Install easiy accessible, weather-proofed disposal points for the aquaculture producers, which could be used by other stakeholders like fisherman as well. Increase collection rates of gear, e.g. supported by sea basin wide or even international projects. Install an insurance fund for farmers to motiviate collection of ALDFG, paid by EPR schemes. Install information boards at beaches about aquaculture (and fisheries) waste (how it does look like). Motivate the public to collect this kind of waste and to bring it to a municipal central location or directly to the owner. In parallel set up a sea-basin or international registration system to report waste: An easy to access online platform should give people information on the collected items (i.e. QR-code, number, etc.). Install professional collection systems like specialised motorboats, cleaning vessels or innovative passive catchers placed outside the farm (depending on currents). Establish networking platforms for exchange of best practices and information between farmers. Stronger promotion of waste collection services by ports, administration and producers. Improve cooperation between aquaculture farmers and other sectors. Improve collaboration between small and/or large aquaculture companies. Share costs of monitoring and set up a feasible monitoring schedule or programme for offshore facilities/other sectors/multi-use approaches. A GPS-system can be used to follow the infrastructure’s active location with satellite. Tagging lost items can help to track them. This is usually done with buoys, which are not environment-friendly by themselves. It is therefore necessary to improve the tracking system in order to trace the material back to its owner. This should be done on a Pan-Baltic level so that knowledge about littering and real ‘litter’ items can be exchanged between countries Passive RFID technology with its cost-effective production and embedding of information provides a good basis for the identification of lost aquaculture (and fishing) gear. Also other technologies like the Passive Acoustic Transponder should be taken into account. A way to improve tracking and monitoring how much litter has been collected (e.g. by the aquaculture company, citizens, NGOs) is to weigh collected litter at the harbour and to give a receipt of the kg that have been collected. Aquaculture gear tracking and environmental data should be combined with an assessment of the causes of gear loss during aquaculture installations and operations to identify potential ALDFG host areas and hot spots. Introduce and improve standardized licensing processes for initiation, operation and decommissioning on municipal level. Permits for aquaculture installations should take into account the local conditions Decommissioning plans should be incorporated at the beginning in the licensing process (in advance of a decommissioning scheme). Funds for an early integration should be put aside. Before getting a license it is necessary to guarantee to the responsible municipal authority that the company will remove the infrastructure. Updated documentation of Best Available Technologies (BAT) could also support the reduction of debris since practicioners are supporting derectly the responsible authority which may not always have the necessary experience and knowledge. Public authorities need to use their licensing powers at all levels of the aquaculture farming process. Include standardised licensing processes in national and/or transnational aquaculture action plans and define circular design targets. Flexibility of the licensing processes would enable adjustments of certain requirements for an aquaculture installation during the operational phase, e.g. more durable materials on the market. Waste management authorities should be invovled in the aquaculture farm licence application process to inform about and foster prevention and reduction measures. Reporting of incidents at sea involving accidental losses of aquaculture gear and infrastructure should be compulsory and should be part of the permits. Addressees are the coastguard and the managing authrority responsible for approving the aquacutlrue farm. Alternative material research should include tests and analyses on substances that were used prior to plastics, e.g. wood for mussel stoppers or for fish transport. Raise efforts to find and promote alternatives to cable ties, like more resistant and durable fixing systems. Install some cameras around the collection points to avoid bad practices and/or vandalism. Aquaculture facilities have changed the design of equipment already to prevent losses. The motivation is the own cost to replace it. The motivation would be stronger if there were additional incentives from the government. Good initiatives, research and innovation should be more widely supported to aid sustainable and innovative developments during the initiation, development and operation of the farms. Good initiatives, research and innovation should be more widely supported. Aquaculture materials and gear should be better labelled including specification of quality standards to help farmers make informed choices when purchasing working materials.