Social Factors Key to Landscape-Scale Coastal Restoration: Lessons Learned from Three U.S. Case Studies

Abstract

In the United States, extensive investments have been made to restore the ecological function and services of coastal marine habitats. Despite a growing body of science supporting coastal restoration, few studies have addressed the suite of societally enabling conditions that helped facilitate successful restoration and recovery efforts that occurred at meaningful ecological (i.e., ecosystem) scales, and where restoration efforts were sustained for longer (i.e., several years to decades) periods. Here, we examined three case studies involving large-scale and long-term restoration efforts including the seagrass restoration effort in Tampa Bay, Florida, the oyster restoration effort in the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland and Virginia, and the tidal marsh restoration effort in San Francisco Bay, California. The ecological systems and the specifics of the ecological restoration were not the focus of our study. Rather, we focused on the underlying social and political contexts of each case study and found common themes of the factors of restoration which appear to be important for maintaining support for large-scale restoration efforts. Four critical elements for sustaining public and/or political support for large-scale restoration include: (1) resources should be invested in building public support prior to significant investments into ecological restoration; (2) building political support provides a level of significance to the recovery planning efforts and creates motivation to set and achieve meaningful recovery goals; (3) recovery plans need to be science-based with clear, measurable goals that resonate with the public; and (4) the accountability of progress toward reaching goals needs to be communicated frequently and in a way that the general public comprehends. These conclusions may help other communities move away from repetitive, single, and seemingly unconnected restoration projects towards more large-scale, bigger impact, and coordinated restoration efforts.

Restoration of seagrass habitat leads to rapid recovery of coastal ecosystem services

“…Eelgrass restoration on the Eastern Shore of Virginia is potentially a prime model for restoration in the 21st century, as the project focused not only on reviving this essential habitat but also on charting the cascading effects for ecosystem functioning and spurring additional restoration efforts of a commercially important species in the bay scallop. These combined efforts by academic, nonprofit, and citizen groups stand as one of the more successful marine restorations for seagrasses and rivals other large-scale marine restorations in terms of scope, rapidity, dedication, and organization ( 4 , 16 ). It is also part of a growing movement toward “ocean optimism,” highlighting that active reversal of degraded ecosystems is possible over reasonable time scales (years to decades) ( 3 ).…”

“…The degradation of coastal habitats worldwide through anthropogenic influences has resulted in the loss of critical services that underpin the welfare of all Earth’s inhabitants ( 1 , 2 ). The growing desire to protect and restore these services have led to the development of habitat restoration strategies to reverse the downward trend ( 3 ), including notable successes such as seagrasses in Tampa Bay, salt marshes in San Francisco Bay, and oysters in the Chesapeake Bay ( 4 ). Many of these successes are achieved through passive measures (such as nutrient reductions in Tampa Bay) ( 5 ), although there are increasing efforts to actively transplant foundational species to restore habitats, such as oysters and seagrasses ( 4 ).…”

“…The growing desire to protect and restore these services have led to the development of habitat restoration strategies to reverse the downward trend ( 3 ), including notable successes such as seagrasses in Tampa Bay, salt marshes in San Francisco Bay, and oysters in the Chesapeake Bay ( 4 ). Many of these successes are achieved through passive measures (such as nutrient reductions in Tampa Bay) ( 5 ), although there are increasing efforts to actively transplant foundational species to restore habitats, such as oysters and seagrasses ( 4 ). Unfortunately, many other efforts are not successful and therefore go unreported.…”

Restore or Redefine: Future Trajectories for Restoration

“…In Sydney, Australia, a project is also ongoing that aims to re-establish lost forests of P. comosa at the scale of the initial degradation −70 km of metropolitan coastline 1 (Campbell et al, 2014;Wood et al, in review). The projects that have seen sustained success have generally been well financed, have often been coordinated by regulatory bodies, carried out over a sustained periods of time, or harnessed the power of local community engagement to deliver lasting results (Eger et al, 2019;DeAngelis et al, 2020;Layton et al, 2020). While these projects are currently in the minority, interest in kelp restoration is accelerating and we are at the point where we can adequately learn from our past mistakes and enhance restoration of our underwater forests (Eger et al, 2019).…”

Operation Crayweed: Ecological and sociocultural aspects of restoring Sydney’s underwater forests

“…Although the beginning of the Anthropocene has been characterised by extensive human‐driven destruction of the Earth’s ecosystems, in the last few decades human activities have also intensely focused on reversing environmental degradation. Success stories of species and ecosystem recovery, either through improved environmental management (de los Santos et al 2019) or through restoration at large spatial scales (DeAngelis et al 2020), continue to emerge. These examples, where science successfully influences policy and leads to positive impacts, can inspire a sense of optimism that enhances community engagement in conservation and motivates further action (Krupnick & Knowlton 2017; Cvitanovic & Hobday 2018; McAfee et al 2019b).…”