Restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems

While the restoration of marine and coastal ecosystems – including wetland, and deep-sea habitats – involves a wide range of approaches due to their unique characteristics, shared common principles can guide or inform the design and implementation of ecosystem restoration initiatives, such as active stakeholder engagement to ensure long-term success and the need for collaborative efforts between states with interconnected maritime territories to address policy gaps. Below is an overview of processes involved in the restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems:

• Conduct preliminary assessment and planning to set tangible restoration goals and develop policy frameworks for targeted coastal and marine ecosystem restoration.
  • Mandate baseline assessments for areas to restore: Require evaluations of habitat extent, biodiversity, water quality, and ecosystem service provision (e.g., fisheries, coastal protection, carbon sequestration) before restoration policies are enacted.
  • Develop restoration priority maps for coastal habitats: Identify mangroves, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, and saltmarshes most critical for biodiversity, carbon storage, and storm protection.
  • Set legally recognized ecosystem-specific restoration targets aligned with national conservation priorities: For example, restoring a percentage of lost mangrove area, coral reef cover, or seagrass beds in line with the restoration target set in the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
  • Integrate restoration into coastal zone management policies: Ensure marine spatial plans and coastal development regulations explicitly account for restoration priorities.
  • Formalize coastal stakeholder engagement protocols: Require consultation with fishing communities, aquaculture operators, tourism operators, and indigenous coastal communities during planning.
• Employ policy and regulatory instruments to strengthen governance and legal frameworks for restoration in coastal and marine contexts. For instance:
  • Enforce protection of restored coastal and marine areas: Designate legal protection for restored mangroves, seagrasses, saltmarshes, coral reefs, and all restored areas to prevent destructive activities (e.g., dredging, coastal reclamation, overfishing) threatening their recovery.
  • Link restoration to coastal development approvals: Make ecosystem restoration a condition for permitting infrastructure, port expansion, or aquaculture development.
  • Mandate cross-sectoral coordination: Require environmental, fisheries, tourism, and disaster management authorities to collaborate on restoration policies and compliance in coastal areas.
• Design and implement science-based monitoring and evaluation systems, and adaptive management to track ecological recovery and adjust policies according to monitoring outcomes.
  • Mandate ecosystem-specific monitoring protocols: Require indicators specific to each ecosystem undergoing restoration. For instance, coverage, tree density and tree survival rate for mangroves; live coral cover, fish species diversity and populations on coral reefs; plant cover and sediment accumulation for saltmarshes.
  • Ensure transparent reporting: Publish coastal restoration progress in national environmental reports and in costal and marine spatial planning updates.
  • Integrate monitoring into policy cycles: Adjust restoration priorities, targets, or regulatory measures based on observed outcomes.
  • Encourage partnerships with research institutions: Support independent verification and scientific research on restoration effectiveness in marine and coastal ecosystems.
• Implement oversight and governance to ensure coordinated and accountable restoration efforts
  • Establish a national or regional coastal restoration coordination body responsible for policy alignment, monitoring, and reporting on coastal and marine ecosystems.
  • Define governance roles for marine and coastal authorities: Allocate responsibilities across environmental, fisheries, and maritime agencies, with mechanisms to favor cross-jurisdictional alignment and resolve conflicts.
  • Enforce compliance in coastal zones: Conduct inspections to prevent illegal activities that undermine restoration, such as destructive fishing or illegal land reclamation.
  • Promote community-based co-management: Recognize the role of local fishers, indigenous coastal communities, and community-based organizations in stewardship of restored habitats.
• Adopt cross-cutting governance measures to leverage the synergies of ecosystem restoration throughout policy domains. For instance:
  • Mainstream restoration in climate, biodiversity, and disaster policies: Link coastal restoration to SDGs, NBSAPs, and NDCs, highlighting its role in carbon sequestration and coastal hazard mitigation.
  • Build institutional capacity: Train public officials in coastal and marine ecosystem governance, regulatory enforcement, and monitoring.
  • Develop conflict resolution frameworks: Address potential tensions between coastal restoration, fisheries, aquaculture, tourism, and infrastructure development.

Effective and sustainable ecosystem restoration is possible through inclusive planning and implementation of policies ensuring participation of all stakeholders particularly local communities that rely on these ecosystems. When sufficient time is provided and long-term funding is secured, restoration efforts have the opportunity to build trust, allow for learning from mistakes, and support the development of effective outcomes – enabling successful and equitable seascape restoration across diverse habitats and scales, including the ecoscape level.

• Knowledge coevolution:
  • Integrate Traditional Knowledge and Western Science through mutual respect.
  • Adopt the “Two-Eyed Seeing” approach to value both knowledge systems.
  • Facilitate regular interactions among local knowledge holders, resource users, and government entities.
  • Encourage open discourse and participation at all planning levels.
• Participatory process:
  • Ensure equal opportunities for all resource users to be involved.
  • Identify diverse perspectives, values, and backgrounds of stakeholders.
  • Utilize workshops, dynamic modeling, and focus groups to co-develop project objectives.
  • Incorporate both extrinsic (e.g., economic incentives) and intrinsic (e.g., ethical values) motivators.
  • Consider alternative livelihoods and share progress with the community.
• Equity:
  • Recognize and address disproportionate impacts on different groups.
  • Integrate equity considerations early and throughout the restoration process.
  • Privilege local knowledge and practices.
  • Promote participation from directly and indirectly affected individuals.
  • Understand local power dynamics and strengthen community organizations.
• Adaptive co-management:
  • Foster collaborative and flexible governance structures.
  • Build trust and maintain open communication with resource users.
  • Engage with rights holders and traditional owners to identify priorities and concerns.
  • Understand local political structures and hierarchies.
  • Implement evidence-based management and monitoring and evaluation systems and be prepared to adapt to changing needs.​

Key tools and guides to support the successful restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems can include:

Tools

Guides

The restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems contributes significantly to advancing the objectives of the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF), and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Climate change mitigation benefits

Coastal and marine ecosystem restoration can play a key role in mitigating climate change. Coastal and marine ecosystems such as mangroves, tidal marshes, and seagrass meadows – often referred to as “Blue Carbon Ecosystems” – have emerged as powerful natural carbon sinks, and human intervention can enhance and restore, their carbon storage capacity. The 2022 IPCC report estimates the overall mitigation potential of coastal vegetated systems to be around 0.5% to 2% of current global emissions.

Climate change adaptation benefits

Restoring coastal and marine ecosystems delivers substantial climate adaptation benefits by strengthening natural defenses against climate-related hazards such as sea-level rise, storm surges, and coastal erosion. Recent studies highlight that the rehabilitated habitats like mangroves, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, and salt marshes absorb wave energy, stabilize sediments, filter pollutants, and reduce flood risks, thereby protecting coastal communities and infrastructure.

Restoration of coastal and marine systems can advance global adaptation agenda by contributing to the following targets under the GGA Framework:

• Target 9b (Food & Agriculture): Restored coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves and seagrass beds, boost fisheries and aquaculture productivity, providing sustainable food sources and strengthening food security for coastal communities. They offer vital nursery and feeding grounds for fish and other aquatic species, improve water quality, and regulate water cycles, benefits that help fisheries and agriculture.
• Target 9d (Ecosystems): Rehabilitation of marine habitats enhances biodiversity, strengthens ecosystem resilience, and improves natural defenses against climate impacts like storm surges and sea-level rise. Restoration efforts typically combine physical habitat reconstruction with biological reintroduction and invasive species management to rebuild ecosystem functions, promoting healthy and diverse habitats and forming self-sustaining systems that better withstand stressors like warming, pollution, and overfishing.
• Target 9e (Infrastructure): Natural coastal barriers, such as restored reefs, protect infrastructure from erosion, flooding, and extreme weather, reducing maintenance costs and safeguarding essential services. Salt marshes and seagrasses reduce wave energy and storm surges, thereby protecting shorelines from erosion and flooding. These habitats also modulate sea-level rise impacts by stabilizing sediments and promoting sediment accretion
• Target 9f (Livelihoods): Healthy coastal and marine environments sustain jobs in fishing, tourism, and related industries, ensure sustainable fisheries, improve water quality, and support livelihoods and coastal community resilience, providing stable incomes and building community resilience to climate shocks.

Biodiversity benefits

Restoring coastal marine ecosystems provides positive biodiversity outcomes contributing to several KM-GBF Targets, mainly:

• Target 1 (Plan and Manage all Areas To Reduce Biodiversity Loss): Aligning food production practices with the restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems demands science-based and biodiversity-inclusive planning and management of these areas. Thus, the implementation of the policy both constitutes progress toward this target, and benefits from the progress. Coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves, seagrass beds, and coral reefs, are essential for maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services. For example, mangrove restoration has been shown to provide significant ecological and economic benefits, including carbon sequestration and coastal protection. Additionally, seagrass restoration efforts have demonstrated the importance of reducing environmental stressors and enhancing ecosystem functions. These restoration activities improve the health of coastal ecosystems and also contribute to broader spatial planning and management goals by ensuring that these areas are effectively managed and integrated into broader biodiversity conservation strategies.
• Target 2 (Restore 30% of all Degraded Ecosystems): Only 15.5% of all coastal area faces low anthropogenic pressure, while at least 66% have already been altered and degraded, with the average increasing to 77% of all exclusive economic zones. In view of the severe state of degradation observed in marine and coastal ecosystems, their restoration represents an imperative for making real progress toward the restoration target of the KM-GBF.
• Target 7 (Reduce Pollution to Levels That Are Not Harmful to Biodiversity): Restoring coastal and marine ecosystems can significantly contribute to reducing pollution risks and their negative impacts. Coastal ecosystems such as mangroves recycle waste and act as natural filters, trapping pollutants and reducing their flow into the ocean. This reduction in pollution not only benefits marine life but also enhances the overall health of coastal ecosystems. Research indicates that restored coastal ecosystems can reduce nutrient pollution by up to 50%, contributing to the target of reducing pollution risks.
• Target 8 (Minimize the Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity and Build Resilience): Coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves and seagrass beds, play a crucial role in maintaining natural carbon sinks and reducing the impacts of climate change on coastal ecosystems. See dedicated sections for details on the climate benefits delivered by marine and coastal restoration.
• Target 10 (Enhance Biodiversity and Sustainability in Agriculture, Aquaculture, Fisheries, and Forestry): Integrating restoration practices for coastal and marine ecosystems into food production would directly contribute to foster sustainability in the agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture sectors. For example, restored wetlands and mangrove forests can host production systems – like shrimp farms – while also help filter out excess nutrients and pollutants from agricultural runoff, improving water quality. Coastal ecosystems like seagrass beds, mangrove forests and tidal marshes support wild capture fisheries by providing habitat and nursery grounds for many economically important fish species. This not only benefits marine life but also enhances the overall health of coastal ecosystems, contributing to the long-term sustainability of fisheries and aquaculture. See Implementing sustainable aquaculture management for details on synergies between restoration activities and aquaculture systems.
• Target 11 (Restore, Maintain and Enhance Nature’s Contributions to People): Coastal and marine ecosystems deliver a wealth of provisioning, regulation and maintenance services. These areas are also highly influenced by the presence of production systems which are heavily managed and aimed at providing economic benefits, and livelihood to coastal communities. The coastal ecosystems, in particular, are affected by both terrestrial and marine influences. Loss or reduction of ecosystem functions and services or loss of biodiversity beyond certain limits can jeopardize the natural functioning of ecosystems, and disrupt the delivery of vital ecosystem services. In view of this, the integration of restoration practices in food production is fundamental for the continued delivery of essential services delivered by marine and coastal ecosystems, particularly to vulnerable communities that are highly dependent on those services for their livelihood.
• Target 12 (Enhance Green and Blue Spaces and Urban Planning for Human Well-Being and Biodiversity): With nearly 20% of the world population living at 15 km or less from the shoreline, integrating restoration practices is a necessary step to integrate both biodiversity and human well-being into urban planning. Urban adaptation scenarios that included investments in nature-based solutions have been found to deliver up to eight times the benefits of a traditionally engineered baseline as well as providing habitat for species of high conservation value.

Other sustainable development benefits

Coastal and marine ecosystem can also support the progress on the following SDGs:

• SDG 1 (No Poverty): Restoring coastal and marine ecosystems enhance food security and create new economic opportunities for local communities. For example, in Europe, the restoration of marine habitats like seagrass beds and shellfish reefs can provide substantial economic benefits, estimated between EUR 284 and EUR 90,000 per hectare per year, which support poverty alleviation efforts in coastal regions. Similar results have also been reported in the Global South, e.g. in East Africa, restored seagrass meadows helped provide direct cash income to rural households.
• SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): Coastal and marine restoration projects can generate employment opportunities, both directly – in the implementation of restoration practices – and indirectly – in sectors such as aquaculture, fisheries, and tourism, promoting economic growth and decent work. Additionally, the restoration of marine habitats can enhance the long-term sustainability of fishing activities and tourism, supporting the livelihoods of coastal communities and contributing to the growth of the blue economy.
• SDG 13 (Climate Action): Coastal and marine restoration enhances the carbon sequestration capacity of “blue carbon ecosystems”, which play a key role in mitigating climate change. Ecosystem restoration also enhances the resilience of coastal communities to climate-related hazards by, for instance, protecting coast from storms, reducing the impacts of sea level rise and limiting coastal erosion.
• SDG 14 (Life Below Water): Restoring coastal and marine ecosystems directly supports the goal by contributing to the sustainable management and protection of marine and coastal ecosystems and the rehabilitation of fish stocks.
• SDG 15 (Life on Land): Marine and coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrass beds, are closely linked to terrestrial and inland water ecosystems. These transitional zones support the life cycles of many species that move between land and sea, maintain ecological connectivity, and provide essential ecosystem services that benefit both terrestrial and aquatic environments.

The success of marine and coastal ecosystem restoration depends on well-designed and effectively implemented interventions. However, these efforts often face technical and non-technical challenges, alongside potential negative externalities and trade-offs that can undermine their outcomes, including:

• Restoring coastal and marine ecosystems faces legislative complexity and a lack of enabling policies within coastal management policies, which has hindered interventions to restore marine ecosystems. For example, the restoration of coral reefs or the development of artificial reefs may trigger the same legislative process as an infrastructure development project, including environmental impact assessment.
• There is a lack of coherent policies and practices for implementing restoration, as well as a lack of structural incentives for post-restoration monitoring and adaptive management. Most projects are limited in performance metrics to assess whether they meet their goals, limited in performance metrics to assess whether they meet their goals, which often remain vaguely defined and difficult to measure.
• Wetland reclamation can degrade ecosystem services and create trade-offs. For example, the relationship between carbon storage and material production transformed from a synergy into a trade-off in 2008 in the Yellow River Delta’s coastal wetlands, and the strength of the trade-off has been increasing since then. This trade-off emerged from reclamation development that favored quick economic gains over long-lasting ecological value, posing a potential long-term threat to the ecological integrity and carbon sinks in coastal wetlands.

Incorporating the following measures within a comprehensive and integrated framework for coastal and marine ecosystem restoration can mitigate trade-offs and overcome implementation challenges:

• Developing and enforcing laws to ensure that technical-guiding standards are adopted in large-scale restoration projects and the performance of restoration projects is assessed against a minimum outcome. For example, China’s Wetland Conservation Law, which came into force on 1 June 2022, emphasizes “no net loss” protection targets and nature-based solutions, providing a solid legal basis for wetland restoration and conservation.
• Fully considering all stages in restoration interventions including designing, implementation, monitoring, and adaptive management. If standards are unavailable and inappropriate at any stage of restoration processes, the risk of restoration failure increases, even potentially giving rise to pseudo-ecological interventions that not only undermine restoration objectives but also exacerbate ecosystem degradation.
• Using intensity indices to reveal the effects on ecosystem services and developing a trade-off intensity index to quantify the trade-offs. This can help identify optimal combinations of ecosystem service values and provide a scientific basis for improving wetland management and ecological restoration.

Robust monitoring methodologies, well-defined indicators, and comprehensive evaluation frameworks are critical for accurately assessing the effectiveness of coastal and marine ecosystem restoration, including the measurement of biodiversity and climate-related outcomes.

Indicators to monitor biodiversity outcomes

The Parties to CBD agreed to a comprehensive set of headline, component, and complementary indicators for tracking progress toward the targets of the KM-GBF. From these, below indicators could be used for monitoring the implementation of restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems and their contribution to KM-GBF Targets:

Tools to monitor biodiversity outcomes

Tools to monitor climate outcomes

Not identified.

Estimated costs associated with the implementation of marine and coastal ecosystem restoration efforts include:

• The cost of restoring marine and coastal ecosystems varies significantly. The median reported cost per hectare is around USD 80,000, while the average is USD 1.6 million, though real costs maybe 2 to 4 times higher. Coral reefs and seagrass are the most expensive to restore, whereas mangrove restoration is typically the largest and least costly per hectare. Restoration costs are up to 30 times lower in developing economies, and community-based projects tend to be more affordable. Overall, success depends more on ecosystem type, site selection, and techniques rather than the amount spent.
• For mangrove restoration, the total global cost is estimated at USD 40.0–52.1 billion when considering both aquaculture and tidal flats. Despite the high initial investment, the economic returns are substantial.

Notable examples of successful marine and coastal ecosystem restoration efforts at the global level include:

• Indonesia’s Coral Reef Revival project, led by Mars Symbioscience Indonesia and the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), has successfully restored damaged coral reefs in Pulau Badi, South Sulawesi. Using innovative techniques like coral transplantation and artificial reef structures, combined with community engagement, the project has revived once-degraded reefs. Within a few years, the restored reef has shown significant growth and increased biodiversity, providing vital habitat for marine life and serving as a natural barrier against coastal erosion.
• The Chesapeake Bay Estuary Enhancement project in the United States is a comprehensive effort to improve water quality and restore vital habitats. The project involves constructing artificial oyster reefs, restoring underwater grass beds, and creating wetlands and riparian buffers. These efforts have improved water clarity, provided critical nursery areas for marine life, and enhanced the overall health of the bay’s ecosystem. The project’s multi-faceted approach demonstrates the importance of addressing various factors impacting estuary health.
• In Guadalupe, a French overseas region in the Caribbean, a marine and coastal ecosystem restoration project has been implemented to enhance climate change adaptation. The project, (2019 to 2024), focused on restoring coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrass meadows. Annual coral transplantation, mangrove rehabilitation, and seagrass preservation and restoration activities have been carried out. Over six years of ecological monitoring in the Bay of Deshaies, coral and seagrass growth returned following the prohibition of boat anchoring and the installation of eco-moorings. 52% of local coral species settled on the mooring blocks, which covered just 300 m². A total of nine coral species and 43 fish species were recorded around the moorings, compared to 17 coral species and 25 fish species in nearby natural reefs. Using MERCI-Cor methods, the project was estimated to offset 400 m² of coral reef loss caused by unregulated anchoring.
• The Wild Oysters project in the United Kingdom aims to restore native oyster populations across the Greater Thames Estuary and other coastal areas. Led by the Zoological Society of London, Blue Marine Foundation, and British Marine, the project has established restoration hubs in Conwy Bay, Tyne and Wear, and Firth of Clyde. By installing 141 oyster nurseries, the project is working towards creating cleaner water, healthier fisheries, and increased biodiversity in UK seas.
• The Coral Restoration Program by Oceans Alive in Kenya is a pioneering initiative aimed at revitalizing damaged coral reefs along the Kenyan coast. Since its inception in 2019, the project has successfully planted over 15,000 corals, focusing on fast-growing species like Acropora and Pocillopora. The program employs innovative coral gardening techniques, including the use of coral trees and tables for nurturing coral fragments before transplantation. A key aspect of the project is its strong emphasis on community involvement, with local fishermen and youth actively participating in coral planting activities. This approach not only aids in ecosystem restoration but also provides alternative livelihoods and raises awareness about marine conservation. The project’s success is evident in the increased fish populations and improved biodiversity in restored areas, demonstrating the potential for large-scale coral reef rehabilitation in the region.

1. Armstrong, K. C., Rakowsky, J. A., Ferguson Irlanda, C. E., Kilcullen, F., Nestor, V., Crowder, L. B., et al. (2025). A framework for just seascape restoration. Npj Ocean Sustainability, 4(1), 1–12.
2. Bayraktarov, E., Brisbane, S., Hagger, V., Smith, C. S., Wilson, K. A., Lovelock, C. E., et al. (2020). Priorities and Motivations of Marine Coastal Restoration Research. Frontiers in Marine Science, 7. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.00484/full.
3. Bayraktarov, E., Saunders, M. I., Abdullah, S., Mills, M., Beher, J., Possingham, H. P., et al. (2016). The cost and feasibility of marine coastal restoration. Ecological Applications, 26(4), 1055–1074.
4. Bersoza Hernández, A., Brumbaugh, R. D., Frederick, P., Grizzle, R., Luckenbach, M. W., Peterson, C. H., et al. (2018). Restoring the eastern oyster: how much progress has been made in 53 years? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 16(8), 463–471.
5. Boström-Einarsson, L., Babcock, R. C., Bayraktarov, E., Ceccarelli, D., Cook, N., Ferse, S. C. A., et al. (2020). Coral restoration – A systematic review of current methods, successes, failures and future directions. PLOS ONE, 15(1), e0226631.
6. Center for Ocean Solutions. (2019, May 2). New IPBES global assessment informs ocean biodiversity and ecosystem services goals. Stanford University. Retrieved June 27, 2025, from https://oceansolutions.stanford.edu/news/new-ipbes-global-assessment-informs-ocean-biodiversity-and-ecosystem-services-goals
7. CBD (2018). Oceans contain a wealth of biodiversity. https://www.cbd.int/article/biodiversityforwater-1
8. de Jong, W., Liu, J., & Long, H. (2021). The forest restoration frontier. Ambio, 50(12), 2224–2237.
9. DeLange, P. C. and M.-L. (400 AD, 00:00). Building resilience in coastal communities: How Blue Ventures is using KoboToolbox to drive marine conservation and improve digital equality. KoboToolbox. Retrieved February 3, 2025, from https://www.kobotoolbox.org/blog/building-resilience-in-coastal-communities-how-blue-ventures-is-using-kobotoolbox-to-drive-marine-conservation-and-improve-digital-equality.
10. IPCC, 2022: Summary for Policymakers [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, A. Reisinger, R. Slade, R. Fradera, M. Pathak, A. Al Khourdajie, M. Belkacemi, R. van Diemen, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, D. McCollum, S. Some, P. Vyas, (eds.)]. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926.001.
11. Danovaro, R., Aronson, J., Bianchelli, S. et al. Assessing the success of marine ecosystem restoration using meta-analysis. Nat Commun 16, 3062 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-57254-2
12. Fradera, M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926.006
13. Fuchs, G., & Stelljes, N. (2023). Why is nature restoration critical for marine areas? Policy brief. Ecologic Institute & Institute for European Environmental Policy. Retrieved June 2025, from ResearchGate.Ecologic Institute. (2022). WHY IS NATURE RESTORATION CRITICAL FOR MARINE AREAS? Retrieved from https://ieep.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/10_Nature-Restoration-and-marine-areas.pdf.
14. Gaffi, L., Cutts, V., Hagemeijer, W., & Sutherland, W. J. (2024). Guidance on planning coastal restoration and setting targets (v1.0). Retrieved February 16, 2026, from https://www.conservationevidence.com/images/Guidance%20docs/2_Guidance%20on%20planning%20coastal%20restoration%20and%20setting%20targets_v1.pdf
15. Halpern, B. S., Frazier, M., Potapenko, J., Casey, K. S., Koenig, K., Longo, C., et al. (2015). Spatial and temporal changes in cumulative human impacts on the world’s ocean. Nature Communications, 6(1), 7615.
16. jessica. (2024, October 2). Reviving Nature: 5 Stunning Habitat Restoration Success Stories. Marine Biodiversity Science Center. Retrieved February 16, 2026, from https://www.marinebiodiversity.ca/reviving-nature-5-stunning-habitat-restoration-success-stories/
17. Kelp Forest Challenge. (2023). A roadmap for protecting and restoring 4 million hectares of kelp forests by 2040. Retrieved August 19, 2025, from https://kelpforestalliance.com/Kelp-Forest-Challenge-Roadmap.pdf.
18. Lecocq, F., H. Winkler, J.P. Daka, S. Fu, J.S. Gerber, S. Kartha, V. Krey, H. Lofgren, T. Masui, R. Mathur, J. Portugal-Pereira,  B. K. Sovacool, M. V. Vilariño, N. Zhou, 2022: Mitigation and development pathways in the near- to mid-term. In IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al Khourdajie,  R. van  Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R.
19. Lovelock, C. E., & Duarte, C. M. (2019). Dimensions of Blue Carbon and emerging perspectives. Biology Letters, 15(3), 20180781.
20. McAfee, D., Reis-Santos, P., Jones, A. R., Gillanders, B. M., Mellin, C., Nagelkerken, I., et al. (2022). Multi-habitat seascape restoration: optimising marine restoration for coastal repair and social benefit. Frontiers in Marine Science, 9. Retrieved February 16, 2026, from https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.910467/full
21. Pendleton, L., Donato, D. C., Murray, B. C., Crooks, S., Jenkins, W. A., Sifleet, S., et al. (2012). Estimating Global “Blue Carbon” Emissions from Conversion and Degradation of Vegetated Coastal Ecosystems. PLOS ONE, 7(9), e43542.
22. Pogoda, B., Boudry, P., Bromley, C., Cameron, T. C., Colsoul, B., Donnan, D., et al. (2020). NORA moving forward: Developing an oyster restoration network in Europe to support the Berlin Oyster Recommendation. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 30(11), 2031–2037.
23. Shumway, N., Bell-James, J., Fitzsimons, J. A., Foster, R., Gillies, C., & Lovelock, C. E. (2021). Policy solutions to facilitate restoration in coastal marine environments. Marine Policy, 134, 104789.
24. Singh, A. (2025, February 1). Marine habitat restoration: Building nature’s underwater lifelines. Marine Biodiversity Science Center. Retrieved June 27, 2025, from https://www.marinebiodiversity.ca/marine-habitat-restoration-building-natures-underwater-lifelines/
25. Stetkiewicz, S., Norman, R. A., Allison, E. H., Andrew, N. L., Ara, G., Banner-Stevens, G., et al. (2022). Seafood in Food Security: A Call for Bridging the Terrestrial-Aquatic Divide. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5. Retrieved April 30, 2025, from https://www.frontiersin.orghttps://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainable-food-systems/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2021.703152/full.
26. Su, J., Friess, D. A., & Gasparatos, A. (2021). A meta-analysis of the ecological and economic outcomes of mangrove restoration. Nature Communications, 12(1), 5050.
27. Traina, A. (n.d.). How marine ecosystem restoration foundations are saving our oceans. Marine Biodiversity Science Center. Retrieved June 27, 2025, from https://www.marinebiodiversity.ca/how-marine-ecosystem-restoration-foundations-are-saving-our-oceans/
28. UN. (2017). Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystems Underpin a Healthy Planet and Social Well-Being. Un Chronicles. Retrieved February 3, 2025, from https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/marine-biodiversity-and-ecosystems-underpin-healthy-planet-and-social-well-being?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
29. UN. (2022). Six Facts on Oceans, Life, and Livelihoods – Our World. UN University. Retrieved April 30, 2025, from https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/six-facts-on-oceans-life-and-livelihoods.
30. UN. (2024). Marine and coastal ecosystem restoration for climate change adaptation in the Caribbean (Guadaloupe, French Oversea region). Retrieved February 4, 2025, from https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/metadata/case-studies/marine-and-coastal-ecosystem-restoration-for-climate-change-adaptation-in-the-caribbean-guadalupe-french-oversea-region.
31. UN. (n.d.). Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources. Retrieved February 4, 2025, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/oceans/.
32. van Katwijk, M. M., Thorhaug, A., Marbà, N., Orth, R. J., Duarte, C. M., Kendrick, G. A., et al. (2016). Global analysis of seagrass restoration: the importance of large-scale planting. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53(2), 567–578.
33. WMO. (2021). World Oceans Day: Life and Livelihoods. World Meteorological Organization. Retrieved April 30, 2025, from https://wmo.int/media/news/world-oceans-day-life-and-livelihoods.
34. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). (2014). Principles of forest landscape restoration: Lessons from global experience. https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/250314_wwf_publication_restoration_dina4_digital.pdf
35. Xie, T., Ning, Z., Cui, B., He, Q., Chen, C., Zhu, Z., et al. (2025). Overlooked discrepancies in protocols undermine coastal restoration practices in China. Communications Earth & Environment, 6(1), 1–11.
36. Yang, W., Jin, Y., Sun, T., Yang, Z., Cai, Y., & Yi, Y. (2018). Trade-offs among ecosystem services in coastal wetlands under the effects of reclamation activities. Ecological Indicators, 92, 354–366.
37. Zhang, J., Lu, Z., Zhou, J., Qin, G., Bai, Y., Sanders, C. J., et al. (2025). Getting the best of carbon bang for mangrove restoration buck. Nature Communications, 16(1), 1297.