By Aditya Bharadwaj
Human fertility is experiencing a steady global decline, raising concerns among scientific and policy-making communities. Alongside well-known factors such as hormonal imbalances, environmental pollutants, and lifestyle changes, a relatively new and pressing issue has emerged: microplastics. These minuscule plastic particles, less than 5 millimetres in size, are pervasive across ecosystems and have been found in the human body, including the blood, placenta, and reproductive organs. Evidence suggests that microplastics may significantly impact human fertility, potentially affecting population health and socio-economic stability.
Microplastics and Reproductive Health: Tiny Particles, Big Consequences
Microplastics originate from the degradation of larger plastic items and the intentional production of microbeads for industrial purposes. These tiny, manufactured particles are used to manufacture everyday products, from cosmetics to medical applications. They can enter the human body through ingestion, inhalation, or absorption through the skin. Their small size allows them to cross cellular membranes and accumulate in tissues. Beyond their physical presence, microplastic impact is exacerbated by lifestyle-related exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), such as bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates, which mimic or interfere with hormonal signalling. Research into the effects of microplastics on fertility using animal models has shown worrying trends. For example, female mice exposed to microplastics displayed reduced ovarian function, disrupted menstrual cycles, and impaired embryo implantation. Research on male fertility has revealed reduced sperm quality, including lower motility and concentration, alongside increased DNA damage. While studies directly involving humans remain limited, these findings indicate the potential for significant reproductive harm.
Falling Fertility Rates and Microplastics: An Overlooked Intersection
Fertility rates worldwide are declining rapidly. By 2020, the global average fertility rate had fallen to 2.3 children per woman, down from 5.0 in 1960. This decline is primarily attributed to socio-economic factors such as delayed childbearing, financial pressures, and greater access to contraception. However, the role of environmental factors, including microplastics, in exacerbating infertility should not be overlooked.
Despite mounting evidence, the relationship between microplastics and fertility remains underexplored in both scientific research and policy frameworks.
The discovery of microplastics in the human placenta highlights a critical pathway through which these particles could affect foetal development and maternal health. Microplastics have been detected in the placentas of women with normal pregnancies, raising concerns about their potential impact on embryonic growth and immune system development. Moreover, the widespread presence of microplastics in food, water, and air underscores the challenge of avoiding exposure. And yet, despite mounting evidence, the relationship between microplastics and fertility remains underexplored in both scientific research and policy frameworks. Fertility-focused policies and organisations have traditionally concentrated on socio-economic and medical interventions, such as improving access to fertility treatments or addressing lifestyle factors.
Meanwhile, microplastics policy initiatives have primarily focused on environmental impacts and waste management strategies, often neglecting human health implications. This bifurcation creates a critical blind spot that hampers effective policymaking. For instance, international policy frameworks addressing microplastics, such as resolutions under the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA), seldom include fertility or broader human health implications in their scope. The absence of integrated approaches means neither community is adequately prepared to address the intersection of these issues.
Closing the Gap in Research
The preceding underscores the urgency of prioritising certain research areas. Although research linking microplastics to infertility is expanding, with new findings highlighting pathways of harm such as oxidative stress, inflammation, and endocrine disruption, longitudinal human studies are urgently needed to corroborate animal-based evidence and quantify risks. The public’s growing awareness of microplastics presents an opportunity for advocacy. In equal measure, campaigns can leverage this awareness to emphasise potential fertility risks, thereby driving demand for stronger regulatory measures. The burgeoning advances in analytical technologies, such as spectrometry and microscopy, enable more precise detection and characterisation of microplastics, which could prove pivotal in assessing exposure levels and correlating them with fertility outcomes. In other words, strengthened research initiatives are essential to address knowledge gaps. Interdisciplinary collaborations involving biological and a spectrum of social sciences must prioritise long-term studies on the impact of microplastics on human fertility. Support from organisations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) or the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) could sustain large-scale epidemiological studies and innovative laboratory research. Partnerships between universities and industries could further foster the development of biodegradable materials to reduce future microplastic pollution.
Geneva’s Role in Bridging Microplastics and Fertility Policy: A Call to Action
As a hub for international policymaking, Geneva is well-positioned to champion a coordinated approach. For example, a UNEA resolution in 2025 could explicitly link microplastics to human health, mandating studies on fertility impacts and calling for stricter limits on EDCs. Fertility-focused organisations, such as the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) or the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), should collaborate with the UN and international environmental agencies to mainstream microplastic risks into reproductive health agendas. Additionally, public health campaigns must communicate the risks of microplastics to fertility in accessible terms, and professional training for healthcare providers should incorporate emerging evidence, enabling practitioners to guide patients on minimising exposure. Schools and universities could integrate this topic into curricula to foster long-term societal awareness.
Furthermore, policymakers could incentivise the development of sustainable materials and microplastic filtration technologies through tax benefits or subsidies. For instance, funding innovations in wastewater treatment could reduce microplastic leakage into water supplies, indirectly lowering human exposure. Accelerating actions, such as phasing out single-use plastics or banning specific products containing microplastics, which are already being implemented gradually, could bring immediate benefits. In this respect, aligning national regulations with international and multilateral conventions is essential for fostering a unified approach to mitigating microplastic pollution.
In 2025 and beyond, interdisciplinary approaches pioneering biological and social science collaborations, robust research initiatives, and bold policy decisions will be essential to mitigating the risk of microplastics on human fertility.
While still developing, the evidence linking microplastics to human fertility is compelling enough to warrant immediate attention from researchers and policymakers. The failure to bridge the gap between microplastics and fertility policy communities leaves humanity ill-equipped to address this growing threat. In 2025 and beyond, interdisciplinary approaches pioneering biological and social science collaborations, robust research initiatives, and bold policy decisions will be essential to mitigating this risk. As an international policy hub, Geneva could lead the charge by facilitating dialogue, crafting integrated policies, and mobilising global action. The cost of inaction seems too great.
About the Author
Aditya Bharadwaj is a Professor and the Chair of Anthropology and Sociology at the Geneva Graduate Institute, where he is also the Co-Director of the Gender Centre.
The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Geneva Policy Outlook or its partner organisations.
