Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Marine larval ecology wikipedia , lookup
Marine habitats wikipedia , lookup
Ecosystem of the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre wikipedia , lookup
Marine microorganism wikipedia , lookup
Marine life wikipedia , lookup
Raised beach wikipedia , lookup
Great Pacific garbage patch wikipedia , lookup
Marine biology wikipedia , lookup
Marine pollution wikipedia , lookup
ANNEX 1: ZERO DRAFT UNEA STUDY ON MARINE PLASTIC DEBRIS AND MICROPLASTICS The “Study on Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics” could be presented as an interactive e-book (with a pdf for reading offline). The Study will benefit from information generated by six components: a. A core study focusing on strengthening the evidence base (Revised GESAMP 1 WG 40 led); b. Study on impact of microplastics on fisheries and aquaculture (FAO/UNEP/IMO led – FAO is considering options on how to manage this, including a subgroup to the GESAMP WG 40) c. Compilation of Best Available Techniques and Best Environmental Practices; d. Modeling component (engaging wider modeling/oceanographic community); e. Socio-economic component (engaging researchers and universities to look at social aspects/welfare impacts and economic effects) f. Regional components (in collaboration with the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans, including small island developing states (SIDS)) The component for which a reconstituted GESAMP working group is proposed (A and B) will focus on strengthening the evidence base concerning microplastics. For (C), (D) and (E) lead institutions have been identified who will bring together the experts and policy makers. Information generated under (F) will be used throughout the study in region specific sections. PROPOSED STRUCTURE: Sections Acknowledgements (contributors, peer reviewers, etc.) Comments ED Foreword Executive summary Key messages and recommendations 1 Introduction 1.1 What is marine litter and microplastics? 1.2 Purpose and structure of this report 2 Marine litter: Identification of key sources for marine plastic debris and microplastics GESAMP component (a): Assess the main sources and categories of plastics and microplastics entering the ocean 2.1 The problem of marine plastic debris and microplastics – what is known and why it is time to take action 2.2 Main sources – known and emerging (including regional variations) 1 GESAMP is an advisory body consisting of specialized experts nominated by the Sponsoring Agencies (IMO, FAO, UNESCO-IOC, UNIDO, WMO, IAEA, UN, UNEP, UNDP). Its principal task is to provide scientific advice concerning the prevention, reduction and control of the degradation of the marine environment to the Sponsoring Agencies. Working Group 40 - Sources, fate and effects of micro-plastics in the marine environment – a global assessment. 3 Where does it end up – modeling marine litter movement, distribution and accumulation 3.1 Distribution – modelling (techniques, maps, gaps) 3.2 Accumulation (e.g. hot spots) 3.3 Monitoring Programmes (snap shot vs. long-term) Citizen science Opportunities (e.g. remote sensing, online databases: modelling + observational data) GESAMP + Modeling components Approach: Identify probable ‘hotspots’ of land- and sea-based sources for plastic and microplastics, using a combination of targeted modeling, knowledge of actual and potential sources (e.g. coastal tourism, aquaculture, fisheries, riverine inputs, urban inputs), environmental and societal data. This can help to inform the development of effective measures in other regions. A modeling workshop involving a wider group of modelers will be convened to improve current assessment methodologies (2nd quarter 2015). Approach: to include coastal-open ocean scaling, 3D circulation, varying particle properties (e.g. size, density). 4 Impacts and costs of marine plastic debris and microplastics – strengthening the evidence base 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 Impacts on ecosystems Impacts on fisheries and aquaculture Economic impacts Social impacts Health Marine plastic debris as vector Uptake by biota GESAMP + Socio-economic components To assess the occurrence of microplastics in commercial fish and shellfish species To assess local, regional and global scales of accumulation of plastics and accompanying chemicals (additives and absorbed contaminants), including SIDS and regional hotspots. Examples of ‘hot spots’, from available evidence, include: the Bay of Bengal, Mediterranean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, Japan Sea and other far eastern seas. Approach: combined modeling and data analysis Initiate in 1st phase (by UNEA), complete in 2nd phase: To assess the effects of nano-scale plastics on marine organisms Approach: Encourage the inclusion of expertise on pharmacology (drug delivery using polymers), mammalian toxicology, nano-sciences and nano-engineering in future assessments. Critically review laboratorybased experiments examining the behaviour and potential effects of nano-plastics and assess their relevance to the natural environment. Improve sampling and detection methods for nano-sized plastic particles, particularly in biota. 2nd phase (Beyond UNEA-2): To assess the risk of physical and chemical effects of ingested microplastics on marine organisms. Approach: Compare information from laboratory-based experiments of organismchemical behaviour with field-based observations. Include expertise on animal behaviour and physiology for target species, including important commercial species. Take account of gut retention times and the conditions inside the gut when assessing risk. Include a consideration of particle size and shape when assessing risk of damage. 2nd phase (Beyond UNEA-2): To assess the significance of plastics and microplastics as a vector for organisms, facilitating the spread of non-indigenous (alien) species (NIS). Approach: Review the published evidence on NIS introductions and potential vectors (e.g. ship hull transfer, ballast water transfer), to estimate the relative importance of plastics and microplastics as a transport vector. Review epidemiological evidence for the occurrence of outbreaks of pathogenic disease associated with NIS. Undertake a targeted risk assessment based on existing data on NIS introductions and disease outbreaks, and utilise existing circulation models to identify key transport routes for pathogenic organisms and the conditions favourable for growth. 5 Most urgent actions to prevent and reduce marine litter with a focus on marine plastic debris and microplastics Compilation of most urgent actions from the six components 5.1 What is currently being done to address marine litter? (table of relevant examples covering e.g. prevention, legislation, voluntary practices, etc.) 5.2 Limitations of current measures to address marine litter / microplastics problems (highlight main obstacles – regional / thematic / stakeholder group focus) 5.3 Summary – what is needed? (e.g. most urgent research gaps, new technologies, legislation, etc - specification of areas especially in need of more research, including key impacts on the environment and on human health;.) 6 Possible measures and best available technologies and environmental practices: availability, use and potential to prevent the accumulation and minimize the level of microplastics (litter) in the marine environment. 6.1 Risk assessment – how to identify priority areas for BAT’s and BEP’s component summary intervention? 6.2 What are BATs and BEPs? 6.3 Guidelines for choosing BATs and BEPs to prevent marine litter 6.4 Lessons from the application of BATs and BEPs to prevent and reduce marine litter 6.5 Steps in the process – from problem identification to evaluating the options, choosing the BAT/BEP (package) and implementation 7 Any other relevant priority areas identified in the TBD after launch of GESAMP report GESAMP assessment. 7.1 Perceptions and attitudes 8. Financing marine litter/microplastics – Economic tools/market-based instruments: availability, use and potential Socioeconomic component 8.1 What are market -based instruments? 8.2 What other tools are available? 8.3 Guidelines for choosing market-based strategies to prevent marine litter 8.4 Lessons from the application of MBIs to marine litter 8.5 Steps in the process – from problem identification to evaluating the options, choosing the instrument (package) and implementation 9. Conclusions and recommendations for different stakeholders 10 Opportunities Priority recommendations from the six components Could include emerging technologies, collaborative platforms etc. to consider when planning for future activities beyond UNEA-2 11 Summary References Annexes May include summaries of the various components N.B. The draft structure will be discussed with the Advisory Group once established. It will not be a negotiated document; rather it will serve as an information document for UNEA-2.