intended positive impacts:

• Encourages academic collaboration

Intended negative impacts:

• Start‑up challenges and governance complexity
• Risk of limited sector knowledge at early stages

Unintended positive impacts:

• Attraction of international researchers

Unintended negative impacts:

• Duplication with existing academic structures
• Risks of uneven geographic coverage

Mitigation actions:

• Clear governance and sector engagement plan
• Coordination with existing innovation bodies

5. CES hosts SAIC as part of ongoing operations

Intended positive impacts:

• Leverages existing administrative and sector knowledge

Intended negative impacts:

• May be seen as less independent
• Risk of lower decision autonomy
• Competing with CES priorities

Unintended positive impacts:

• Easier integration with current sector initiatives
• Unintended negative impacts:
• Limited flexibility in funding allocation

Mitigation actions:

• Clear delineation of SAIC functions within CES
• Transparent funding criteria

6. HIE hosts SAIC as part of ongoing operations

Intended positive impacts:

• Leverages regional deployment experience
• Supports industry in island and rural communities

Intended negative impacts:

• Potential perceived bias towards HIE geographic focus

Unintended positive impacts:

• Strengthened innovation in the Highlands and Islands

Unintended negative impacts:

• Other regions may receive less attention
• Risk of duplication with other enterprise work

Mitigation actions:

• Inclusive funding framework covering all of Scotland
• Monitoring participation by region

7. A new finfish industry‑led innovation body

Intended positive impacts:

• Strong alignment with industry needs
• High sector ownership and buy‑in
• Promotes rapid adoption of innovation

Intended negative impacts:

• Potential conflict of interest
• Risk of favouring larger companies
• Less academic collaboration

Unintended positive impacts:

• Faster uptake of applied research

Unintended negative impacts:

• Disadvantaged research‑focused projects with no immediate commercial output
• Focus shifts toward commercialisation rather than innovation

Mitigation actions:

• Governance including independent academic representation
• Transparent competitive funding and oversight