Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science.

Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science - a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline - the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. 'non-native', 'alien', 'invasive' or 'invader', 'exotic', 'non-indigenous', 'naturalised', 'pest') to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) 'non-native', denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) 'established non-native', i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) 'invasive non-native' - populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising 'spread' for classifying invasiveness and 'impact' for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.

Cleaning Up without Messing Up: Maximizing the Benefits of Plastic Clean-Up Technologies through New Regulatory Approaches.

As the global plastics crisis grows, numerous technologies have been invented and implemented to recover plastic pollution from the environment. Although laudable, unregulated clean-up technologies may be inefficient and have unintended negative consequences on ecosystems, for example, through bycatch or removal of organic matter important for ecosystem functions. Despite these concerns, plastic clean-up technologies can play an important role in reducing litter in the environment. As the United Nations Environment Assembly is moving toward an international, legally binding treaty to address plastic pollution by 2024, the implementation of plastic clean-up technologies should be regulated to secure their net benefits and avoid unintended damages. Regulation can require environmental impact assessments and life cycle analysis to be conducted predeployment on a case-by-case basis to determine their effectiveness and impact and secure environmentally sound management. During operations catch-efficiency and bycatch of nonlitter items, as well as waste management of recovered litter, should be documented. Data collection for monitoring, research, and outreach to mitigate plastic pollution is recommended as added value of implementation of clean-up technologies.

Beach litter sources around Nuuk, Greenland: An analysis by UArctic summer school graduate course students.

Modeling studies illustrate the potential for long-range transport of plastics into the Arctic, although the degree to which this occurs remains relatively undocumented. We utilised a teaching exercise at a UArctic summer school graduate course in Nuuk, Greenland to conduct a preliminary in-depth analysis of beach litter sources in the Nuup Kangerlua fjord. Students and instructors collected and analysed 1800 litter items weighing 200 kg from one location in the fjord and another at its mouth. The results suggest a predominance of local sources to macrolitter, rather than long-range transport from Europe. Fisheries-related items and rope were common. Packaging which could be identified was largely suspected to be products distributed in Greenland, and soft plastics, which rarely disperse far from its source, were also common. The results suggest local measures to reduce mismanaged waste and emissions from fisheries are important for reducing marine litter in West Greenland.

The economic costs, management and regulation of biological invasions in the Nordic countries.

A collective understanding of economic impacts and in particular of monetary costs of biological invasions is lacking for the Nordic region. This paper synthesizes findings from the literature on costs of invasions in the Nordic countries together with expert elicitation. The analysis of cost data has been made possible through the InvaCost database, a globally open repository of monetary costs that allows for the use of temporal, spatial, and taxonomic descriptors facilitating a better understanding of how costs are distributed. The total reported costs of invasive species across the Nordic countries were estimated at $8.35 billion (in 2017 US$ values) with damage costs significantly outweighing management costs. Norway incurred the highest costs ($3.23 billion), followed by Denmark ($2.20 billion), Sweden ($1.45 billion), Finland ($1.11 billion) and Iceland ($25.45 million). Costs from invasions in the Nordics appear to be largely underestimated. We conclude by highlighting such knowledge gaps, including gaps in policies and regulation stemming from expert judgment as well as avenues for an improved understanding of invasion costs and needs for future research.

Small circles: The role of physical distance in plastics recycling.

Circular economy (CE) strategies are central in solving the waste management challenges of today, yet the global nature of the waste trade results in emissions and the export of negative environmental externalities to low-income countries. Here, we target a systemic challenge in the current indicators developed to measure more sustainable consumption and production progress. We argue that sustainable, circular solutions to recycling need to account for the negative externalities caused by the physical distance of the waste trade. We define the new concept "Small Circles" (SC) and suggest a new circularity indicator that can better ensure sustainability in implementing closed-loop strategies and thereby provide critical criteria to consider in pursuing CE. The SC approach advocates the need to manage the waste within a smaller geographical area of its origin to reduce the environmental burdens originating from the transboundary export of waste. Further, it ensures that the waste-producing regions take responsibility for their waste generation and management. If implemented appropriately, we argue that the SC approach could improve the transparency of the fate of waste and boost local opportunities through job creation and allow for the development of symbiotic relations among regional industries. The SC concept demands commitment from all stakeholders across the product value chain to extract value from the waste without jeopardizing sustainability goals. The application of the SC concept is explained by describing the sustainability challenges and opportunities related to plastic waste management in Europe. To concretize the SC approach and the circularity indicator further, the management of the plastic waste sourcing from the Norwegian fishing sector and plastic waste management in the US are used as case examples.

Global marine litter research 2015-2020: Geographical and methodological trends.

A systematic review of research on marine macrolitter densities in the past five years (2015-2020) revealed considerable knowledge gaps in the field. Nearly half he reviewed studies were on stranded litter. Data are scarce from many of the regions estimated to mismanage the largest amounts of plastic waste. In regions where data are available these are typically from coastal areas with few data from the high and deep seas; 57% and 87% of studies on pelagic and seafloor litter, respectively, took place within 100 km from shore. Data on pelagic litter are generally constrained to the sea surface and only two of 30 pelagic studies have measured macrolitter deeper in the water column. Reported litter densities are generally highest for stranded litter, although seafloor litter densities by weight are high in some areas. Reported densities of floating litter are several orders of magnitude lower. However, a lack of standardisation of methods makes it difficult both to assess and to compare litter densities within and across the different environmental compartments in time and space. The review illustrates a great need for survey design development within the field of macroplastics and point to some long-established considerations from ecological research pertaining to independence of data points, spatial autocorrelation, sampling scale, and plot size and shape which are highly relevant also for marine litter research. These considerations are relevant both for global standardisation efforts and for independent studies. Furthermore, the knowledge gaps created by geographic and compartment biases in research needs to be addressed to identify further research needs, validate models and inform policy.

Methods for determining the geographical origin and age of beach litter: Challenges and opportunities.

Beach litter analysis is a cost-effective tool to identify litter sources and subsequent management actions. However, standard beach litter protocols are not generally developed to identify litter's origins and age. Data from Svalbard (North Atlantic/ Arctic Ocean) were therefore used to explore reliable methods to fill this knowledge gap. Written text and country specific brands, as well as printed production or expiry dates proved the most efficient and reliable identifiers. The use of product design and logos considerably increased the proportion of items that could be sourced (by 19%) and dated (by 22%). The successful use of these is defined by the expertise of the analysing team and may introduce bias. The bias can be reduced by developing picture guides and involving stakeholders. The analyses showed that littering is on-going and that the area's major fishing nations, Norway and Russia, dominated the identified litter (38% and 14%, respectively).

Blue justice: A survey for eliciting perceptions of environmental justice among coastal planners' and small-scale fishers in Northern-Norway.

Ocean-based economic development arising from an increasing interest in the 'blue economy' is placing ecosystems and small-scale fisheries under pressure. The dominant policy response for dealing with multiple uses is the allocation of coastal space through coastal zone planning (CZP). Recent studies have shown that the rush to develop the blue economy and regulate coastal activity can result in social injustices and the exclusion of less powerful and unrecognized groups (e.g., small-scale fishers, women, Indigenous peoples and youth). To achieve a primary goal of the 2030 sustainable development agenda to "leave no one behind", it is important to understand the implications of coastal planning and development for these groups. Here, we present a social survey protocol for examining perceptions of justice related to small-scale fisheries (SSF) in the context of the blue economy in coastal areas. Specifically, we designed the survey instrument and sampling protocol to assess whether decisions about the use of the coastal zone over the last five years have i) followed principles of good governance, ii) recognized fishers' knowledge, culture and rights and iii) been attentive to impacts of changed coastal zone use on fisheries. The survey will engage coastal planners (N = app. 120) and fishers (N = app. 4300) in all the coastal municipalities (N = 81) in Northern-Norway. The sampling protocol is designed to ensure representation of different sectors of society, including those defined by gender, age, ethnicity and occupation (e.g., small-scale fishers, large-scale fishers, coastal planners).

Beach litter deep dives - A method for improved understanding of sources of and behaviour behind littering.

Information from established beach litter protocols is insufficient to implement targeted, preventive management measures. Complementary methodologies, named "Beach litter Deep Dives", have been developed to get a better understanding of the sources of and behaviour behind littering. The methods are adaptive and determined by the context and aim of the deep dive. A Professional Deep Dive's aim is documentation, where trained professionals register information relevant for the research or management question of concern. Deep Dives with Experts invites people from relevant backgrounds that have knowledge on the sources of and behaviour behind litter found. Deep Dive Workshops focus on dialogue with stakeholders and decision makers to identify actions. Experience from deep dives illustrates their potential to provide valuable information that is directly relevant to managers and polluters. Inclusion of stakeholders has increased their awareness, resulting in polluters taking ownership to the problem and motivated measures to reduce littering.

Basic principles for development and implementation of plastic clean-up technologies: What can we learn from fisheries management?

Plastic pollution compromises ocean health, with large amounts of plastics continuing to enter marine and coastal environments. Various mitigative engineering solutions are being developed and implemented in response to this threat. While recognising the positive impacts of clean-ups, we highlight two perspectives given little attention to date, which are vital to evaluating the cost-benefit ratio of clean-ups: firstly, clean-up efficiency where density and accessibility of litter are key, and secondly, potential negative externalities that implementation of clean-up technologies may have. These principles, catch per unit effort and the impact on non-target species, are well known from fisheries management. We argue they should also be applied in evaluating marine litter removal schemes.

Citizen science for better management: Lessons learned from three Norwegian beach litter data sets.

Increased plastic consumption and poor waste management have resulted in litter representing an ever-increasing threat to the marine environment. To identify sources and evaluate mitigation measures, beach litter has been monitored. Using data from two citizen science protocols (CSPs) and OSPAR monitoring of Norwegian beaches, this study 1) identifies the most abundant litter types, 2) compares OSPAR to citizen science data, and 3) examines how to improve the management relevance of beach litter data. The dominant litter types were; food and drink- and fishery related items, and unidentifiable plastic pieces. Data from CSPs are consistent with OSPAR data in abundance and diversity, although few OSPAR beaches limit verification of CSP data. In contrast to OSPAR, the CSPs estimate the weight of the litter. CSPs lack important variables which could explain why some litter types are abundant in some particular areas. The latter could be improved by recording GPS positions.