The survival of fish stocks and the balance of aquatic ecosystems are seriously threatened by anthropogenic pressure: overfishing, fishing gear abandoned at sea, marine litter.
However, the European debate on the protection of the seas-on which the guaranteed supply of fish resources, among other things, depends-continues to overlook the overall impact of the ‘fishing factor.’
1) FOREWORD.
Marine litter. The great unknown
Marine litter(marine debris, or marine litter) is perhaps the greatest unknown on planet Earth. One can guess-but only partly measure, in the absence of shared metrics, among other things-the enormity of waste that is dumped into the seas every year and floats there, floats in the water column, is deposited on the seabed. (1) But even one cannot imagine how much fishing gear is abandoned and scattered in the deep.
The only certainties are the absolute prevalence of plastic-over other materials-and its inexorable tendency to degrade into microplastics and nanoplastics. Which, through fish fauna, become part of the food chain. And they carry with them a variety of toxic chemicals, as well as pathogenic microorganisms.
2) EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
2.1) Resolution 25.3.21
The European Parliament-in its resolution 25.3.21, on the effects of marine litter on fisheries-emphasized the urgency of introducing useful measures to reduce marine litter. More restrictions on the use of single-use plastic items are needed, in favor of reuse and the use of biodegradable materials.
Expanded polystyrene containers for fishery and aquaculture products should be phased out . And address the problem of nets and other fishing gear-abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG)-whose recycling rate is estimated at 1.5 percent. Therefore, we need to accelerate the development of a circular economy in these sectors, including through research projects such as EcoeFISHent.
2.2) Marine Strategy Framework Directive, MSFD.
The Strasbourg assembly urged the Commission to revise the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (dir. 2008/56/EC, MSFD). To establish a new policy framework that encompasses all regulations on waste, including marine waste, and environmental protection. As already envisioned in the
Green Deal
, the EU strategies on biodiversity and
Farm to Fork
, as well as the Circular Economy Action Plan.
2.3) Marine environment strategy, activities required
Parliament Resolution 25.3.21 therefore urges the European Commission to:
– Support an ambitious governance model in the UN international negotiations on marine biodiversity, beyond national jurisdictions. To recognize all oceans and seas as a global commons,
– Coordinate efforts to adopt an ambitious and legally binding agreement on plastic pollution at the United Nations Environment Assembly,
– Integrate different the MSFD(Marine Strategy Framework Directive), SUP(Single Use Plastics), MSP(Maritime Spatial Planning, relating to port reception facilities) and that on maritime planning, (2)
– Adopt the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear to promote responsible management of fishing gear and reduce its abandonment in the environment. (3)
2.4) Funding research
The scarcity of data makes it difficult to assess the impact of marine litter on aquatic ecosystems, fisheries and aquaculture, and food safety of products. Parliament therefore encourages the Commission and member states to:
– Increase funding for data collection and research,
– Propose effective measures to mitigate the impact of micro- and nanoplastics on fish resources and human health.
Fishing gear needs to be identified and tracked with new tools, and this is in fact the main issue to be addressed. Only the registration of fishing materials, their proper disposal and verification of mass balance will be able to curb the phenomenon of ‘ghost nets’(ghost gear).
2.5) Circular economy in fisheries and aquaculture
The development of the circular economy must include increased support for research to identify appropriate solutions to mitigate the impacts of fishing and aquaculture on the ecosystem. These include ‘smart’ equipment design and technological innovation to develop efficient and ‘attractive’ recycling channels.
Member States should swiftly follow up on the establishment of national minimum collection rates for fishing gear containing plastics, as established in the UAS Directive. (4) Instead, the Commission should create an ad hoc funding fund for member states that establish production chains for recycled and environmentally friendly gear.
2.6) Marine waste collection and management programs.
An action plan should be adopted in Brussels to combat waste dispersed in the EU hydrosphere by reducing it at the source. Limit the use and consumption of plastic and thus address in a logic of prevention the pollution of rivers, streams and coasts. The Commission, as it turns out, is in fact about to present a plan that is likely to disappoint Strasbourg’s expectations. (5)
A special fund for cleaning up the seas should be established by the member states in order to finance:
– At-sea collection of marine litter by fishermen on a voluntary (and paid, or otherwise incentivized) basis,
– The provision of facilities and equipment for on-board storage of waste and its monitoring,
– The training of operators,
– waste treatment and the personnel needed for such operations,
– investments in ports so as to organize facilities for receiving and storing abandoned fishing gear and collected marine litter.
2.7) Wastewater treatment plants
Wastewater treatment plants and sewage systems should also be improved as an essential measure to reduce the impact of effluent on aquaculture and fisheries, as well as the marine and coastal environment in general.
Sufficient resources must be devoted to cleaning up all kinds of polluting materials derived from plastics. It is worth mentioning in this regard that:
– Even modern Waste Water Treatment Plants(WWTPs), such as one of the two largest plants in the Lombardy region, are still unable to filter microplastics adequately,
– municipalities with a population of less than 2,000 are to date exempt in the EU from the obligation to organize wastewater treatment.
3) EUROPEAN COMMISSION
3.1) Commission’s response 3.8.21 to Parliament.
The European Commission-in its response 3.8.21-provides a seemingly favorable response. But the political will of Parliament is matched by words whose concrete impact on the ecosystem seems utopian:
– Implementing acts to manage waste on board ships and the reporting/monitoring of passively fished waste under the directive on port reception facilities for delivery of ship waste are being prepared,
– Several studies are underway. On the possible revision of the MSFD(Marine Strategy Framework Directive. See footnote 4) and the implementation of theMaritime Spatial Planning (MSP) directive, to which a guide on how to integrate monitoring data and tools into national maritime spatial plans will be devoted.
3.2) International context
The European executive will continue to support the activities conducted under the
Global Partnership on Marine Litter
and to ‘actively engage’ ahead of the fifth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly in February 2022.
Work will be done to adopt a resolution establishing an intergovernmental negotiating committee and a legally binding agreement aimed at addressing plastic pollution in the environment through a circular approach.
3.3) Research and funding
The European Union funds R&D initiatives toward the circular economy through InvestEU, Horizon Europe and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund. A number of active projects in Horizon 2020 address plastic pollution from various aspects, including exposure to micro- and nanoplastics and its impact on human health. Horizon Europe provides additional research opportunities to build on the results of these projects and address persistent gaps.
Several Commission-led projects support data collection and monitoring of litter in the EU and its neighborhood, others support regional plans against littering in the Mediterranean, Northeast Atlantic, Baltic, and Black Seas. An implementation plan is also being prepared for the future Horizon Europe mission on oceans, seas and waters.
3.4) Countering illegal activities
Illegal wasteexports range between 15 percent and 30 percent of the total, with an annual turnover of about € 9.5 billion. In November 2021, the Commission proposed a revision of the EU Waste Export Regulation to facilitate its shipment to the internal market and promote the circular economy by countering its illegal export with stricter rules. (6)
Zero tolerance forIllegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU) and pollution caused by discarded fishing gear. The Commission says it will engage with member states in order to consider the most appropriate concept to be proposed in negotiations on the future marine biodiversity agreement.
3.5) Monitoring and data collection
The Waste Technical Group is updating monitoring guidelines and baselines to assess the amounts of all types of waste-including microplastics-on shorelines (where work is already completed), in the seabed, and in the water column.
Pursuant to the UAS Directive, a specific act on the reporting of fishing gear placed on the market and on the waste of fishing gear containing plastics is imminent. The Commission will examine the quality of the data and their sources in order to improve them.
3.6) Disposable plastic items.
The first evaluation of theSingle Use Plastics (SUP) directive will take place by 3.7.27. This will include an assessment of the need for a legislative proposal to establish binding quantitative consumption reduction targets and binding collection rates for fishing gear waste.
The Commission will also call for the development of harmonized standards on the circular design of fishing gear to encourage readiness for reuse and recycling at end-of-life.
Accidental container leaks deserve closer monitoring and ‘probably’ further initiatives to combat the resulting pollution. Microplastics intentionally used in products will be restricted by chemicals legislation (REACH. See note 7).
4) Concluding reflections
Reducing marine litter is one of the primary goals of the seventh
Environmental Action Programme to 2020
, adopted by the EU in 2013. No measurable results have been achieved so far, however. Persist
overfishing
, overfishing and illegal fishing, in a sea of plastic. (8)
A major contribution can come from research projects – such as EcoeFISHent, SeaFoodTomorrow, ProFuture –
which aim to enhance the value of co-products (
upcycling
), produce renewable proteins (microalgae), and recover and recycle fishing and aquaculture gear.
At the same time, more rigorous political action seems imperative. On the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), still disconnected from evidence on the health of the seas and fish stocks, but also on traceability and the circular economy of fishing gear. Without neglecting the
due diligence
, to be applied to operators in the EU to safeguard the planet’s seas.
#SDG12, #SDG14
Dario Dongo and Giulia Torre
Cover image from How to get abandoned, lost and discarded ‘ghost’ fishing gear out of the ocean. The Conversation, 13.8.20
Notes
(1) Luisa Galgani, Ricardo Ricardo Beiras, François Galgani, Cristina Panti, Angel Borja. (2019). Editorial: Impacts of Marine Litter. Front. Mar. Sci., April 26, 2019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00208
(2) In order, dir. 2008/56/EC, EU dir. 2019/904, 2019/883, 2014/89
(3) FAO (2019). Voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear. FAO, Rome. ISBN 978-92-5-131312-1. https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/CA3546T/
(4) Dario Dongo. Protection of fisheries and marine ecosystems, EU (in)action plan. GIFT(Great Italian Food Trade). 12/26/21, https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/progresso/tutela-di-pesca-ed-ecosistemi-marini-piano-di-in-azione-ue
(5) The Legislative Decree. 196/21, which transposes the UAS directive in Italy (see. previous article) stipulates that by 31.12.24, waste from fishing gear containing plastics shall be managed through the systems established pursuant to the Environment Code (Legislative Decree 152/06), Part IV, or special systems to be established by decree pursuant to its Article 178-bis, Paragraph 1. The Minister of Ecological Transition shall establish by non-regulatory decree the national minimum annual collection rate of discarded fishing gear containing plastic for recycling. The schemes established under this subparagraph shall ensure that producers of fishing gear containing plastic cover the costs of separate collection of such gear when it is decommissioned and delivered to port collection facilities that comply with the provisions transposing EU dir. 2019/883 or other equivalent collection systems, the costs of subsequent transport and treatment,
as well as those of awareness measures (Legislative Decree 196/21, Article 8.4)
(6) European Commission. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on shipments of waste and amending Regulations (EU) No 1257/2013 and (EU) No 2020/1056. COM(2021)709 final https://ec.europa.eu/environment/system/files/2021-11/proposal-for-a-new-regulation-on-waste-shipments_0.pdf
(7) Reg. EC 1907/2006
(8) See the European Commission’s June 2020 report on the first cycle of implementation of the MSFD, COM(2020) 259 final. See footnote 4
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
Graduated in law, master in European Food Law, she deals with agro-food, veterinary and agricultural legislation. She is a PhD in agrisystem.
