Abstract Small‐scale fisheries are vital for the livelihoods, nutrition and well‐being of millions of people in coastal regions. In many parts of the Global South, rising poverty, limited alternatives and declining resources have driven the spread of mosquito net fishing (MNF), a non‐selective practice using repurposed health‐distributed nets. While MNF raises serious ecological concerns and is widely prohibited, it remains prevalent. This persistence highlights a fundamental paradox and raises critical questions about the social, economic and ecological trade‐offs shaping fishing decisions in vulnerable coastal communities. To explore this paradox, we applied an integrated framework addressing four interlinked and understudied facets of MNF: (1) fishers' motivations, (2) the diversity of realized benefits, (3) the roles of women, and (4) value chain structure. We focused on Ranobe Bay, southwest Madagascar, where livelihood insecurity, changing fishing practices and ecological degradation intersect. Using a mixed‐methods approach, we combined semi‐structured interviews with 84 fishermen and fisherwomen, a five‐month catch survey, and a post‐landing survey tracking destination, uses, and income from 35 catches. MNF was practised by both Vezo and Masikoro fishers, including migrants, with 60% citing poverty and affordability as primary motivations. Despite social stigma and spatial exclusion, MNF supported daily catches of 8.8–17.7 kg and 379 morpho‐species, with an average size of 4.9 cm. Households retained 10% of catches for consumption—primarily preferred, larger and inexpensive species—supporting frequent fish intake (5–7 meals per week) among 83% of fishers. Most catches (88%) were sold fresh, either locally or in nearby markets, while only 2% were processed. Women played key roles throughout fishing and trade, strengthening their economic agency and household contributions. Nevertheless, incomes remained below the poverty line, and ecological impacts were evident. The MNF paradox lies in its provision of immediate economic and nutritional benefits, while simultaneously exacerbating long‐term ecological degradation and reinforcing poverty and marginalization. In the absence of viable alternatives, MNF constitutes a socio‐ecological trap, where short‐term survival strategies undermine future livelihood security and ecosystem resilience. Addressing it requires integrated solutions that combine poverty alleviation, gender equity and inclusive governance to support both livelihoods and ecosystem sustainability. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Rasoanirina et al. (2026) studied this question.