A Review on Coastal Urban Ecology: Research Gaps, Challenges, and Needs

Abstract

Coastal urban areas have dramatically increased during the last decades, however, coastal research integrating the impacts and challenges facing urban areas is still scarce. To examine research advances and critical gaps, a review of the literature on coastal urban ecology was performed. Articles were selected following a structured decision tree and data were classified into study disciplines, approaches, type of analysis, main research objectives, and Pickett's paradigms in-, of-, and for- the city, among other categories. From a total of 237 publications, results show that most of the research comes from the USA, China, and Australia, and has been carried out mostly in large cities with populations between 1 and 5 million people. Focus has been placed on ecological studies, spatial and quantitative analysis and pollution in coastal urban areas. Most of the studies on urban ecology in coastal zones were developed at nearshore terrestrial environments and only 22.36% included the marine ecosystem. Urban ecological studies in coastal areas have mainly been carried out under the paradigm in the city with a focus on the disciplines of biology and ecology. Results suggest a series of disciplinary, geographical, and approach biases which can present a number of risks. Foremost among these is a lack of knowledge on social dimensions which can impact on sustainability. A key risk relates to the fact that lessons and recommendations of research are mainly from developed countries and large cities which might have different institutional, planning and cultural settings compared to developing and mid-income countries. Scientific research on coastal urban areas needs to diversify toward an ecology of and for the cities, in order to support coastal development in a diversity of countries and settings.

Bird Communities in Coastal Areas. Effects of Anthropogenic Influences and Distance From the Coast

“…Furthermore, by 2009, 67% of megacities corresponded to coastal cities (von Glasow et al, 2013). However, coastal urbanization research has been mainly focused on terrestrial aspects (Graells et al, 2021). There is a gap in studies that focus on the coastal ecotone and the influence of urban areas focusing on marine and terrestrial interaction of species in an urbanized area.…”

Waterbird–habitat relationships in South Carolina: implications for protection, restoration, and management of coastal and inland wetlands

“…The South Atlantic is one of the most rapidly developing regions in the United States despite frequent tropical storms, flooding, and sea‐level rise (Hughes 2004; Barragán & de Andrés 2015; Graells et al 2021). These coastal pressures will result in irreversible alteration, degradation, and loss of low‐lying coastal and intertidal mudflats, marshes, and MTIs (Erwin et al 2006; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2021; Fields‐Black et al 2022).…”

“…A premiere example is the Ashepoo‐Combahee‐Edisto (ACE) Basin Task Force, a cooperative conservation partnership that has protected and conserved >105,000 ha of private and public lands in perpetuity through conservation easements and stakeholder cooperation (Rissman et al 2014; Folk 2018 b ). Indeed, restored and protected wetland acreage in South Carolina are extensive, but coastal development and wetland loss, increasingly frequent and severe tropical storms and flooding, and sea‐level rise threaten these and other coastal wetlands (Barbier 2015; Graells et al 2021; Hanks et al 2021). The goal of the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) is to protect, restore, and enhance coastal and other wetlands to benefit birds, other wildlife, and people (https://acjv.org/, accessed 4 April 2023).…”

Developing a TOD assessment model based on node–place–ecology for suburban areas of metropolitan cities: A case in Odawara

“…However, since this literature only addresses the selection of node and place indicators and is largely devoid of ecological aspects, we need to look for suitable ecology indicators from other literature (Cheng et al, 2015; Evans et al, 2022; Graells et al, 2021; Güney, 2022; Lepczyk et al, 2017; Ma et al, 2016; Ou et al, 2013; Tan et al, 2021; Webb et al, 2005; Wang et al, 2017; Wallace and Clarkson, 2019; Xu and Iop, 2020; Zhang and Han, 2017; Zhu et al, 2021). After listing all the indicators (for details, see supplementary), we need to select the ones that fit the purpose of this study.…”