When regulation is working well, economic activity is regulated to achieve the greatest possible net social economic benefit without undue interference with the freedom of buyers and sellers in the marketplace.
When the regulatory environment fails in its economic and political purposes, it is dysfunctional. And
to the extent that it does not benefit the national economy, but reflects rather an unresolved political
struggle between contending special interests, the industry and the economy suffer economic losses.
Aquaculture in Canada is subject to a complex of institutions, guidelines, and injunctions that forms
the regulatory environment. The resulting hurdles to aquaculture businesses span transnational organizations, conventions, and accords; federal government agencies and legislation; provincial agencies and legislation; and a number of miscellaneous organizations and associations. In short, there is an absence of an overall rational model for the assessment of net social economic benefits in aquaculture. According to authors Robin Neill and Brian Rogers, the current regulatory environment is dysfunctional.