Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020;12(3):10.3390/su12030869.
doi: 10.3390/su12030869.

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

Affiliations

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

Bryan M DeAngelis et al. Sustainability. 2020.

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.

Keywords: coastal habitat; coastal restoration; marsh; oyster; restoration success; seagrass.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Infographic of summary Goals and Metrics, Restoration Status and Outcomes, and Funding Sources for three case study locations. Tampa Bay: Photo Credit, James R. White. Restoration focused on rehabilitation of seagrasses via improvements in water quality, but also to restore four other key habitats to the proportion they were in the 1950s relative to seagrasses. Other aquatic habitats like mangroves are at or near this goal, and some are increasing in extent. Funding has averaged USD 250M per year. Chesapeake Bay: Photo Credit, Oyster Recovery Partnership. Goals were based on “Oyster Success Metrics” defining reef- and landscape-level criteria necessary for a tributary to be considered “restored”. The 142 hectares restored in Harris Creek is presently the largest oyster reef restoration project in the world. Since 2011, more than USD 51M of federal dollars has been spent on oyster restoration in MD alone. San Francisco Bay: Photo Credit, Dicklyon. The 40,500 hectares recommended by the Goals Project was based around improved habitat quality and quantity to support key species and presented at various geographic scales. In 2002, voters approved USD 200M to implement projects recommended in the Goals Project report. The 2016 voter-approved parcel tax is expected to raise USD 25M annually for restoration.

References

    1. Bayraktarov E; Saunders MI; Abdullah S; Mills M; Beher J; Possingham HP; Mumby PJ; Lovelock CE The cost and feasibility of marine coastal restoration. Ecol. Appl 2016, 26, 1055–1074. - PubMed
    1. Hernández AB; Brumbaugh RD; Frederick P; Grizzle R; Luckenbach MW; Peterson CH; Angelini C Restoring the eastern oyster: How much progress has been made in 53 years? Front. Ecol. Environ 2018, 16, 463–471.
    1. Miller JR; Hobbs RJ Habitat Restoration—Do We Know What We’re Doing? Restor. Ecol 2007, 15, 382–390.
    1. Perring MP; Standish RJ; Price JN; Craig MD; Erickson TE; Ruthrof KX; Whiteley AS; Valentine LE; Hobbs RJ Advances in restoration ecology: Rising to the challenges of the coming decades. Ecosphere 2015, 6, art131.
    1. Hobbs RJ; Harris JA Restoration Ecology: Repairing the Earth’s Ecosystems in the New Millennium. Restor Ecol. 2001, 9, 239–246.