Marine litter along India’s coastline is influenced by tides, currents, wind, shipping, tourism, industry and land-based waste, says CMFRI Director Grinson George.
CMFRI surveys across 261 beaches show that only 20-30 per cent of marine litter comes from fishing and related operations.
George says a circular economy for ocean plastic will work only if fisherfolk are incentivised and consumers are willing to pay more for recycled products.
India’s marine litter crisis is no longer confined to polluted beaches, with plastic waste now being recorded in reefs, mangroves, fish habitats and near-shore fishing grounds, according to Grinson George, Director of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)-Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute.
CMFRI’s surveys across 261 beaches show that fishing contributes only 20-30 per cent of marine litter, while much of the waste is carried by tides, currents, winds, shipping and land-based sources. In this interview, George tells Down To Earth why tackling ocean plastic will require more than clean-ups — and why fisherfolk need incentives, markets and public support to make recycled marine plastic viable.
Akshit Sangomla (AS): What is CMFRI’s current work on marine litter, which has become a major problem for India’s coastline as well as coasts and oceans across the world?
Grinson George (GG): CMFRI’s regional research stations and centres are spread from Veraval in Gujarat to Digha in West Bengal. Our scientists visit about 261 beaches and conduct transect surveys. A transect survey is a scientifically approved methodology in which marine litter is collected along 100-metre transects and categorised into 54 types, based on protocols set by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
For ease of research, we further group these into six major headings. These include litter from terrestrial sources, fishing-related sources and other categories. Based on the quantity and type of litter collected and analysed, we classify beaches into low, moderate and high marine litter categories based on litter density.
This has acted as a ready reckoner for many policy planners to understand the status of marine litter over the years. We also advise on the steps that can be taken to reduce marine litter on beaches and understand the various sources from which it reaches these areas.
AS: From your analysis, what is the scale of the marine litter problem? Are certain regions or beaches more prone to it?
GG: Our studies indicate that certain regions are more prone to marine litter. But litter found on a particular beach need not necessarily have been generated there. Along the Indian coast, there are effective semi-diurnal tidal systems. These tidal currents flood and recede from beaches twice a day, and along with ocean currents, they can transport litter from other places and deposit it on beaches.
One general expectation is that beaches with high tourism will have more marine litter. But in our surveys, we observed that it is not just the floating tourist population that increases litter. There are many other factors.
For example, I can tell you about my experience as a researcher. During one marine litter survey early in my career, we went to a least-inhabited island towards the southern tip of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Contrary to our expectations, we found a lot of marine litter on the beaches. This was mainly because the island was very close to a ship channel. When ship channels get busier, materials may be discarded into the open ocean. This litter can then be carried by ocean currents and deposited on islands.
There are also industries close to beaches that can contribute to litter. And the litter need not necessarily originate from the country where the beach is located. It can come from other countries as well.
This dispersal mechanism can be studied through scientific decision-support systems, which help identify the nature of the material and backtrack its possible place of origin. Such studies are happening globally. They use physical forcings such as tidal current systems and near-shore coastal currents. There are also atmospheric forcings such as wind systems. All these can contribute to the movement of marine litter from one place to another.
AS: What are the impacts of marine litter on the fisheries sector? Are certain fish species more likely to be affected than others?
GG: In general, when it comes to marine fisheries, people tend to believe that because fisheries are the major activity taking place at sea, the sector must also be a major contributor to marine litter. But our studies have clearly indicated that only 20-30 per cent of marine litter comes from fishing and related operations.
It is crucial to understand how essential fish habitats, breeding grounds, spawning grounds and nursery grounds are being affected by the presence of marine litter. In our studies, we found marine litter in some of these areas.
If you look at fishing in India’s Exclusive Economic Zone, particularly in the northern Indian Ocean region, most of it is small-scale in nature. It happens mostly close to the coast, and most fishing occurs up to a depth of 60 metres. So the impact of marine litter on fishing is more prominent in India’s near-shore waters.
There is also a seasonal disparity in these impacts. During the monsoon season, maximum precipitation and terrestrial discharge of water into coastal waters increases the intensity of marine litter in coastal ecosystems and fishing regions.
Our scientists conduct diving surveys as part of our research. They have found marine litter in reef areas, artificial reef areas and mangrove habitats. The basic belief is that marine litter is likely to affect surface waters more than the water column. We believe it will affect pelagic fisheries. We have conducted studies on the impacts of litter on both pelagic and demersal fishes.
We have observed litter, mainly associated microplastics, in the gastrointestinal tract of fish. A major component of litter is plastic, which weathers over time into microplastics. In India, one practical point is that microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract can usually be removed before cooking, because we generally remove the viscera of fish. Scientific papers from CMFRI and other organisations indicate that where microplastics are seen in the environment, they are also seen in the gastrointestinal tracts of fish.
AS: How does marine litter affect the livelihoods of fisherfolk along the Indian coastline, many of whom use traditional fishing methods and small boats?
GG: Fisherfolk going for fishing and related activities along the Indian coastline use both active and passive fishing gear. In both types, marine litter sometimes comes in along with the fish, and it is a menace.
CMFRI had a plan to collect this litter from fisherfolk when they returned to shore, so that it would not further disturb the oceans. But creating a circular economy by putting retrieved ocean plastics back into use is difficult. Even though we joined hands with some non-governmental organisations, we found it challenging to continue the activity.
Unless there is serious concern in society about using plastic retrieved from the ocean, there is no value for it. A circular economy needs to work for the benefit of fisherfolk, because bringing back litter from the ocean is not beneficial for them. We tried to speak to NGOs already working for the welfare of fishing communities, and some of them tried this out. But products made from retrieved marine litter are much more expensive — sometimes four to five times more expensive than regular plastic products.
Society should be willing to purchase these products despite their higher cost. Some companies, for instance, use recycled plastic to make shoes for children, which may cost around Rs 2,000 in the market. The same shoe made of normal plastic could be available for Rs 400-500. Is society willing to pay such a big difference in price? Definitely not — unless society really feels that it has to support the environment, ecosystems and the communities working in these tough areas to bring nutritious, high-quality proteins to people.
Unless this awareness is widespread, it is very difficult to sustain a circular economy.
Some marine litter, especially plastic, gets aggregated in different forms and creates refuge for fish. Fisherfolk tell us that areas with more plastic act like fish aggregation devices, although this requires further scientific validation. These are practical observations from fisherfolk, but we need more scientific information on this.
AS: If a circular economy around marine litter has to be put in place, and if fisherfolk have to be a major part of it, how can this be done?
GG: This can be achieved if we can provide quality products and if the government promotes these activities in a particular way. But government promotion is only one part. People should believe that by doing this, they are contributing to themselves and to future generations.
Even a wealthy person going to a shop may not buy a product simply because it is made of recycled plastic, because it costs much more. But in certain countries, I have seen a huge demand for such recycled materials. People realise that they may not be able to control plastic use from their own side, but they can compensate by buying a product that supports those affected by litter, most of which is produced on land.
Such an attitude has to be developed among people, and the best way to do this is to educate them when they are young. Products made from recycled marine plastic could be introduced through school programmes supported by CSR initiatives, helping create environmental awareness from an early age.
This can create a realisation among schoolchildren. When they grow up, they will remember that this was done at their schools. They will understand that they are paying back for the security of coastal waters and the communities residing there. Along with the shoes, a small note can be given to them explaining the relevance of that particular product. This will stay in their minds for a long time.
AS: Can an incentive mechanism be put in place for fisherfolk to bring back the litter they encounter during fishing trips?
GG: Unless we provide an incentive, there is no way fisherfolk will bring litter back from the sea.
Imagine a fisherman going to deeper parts of the sea. For every kilogram of fish, they carry one kilogram of ice — a 1:1 ratio. Fish is a perishable commodity and cannot remain fresh without ice. If they travel further into the sea, the fish-to-ice ratio can go up further, to as much as 1:3 — for every kilogram of fish, three kilograms of ice.
Fishing is their primary source of livelihood and income. If you tell them to bring less fish and more plastic, why will they do that? They do not have much holding space. But if there is a way for them to bring back plastic and receive an incentive, fisherfolk may realise that by doing this they are protecting their environment while also receiving some benefit.
The economy has to work from the retrieval of plastic by fisherfolk to its use by companies making products that benefit society. Companies using retrieved plastic can incentivise fisherfolk, and the government can support activities that create awareness among them.
AS: Is there active collaboration between CMFRI and fisherfolk communities on data collection, monitoring or other marine-litter-related activities?
GG: With respect to marine litter, we initiated a volunteer group among fishing communities to salvage or retrieve marine litter, collect it and send it to the municipal corporation or other agencies for further management. It was called Nila Haritha Sena, or Blue Green Brigade, in Malayalam.
Because we were unable to make the circular economy work in this scenario, we could not continue the programme. Unless there is continuous funding, some projects like this stop. Without funding, pilot scientific studies cannot be scaled up.
AS: Are the characteristics and sources of marine litter dependent on the part of the coast being studied?
GG: We cannot say this for any specific state. If you look at our interactive web maps, you will see that the situation is dynamic and changes seasonally and spatially. But we cannot say whether Kerala is doing better in managing marine litter or Gujarat is doing badly. I cannot make that out from the data we have accumulated.
The database has been in the public domain for the last 10 years. More data has to be generated, and it has to be more accurate, before we can say whether a particular state is doing well or not.