Fishing-related plastic waste and coastal systems

Much of the plastic reaching marine environments begins on land, so public discussion often concentrates on single-use packaging. Plastic associated with fishing also contributes to marine pollution, but its origins and pathways can be harder to identify and document.

The study brings together existing research on fishing-related plastic waste. It considers what is established, where evidence remains limited, and how environmental effects intersect with human health and socio-economic conditions.

Mapping connected causes

To organise these relationships, the researchers developed a preliminary causal loop diagram. This systems tool is used to show how different factors may influence one another over time, including fishing practices, material loss, waste management, environmental conditions and the pressures experienced by coastal communities.

The diagram is not presented as a final model. Instead, it provides a foundation for further investigation into the complex movement of plastic through fishing systems and marine environments.

• 01
  Sources can be difficult to trace.
  Marine debris may move across long distances, while incomplete reporting and monitoring make attribution challenging.
• 02
  Impacts are interconnected.
  Environmental harm can affect livelihoods, food systems, public services and the wider resilience of coastal areas.
• 03
  Evidence gaps matter.
  Identifying what is not yet known helps guide monitoring, research priorities and practical interventions.
• 04
  Short-term action may shift problems.
  Measures focused on one stage can create unintended effects elsewhere if the full material system is not considered.

Why an integrated view matters

The paper cautions against narrow responses that address visible waste without accounting for its causes, movement and consequences. It instead supports coordinated approaches that recognise the multiple plastic streams entering the ocean and the different organisations and communities involved.

That broader framing can help researchers and decision-makers compare interventions more carefully. It also encourages attention to prevention, equipment design, use, retrieval, collection and end-of-use treatment rather than relying on clean-up alone.