Stakeholder priorities for multi-functional coastal defence developments and steps to effective implementation

To fulfil international conservation commitments, governments have begun to recognise the need for more proactive marine planning policies, advocating sensitive engineering design that can deliver secondary benefits above and beyond the primary purpose of developments. In response, there is growing scientific interest in novel multi-functional coastal defence structures with built-in secondary ecological and/or socio-economic benefits. To ensure research efforts are invested effectively, it is first necessary to determine what secondary benefits can potentially be built-in to engineered coastal defence structures, and further, which of these benefits would be most desirable. It is unlikely that secondary benefits are perceived in the same way across different stakeholder groups. Further, their order of priority when evaluating different options is unlikely to be consistent, since each option will present a suite of compromises and trade-offs. The aim of this study was to investigate stakeholder attitudes towards multi-functional coastal defence developments across different sector groups. A preliminary questionnaire indicated unanimous support for implementing multi-functional structures in place of traditional single-purpose ones. This preliminary survey informed the design of a Delphi-like study, which revealed a more nuanced and caveated level of support from a panel of experts and practitioners. The study also elicited a degree of consensus that the most desirable secondary benefits that could be built-in to developments would be ecological ones – prioritised over social, economic and technical benefits. This paper synthesises these findings, discusses the perceived barriers that remain, and proposes a stepwise approach to effective implementation of multi-functional coastal defence developments

From ocean sprawl to blue-green infrastructure:A UK perspective on an issue of global significance

Artificial structures are proliferating in the marine environment, resulting in ‘ocean sprawl’. In light of the potential environmental impacts of this, such as habitat loss and alteration, it is becoming increasingly important to incorporate ecologically-sensitive design into artificial marine structures. The principles of eco-engineering and green infrastructure are embedded in urban planning practice for terrestrial and freshwater development projects. In marine planning, however, eco-engineering of blue-green infrastructure remains an emerging concept. This note provides a UK perspective on the progress towards uptake of eco-engineering approaches for enhancing biodiversity on artificial marine structures. We emphasise that, despite a clear ‘policy pull’ to incorporate biodiversity enhancements in marine structures, a range of proof-of-concept evidence that it is possible to achieve, and strong cross-sectoral stakeholder support, there are still few examples of truly and purposefullydesigned blue-green artificial structures in the UK. We discuss the barriers that remain and propose a strategy towards effective implementation. Our strategy outlines a step-wise approach to: (1) strengthening the evidence base for what enhancements can be achieved in different scenarios; (2) improving clarity on the predicted benefits and associated costs of enhancements; (3) packaging the evidence in a useful form to support planning and decision-making; and (4) encouraging implementation as routine practice. Given that ocean sprawl is a growing problem globally, the perspective presented here provides valuable insight and lessons for other nations at their various states of progress towards this same goal

Partial replacement of cement for waste aggregates in concrete coastal and marine infrastructure

The effects of climate change and an expanding human population are driving the need for the expansion of coastal and marine infrastructure (CMI), the development of which is introducing hard substrate into the marine environment on a previously unseen scale. Whilst the majority of previous research has focussed on how physical features affect intertidal macrobiotic communities, this study considered the effects of differences in the chemical composition of concrete on subtidal biofilm and macrobiotic communities. Two commonly used cement replacements, pulverised fly ash (PFA) and ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS), were used in a combination of proportions to assess how concrete tiles with differing surface chemistries affect development of early successional stages of marine biofouling communities. Controlled leaching experiments showed that although total metal leaching varied considerably between tile type, tiles containing GGBS resulted in statistically lower amounts of metal released compared with tiles containing PFA. Concrete treatment had no effect on the percentage cover or richness of diatoms, but there were significant increases in both over the duration of the experiment. Concrete treatments containing GGBS had a lower richness of native macro-fouling species compared to the control, but there was no significant difference in non-native species richness among treatments. Results suggest that different components can be used to alter the surface chemistry of concrete to further enhance the ecological value of CMI more than physical features can achieve alone

Greening of grey infrastructure should not be used as a Trojan horse to facilitate coastal development

Climate change and coastal urbanization are driving the replacement of natural habitats with artificial structures and reclaimed land globally. These novel habitats are often poor surrogates for natural habitats. The application of integrated greening of grey infrastructure (IGGI) to artificial shorelines demonstrates how multifunctional structures can provide biodiversity benefits whilst simultaneously serving their primary engineering function. IGGI is being embraced globally, despite many knowledge gaps and limitations. It is a management tool to compensate anthropogenic impacts as part of the Mitigation Hierarchy. There is considerable scope for misuse and ‘greenwashing’ however, by making new developments appear more acceptable, thus facilitating the regulatory process. We encourage researchers to exercise caution when reporting on small-scale experimental trials. We advocate that greater attention is paid to when experiments ‘fail’ or yield unintended outcomes. We advise revisiting, repeating and expanding on experiments to test responses over broader spatio-temporal scales to improve the evidence base. Synthesis and applications. Where societal and economic demand makes development inevitable, particular attention should be paid to avoiding, minimizing and rehabilitating environmental impacts. Integrated greening of grey infrastructure (IGGI) should be implemented as partial compensation for environmental damage. Mutual benefits for both humans and nature can be achieved when IGGI is implemented retrospectively in previously developed or degraded environments. We caution, however, that any promise of net biodiversity gain from new developments should be scrutinized and any local ecological benefits set in the context of the wider environmental impacts. A ‘greened’ development will always impinge on natural systems, a reality that is much less recognized in the sea than on land.</p

Design catalogue for eco-engineering of coastal artificial structures:a multifunctional approach for stakeholders and end-users

Coastal urbanisation, energy extraction, food production, shipping and transportation have led to the global proliferation of artificial structures within the coastal and marine environments (sensu “ocean sprawl”), with subsequent loss of natural habitats and biodiversity. To mitigate and compensate impacts of ocean sprawl, the practice of ecoengineering of artificial structures has been developed over the past decade. Eco-engineering aims to create sustainable ecosystems that integrate human society with the natural environment for the benefit of both. The science of eco-engineering has grown markedly, yet synthesis of research into a user-friendly and practitioner-focused format is lacking. Feedback from stakeholders has repeatedly stated that a “photo user guide” or “manual” covering the range of eco-engineering options available for artificial structures would be beneficial. However, a detailed and structured “user guide” for eco-engineering in coastal and marine environments is not yet possible; therefore we present an accessible review and catalogue of trialled eco-engineering options and a summary of guidance for a range of different structures tailored for stakeholders and end-users as the first step towards a structured manual. This work can thus serve as a potential template for future eco-engineering guides. Here we provide suggestions for potential eco-engineering designs to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and services of coastal artificial structures with the following structures covered: (1) rock revetment, breakwaters and groynes composed of armour stones or concrete units; (2) vertical and sloping seawalls; (3) over-water structures (i.e., piers) and associated support structures; and (4) tidal river walls

Eco-engineered rock pools: a concrete solution to biodiversity loss and urban sprawl in the marine environment

journal_title: Environmental Research Letters article_type: lett article_title: Eco-engineered rock pools: a concrete solution to biodiversity loss and urban sprawl in the marine environment copyright_information: © 2016 IOP Publishing Ltd license_information: cc-by Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI. date_received: 2016-05-12 date_accepted: 2016-08-10 date_epub: 2016-09-1

Habitat Complexity Affects the Structure but Not the Diversity of Sessile Communities on Tropical Coastal Infrastructure

Increasing human population, urbanisation, and climate change have resulted in the proliferation of hard coastal infrastructure such as seawalls and breakwaters. There is increasing impetus to create multifunctional coastal defence structures with the primary function of protecting people and property in addition to providing habitat for marine organisms through eco-engineering - a nature-based solutions approach. In this study, the independent and synergistic effects of physical complexity and seeding with native oysters in promoting diversity and abundances of sessile organisms were assessed at two locations on Penang Island, Malaysia. Concrete tiles with varying physical and biological complexity (flat, 2.5 cm ridges and crevices, and 5 cm ridges and crevices that were seeded or unseeded with oysters) were deployed and monitored over 12 months. The survival of the seeded oysters was not correlated with physical complexity. The addition of physical and biological complexity interacted to promote distinct community assemblages, but did not consistently increase the richness, diversity, or abundances of sessile organisms through time. These results indicate that complexity, whether physical or biological, is only one of many influences on biodiversity on coastal infrastructure. Eco-engineering interventions that have been reported to be effective in other regions may not work as effectively in others due to the highly dynamic conditions in coastal environment. Thus, it is important that other factors such as the local species pools, environmental setting (e.g., wave action), biological factors (e.g., predators), and anthropogenic stressors (e.g., pollution) should also be considered when designing habitat enhancements. Such factors acting individually or synergistically could potentially affect the outcomes of any planned eco-engineering interventions.</jats:p

Chapter 4 Design Options, Implementation Issues and Evaluating Success of Ecologically Engineered Shorelines

Human population growth and accelerating coastal development have been the drivers for unprecedented construction of artificial structures along shorelines globally. Construction has been recently amplified by societal responses to reduce flood and erosion risks from rising sea levels and more extreme storms resulting from climate change. Such structures, leading to highly modified shorelines, deliver societal benefits, but they also create significant socioeconomic and environmental challenges. The planning, design and deployment of these coastal structures should aim to provide multiple goals through the application of ecoengineering to shoreline development. Such developments should be designed and built with the overarching objective of reducing negative impacts on nature, using hard, soft and hybrid ecological engineering approaches. The design of ecologically sensitive shorelines should be context-dependent and combine engineering, environmental and socioeconomic considerations. The costs and benefits of ecoengineered shoreline design options should be considered across all three of these disciplinary domains when setting objectives, informing plans for their subsequent maintenance and management and ultimately monitoring and evaluating their success. To date, successful ecoengineered shoreline projects have engaged with multiple stakeholders (e.g. architects, engineers, ecologists, coastal/port managers and the general public) during their conception and construction, but few have evaluated engineering, ecological and socioeconomic outcomes in a comprehensive manner. Increasing global awareness of climate change impacts (increased frequency or magnitude of extreme weather events and sea level rise), coupled with future predictions for coastal development (due to population growth leading to urban development and renewal, land reclamation and establishment of renewable energy infrastructure in the sea) will increase the demand for adaptive techniques to protect coastlines. In this review, we present an overview of current ecoengineered shoreline design options, the drivers and constraints that influence implementation and factors to consider when evaluating the success of such ecologically engineered shorelines