Keywords

1 Introduction

Marine plastic pollution is vast, ubiquitous, and increasing across the globe (Jambeck et al. 2015; Borrelle et al. 2020; OECD 2022). In the environment, plastics have been shown to cause harm to a wide range of wildlife (Kühn et al. 2015), whilst the breakdown of plastics into smaller pieces poses a threat to human health, with plastics presence found in breast milk, infant faeces, infant milk formula, and in the placenta (Ragusa et al. 2022; Liu et al. 2023). Marine plastics are causing a range of negative ecological and social impacts, whilst the annual economic impact has been estimated at up to $33,000 per tonne of marine plastics (Beaumont et al. 2019). Meanwhile marine plastics have been cited as a potential planetary boundary threat in need of urgent prevention and management (Vegter et al. 2014; Villarrubia-Gómez et al. 2018).

Fishing nets, and associated gear, are one of the most harmful types of marine plastic debris (Wilcox et al. 2016; Gilman et al. 2021), whilst simultaneously it has been suggested that fisheries themselves are one of the most vulnerable sectors in terms of the impact of plastics, with productivity, profitability, safety, and viability at risk (Beaumont et al. 2019).

2 Northern Periphery and Arctic Region

The Northern Periphery and Arctic (NPA) region comprises locations in northern Europe and the Arctic, specifically the whole of Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands, together with portions of Ireland, Norway, Svalbard, Sweden, and Finland. Until recently, it also included parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland, and we include these regions in this chapter (Fig. 3.1), as they were included in several relevant and recently completed projects funded by the Northern Periphery and Arctic Programme, part of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective (Interreg), a cooperative funding mechanism of the European Regional Development Fund.

Fig. 3.1
A map of the northern periphery and arctic region highlights the countries within the region.

Map showing the countries, and portions of countries within the northern periphery and Arctic region. Created by the Circular Ocean project

Full size image

The region is characterised by a high proportion of remote and rural areas with relatively low population density and has many important fishing grounds, ports and operations. The capital cities of Ireland, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland are not included within the region, although Reykjavik (Iceland), Nuuk (Greenland), and Tórshavn (Faroe Islands) are included. Consequently, the NPA region has relatively fewer businesses and recycling infrastructure compared to other parts of Europe. The urban centres that are present in the NPA region are, by definition, remote from large towns and cities. Larger distances and travel times pose a barrier in connecting individuals and business, with passenger and freight transport in some instances limited to ferries, or airplanes. In Greenland, there are no roads that connect towns, and therefore transport is either by helicopter or airplane, by dog and sled, or by sea in the summer.

3 The Circular Economy

The traditional linear economy, or take-make-dispose model, is widely considered to be more damaging to the environment, with lower resource sustainability than a circular economy (Sariatli 2017). A circular economy can be considered a system where waste has been designed out, with resources used for as long as possible. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2022) considers the circular economy to be designed to: (1) eliminate waste and pollution, (2) circulate products and material at their highest value, and (3) regenerate nature. Reducing waste and the consumption of resources can result in lower energy requirements and generate jobs and businesses (Stahel 2016). By definition, a circular economy is one that has enhanced sustainability, and/or where the life of products is extended and resources used through more than one life, thereby giving increased circularity. There has been increased awareness of the issues relating to the circular economy, circularity, and sustainability, with notable progression by high-profile companies. Indeed, attention of these terms is reflected in internet searches, with data showing increased global relative search interest over the last 10 years (Fig. 3.2).

Fig. 3.2
A line graph plots the worldwide relative search interest with respect to time from September 2012 to March 2022. The lines denote circular economy, circularity, and sustainability. All the lines follow a fluctuating and gradually increasing trend.

Global relative interest in three search terms, Circular Economy, Circularity, and Sustainability from Google Trends over time. Numbers represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart, from 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2022

Full size image

Similarly, public awareness and interest in marine plastics has also increased during this time period (Fig. 3.3).

Fig. 3.3
A line graph plots the worldwide relative search interest with respect to time from September 2012 to March 2022. The lines denote ocean plastic and marine plastic. Both lines follow a fluctuating increasing trend.

Global relative interest in two search terms, Ocean plastic, and Marine plastic from Google Trends over time. Numbers represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart, from 1 September 2012 to 31 August 2022

Full size image

4 Quantifying End-of-Life Fishing Nets and Ropes

Fishing nets and ropes may be abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded, at sea, ultimately sinking to the sea floor, or deposited on shorelines by tides. Alternatively, fishing nets and ropes can be stored, collected, or dumped on land, for instance at ports. For there to be an effective and sustainable sector reusing and/or recycling fishing nets, it is imperative that there are accurate data regarding the amount, type, and distribution of fishing nets. However, there are fundamental data gaps regarding these basic metrics. For instance, accurate estimates regarding the amount (mass or volume) of abandoned, lost, or otherwise derelict fishing gear (ALDFG) are currently lacking, both globally and regionally. An often-quoted figure is that approximately 640,000 tonnes of fishing nets enter the oceans each year. However, this figure is problematic, as it seems that it cannot accurate be traced back to its original source (Richardson et al. 2021). In a press release by UNEP (2009), it states that 10% of marine litter is in the form of fishing nets and rope:

The report estimates that abandoned, lost or discarded fishing gear in the oceans makes up around 10 percent (640,000 tonnes) of all marine litter. Merchant shipping is the primary source on the open sea, land-based sources are the predominate cause of marine debris in coastal areas.

The figure of 640,000 tons is arrived at by using an older estimate of plastic debris entering global seas each year (6.4 million tonnes), and multiplying by 10% (the proportion inappropriately said to represent abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear). However, the report itself (Macfayden et al. 2009) states:

Attempts at broad-scale quantification of marine litter enable only a crude approximation of ALDFG comprising less than 10 percent of global marine litter by volume, with land-based sources being the predominate cause of marine debris in coastal areas and merchant shipping the key sea-based source of litter.

Therefore, the estimate provides a figure of less than 10% of marine litter comprised of fishing nets and ropes, but in the unit of volume. Given the mix of units and the discrepancy between press release and report itself, it appears there is little basis for the annual figures of 640,000 tonnes of fishing nets and ropes entering the oceans. Using information submitted to LITTERBASE (Bergmann et al. 2017), which has collated data from 1413 studies, the estimated proportion of all fisheries-related gear is 13.21%, with fisheries plastics and rope representing 10.7% of global marine litter.

To facilitate and support stakeholders interested and compelled to engage with a more circular approach to fishing gear management, we need a better understanding of material flow, especially at local and regional scales. There have also been alternative and more regionalised approaches to estimate the amount of fishing gear lost, repaired, and reaching end-of-life. Using a Local Ecological Knowledge approach involving detailed interviews with 114 fishers in Norway, Deshpande et al. (2019) determined estimates of annual rates of fishing gear disposal and found that the life span of fishing gear varied with type, with purse seine nets lasting the longest at just over 10 years, whilst trawl and gillnets has the shortest life spans with a mean of 2.8 and 2.1 years, respectively. These differences between fishing net type, reflect their methods and the associated risk of entanglement, abrasion or breaking. Consequently, a greater proportion of gillnets (33.1%) and trawl nets (25.1%) are disposed of annually, in comparison to purse seine nets (7.3%), although almost a third of longline nets (30.8%) are also estimated to reach end-of-life each year. These estimates, at least in the setting and context of Norway, can provide an idea of the amount of material available for use by up/recyclers (30.8%). This approach could be replicated in regions across Europe, and more widely, to provide better estimates of the mass of fishing gear available for second-life. More accurate data are vital to enable the move to a more circular economy for fishing nets and ropes.

For fishing nets and ropes that do not reach end-of-life at harbours, port reception facilities, or recycling centres, there are alternative ways in which they may be located and quantified. The identification of marine plastics hotspots can enable and inform collection and recycling efforts. Organised and ad hoc beach cleans by volunteers can be valuable in not only helping to remove fishing nets and ropes from shorelines, but also in providing information regarding the rate of deposition, mass, and location of this debris. In the UK the charity, Marine Conservation Society organises beach cleans, and records data on the litter collected. Similarly, Nordic Coastal Clean-up (2022) is a network of 8 organisations across Greenland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, and Finland, who reported that 16.8% of items removed were fisheries-related debris in 2021, with the Nordic region said to comprise a greater proportion of this type than other regions. Similarly, hotspots may be identified through crowdsourcing, community/citizen science projects including LITTERBASE and Birds and Debris. LITTERBASE (Bergmann et al. 2017) collates and maps information on marine litter from published studies, whilst Birds and Debris (http://www.birdsanddebris.com), created as part of the Blue Circular Economy project (2018–2022), collects incidences of interactions between birds and debris, including entanglements and nest incorporation of predominantly threadlike debris such as sections of nets and rope.

An additional way in which plastics hotspots may be identified is through remote sensing, for instance via airplanes, drones, and satellite data (Goddijn-Murphy et al. 2018; Topouzelis et al. 2021). Remote sensing provides a significant future opportunity to identify hotspots of fishing nets and ropes, especially in more northerly regions including the Arctic, where population densities are lower and the regular or incidental monitoring, reporting, and removal of plastic litter are much reduced, and more costly.

5 Fishing Nets and Ropes in the Northern Periphery and Arctic Region

The logistical challenges of transport in the NPA region pose a particular barrier when developing a more circular economy for end-of-life fishing nets and ropes. For instance, in Sisimiut, the second largest town in the West of Greenland, fishing nets are accumulating in a local dump site, as there are no local recycling facilities and each municipality is responsible for their own waste management (Linneberg et al. 2021). Across Greenland, waste is either sent to local landfills or incinerated, with some hazardous materials and metals being exported to Denmark (Eisted and Christensen 2011; Papineschi et al. 2019). Transporting end-of-life fishing nets and ropes to Europe, for example Denmark, would have significant implications in terms of financial cost, carbon emissions, and political considerations. Remote-recycling challenges are seen across the NPA region, including the Faroe Islands, where there is an absence of a local recycling industry among the 18 islands with recyclables being transported to Europe (Papineschi et al. 2019). In Svalbard, material in dump sites is causing concern in terms of contaminants, including microplastics, leaching into the soil (Granberg et al. 2019). Waste from Longyearbyen, Svalbard, is transported to Norway for incineration (Granberg et al. 2019), whilst plastics in Iceland are largely sent to Sweden for processing (Papineschi et al. 2019).

If there is to be a significant move away from a take-make-dispose business model for fishing nets and ropes in remote regions, then local solutions, transnational coordination, or a combination of both, are needed. If local solutions are developed to recycle, or reuse end-of-life fishing nets and ropes, then this will likely be more sustainable than alternatives requiring significant transport. A so-called Small Circles approach, where physical distances are minimalised, has been suggested to be the preferred model towards sustainability in plastics recycling (Havas et al. 2022), but is particularly challenging in remote and rural regions.

Transnational coordination, whether through international agreements, or through businesses or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) operating across borders, can assist in developing economies of scale for fishing net recycling and reuse. Local end-of-life, or discarded fishing net availability may be unpredictable, or at low levels in isolated regions. Transnational collection schemes include businesses such as Nofir, based in Norway, which collects fishing nets across the globe for recycling, reuse, and energy recovery, and the KIMO Fishing for Litter programme, which supplies collection bags and disposal services for fishers who bring back waste fishing nets and other waste collected at sea, and operate in ports of Norway, Ireland, and UK. Such schemes are reliant on coordinated efforts and/or significant logistical operations to bring together significant quantities of fishing nets and represent a potential mechanism by which fishing net circularity is achieved. However, the large distances and associated carbon emissions involved with the transport of material provides a barrier towards sustainability.

Local solutions for fishing net recycling may come through innovation in technology and design. For instance, 3D printing offers the potential for individuals or businesses in remote and rural regions to use locally available plastic polymers to create new products (Hunt and Charter 2016). Due to the large volume of polymer waste generated by fishing nets and ropes, it is theoretically possible to convert these materials into value-added products using 3D printing. The use of polymers in 3D printing holds considerable potential as a localised production method, especially as the technology becomes increasingly accessible. The cost of purchasing cleaning equipment, shredders, filament extruders, and a fused filament fabrication 3D printer could be offset, if recycled plastic filaments can be made successfully from fishing nets and ropes. Alternatively, moulds may be created using fused filament fabrication 3D-printed tools, allowing products to be made using an injection moulder and filament with a higher melting point (Hunt and Charter 2016).

6 Engagement and Knowledge Sharing

Interdisciplinary engagement and knowledge sharing can be important in helping to drive innovation. As part of the Circular Ocean project, a ChemHack event was held during the 17th European Meeting on Environmental Chemistry (EMEC), Inverness, 2016. Its aim was to bring together expertise in the field of environmental chemistry to solve a challenge pertinent to the recycling of fishing nets and ropes (Boyd 2017). The event provided a platform for participants to think, develop and cocreate eco-innovative solutions faced by the fishing industry. Anti-foulants are impregnated in fishing nets and ropes and cages to protect and extend the life of that equipment. However, these chemical treatments make the recycling of fishing nets, ropes, and cages problematic at the end-of-life stage. The challenge of the ChemHack event was to develop innovative solutions to end- of-life problems associated with contaminated fishing nets and ropes, specifically washing processes to remove anti-foulants and other chemical compounds impregnated into nylon fishing nets and ropes and cages. This included identifying processes to decontaminate the wastewater arising from the washing process and to extract copper compounds from fishing nets, ropes, and cages for recycling metals.

Local- and sector-specific knowledge can be essential in understanding barriers to the development of circular, more sustainable solutions, and to initiate and enable cooperation and coordination between different stakeholders. One method which can be effective in informing on concepts of the circular economy, sustainable development, and circular business models, whilst promoting collective strategic thinking are Scenario Exploration Systems (SES), also referred to as Serious Games (Whalen et al. 2018; Manshoven and Gillabel 2021). The Circular Ocean project used an SES in Ireland and Iceland to explore the issue of recycling fishing nets and ropes at a port area. The SES was created by the EU Policy Lab, part of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, following a two-year foresight study on the future of eco-industries and eco-innovation in Europe to 2035. It deploys sustainable transition scenarios using a physical board. Invited stakeholders took the role of SMEs involved in recycling or reuse, fisheries agencies, harbour masters, and fishermen, with two scenarios, local self-reliance and shared circular strategies, explored. The exercise facilitated discussion, knowledge sharing, and the development of coordinated strategies, with key messages including:

  • It is necessary for all stakeholders to work together to make a difference in this issue.

  • Taxation will have to be adapted to improve the economics of recycling and reuse.

  • Some regulatory interventions will be necessary to stop some detrimental practices.

7 Legislation and Policy

It appears that interventions through regulations will be a key driver to lessen the presence and impact of marine pollution and to ensure enhanced resource sustainability, and the development of more circular business models. Currently, there are a range of international agreements and policies relevant to the NPA region that are aimed at preventing or reducing marine pollution. These include MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from ships), whilst the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (also called the London Convention, and updated via the London Protocol), United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Basel Convention), and Honolulu Strategy (for an overview see supplementary material in Linneberg et al. 2021). In addition, by 2025 Goal 14 of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is to:

“Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”, with a target to “prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution” (UN 2017).

Within the NPA region, the OSPAR Commission, an intergovernmental convention aimed at protecting the Northeast Atlantic marine environment, has “Polluter Pays” as a guiding principle (OSPAR 2021). In addition, the OSPAR Convention’s North-East Atlantic Environment Strategy 2030, sets out its strategic objectives, including S4.08 which states that:

By 2025 OSPAR will develop and implement measures to substantially reduce marine litter from fishing and aquaculture gear, in collaboration with those sectors, as appropriate, and by 2027 will determine the need for, and where appropriate adopt, targets or other actions for the separate collection of end-of-life fishing and aquaculture gear coherent with relevant EU directives and the update of the OSPAR Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter.

Protection of Arctic Marine Environment (PAME), a working group of the Arctic Council, developed a Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter in the Arctic (PAME 2021). It sets out a suite of actions including those that aim to reduce marine litter from fisheries and aquaculture, cleaning Arctic coasts, and sustainable materials management in the Arctic environment. There are at least 5 actions which are especially pertinent to the collection and recycling of fishing nets and ropes, and can therefore assist the movement towards a more circular economy in the NPA region, including:

Action 2: Support and promote gear marking, reporting, and recovery of ALDFG, as outlined in the FAO Voluntary Guidelines for the Marking of Fishing Gear.

Action 3: Identify most commonly lost or discarded fishing gear in different areas of the Arctic, as well as where opportunities may exist to develop procedures for ALDFG prevention and reduction within the region.

Action 4: Identify hot spot areas of ALDFG in the Arctic through mapping of known snagging sites or unsanctioned dumping grounds, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders.

Action 7: Promote separate collection of end-of-life fishing gear and ALDFG in relevant ports to enhance its further recovery and preparation for reuse or recycling.

Action 29: “Promote the development and design of materials for use in fishing gear that minimises impacts upon ecosystems or the environment from ALDFG”.

Meanwhile, the European Commission adopted its Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) in March 2020, as part of the European Green Deal which supports sustainable growth. Together with the EU’s Single-Use Plastics (SUP) Directive (European Union 2019), which includes an extended producer responsibility (EPR) scheme for fishing gear, to be implemented by member states by the end of 2024, with Norway, Iceland, and the UK also developing parallel policies. This legislation puts added responsibility onto producers in terms of covering the cost of separation, transport, and treatment of fishing gear plastics, and is therefore likely to result in an increased availability of reusable and recyclable material in the NPA region.

Following an agreement between UN member states to negotiate on a new global treaty on plastics pollution, there are ongoing and concerted efforts to develop a coordinated approach to a more sustainable and circular plastics economy. It remains to be seen whether an effective international, legally binding agreement can be agreed to reduce plastics production and pollution, how this is implemented in practice, and how this varies across countries and regions.

8 Conclusion

Increased awareness of the impact of marine plastics, in addition to current and impending legislation and strategies for reducing the presence and impact of ALDFG in the environment provide an impetus for the movement towards a more circular economy. If the impacts of fishing nets and ropes are to be mitigated it is imperative that there is a marked increase in the sustainability of these resources. Developing a circular economy for fishing nets and ropes in the NPA region is challenging, due to relatively low population density, large distances to recycling and business infrastructure, and the large coastlines which make monitoring and collection more difficult. However, a better understanding of the quantity, location, and flow of fishing nets and ropes, in addition to new recycling and upcycling opportunities, can be achieved through innovation and adaptation. Remote and rural regions, and in particular the fishing sector, are often accustomed to adapting to change and incorporating innovation. It is likely that an effective circular economy for fishing nets and ropes in the NPA region will only be achieved through a collaborative approach involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders. This will be important in the NPA region if fishing nets and ropes are to be managed sustainably, whilst exploiting opportunities for reuse, recycling, and upcycling.