Establishing the links between economic development and the restoration of natural capital

Blignaut, James Nelson; Esler, Karen J.; M, de Wit; Maitre, David C. Le; Milton, Suzanne J.; Aronson, James

doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2012.12.003

Cited by 35 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To fully evaluate the outcomes, all relevant variables, including the social ones, should be included. Barthélémy and Armani (2015) noted that social processes and local experiences are often ignored in restoration projects and Aronson et al (2010) and Blignaut et al (2013Blignaut et al ( , 2014 found that the benefits of restoration for society were not given due attention. In most of our case studies, however, the social component was fairly well included in the projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

Nilsson¹,

Aradóttir²,

Hagen³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. We developed a conceptual framework for evaluating the process of ecological restoration and applied it to 10 examples of restoration projects in the northern hemisphere. We identified three major phases, planning, implementation, and monitoring, in the restoration process. We found that evaluation occurred both within and between the three phases, that it included both formal and informal components, and that it often had an impact on the performance of the projects. Most evaluations were short-term and only some parts of them were properly documented. Poor or short-term evaluation of the restoration process creates a risk that inefficient methods will continue to be used, which reduces the efficiency and effectiveness of restoration. To improve the restoration process and to transfer the knowledge to future projects, we argue for more formal, sustained evaluation procedures, involving all relevant stakeholders, and increased and improved documentation and dissemination of the results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

Nilsson¹,

Aradóttir²,

Hagen³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research on restoration has mainly focused on terrestrial, rather than on marine coastal ecosystems (Blignaut et al. ) and the monetary value of the ecosystem services (de Groot et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The cost and feasibility of marine coastal restoration

Bayraktarov

Saunders

Abdullah

et al. 2016

Ecological Applications

559

366

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land‐use change in the coastal zone has led to worldwide degradation of marine coastal ecosystems and a loss of the goods and services they provide. Restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed and is critical for habitats where natural recovery is hindered. Uncertainties about restoration cost and feasibility can impede decisions on whether, what, how, where, and how much to restore. Here, we perform a synthesis of 235 studies with 954 observations from restoration or rehabilitation projects of coral reefs, seagrass, mangroves, saltmarshes, and oyster reefs worldwide, and evaluate cost, survival of restored organisms, project duration, area, and techniques applied. Findings showed that while the median and average reported costs for restoration of one hectare of marine coastal habitat were around US$80 000 (2010) and US$1 600 000 (2010), respectively, the real total costs (median) are likely to be two to four times higher. Coral reefs and seagrass were among the most expensive ecosystems to restore. Mangrove restoration projects were typically the largest and the least expensive per hectare. Most marine coastal restoration projects were conducted in Australia, Europe, and USA, while total restoration costs were significantly (up to 30 times) cheaper in countries with developing economies. Community‐ or volunteer‐based marine restoration projects usually have lower costs. Median survival of restored marine and coastal organisms, often assessed only within the first one to two years after restoration, was highest for saltmarshes (64.8%) and coral reefs (64.5%) and lowest for seagrass (38.0%). However, success rates reported in the scientific literature could be biased towards publishing successes rather than failures. The majority of restoration projects were short‐lived and seldom reported monitoring costs. Restoration success depended primarily on the ecosystem, site selection, and techniques applied rather than on money spent. We need enhanced investment in both improving restoration practices and large‐scale restoration.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the cost for coastal restoration projects depends on the ecosystem type, national economic strength, restoration project framework and engineering technique carried out (Blignaut et al. , Bayraktarov et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of the propagule–sediment–tide “power balance” for revegetation at the coastal frontier

Tan

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revegetation of pioneer plants is a critical phase in community establishment for mudflats in seriously degraded coastal wetlands. We tested a hypothesis of the importance of a “power balance” among propagule resilience and sedimentary and tidal disturbances for vegetation reestablishment. Our experiment used three types of propagules (seeds, seedlings, and corms) of native Scirpus species in the fringing flats with similar tidal flows and varying sedimentary intensities in the Yangtze Estuary. Regardless of the initial planting densities, the seed germination rate was extremely low in the field situation. Although the incubated seedlings were planted directly on the bare flat, the wave movement easily flushed the seedlings, even at the site with moderate sedimentary accretion. Failure of the revegetation practice using the seed and seedling materials indicated that the combined “growing and anchoring power” of young seedlings and “stabilizing power” of the sediment were insufficient to withstand the “dislodging power” of the tidal energy. In contrast, the planting approach with underground propagules (corms) proved to be feasible for vegetation establishment at the sites with moderate and low‐level sedimentary intensities. The successful practice improved the tipping point of plant survival and tussock formation could be surpassed when the combined growing and anchoring power of seedlings that developed from corms with the stabilizing power of the sediment was greater than the dislodging power of the wave energy. However, at the site with high‐level sedimentary intensity, the excessive sediment converted to the burying stress power as seedlings developed from the corms, revealing a burial threshold for seedling survival. The risk of seedling establishment was high when the burying stress power of the sediment far outweighed the combination of the growing power of the seedlings and the sediment removal power of the tidal current and surpassed the tipping point of vegetation die‐off. Additionally, we checked the practice cost of the different approaches to ensure a highly cost‐effective revegetation planning based on site suitability. This study highlights that understanding of the propagule–sediment–tide power balance offers a tool for improvement of the revegetation and management of site‐specific sedimentary and hydrological environments for many degraded coastal ecosystems.

show abstract

Establishing the links between economic development and the restoration of natural capital

Cited by 35 publications

References 22 publications

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

The cost and feasibility of marine coastal restoration

The importance of the propagule–sediment–tide “power balance” for revegetation at the coastal frontier

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About