IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v65y2024ics2212041623000670.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatially explicit ecosystem accounts for coastal wetland restoration

Author

Listed:
  • D. P. Costa, Micheli
  • Wartman, Melissa
  • Macreadie, Peter I.
  • Ferns, Lawrance W.
  • Holden, Rhiannon L.
  • Ierodiaconou, Daniel
  • MacDonald, Kimberley J.
  • Mazor, Tessa K.
  • Morris, Rebecca
  • Nicholson, Emily
  • Pomeroy, Andrew
  • Zavadil, Elisa A.
  • Young, Mary
  • Snartt, Rohan
  • Carnell, Paul

Abstract

Coastal wetlands (i.e., mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrasses) have been recognised as an efficient natural climate solution to help mitigate and adapt to climate change. These ecosystems are also known to provide additional ecosystem services to coastal communities (e.g., fisheries and biodiversity enhancement, nutrient removal). Despite their importance to coasts and coastal communities, we lack spatially explicit information on the values of these ecosystems and the estimated return on investment from coastal management activities to rehabilitate them. Here, we aligned an environmental economic accounting framework combined with a scenario analysis to develop a set of accounts for mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrasses across the state of Victoria (Australia) as a case study, including the following ecosystem services: commercial and recreational fisheries, carbon and nitrogen sequestration, and coastal hazard mitigation. Importantly, we assessed the current extent, condition, and ecosystem services (physical and monetary) from these coastal ecosystems and examined how they could be improved through management actions. Overall, we found that the combined benefit (i.e., nitrogen and carbon sequestration, fisheries, and coastal hazard mitigation) provided by existing mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrasses in Victoria is approximately AUD120.9 billion per year. Considering the management scenarios included in this study, our analysis showed that levee removal plus managed retreat had the highest cost at AUD7.6 billion; however, it also provided the highest net benefit of AUD134.8 trillion after 50Â years, with a 5Â % discount rate. In contrast, fencing was the cheapest management action to restore mangroves and saltmarshes, delivering more than AUD140 billion after 50Â years. While our results demonstrate a large return on investment if coastal wetlands are restored at large scale, the implementation of small-scale projects is still a major challenge. However, this study demonstrates that an environmental economic accounting framework combined with a scenario analysis is a powerful approach to guide the decision-making process, providing critical information on the estimated return-on-investment from restoration of mangroves and saltmarshes, with encouraging implications of the impacts of actions at local scales.

Suggested Citation

  • D. P. Costa, Micheli & Wartman, Melissa & Macreadie, Peter I. & Ferns, Lawrance W. & Holden, Rhiannon L. & Ierodiaconou, Daniel & MacDonald, Kimberley J. & Mazor, Tessa K. & Morris, Rebecca & Nicholso, 2024. "Spatially explicit ecosystem accounts for coastal wetland restoration," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:65:y:2024:i:c:s2212041623000670
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041623000670
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2023.101574?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:65:y:2024:i:c:s2212041623000670. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.