40 Nature-based Solutions to Build Coastal Community Resilience

As a result of changes including sea-level rise, increased severity and intensity of weather events and degradation of habitats, coastal community resilience has declined. Nature-based solutions have been proposed to build coastal community resilience. These may include revegetation and restoration of habitats including mangroves, saltmarsh, seagrass, coral reef and mussel beds (Bethan et al., 2022).

Restoration of these habitats can result in significant environmental, economic and social benefit. For example, revegetation of mangrove and saltmarsh habitat stabilises coastlines, provides important habitat for species and is an important breeding ground, increases biodiversity and sequester carbon. Mussel beds and coral reefs provide an additional zone of protection for coastal habitats and when used in combination with seagrass, saltmarsh and / or mangrove restoration have increased ability to build coastal community resilience.

Watch the video below to learn about nature based solutions to build coastal community resilience for society and the environment. The video provides examples of nature based solutions that can build resilience and support a sustainable blue economy.

Examples of nature-based solutions

Healthy coastal ecosystems provide services, ranging from food provisioning and carbon sequestration to nutrient cycling and water purification (Barbier et al., 2011; Liquete et al., 2013). These ecosystems, including salt marshes, seagrasses, mangroves, kelp forests, shellfish reefs, and coral reefs, also serve to buffer communities from coastal hazards by reducing physical impacts, such as shoreline erosion, wave energy (Barbier et al., 2011; Temmerman et al., 2022), and storm surge (Guannel et al. 2016). For example, wave height can be reduced by salt marsh vegetation by 60% (Möller et al., 2014), fringing oyster reefs by 30–50% (Wiberg et al., 2018), and coral reefs by 84% (Ferrario et al., 2014). The ability of coastal systems to dampen wave energy can reduce erosion (Chowdhury et al. 2019; Scyphers et al., 2011) and in some cases, trigger a shift from coastal erosion or shoreline retreat to accretion (McClenachan et al., 2020). Attenuation of storm surge by mangrove forests (Zhang et al., 2012) and marshes (Barbier et al. 2013; Gedan et al. 2011) may also contribute to coastal protection by substantially decreasing the vulnerability of coastal communities.

Text Attribution

This text is from “What evidence exists on the performance of nature-based solutions interventions for coastal protection in biogenic, shallow ecosystems? A systematic map protocol”by Avery B. Paxton, Trevor N. Riley, Camille L. Steenrod, Carter S. Smith, Y. Stacy Zhang, Rachel K. Gittman, Brian R. Silliman, Christine A. Buckel, T. Shay Viehman, Brandon J. Puckett & Jenny Davis, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

End Text Attribution

Below are some examples of coastal nature-based solutions. A number of restoration projects are contributing to maintain and rebuild these important ecosystems.

Coral reefs
Mangrove
Saltmarsh
Seagrass

Multi-habitat

A multi-habitat nature-based solution using a cross-habitat approach increases the likelihood of success as different ecosystems are interconnected and one can impact the other. For example, habitats such as mangrove, saltmarsh, seagrass and shellfish or coral reefs may work collectively to provide stability and protection of the coastal environment (Vozzo et al., 2023). In this case, coral and / or shellfish reefs such as mussel or oyster beds, provide protection and baffle or diffuse waves so that the area closer to the coast is not as rough and allows for seagrass, saltmarsh and mangrove habitats to grow. In turn, mangroves and saltmarsh provide nutrients to other habitats and allow for binding of sediment stabilising the coast which reduced the amount of sediment entering seagrass and coral environments which can affect photosynthesis (Earp et al, 2018). Having two or more of these habitats together provides additional support and higher success of nature-based approaches.

Alternative text description provided below.
Figure 1. Interdependencies of ecosystems along the tropical seascape. (Based on Moberg and Folke 1999; Heck et al. 2008; Berkström et al. 2012)
Image Text Version

Figure 1. Interdependencies of ecosystems along the tropical seascape

Diagram showing a cross section of a tropical seascape with 5 interconnected zones with interactions. The 5 zones, from right to left, are ‘land’, ‘mangroves’, ‘seagrass’, ‘coral reef’ and ‘deep sea’ and their interactions are listed below.

Land

Sediments and nutrients flow from land zone to mangrove zone.

Mangrove

Mangrove zone performs 4 functions flowing to both seagrass zone and land zone: sediment binding, nutrient cycling, organic material export and storm buffering. Mangroves also provide a habitat for migratory species and larval export for the seagrass zone.

Seagrass

Seagrass zone performs 6 functions flowing to both the coral reef and mangrove zone. These include: sediment binding, nutrient cycling, organic material export, storm buffering, habitat for migratory species and larval export.

Coral reef

Coral reef zone performs 2 functions flowing to both the deep sea and seagrass zones, including nutrient cycling and organic material export. This zone also performs storm buffering and provides a habitat for migratory species, flowing to the seagrass zone only.

End Image Text Version

“For a World Without Boundaries: Connectivity Between Marine Tropical Ecosystems in Times of Change” in “YOUMARES 8 – Oceans Across Boundaries: Learning from each other” by Hannah S. Earp, Natalie Prinz, Maha J. Cziesielski & Mona Andskog, is licenced under CC BY 4.0

Barriers to coastal restoration

Implementing nature-based solutions in urban environments can bring unique challenges. Some stem from biophysical constraints and their interaction with the built environment. For example, in urban environments, space is often at a premium, and coastal habitats are at risk of coastal squeeze, in which there isn’t space for them to migrate upslope as sea-level rises (Doody, 2013; Beagle et al., 2019; Brinson, Christian & Blum, 1995). Also, sediment supply in urban environments is often dramatically reduced from more natural conditions, starving marshes of sediment, preventing accretion, and thus making it difficult, if not impossible, for them to keep up with sea-level rise (Peteet et al., 2018; Schoellhamer, 1999; Stralberg et al. 2011). Other challenges relate to ownership, governance, regulations, and funding. In urban areas, patchy ownership of real estate along the shoreline complicates coordinated action. Similarly, governmental jurisdictions are often complex and overlapping. Meeting joint objectives requires integration among various levels of government, extensive stakeholder engagement, agreement about the risks faced and feasibility of solutions, and policies that enable desired actions (Hurlimann et al., 2014). Regulatory challenges exist too—for example, regulations designed to prevent the filling of wetlands can prevent the ‘beneficial use’ of sediments for such purposes (Eichenberg, Bothwell & Vaughn, 2001; San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, 2019). Finally, coastal adaptation strategies can be expensive; finding the revenue to devote to future challenges can be difficult for already stressed communities (Hirschfeld & Hill, 2017).

This text is from “Protection and restoration of coastal habitats yield multiple benefits for urban residents as sea levels rise” by A.D. Guerry, J. Silver, J. Beagle, K. Wyatt, K. Arkema, J. Lowe, P. Hamel, R. Griffin, S. Wolny, E. Plane, M. Griswold, H. Papendick & J. Sharma, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0

Click on each of the tabs below to learn more.  

 

Coastal squeeze and coastal urbanization
Landowner rights
Lack of understanding of the benefits

Activity: Test your Knowledge

Test your knowledge in the quiz below:

Activity Text Version

Activity: Test your Knowledge

This exercise invites readers to answer questions to test their knowledge, based on the nature-based solutions to build coastal community resilience information above. Questions and answers are listed below.

Question 1

Which of the following are examples of habitats that can be used as nature-based solutions to build coastal community resilience?

Select all that apply from:

  • Oyster beds
  • Saltmarsh
  • Mangrove
  • Coral reefs
Answers to question 1
  • Oyster beds
  • Saltmarsh
  • Mangrove
  • Coral reefs
Question 2

Which of the following statements are correct in relation to nature-based solutions to building coastal community resilience.

Select all that apply from:

  • Nature-based solutions aim to enhance environmental benefits only and address coastal stability issues
  • Mangrove restoration can aid in coastal protection, stabilisation and carbon sequestration
  • The best way to use nature-based solutions is to focus on restoring a singe habitat at a time
  • Nature-based solutions aim to enhance environmental, social and economic benefits while addressing multiple problems
Answers to question 2
  • Mangrove restoration can aid in coastal protection, stabilisation and carbon sequestration
  • Nature-based solutions aim to enhance environmental, social and economic benefits while addressing multiple problems
Question 3

True or False. Cross-habitat restoration is beneficial over single-habitat restoration because different habitats interlink and support the other. e.g. mangrove and saltmarsh remove sediment from the water to allow seagrass and coral reefs clear water to allow for photosynthesis.

Answers to question 3
  • True
Question 4

Select all correct responses from:

  • Ecosystem accounting could help people understand the importance of ecosystems such as coastal wetlands
  • Landowner rights are not an issue for coastal restoration projects because they are in tidal zones which are not owned by landowners
  • To promote resilient communities, restoration should identify dependency of multiple habitat types on one another
  • Coastal squeeze is caused by anthropogenic buildings or structures that don’t allow for natural movement of coastal wetlands up-shore with sea-level rise
Answers to question 4
  • Ecosystem accounting could help people understand the importance of ecosystems such as coastal wetlands
  • To promote resilient communities, restoration should identify dependency of multiple habitat types on one another
  • Coastal squeeze is caused by anthropogenic buildings or structures that don’t allow for natural movement of coastal wetlands up-shore with sea-level rise

End Activity Text Version

References

Barbier, E. B., Georgiou, I. Y., Enchelmeyer, B., & Reed, D. J. (2013). The value of wetlands in protecting southeast Louisiana from hurricane storm surges. PloS one, 8(3), e58715. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058715

Barbier, E. B., Hacker, S. D., Kennedy, C., Koch, E. W., Stier, A. C., & Silliman, B. R. (2011). The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecological monographs, 81(2), 169-193. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-1510.1

Beagle, J., Lowe, J., McKnight, K., Safran, S.M., Tam, L., Szambelan, S.J., (2019). San Francisco Bay Shoreline Adaptation Atlas: Working with Nature to Plan for Sea Level Rise Using Operational Landscape Units. SFEI Contribution No. 915. p. 255. https://www.sfei.org/documents/san-francisco-bay-shoreline-adaptation-atlas-working-nature-plan-sea-level-rise-using

Brinson, M. M., Christian, R. R., & Blum, L. K. (1995). Multiple states in the sea-level induced transition from terrestrial forest to estuary. Estuaries, 18(4), 648-659. https://doi.org/10.2307/1352383

Chowdhury, M. S. N., Walles, B., Sharifuzzaman, S. M., Shahadat Hossain, M., Ysebaert, T., & Smaal, A. C. (2019). Oyster breakwater reefs promote adjacent mudflat stability and salt marsh growth in a monsoon dominated subtropical coast. Scientific reports, 9(1), 8549. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44925-6

Doody, J. P. (2013). Coastal squeeze and managed realignment in southeast England, does it tell us anything about the future?. Ocean & coastal management, 79, 34-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.008

Earp, H. S., Prinz, N., Cziesielski, M. J., & Andskog, M. (2018, August). For a world without boundaries: connectivity between marine tropical ecosystems in times of change. In YOUMARES 8–Oceans Across Boundaries: Learning from each other: Proceedings of the 2017 conference for YOUng MARine RESearchers in Kiel, Germany (pp. 125-144). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Eichenberg, T., Bothwell, S., & Vaughn, D. (2001). Climate change and the public trust doctrine: using an ancient doctrine to adapt to rising sea levels in San Francisco Bay. Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal, 3(2), 2. https://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/gguelj/vol3/iss2/2/ 

Ferrario, F., Beck, M. W., Storlazzi, C. D., Micheli, F., Shepard, C. C., & Airoldi, L. (2014). The effectiveness of coral reefs for coastal hazard risk reduction and adaptation. Nature communications, 5(1), 3794. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4794

Gedan, K. B., Kirwan, M. L., Wolanski, E., Barbier, E. B., & Silliman, B. R. (2011). The present and future role of coastal wetland vegetation in protecting shorelines: answering recent challenges to the paradigm. Climatic change, 106(1), 7-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-0003-7

Guannel, G., Arkema, K., Ruggiero, P., & Verutes, G. (2016). The power of three: coral reefs, seagrasses and mangroves protect coastal regions and increase their resilience. PloS one, 11(7), e0158094. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158094

Hirschfeld, D., & Hill, K. E. (2017). Choosing a future shoreline for the San Francisco Bay: strategic coastal adaptation insights from cost estimation. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 5(3), 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse5030042

Hurlimann, A., Barnett, J., Fincher, R., Osbaldiston, N., Mortreux, C., & Graham, S. (2014). Urban planning and sustainable adaptation to sea-level rise. Landscape and urban planning, 126, 84-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.12.013

Liquete, C., Piroddi, C., Drakou, E. G., Gurney, L., Katsanevakis, S., Charef, A., & Egoh, B. (2013). Current status and future prospects for the assessment of marine and coastal ecosystem services: a systematic review. PloS one, 8(7), e67737. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067737

McClenachan, G. M., Donnelly, M. J., Shaffer, M. N., Sacks, P. E., & Walters, L. J. (2020). Does size matter? Quantifying the cumulative impact of small‐scale living shoreline and oyster reef restoration projects on shoreline erosion. Restoration Ecology, 28(6), 1365-1371. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13235

Möller, I., Kudella, M., Rupprecht, F., Spencer, T., Paul, M., Van Wesenbeeck, B. K., … & Schimmels, S. (2014). Wave attenuation over coastal salt marshes under storm surge conditions. Nature Geoscience, 7(10), 727-731. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2251

Obst, C., Hein, L., & Edens, B. (2016). National accounting and the valuation of ecosystem assets and their services. Environmental and Resource Economics, 64(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-015-9921-1

Peteet, D. M., Nichols, J., Kenna, T., Chang, C., Browne, J., Reza, M., … & Stern-Protz, S. (2018). Sediment starvation destroys New York City marshes’ resistance to sea level rise. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(41), 10281-10286. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715392115

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. (2019). Bay fill for habitat restoration, enhancement, and creation in a changing bay. 

Schoellhamer, D. H. (2011). Sudden clearing of estuarine waters upon crossing the threshold from transport to supply regulation of sediment transport as an erodible sediment pool is depleted: San Francisco Bay, 1999. Estuaries and Coasts, 34(5), 885-899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-011-9382-x

Scyphers, S. B., Powers, S. P., Heck Jr, K. L., & Byron, D. (2011). Oyster reefs as natural breakwaters mitigate shoreline loss and facilitate fisheries. PloS one, 6(8), e22396. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022396

Stralberg, D., Brennan, M., Callaway, J. C., Wood, J. K., Schile, L. M., Jongsomjit, D., … & Crooks, S. (2011). Evaluating tidal marsh sustainability in the face of sea-level rise: a hybrid modeling approach applied to San Francisco Bay. PloS one, 6(11), e27388. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027388

Temmerman, S., Horstman, E. M., Krauss, K. W., Mullarney, J. C., Pelckmans, I., & Schoutens, K. (2023). Marshes and mangroves as nature-based coastal storm buffers. Annual Review of Marine Science, 15(1), 95-118. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-040422-092951

Vozzo, M. L., Doropoulos, C., Silliman, B. R., Steven, A., Reeves, S. E., Ter Hofstede, R., … & Saunders, M. I. (2023). To restore coastal marine areas, we need to work across multiple habitats simultaneously. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(26), e2300546120.

Zhang, K., Liu, H., Li, Y., Xu, H., Shen, J., Rhome, J., & Smith III, T. J. (2012). The role of mangroves in attenuating storm surges. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 102, 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2012.02.021

Wiberg, P. L., Taube, S. R., Ferguson, A. E., Kremer, M. R., & Reidenbach, M. A. (2019). Wave attenuation by oyster reefs in shallow coastal bays. Estuaries and Coasts, 42(2), 331-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-018-0463-y

 

Licence

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Sustainable Marine Futures Copyright © 2026 by Deakin University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book