ArticlePloS one2025
Deep-sea mining and its risks for social-ecological systems: Insights from simulation-based analyses.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pros and cons of deep-sea mining (DSM) is currently hotly debated. Here, we assess the environmental, economic, and social risks of DSM by comparing scenarios with and without DSM involvement. The "Without" scenario relies solely on land-based mining and circular economy solutions, while the "With" scenario incorporates DSM alongside circular strategies, highlighting the dangers of heavy DSM dependence. Through literature review and expert interviews, our study identifies key risk indicators across environmental, economic, and social dimensions, forming a comprehensive assessment framework. Through the application of qualitative data and fuzzy cognitive mapping, the analysis reveals that environmental factors are the most influential (centrality: 1.46), followed by social (1.32) and economic (1.0) factors. In the "With DSM" scenario, all indicators show increased risks, with environmental factors, particularly "coastal state vulnerability," experiencing a 13% rise. Social risks, including "violation of law," "participatory rights," "lack of effective control," and "degraded reputation," increase by 8-11%, while economic risks, such as "contractual violations," "lack of special provision," "knowledge gap on economic assistance fund" and disputes among "multiple stakeholders," see an 11% uptick. Our results suggest that the risks DSM poses to deep-sea marine ecosystems are likely too significant to justify its pursuit and advocates for circular economy solutions as viable alternatives to mitigate environmental, social, and economic risks. We recommend that policies should promote circular practices through resource recovery incentives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.