Early Career Researchers, or ECRs, are typically defined as scientists in the initial stages of their research careers, though the precise boundaries vary. Some institutions count the years elapsed since a researcher completed their highest academic qualification, while others allow researchers to self-identify. In the marine field, the term Early Ocean Career Professionals, or ECOPs, is also used, aligned with the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, which runs from 2021 to 2030. Whatever the label, the editorial team behind the collection, led by Dorota Kołbuk of University College Dublin together with colleagues at Aarhus University, the University of Edinburgh and the marine research institute AZTI in Spain, argues that these researchers carry a disproportionate share of the fundamental work of science: developing and testing new methods, driving discovery, and communicating results to audiences far beyond academia.

What distinguishes many marine ECRs, the editors note, is their fluency across boundaries of discipline and sector. They are frequently at the forefront of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches, navigating between academic and non-academic communities and operating at the science-policy interface. Prior global surveys of Early Career Ocean Professionals have already identified research priorities with the potential to shape ocean sustainability policy at local, national and international levels. The new collection was deliberately open in format, inviting new frameworks and methods as well as collaborative perspectives on ECR initiatives, with interdisciplinary, transboundary and social-sciences-centered approaches explicitly encouraged. The resulting papers range from local case studies of community and knowledge co-creation to global perspectives on equity, policy and the integration of different kinds of knowledge.

One cluster of contributions examines what the editors describe as the pressures-changes-responses chain, a framing that has become increasingly influential through formal assessment frameworks such as DPSIR, which stands for Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response, and its successor DAPSI(W)R(M), which adds human activities, impacts on welfare and management measures to the chain. These frameworks provide a structured way to trace how human activities cascade through marine ecosystems and to insist that management measures remain responsive to environmental change. The ECR-led studies applying this logic tend to spotlight socioeconomic dimensions that traditional ocean research has overlooked, a pattern the editors highlight as one of the collection’s defining strengths.

Marine litter is a case in point. A systematic review by Guerrato and Gonçalves set out to assess what global research says about the impacts of marine litter on small-scale fisheries, a question with direct consequences for some of the world’s most vulnerable coastal livelihoods. The striking finding is how little evidence exists: the review identified only 14 relevant studies, conducted primarily in countries of the Global North. While the origins, distribution pathways and ecological impacts of marine litter are relatively well studied, its socioeconomic impacts remain poorly understood. The authors call for more socially attuned and geographically balanced research, an appeal that underscores how research agendas themselves can be skewed toward wealthier regions even when the affected communities are elsewhere.

A second socioeconomic study, by Akoton and colleagues, turns to the mangrove-lined coastline of Benin. Using semi-structured interviews and observational methods, the researchers profiled households according to their dependence on mangrove resources and distinguished five household categories reflecting different degrees of vulnerability, access to resources and patterns of mangrove use. The practical implication is significant: because communities are internally differentiated, one-size-fits-all mangrove management is unlikely to work. Strategies need to be tailored to local socioeconomic profiles, providing evidence for targeted, locally specific management rather than blanket conservation rules imposed from outside.

Urban coastlines present a different pressure profile, and a review by Minuti and colleagues examines how Hong Kong is attempting to reconcile rapid urbanization with ocean sustainability through ecologically engineered infrastructure. Conventional coastal defenses, the so-called hard built structures such as seawalls and breakwaters, tend to overlook biodiversity, ecological function and habitat complexity. Eco-engineered shorelines have emerged as a response, incorporating design features that support marine life while still protecting the shore. By situating the evolution of these coastal defense structures in technical, ecological and socio-political context, the authors identify the key success factors and persistent challenges for eco-shorelines and offer what amounts to a roadmap for other coastal cities grappling with the same trade-off between protection and ecology.

Collaboration and co-creation emerge as another unifying theme, tested across three very different geographic settings: the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area in southern China, San Antonio Bay in Argentina, and the Mono Transboundary Biosphere Reserve straddling Benin and Togo. In the first setting, Chu investigated the cross-border wetlands between Shenzhen and Hong Kong, where local non-governmental organizations stepped in to lead conservation efforts. Through interviews with state and non-state actors, Chu identified the factors that made this transboundary NGO collaboration succeed and noted a growing role for other non-state actors, including early career researchers, in supplying the scientific basis for further conservation measures.

The Argentine case shows what happens when those favorable conditions are absent. Relano and colleagues examined the San Antonio Bay Marine Protected Area, which was designated without stakeholder collaboration and ultimately proved ineffective, a classic paper park. According to stakeholders interviewed for the study, the top-down designation created conflicts that contributed to degradation of the very area the protection was meant to safeguard. Yet the case also demonstrates a more hopeful dynamic: in the absence of formal co-creation, community-led initiatives emerged as a way of fostering environmental stewardship and driving positive change on the ground. In West Africa, Tcheton and colleagues documented how Indigenous and Local Knowledge practices support mangrove conservation in the Mono Transboundary Biosphere Reserve. Their interviews and observations revealed a wealth of practices sustaining natural resource management, alongside growing risks to those practices, and the authors call for preserving the area’s biocultural diversity and formally including Indigenous and Local Knowledge in policy design and implementation.

The final strand of the collection turns the lens on ECRs themselves, offering recommendations from early career scientists operating at the science-policy and knowledge-production interfaces. Guilhon and colleagues surveyed deep-sea ECRs about the barriers and opportunities they face in engaging with policy- and decision-makers and found a striking mismatch: a vast majority of respondents want to participate in ocean policy and decision-making processes, yet a similarly overwhelming majority encounter multiple barriers to doing so. The authors frame the result as a call to action for improved ECR inclusion. Vozzo and colleagues, writing as ECOPs who represent current and future ocean leaders, recommend that the wider ocean community promote transparent data practices, value different knowledge systems such as Indigenous and Local Knowledge, and invest in knowledge exchange across disciplines and jurisdictions. A perspective piece by West and colleagues goes further, arguing that Western science has dominated knowledge production since colonial times and persists through extractive, neo-colonial practices and a hierarchy that values natural sciences over social ones; the authors invite the academic community to adopt reflexivity, confront colonial practices and draw on diverse methodologies for more just and contextually sensitive research. As the editors conclude, the collection’s emphasis on equity and social justice, its notable contributions from the Global South, and its revival of long-neglected topics all point the same way: because early career researchers are the future leaders of ocean science, their voices need to be heard today.

Subject of Research: Contributions of early career researchers to ocean sustainability science and marine governance

Article Title: Editorial: The contributions of Early Career Researchers in advancing ocean sustainability

Article References: Kołbuk, D., Hemraj, A. D., Guilhon, M., & Borja, A. (2026). Editorial: The contributions of Early Career Researchers in advancing ocean sustainability. Frontiers in Ocean Sustainability, 4, Article 1944100. https://doi.org/10.3389/focsu.2026.1944100

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/focsu.2026.1944100

Keywords: early career researchers, ocean sustainability, marine governance, marine litter, mangroves, eco-engineered shorelines, Indigenous and Local Knowledge, science-policy interface, marine protected areas, UN Ocean Decade, Global South, knowledge co-creation