Use, Fate and Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Plastic Films

According to data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the global annual consumption of agricultural plastic films stands at 6‑9 million tonnes, and the figure is projected to rise to 9‑14 million tonnes by 2030. As key inputs for modern agricultural production, mulch films, greenhouse films and silage films can regulate light, temperature and moisture, suppress weeds, pests and diseases, and improve forage storage conditions. Nevertheless, agricultural plastic films have gradually become a major source of plastic pollution in farmland. Existing research has largely focused on residual agricultural films and microplastic contamination, while systematic understanding of the full‑chain mechanism of “material composition‑fragmentation and degradation‑pollutant release‑cross‑media transport‑ecological effects” remains insufficient.

An international research team comprising scientists from the Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research (Chinese Academy of Sciences), China Agricultural University, Stockholm University, Beijing Normal University and Bangor University (UK) was invited by Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. Drawing on over 200 studies, reports and industry analyses, the team conducted a full‑life‑cycle systematic review covering global consumption patterns, material composition, fragmentation and degradation processes, release of microplastics and chemical additives, cross‑media transport, and ecological impacts of agricultural plastic films. It also put forward comprehensive governance pathways involving safe additives, sustainable alternative materials, as well as the recycling and resource utilization of agricultural plastic films.

At present, Asia accounts for approximately 70 % of global agricultural plastic film consumption. China, with an annual usage of around 2.3 million tonnes, ranks as the world’s largest consumer of agricultural plastic films (Figure 1). Regional disparities also exist in film‑type consumption. Mulch films make up roughly 50 % of total agricultural plastic film use in China. Silage films represent a high proportion of consumption across Europe and North America, while greenhouse films are widely adopted for protected horticulture of vegetables and fruits in Southern Europe.

The study further reveals that after application and disposal, agricultural plastic films undergo physical fragmentation and/or chemical degradation driven by ultraviolet radiation, microorganisms, soil fauna and other environmental factors. Conventional agricultural films are mainly made of low‑density polyethylene. They degrade slowly in the environment and primarily break down physically, leaving long‑lived microplastic residues. Biodegradable films fabricated from polylactic acid (PLA), poly(butylene‑adipate‑co‑terephthalate) (PBAT), starch and other raw materials exhibit faster fragmentation and mass‑loss rates, which, however, do not equate to complete mineralization. Field observations indicate that around 30 % of PLA‑based mulch films may be converted into microplastics within two years, whereas only a limited fraction is fully mineralized into carbon dioxide and biomass. The EN 17033 certification standard for soil‑biodegradable mulch films stipulates a minimum mineralization rate of 90 % within two years under controlled incubation conditions.

Figure 1 Global distribution of agricultural plastic film consumption

“Biodegradable” does not mean rapid and complete degradation under real‑world farmland conditions, nor does it imply zero environmental risks. In practical field settings, low temperature, drought, insufficient contact between soil and plastic films and other conditions commonly inhibit microbial activity, resulting in mineralization rates lower than those measured under controlled laboratory incubation. The environmental footprint of agricultural plastic films is also shaped by raw‑material selection and manufacturing processes. Production constitutes the major phase of energy consumption and carbon emissions for agricultural plastic films; certain PBAT‑based films even have higher production‑phase energy demands than conventional polyethylene films. Large‑scale cultivation of corn, sugarcane and other crops as feedstocks for bio‑based plastics may intensify competition for land, water resources and food supplies. Accordingly, evaluations of biodegradable or bio‑based agricultural films ought to take energy consumption and real‑world mineralization performance into consideration.

The research also notes that aged agricultural plastic films can release microplastics, chemical additives and non‑intentionally added substances (Figure 2). Microplastic concentrations in global agricultural soils can reach as high as 13 000 particles per kilogram, among which agricultural plastic films contribute 10‑30 % of the total load. Microplastics and chemical additives leached from agricultural films can migrate into deeper soil layers, groundwater, the atmosphere and plant tissues. They may weaken soil aggregate stability and water‑holding capacity, disturb soil microbial communities and element cycling, and impose adverse impacts on soil fauna and crops. It should be highlighted that microplastic concentrations adopted in most existing toxicological experiments (0.1‑10 wt %) are several orders of magnitude higher than real‑world environmental levels. Field‑based investigations are therefore required to verify the actual ecological risks posed by low‑dose, long‑term and combined exposure scenarios.

In summary, the research team proposes three core strategies for sustainable agricultural‑film management. First, establish a “screening‑assessment‑regulation” system for chemical additives to phase out or safely substitute substances featuring high persistence, high bioaccumulation potential and high toxicity. Second, prioritize the development of bio‑based agricultural films manufactured from agricultural waste feedstocks and validated for degradation under realistic environmental conditions. Third, improve mechanical strength and recyclability of agricultural films: implement mechanical recycling for films with simple composition and low contamination, and explore chemical‑recycling approaches for composite or heavily polluted film waste. Looking ahead, global databases documenting the usage and chemical composition of agricultural plastic films should be constructed; analytical methodologies for microplastics and additives need harmonization; long‑term monitoring networks should be deployed; and real‑world field data shall inform revisions to biodegradability standards and relevant policies.

Figure 2 Environmental fate of microplastics and additives originating from agricultural plastic films

This review paper, entitled The use, fate and environmental impacts of plastic films in agriculture, was published online on 23 July 2026 in Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. Zeng Jiamin, a PhD candidate researching atmosphere‑water interactions and environmental safety in alpine‑cold regions, serves as the first author. Professor Wang Xiaoping and Associate Professor Wang Jie from China Agricultural University are the co‑corresponding authors. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41925032, U21A2038 and 42107438), the Xizang Autonomous Region Science and Technology Program (Grant No. XZ202401ZY0005), the Beijing Facility Vegetable Innovation Team Project (Grant No. BAIC01), and the Global Challenges Research Fund of the UK Natural Environment Research Council (Grant No. NE/V005871/1).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017‑026‑00808‑9