This commentary reviews current empirical trends focusing on microplastics in the social sciences and discusses how science communication and media research can make meaningful contributions to advancing scientific contributions on social constructions of microplastic pollution. We present our case by defining microplastics as a “wicked” environmental issue, characterized by complexity in many ways. Reviewing scientific literature on microplastics in the social sphere, we reflect on how communication and media studies can contribute relevant insights to advance the empirical knowledge base on microplastic pollution as well as strengthen the theoretical and methodological rigor in these scientific endeavors.
AllenB.CoumoulX.LacorteS. (2019). Microplastic freshwater contamination: An issue advanced by science with public engagement. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(17), 16904–16905.
2.
AndersonA. G.GroseJ.PahlS.ThompsonR. C.WylesK. J. (2016). Microplastics in personal care products: Exploring perceptions of environmentalists, beauticians and students. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 113, 454–460.
BallantyneA. G.PeronardJ.-P.HansenR. A.GrossA. (2021). Media issue crystallization: The case of microplastic in Denmark. Environmental Communication, 15(5), 610–624.
5.
BoykoffM. (2007). From convergence to contention: United States mass media presentations of anthropogenic climate change science. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32, 477–489.
6.
BremA.Puente-DiazR.AgoguéM. (2016). Creativity and innovation: State of the art and future perspectives for research. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(04), Article 1602001.
7.
BurrellG.MorganG. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. Ashgate.
8.
BurtonG. A.Jr. (2017). Stressor exposures determine risk: So, why do fellow scientists continue to focus on superficial microplastics risk?Environmental Science & Technology, 51(23), 13515–13516.
9.
CammalleriV.MarottaD.AntonucciA.ProtanoC.FaraG. M. (2020). A survey on knowledge and awareness on the issue “microplastics”: A pilot study on a sample of future public health professionals. Annali Di Igiene: Medicina Preventiva e Di Comunita, 32(5), 577–589.
10.
ChangM. (2015). Reducing microplastics from facial exfoliating cleansers in wastewater through treatment versus consumer product decisions. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 101(1), 330–333.
11.
COM. (2018). A European strategy for plastics in the circular economy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.
12.
CraigR. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161.
13.
de SáL.C.OliveiraM.RibeiroF.RochaT.L.FutterM.N. (2018). Studies of the effects of microplastics on aquatic organisms: What do we know and where should we focus our efforts in the future?Science of the Total Environment, 645, 1029–1039.
14.
DengL.CaiL.SunF.LiG.CheY. (2020). Public attitudes towards microplastics: Perceptions, behaviors and policy implications. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 163, Article 105096.
15.
FaradyS. E. (2019). Microplastics as a new, ubiquitous pollutant: Strategies to anticipate management and advise seafood consumers. Marine Policy, 104, 103–107.
16.
FilhoW. L.SalviaA. L.BonoliA.SaariU. A.VoronovaV.KlõgaM.BarbirJ. (2021). An assessment of attitudes towards plastics and bioplastics in Europe. Science of the Total Environment, 755, Article 142732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142732
17.
HendersonL.GreenC. (2020). Making sense of microplastics? Public understandings of plastic pollution. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 152, Article 110908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.110908
KrammJ.VölkerC.WagnerM. (2018). Superficial or substantial? Why care about microplastics in the anthropocene?Environmental Science & Technology, 52, 3336–3337.
20.
PahlS.WylesK. J. (2017). The human dimension: How social and behavioural research methods can help address microplastics in the environment. Analytical Methods, 9, 1404–1411.
21.
RistS.AlmrothB. C.HartmannN. B.KarlssonT. M. (2018). A critical perspective on early communication concerning human health aspects of microplastics. Science of the Total Environment, 626, 720–726.
22.
RistS.HartmannN. B. (2018). Aquatic ecotoxicity of microplastics and nanoplastics: Lessons learned from engineered nanomaterials. In WagnerM.LambertS. (Eds.), Freshwater microplastics: The handbook of environmental chemistry (Vol.58, pp. 25–49). Springer.
23.
SchäferM. S. (2009). From public understanding to public engagement. Science Communication, 30(4), 475–505.
24.
SchönbauerS.MüllerR. (2021). A risky object? How microplastics are represented in the German media. Science Communication, 43(5), 543–569.
25.
VölkerC.KrammJ.WagnerM. (2020). On the creation of risk: Framing of microplastics risks in science and media. Global Challenges, 4(6), Article 1900010.
26.
WardmanT.KoelmansA. A.WhyteJ.PahlS. (2020). Communicating the absence of evidence for microplastics risk: Balancing sensation and reflection. Environmental International, 150, Article 106116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106116
27.
Welzenbach-VogelI. C.WerlingK.BarkelaB.MildeJ. (2021). Plastics in mass media. A content analysis of German media coverage of plastic-associated risks and sustainable alternatives to plastics. Environmental Communication, 16, 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2021.1979618
28.
World Health Organization. (2019). Microplastics in drinking-water.
