Coral restoration: Socio-ecological perspectives of benefits and limitations

Hein, Margaux Y.; Birtles, Alastair; Willis, Bette L.; Gardiner, Naomi M.; Beeden, Roger; Marshall, Nadine

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2018.11.014

Cited by 77 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Socio-cultural and economic outcomes should also be assessed as part of coral restoration objectives, such as whether or not coral restoration can promote alternative livelihoods [32,119], or promote local conservation stewardship [120,121]. As in other forms of management, adequate stakeholder involvement in planning and implementation of restoration efforts is likely to significantly influence project outcomes [39,96,113,122,123]. Finally, practitioners should involve local communities as much as possible throughout the planning and implementation of the project to ensure local ownership, i.e.…”

Section: Objectives and Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Critics of coral restoration have argued that (1) coral restoration detracts focus from mitigating climate change and other threats to the marine environment [9,30], and (2) is pointless unless it can restore reefs at the ecosystem scale [31]. Proponents of coral restoration counter (1) that interventions can serve to protect coral biodiversity in the short-term, while mitigation of large-scale threats such as climate change and water quality take effect [24], (2) are necessary for the recovery of endangered and rare coral species such as Acropora palmata and A. cervicornis in the Caribbean where natural population maintenance has broken down [32][33][34], and (3) increase environmental stewardship and interest in protecting coral reefs by including local communities in restoration projects [35][36][37][38][39]. Global temperature is predicted to increase for several more decades even in a zero-carbon emission scenario [40,41].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coral restoration – A systematic review of current methods, successes, failures and future directions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coral reef ecosystems have suffered an unprecedented loss of habitat-forming hard corals in recent decades. While marine conservation has historically focused on passive habitat protection, demand for and interest in active restoration has been growing in recent decades. However, a disconnect between coral restoration practitioners, coral reef managers and scientists has resulted in a disjointed field where it is difficult to gain an overview of existing knowledge. To address this, we aimed to synthesise the available knowledge in a comprehensive global review of coral restoration methods, incorporating data from the peer-reviewed scientific literature, complemented with grey literature and through a survey of coral restoration practitioners. We found that coral restoration case studies are dominated by short-term projects, with 60% of all projects reporting less than 18 months of monitoring of the restored sites. Similarly, most projects are relatively small in spatial scale, with a median size of restored area of 100 m 2. A diverse range of species are represented in the dataset, with 229 different species from 72 coral genera. Overall, coral restoration projects focused primarily on fast-growing branching corals (59% of studies), and report survival between 60 and 70%. To date, the relatively young field of coral restoration has been plagued by similar 'growing pains' as ecological restoration in other ecosystems. These include 1) a lack of clear and achievable objectives, 2) a lack of appropriate and standardised monitoring and reporting and, 3) poorly designed projects in relation to stated objectives. Mitigating these will be crucial to successfully scale up projects, and to retain public trust in restoration as a tool for resilience based management. Finally, while it is clear that practitioners have developed effective methods to successfully grow corals at small scales, it is critical not to view restoration as a replacement for meaningful action on climate change.

show abstract

Section: Objectives and Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coral restoration – A systematic review of current methods, successes, failures and future directions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two examples, as well as several others [40][41][42], clearly illustrate the complex management problems existing in the environmental recovery of these natural areas, and the need to deepen research in this field to achieve satisfactory results in processes of this type that frequently need to be undertaken in such areas [43]. Despite the growing scientific interest in incorporating the economic variables and the social perspective into environmental recovery processes [44][45][46], there are currently important gaps at the level of research in this field. In addition to the usual difficulty in defining the scope of action and the responsibility that public and private stakeholders should assume in the process [47], we must also consider the increasing complexity of finding an optimal management framework [48].…”

Section: The Concept Of Management For the Recovery Of Natural Areas mentioning

confidence: 91%

New Strategies to Improve Co-Management in Enclosed Coastal Seas and Wetlands Subjected to Complex Environments: Socio-Economic Analysis Applied to an International Recovery Success Case Study after an Environmental Crisis

García-Ayllón

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enclosed coastal seas and wetlands are areas of high ecological value with singular fauna and flora, but several cases of environmental catastrophes in recent decades can easily be referenced in the international literature. The management of these natural territories is complex in developed countries since they are usually subjected to intense human activity with a varied catalog of activities and anthropizing features that alter the balance of the ecosystem. In this article, the concept of the Socio-Ecological System (SES) to diagnose and achieve a sustainable cohabitation between human anthropization and the natural values based on the tool of GIS participatory mapping is proposed as an innovative approach for the management and recovery of these complex areas. The article develops a comprehensive general methodology of spatial GIS diagnosis, planning, and co-management implementation between public and private stakeholders combined with economic tools such as the Willingness to Pay (WTP) and the Cost Transfer Sector (CTS). This innovative approach is applied to the Mar Menor lagoon, which is an international and successful case study of environmental recovery on the Spanish Mediterranean coast. The coastal lagoon suffered an unprecedented eutrophication crisis in 2015, but it managed to recover in the summer of 2018 without the need to implement major structural measures. In this case study, several solutions to redress the current impacts will be developed through a participatory process based on GIS mapping. Lastly, the discussion reflects the concept of self-resilience of an ecosystem based on the unexpected positive turn of the environmental crisis in the lagoon ending.

show abstract

“…Limited government support and funding, a need for new or refined policy, plans relevant to restoration and adaptation [ 125 ], better enforcement and reduction in permitting constraints (see S4 Appendix ) have all been identified as general limitations to coral restoration effectiveness [ 126 ]. While substrate stabilisation has been identified as a potentially useful technique, it has not been a focus in reef intervention policy, especially in Australia ( S4 Appendix ).…”

Section: Active Intervention To Stabilise Substrate and Add Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Substrate stabilisation and small structures in coral restoration: State of knowledge, and considerations for management and implementation

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coral reef ecosystems are under increasing pressure from local and regional stressors and a changing climate. Current management focuses on reducing stressors to allow for natural recovery, but in many areas where coral reefs are damaged, natural recovery can be restricted, delayed or interrupted because of unstable, unconsolidated coral fragments, or rubble. Rubble fields are a natural component of coral reefs, but repeated or high-magnitude disturbances can prevent natural cementation and consolidation processes, so that coral recruits fail to survive. A suite of interventions have been used to target this issue globally, such as using mesh to stabilise rubble, removing the rubble to reveal hard substrate and deploying rocks or other hard substrates over the rubble to facilitate recruit survival. Small, modular structures can be used at multiple scales, with or without attached coral fragments, to create structural complexity and settlement surfaces. However, these can introduce foreign materials to the reef, and a limited understanding of natural recovery processes exists for the potential of this type of active intervention to successfully restore local coral reef structure. This review synthesises available knowledge about the ecological role of coral rubble, natural coral recolonisation and recovery rates and the potential benefits and risks associated with active interventions in this rapidly evolving field. Fundamental knowledge gaps include baseline levels of rubble, the structural complexity of reef habitats in space and time, natural rubble consolidation processes and the risks associated with each intervention method. Any restoration intervention needs to be underpinned by risk assessment, and the decision to repair rubble fields must arise from an understanding of when and where unconsolidated substrate and lack of structure impair natural reef recovery and ecological function. Monitoring is necessary to ascertain the success or failure of the intervention and impacts of potential risks, but there is a strong need to specify desired outcomes, the spatial and temporal context and indicators to be measured. With a focus on the Great Barrier Reef, we synthesise the techniques, successes and failures associated with rubble stabilisation and the use of small structures, review monitoring methods and indicators, and provide recommendations to ensure that we learn from past projects.

show abstract

Coral restoration: Socio-ecological perspectives of benefits and limitations

Cited by 77 publications

References 51 publications

Coral restoration – A systematic review of current methods, successes, failures and future directions

Coral restoration – A systematic review of current methods, successes, failures and future directions

New Strategies to Improve Co-Management in Enclosed Coastal Seas and Wetlands Subjected to Complex Environments: Socio-Economic Analysis Applied to an International Recovery Success Case Study after an Environmental Crisis

Substrate stabilisation and small structures in coral restoration: State of knowledge, and considerations for management and implementation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About