idw – Informationsdienst Wissenschaft
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
Nachrichten, Termine, Experten
Conflicts of interest and unclear responsibilities are hampering efforts to recover lost and illegally discarded fishing gear in the Baltic Sea. Despite EU and regional measures, progress on tackling ‘ghost gear’ pollution has stalled, according to a new study published in Maritime Studies. The authors, including RIFS researcher Ben Boteler, call for stronger cross-sectoral coordination and clearer mandates.
It is estimated that almost two per cent of all fishing gear worldwide is lost each year, contributing significantly to marine plastic pollution. Previous research has shown that fishing is responsible for around 18 per cent of plastic pollution in the oceans. Lost fishing gear often continues to trap marine life for years, entangling fish, seabirds and marine mammals, leading to starvation or drowning.
Fragmented responsibility hinders cooperation
The problem of ghost gear has been known for decades, yet progress in tackling it has been slow. In their study, researchers led by Ben Boteler (Research Institute for Sustainability/Wageningen University) identify the reasons for this and propose potential solutions. Their findings are based on interviews with representatives from policymaking, industry, non-governmental organisations and science. The focus is on cooperation between governmental and non-governmental actors within the Baltic Sea, with particular attention given to the framework of the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), the intergovernmental organisation of the Baltic Sea littoral states and the EU. This body coordinates regional policy but has no legal authority to enforce measures.
Boteler concludes: “Cooperation does take place, but it is fragmented and is hindered by power imbalances between actors at different levels and with different focus – particularly between actors with environmental versus sectoral mandates.”
European Union directives, including the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Single-Use Plastics Directive, form the legal backbone for combating marine litter and provide instruments such as the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for fishing gear. This system holds manufacturers accountable for the environmental impact of their products across the entire product life cycle. However, implementing EU rules is challenging due to overlapping policy areas, national jurisdictions, competing economic interests, and a lack of infrastructure for collecting, taking back, and recycling fishing gear.
Fishing gear is expensive, recovery even more so
“As HELCOM’s mandate is limited to coordinating measures, it relies on member states and EU institutions to drive these measures forward. But inadequate and unclear actor roles have created a power vacuum: responsibility is too diffusely distributed for any single actor to take the lead and initiate a large-scale recovery of lost fishing gear,” says Boteler. Added to this is the fact that the industry’s key players – particularly manufacturers and importers of fishing gear – are not sufficiently involved in implementing agreed upon policies. This complicates the development of joint solutions, such as deposit-refund schemes or improved tagging systems for fishing gear.
The study also addresses the complicated situation faced by the industry. Fishing gear is expensive, and there is a strong economic incentive not to lose it. However, nets can be damaged or dislodged by storms, strong currents, or ice, leading to gear loss. Conflicts between different fishing methods or collisions with vessels also often result in the loss of equipment. In many cases, recovery is costly, dangerous and economically unviable – and the gear remains in the sea.
Mistrust hinders better data collection
Some stakeholders in the political and business sectors are concerned that fishers may not report lost gear, or may underreport it, for fear of future regulations. “This lack of trust is a problem. Currently, the available data on the extent and impacts of ghost gear is insufficient. To understand the full scale of the challenge, all stakeholders must build trust and develop a joint action plan,” says Boteler. Environmental organisations have attempted to fill the gaps by mapping lost fishing gear and raising public awareness. However, without stronger coordination and clearer mandates, progress would likely only be made incrementally, explain the researchers.
The study also mentions the widespread fear that the fishing industry in the Baltic Sea is already in decline due to shrinking fisheries and stricter quotas. This perception, the authors argue, may lead policymakers to hesitate in imposing additional costs on the fishing sector, even as environmental groups advocate for stronger measures.
Measures for a clean Baltic Sea
The researchers recommend establishing joint working groups involving fisheries, waste management, and environmental authorities, strengthening cooperation with fishing gear manufacturers, improving regional platforms for data sharing, and developing voluntary guidelines or pilot projects for the retrieval of fishing gear. The Baltic Sea case offers a cautionary lesson as countries negotiate a global agreement on plastic pollution: even with high awareness and established institutions, coordinating interests across sectors and levels of government remains a significant challenge.
Ben Boteler
ben.boteler@rifs-potsdam.de
Boteler, B., van Leeuwen, J., Dodd, L., Morrison, T. H., & Passarello, C. (2026). All caught up? Entangled in power, politics, and plastics: the case of abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear in the Baltic Sea. Maritime studies, 25(1): 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-026-00479-8
Criteria of this press release:
Journalists
Oceanology / climate, Politics
transregional, national
Research results
English
You can combine search terms with and, or and/or not, e.g. Philo not logy.
You can use brackets to separate combinations from each other, e.g. (Philo not logy) or (Psycho and logy).
Coherent groups of words will be located as complete phrases if you put them into quotation marks, e.g. “Federal Republic of Germany”.
You can also use the advanced search without entering search terms. It will then follow the criteria you have selected (e.g. country or subject area).
If you have not selected any criteria in a given category, the entire category will be searched (e.g. all subject areas or all countries).
