This record provides an overview of the NESP Marine and Coastal Hub small-scale study - "A national framework for improving seagrass restoration". For specific data outputs from this project, please see child records associated with this metadata. -------------------- Across Australia, the loss of >275,000 ha of seagrass meadows and associated ecosystem services – valued at AU$ 5.3 billion – has contributed to the long-term degradation of estuarine and coastal marine ecosystems. Restoration of seagrass is critical for improving the health and function of these ecosystems and sustaining coastal communities and industries that depend on them. This is primarily because restoration practices are piecemeal and driven by local drivers and are generally not conducted at scales of seagrass loss. We address this problem by bringing together scientists and key stakeholders to collate knowledge on seagrass ecology and restoration and generate a framework to scaling-up restoration nationally. We also build on ongoing restoration trials to test the proposed framework.These are: assessing sediment quality and manipulations (Gamay Rangers, UNSW); use of sediment filled hessian tubes for seed and seedling capture (Malgana Rangers, UWA), and: scaling up seed collection for seed-based restoration (Seeds for Snapper, OZFISH, UWA). Planned Outputs • Effect of sediment quality and manipulation on seagrass transplant success (field data) • Locations and health of beachcast fragments of Posidonia in Botany Bay (field data) • Effect of engineering hydrodynamics (by use of hessian socks) on seagrass transplant success (field data)

This record provides an overview of the NESP Marine and Coastal Hub small-scale study - "A national inventory of implemented nature-based solutions to mitigate coastal hazards". For specific data outputs from this project, please see child records associated with this metadata. -------------------- Climate change and continued population growth are accelerating the need for diverse solutions to coastal protection. Traditionally shorelines are armoured with conventional “hard” or “grey” engineering structures, which are non-adaptive and come with significant economic, environmental and social costs. While hard structures will continue to have a place in coastal protection, alternative methods that are more sustainable and climate-resilient should be more broadly adopted into the future where appropriate. Nature-based methods (through “soft” or “hybrid” techniques) have the potential to play important roles in climate adaptation and mitigation because of their ability to reduce the threats of coastal erosion and flooding and provide co-benefits such as carbon sequestration. One reason that nature-based methods have been underutilised in Australia is that decision-makers need clearer guidelines for when a soft, hybrid or hard coastal defence approach is most appropriate. This resulted in the recently published foundational guide (led by Morris and Swearer and delivered under ESCC Hub Project 5.9: Natural habitats for coastal protection and carbon sequestration) to inform the national use of nature-based methods for coastal hazard risk reduction. In the process of producing these guidelines, the lack of a national inventory of coastal protection projects already using nature-based methods was identified by end-users as a priority to enable their wider adoption as an adaptation strategy in Australia. This project generates an online inventory of all current and planned on-ground actions by coastal land managers that have implemented a nature-based solution (NBS) to mitigate coastal hazards. The resulting inventory is the first step in identifying best practice, which will inform the future development of detailed technical design guidelines for implementing different nature-based methods in Australia. Planned Outputs • A national inventory of existing implemented nature-based solutions to mitigate coastal hazards [spatial dataset] • Final technical report with analysed data, including a short summary of recommendations for policy makers of key findings [written]