The agricultural plastic paradox: Feeding more, harming more?
Kai Wang, Xuejun Liu, David R. Chadwick, Changrong Yan, Michaela K. Reay, Tida Ge, Fan Ding, Jingkuan Wang, Ruimin Qi, Mouliang Xiao, Rui Jiang, Yanling Chen, Ji Ma, Charlotte Lloyd, Richard P. Evershed, Yongming Luo, Yong‐Guan Zhu, Fusuo Zhang, Davey L. Jones
Abstract
Agricultural plastic film mulch (PFM) covers ca. 50 million hectares of the Earth's surface and has revolutionized agriculture, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, by improving crop yields, water use efficiency, farmer incomes and feeding an extra 85 million people in China alone. However, concerns are growing about the impact of PFM-derived microplastics (MP) on soil quality, the food chain, and the environment. Here we show that current research on the effects of MP in agricultural soils is limited by inconsistent methodologies and unrealistic experimental concentrations, leading to major uncertainty in assessing the true risks associated with PFM use. Furthermore, we highlight the need for standardized protocols, experiments using realistic MP concentrations, and a better understanding of the relative contribution of PFM to MP pollution to develop informed policies. Furthermore, while biodegradable alternatives show promise, their significantly higher costs (2-3 times that of conventional LDPE PFM) and variable performance across different agricultural environments present economic and practical challenges that must be addressed through targeted policy incentives and continued technological innovation. Our findings suggest that while further research is conducted, managing PFM to reduce environmental impact, rather than imposing ill-informed bans on plastic use, is crucial to balance food security and sustainable development goals. Exploring "zero-leakage" instead of "zero-use" approaches to PFM should be the primary aim to help mitigate potential risks while preserving the substantial benefits of this agricultural technology.