Coastal management
Coastal management includes strategies to assess and protect coastal zones and mitigate hazardous erosion and flooding1, 2. Coastal regions include urban and rural settlements and are significant for human habitation, work, and recreation3. Around 40% of the human population lives in coastal regions and human migration and activities in these areas are increasing, putting pressure on ecosystems and reducing their beneficial qualities1, 2, 4.
Coastal managers and planners in the U.S. work at the state level to inform and adhere to federal coastal protection and management statutes5. Local and regional organizations can also lead and influence initiatives5. Coastal regions include land adjacent to oceans, seas, estuaries, major rivers, and very large lakes3. Diverse habitats in coastal watersheds, such as marshes and wetlands, are often included in management plans6, 7. Plans which anticipate threats like sea level rise related to climate change and acute events like oil spills are also part of coastal management2. Coastal management strategies can often be categorized as plans focusing on protection, accommodation, retreat, or sacrifice, which is usually sought when the first three are not feasible1. Most coastal management approaches focus on protection and include common risk-reducing strategies like adding or enhancing grey (built) or natural infrastructure, or a combination, to reduce risk for habitat degradation and risk to human communities and economic livelihoods. Grey infrastructure includes hard structures parallel to shorelines for protection against storm surge and flooding, such as seawalls and levees, as well as structures to slow erosion such as sloping revetments, rock jetties and breakwaters. Natural infrastructure restores existing or naturally occurring features and processes, such as removing barriers to allow for tidal flows and sediment augmentation in marshes and barrier islands; restoring oyster and coral reefs; restoring and planting mangroves and native vegetation which can stabilize shorelines so species and habitats can migrate inland; and changing land use to conserve and connect habitats2.
What could this strategy improve?
Expected Benefits
Our evidence rating is based on the likelihood of achieving these outcomes:
Improved wildlife habitat
Improved ecosystem restoration
Improved health outcomes
Improved mental health
Improved well-being
What does the research say about effectiveness?
Coastal management is a suggested strategy to support biodiverse, healthy ecosystems and human health8, 9. Coastal zones and their habitats directly and indirectly support human health, well-being, and safety8. Ecosystem and human well-being are interconnected, so experts recommend considering both when designing management interventions, including allocating resource rights and zoning for protection and use. Benefits that people derive from nature, from material provisions to regulating, supportive, and cultural functions, are often called ecosystem services. More research is needed which explicitly measures how coastal ecosystem services enhance human well-being9. Experts agree that protective strategies are necessary for successful coastal management2, 8, 9; however, more information is needed to confirm the best approaches and strategies for cross-sector collaborations, such as with public health and environmental agencies.
Benefits. Access to green and blue spaces, such as water or coasts, provides mental, physical and social benefits to human health8. Access to blue space for recreation appears to have positive effects on mental health3. Direct exposure may reduce stress and anxiety and encourage physical activity8. Healthier ecosystems provide higher quality ecosystem services, which support humans’ physical and psychological health, including supporting humans’ immune and respiratory health and reducing infectious disease transmission. Healthy ecosystems have aesthetic, cultural, spiritual, and recreational value, produce material goods like food, fiber, and medicine, and support economic livelihoods8.
Conversely, degraded ecosystems present risks to human and other species’ health3. Ecosystems are threatened by climate change, land-based pollution, unsustainable resource extraction, and habitat degradation9. These threats contribute to human and other species’ exposure to toxic algal blooms, infectious disease organisms (such as bacteria and microbes from sewage pollution), oil spills, and chemicals in air, water, soil, and seafood. Sea level rise and extreme weather events increase exposure to storms and flooding, which can cause death, displacement, loss of sites of community and cultural value, and disturb social and familial networks – experiences which are shown to negatively affect mental and physical health3.
Storm protection. Coastal regions can provide storm protection for nearby communities and mitigate erosion. Healthy coastal wetlands have vegetation growing in shallow water, which work to reduce surges and waves. Wetlands can absorb floodwater and reduce flood damage. Wetland type, storm type and severity, and region play a role in these complex interactions. As of 2021, a multi-country study of tropical cyclones estimates that the storm protection value of coastal wetlands is nearly $450 billion annually10.
Carbon sequestration. Coastal habitats sequester carbon and avoid CO2 emissions2, 11. Rates vary among coastal habitat types, but some research suggests sediment may trap organic carbon better than terrestrial forests over the long term. Estimates suggest that the degradation and loss of coastal habitats could release up to 1 billion tons of CO2 annually2. Protecting coastal habitats is highly recommended as a strategy that quickly avoids CO2 emissions and sequesters carbon11.
Natural infrastructure refers to both natural habitats and installations which mimic natural processes and protect coastal habitats. Experts suggest this approach may add cultural and recreational benefits, while reducing erosion and preserving habitats. A review of coastal management across habitat types (tidal marshes, beaches and barrier islands, biogenic reefs, and mangroves) suggests natural infrastructure included in multi-component coastal adaptation strategies increases areas’ resilience to sea level rise and storm impacts. Natural infrastructure implementation must be tailored to the location. Natural infrastructure can increase overall habitat area, including inland from shorelines, which can exponentially reduce wave height and storm surge. Restoring and nourishing beaches, dunes, and islands (e.g., adding sand or appropriate sediment, establishing dune grass) can be beneficial, depending on the site and species’ habit requirements. Limiting development and preserving or restoring nearby open space reduces risk when waves overtop natural or grey barriers. Such space may also allow marshes, mangroves, and beaches to migrate – maintaining access to these habitats for all species2.
Grey infrastructure is frequently used first in coastal risk reduction efforts and remains a focus in many communities’ approaches. Compared with alternatives, grey infrastructure such as seawalls can often be built quickly to address flooding, wave impacts, and erosion and its cost-effectiveness is well-studied. However, grey infrastructure is expensive to maintain, repair, and replace and can negatively impact local environments, including leading to fragmented habitats, declines in biodiversity, and increases in invasive species. More research is needed on hybrid approaches combining grey and natural infrastructure and on how well grey, natural, and hybrid infrastructure compare in reducing flood risk2.
Challenges. Experts caution that some widely used solutions can have negative impacts. Sand nourishment has a short lifetime, can be expensive to maintain, and can harm both the dredged ocean and beach environments. For example, beach habitats may no longer be suitable if the new sand quality differs from what species require for nesting. Structures built to reduce beach erosion can increase erosion in other locations1. Beach and shoreline stabilization projects can also conflict with each other or local practices, reducing the projects’ effectiveness; for example, oyster reefs to stabilize shorelines can be over-harvested2.
Recommendations. Experts recommend that decision makers integrate local community engagement in coastal, environmental, land-use, and climate adaptation projects12 and recommend making projects’ management and financing transparent, which may increase social acceptability and ecological fit1. Scientifically informed approaches and strategies can vary and should be chosen based on local needs and geographies1. Data and monitoring are critical to management; experts note that adaptive frameworks and decision support tools allow managers to continually update data and risk predictions and to better evaluate interventions2. More investment in monitoring and evaluation is needed to address underreporting and data gaps. For example, wetland restoration projects may describe areas as restored, but in-depth evaluations documenting ecosystem service recovery are rare. Experts recommend looking to strong examples like standardized oyster reef monitoring13.
How could this strategy advance health equity? This strategy is rated inconclusive impact on disparities.
The impacts of U.S. coastal management interventions on disparities are inconclusive. Interventions vary by geography and community and studies do not focus on disparities or equity impacts. Experts suggest that coastal management interventions focused on protection and restoration of coastal habitats may decrease disparities and the disproportionate burden of severe storms, climate change, and coastal environment changes, if interventions are targeted to benefit coastal residents and communities with lower incomes and at risk for marginalization. There are many areas in the U.S. at risk, including small Indigenous communities in Alaska and Washington state who may lack the resources and political influence of larger cities for coastal management and disaster planning. Estimates suggest that sea level rise by 2100 threatens between 4 and 13 million people in the continental U.S. alone, who live in both large and small communities, with the most people at risk in California, Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey, and New York29. Intervention design and implementation will determine whether coastal management efforts reduce disparities in U.S. communities and territories or not.
Economic inequality increases vulnerability to economic shocks like climate disasters. Countries with higher inequality and larger populations experiencing poverty are likely to experience more severe effects from climate disasters1. Communities that are disadvantaged are more likely to be exposed to hazards and residents’ experiences with marginalization may reasonably discourage them from engaging in disaster planning or seeking resources in post-disaster settings4. Neighborhoods with lower incomes, which are at high risk of extreme weather events, including floods, drought, heat, and wildfires, have experienced faster population growth than lower risk areas. This may be partially due to local regulations in lower risk areas that prevent or limit the growth of sustainable infill housing development30.
People’s access to benefits from coastal ecosystems is mediated by power, such that benefits flow unevenly9. Ecosystem-based management (EBM) approaches prioritize managing competing uses for the marine environment without degrading it31. Some countries integrate cultural preservation, environmental health, and economic development strategies, as with Australia’s Reef 2050 Plan, its long-term sustainability plan for the Great Barrier Reef. This plan includes actions to protect Indigenous cultural heritage and to promote ecosystem health alongside sustainable economic activities32. Aotearoa New Zealand’s ten-year research program Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge also uses a co-governance and EBM approach33.
EBM approaches may draw on Indigenous environmental governance and management approaches, which focus on long-term sustainability of ecosystems and livelihoods and resilience to disturbances. Indigenous communities’ leadership and participation in coastal and marine governance and management may contribute to more inclusive processes and effective management strategies. Indigenous sovereignty was not ended by colonization and nation-states are bound (e.g., by international law and agreement, treaties, and case law decisions) to recognize Indigenous right to involvement in planning and management regarding ancestral lands and waters33. Indigenous communities may experience greater cultural consequences with biodiversity decline, per a case study from New Zealand34. Communities which relocate may lose the relevance of traditional environmental knowledge35. Case studies emphasize that people’s well-being can influence ecosystems; for example, an Australian study suggests that revitalizing Indigenous knowledge and practices like landscape burning can benefit the environment9. More research is needed regarding the ability and comfort of women and gender minorities in Indigenous groups to participate fully in governance and management processes. Experiences vary and people with these identities may have different access to environmental benefits, different exposure to environmental threats, and barriers to participating in forums and decision-making33.
Hawaiian communities have long used an Indigenous resource management approach, which prioritizes maintaining sustainable resource abundance (e.g., reciprocal ecosystem service optimization, including for food production and biodiversity conservation). However, colonization of Hawai‘i by Amer-Europeans and the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai‘i in 1893, followed by the U.S. centralized governance system, have contributed to habitat loss, invasive species, and over-extraction – meaning Hawai‘i has endangered species and extinction rates among the world’s highest36. Approaches now used in Hawai‘i include community-based management (common resources managed by the community), collaborative management (community-based management with formal government or private support), and conservation efforts initiated by Indigenous people and local communities (IPLCs), referred to as Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs). Some ICCAs are formalized through collaborative agreements. The ICCA management approach emphasizes that stewardship responsibility is rooted in relationship to lands and waters, through genealogy, lifeways and longevity there, not in land ownership, and it identifies roles for all generations in sustaining the lands and waters for the future36. These communities have navigated challenges to create collaborative management agreements with U.S. state and federal authorities and large landowners. Funding instability for ICCA land and sea-based projects is a challenge, with most work funded through short-term grants; however, one innovative funding stream includes a non-profit which operates under legal mandate and receives payments from luxury homeowners (% of real property value), with funds earmarked to protect natural and cultural resources36.
Coastal management through planned relocation. Erosion associated with sea level rise, more intense storms, and extreme high tides threaten coastal and island communities in the near-term, reducing habitability and exposing communities to catastrophic events. Experts caution that planned relocation, also called managed retreat, aims to move communities before such events, though planning takes years, reaching consensus can be a challenge, and relocation can negatively impact health, sociocultural, and economic conditions. Experts recommend the U.S. create a federal strategy for managed retreat, to better coordinate community relocations and avoid unmanaged displacement – emphasizing that advance plans can be an adaptive tool to maintain thriving communities with coastal connections37. Studies of displacement due to conflict, drought, and flooding suggest climate change associated displacement is likely to include similar effects35.
Impacts include mental health effects (e.g., anxiety, depression, substance abuse, suicide), reduced health care access, and lost social capital, especially among those with a strong attachment to place. Immediate health exposures include environmental hazards (e.g. flooding), which increase the risk of drowning, trauma, and disease exposure, and may limit access to clean water. Securing funding for relocation is a significant barrier, as experienced by the Alaska Native Village of Kivalina, on Alaska’s barrier islands. Federal and state agencies did not agree to fund Kivalina’s relocation, and the Village lost a lawsuit against fossil fuel companies who contributed to climate change35.
Residents of small, relocated communities in the U.S. describe concerns with the process and outcomes, including the search for suitable and affordable land, loss of property, lower quality of replacement housing, lack of job opportunities, and reduced food security in communities reliant on subsistence fishing and agriculture. More research is needed on health impacts of managed retreat, including direct measurement providing before and after data to inform interventions and how to support community resilience35.
Strategies which may support resilience for communities considering relocation include adequate, sustained funding and significant involvement from residents to ensure the new location meets priorities. Where feasible, some relocated communities have maintained access to the original community site, for example, to access fishing and nurture ties to the area. Communities want new locations to include improved infrastructure (e.g., walkability, energy efficiency, stormwater management and sanitation) as well as shared spaces and resources like community centers and ‘relocation archives.’ Community decision-making and implementation of plans require timely information about existing and anticipated hazards and adequate human capital for building, planning, and service delivery35.
What is the relevant historical background?
Humans have long lived near, valued, and utilized coastal ecosystems, for economic as well as social and recreational purposes. Coastal erosion is accelerated by human activities, including dams and other watershed interventions, which impair sediment transport downstream, and coastal urban development, which changes land cover types and increases impermeable surfaces. These activities have contributed to beach erosion and retreating shorelines over the past 60 years, putting more areas at risk for coastal flooding, which is predicted to increase as human-caused climate change raises sea levels and increases storm frequency and severity and wave height1.
In the U.S., the federal government and states share authority for coastal management. The 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act guides coastal protection efforts and outlines fundamental federal requirements. States can tailor their coastal management programs based on their coastal landscapes, issue permits for coastal management projects, and some have comprehensive guidance for coastal planners. States can also mandate that local governments monitor features like beaches, and some states regularly publish reports on coastline status, funding, and long-term plans for coastal management1.
The 1989 federal “No Net Loss” policy recognizes wetlands as a valued resource in the U.S. and provides federal funding for restoration and mitigation efforts, though evidence suggests efforts are not keeping pace with wetlands that are being degraded or eliminated, such as in development projects. While a 2008 rule requires that companies protect and steward mitigated wetland sites, whether companies comply is not known. Replaced and mitigated wetlands may also be inferior to the naturally occurring sites. Other wetland degradation and loss occurs that is not covered by current policy or regulation, meaning experts recommend more investment in wetland protection and restoration to achieve goals13. Litigation and decisions related to the Clean Water Act (1972) also impact coastal and wetland management. A 2023 Supreme Court decision (Sackett v. EPA) and corresponding EPA rule changes appear likely to weaken or eliminate federal protections for wetlands across the U.S., including inland wetlands, depending on how the changes are interpreted. This would leave a patchwork of state protections38.
Experts who conducted a multi-country analysis recommend that local coastal management be guided by broader regulatory frameworks, at the regional, national, or supranational level, and that protections be legally mandated and enforced. Where this is not feasible, an adaptation-focused approach may be more pragmatic, accompanied by early warning systems to support decision-making. Legislation should establish funding, though if federal funding is unreliable due to shifting political support, grants and innovative funding sources like public-private partnerships should be sought1. The Biden Administration formed a federal interagency subcommittee to support communities considering relocation in response to climate impacts or pollution hazards, offering guidance and tools as well as highlighting opportunities to secure federal support39, 40. This subcommittee emphasized the necessity of community participation in designing and implementing their own relocation projects, so communities can continue to protect, define, and determine their own future40. The Trump Administration disbanded this subcommittee, despite its work’s alignment with United Nations (UN) principles. As of 2025, the UN principles for planned relocation include that it should be a last resort; that states should ensure sufficient and sustainable funds; that persons or groups should have the right to request or challenge such relocation before a court of law; and that such relocation occur within a rights-based framework protecting relocated people’s individual and collective civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights39.
Equity Considerations
- Who leads coastal management efforts in your local neighborhood, region, or state? How are communities engaged in decision-making?
- Do coastal management efforts include assessing environmental and biodiversity impacts and co-benefits? Is this required by legislation? How are interventions evaluated?
- Who can exercise their rights to access and utilize coastal resources? Are Indigenous communities able to exercise their rights to guide management and protection?
Implementation Examples
The National Coastal Zone Management Program is a voluntary partnership between the federal government and coastal and Great Lakes states and territories, authorized by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and based in the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office for Coastal Management. As of 2025, 34 coastal states participate, combining federal and state expertise for their unique programs14. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversees multiple programs and partnerships in coastal management. The EPA also compares interventions, for example, the cost-benefits associated with green infrastructure like living shorelines15. Scientists, natural resource managers, and communities can also partner and access research, data, and tools via the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers, a network covering the U.S., Affiliated Pacific Islands, and U.S. Caribbean16.
The National Sea Grant College Program is a long-running federal-university partnership that supports coastal, marine, and Great Lakes research, extension and education; as of 2023, Sea Grant reported that a federal investment of $94 million provided an economic benefit of $828 million. This includes direct work with communities on their priorities for climate adaptation and disaster recovery, as well as long-term planning17. Some state-based organizations have longstanding partnerships with Sea Grant to provide education and fund research on local priorities, such as Sea Grant North Carolina18.
Multi-state decision support and mapping tools include Coastal Resilience, which helps planners, government officials, and communities identify strategies to reduce risk, restore coastal habitats, and promote resilience, developed through a public-private partnership19. State agencies, like North Carolina’s Division of Coastal Management, can also offer comprehensive resources, including hazard forecasts, adaptation examples, and tools for assessment and planning20.
Coastal States Organization (CSO) is a non-profit that supports states and territories with Coastal Zone Management Plans and facilitates learning and network strengthening among coastal practitioners21. Organizations focused on specific habitats include America’s Estuaries, which offers accessible information about coastal ecosystem health, grant opportunities22, and the status of federal funding for coastal management and adaptation measures23. Project Drawdown evaluates protection measures for coastal wetlands and reports on their effectiveness11. State-based organizations like the California Coastkeeper Alliance advocate for coastal protection policies and participate in global networks24.
International efforts in coastal zones often link to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 14: Life Below Water, which emphasizes conserving and sustainably using oceans, seas, and marine resources, noting that these ecosystems’ health are essential to life on Earth25. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) regularly reports on coastal zone management and coastal and marine ecosystem health26. Notable examples outside the U.S. include Adapt Land&Sea, an online platform developed by Australia’s National Environmental Science Program to connect decision-makers with climate adaptation insights and tools27. As of 2016, legislation in the Australian state New South Wales mandates that local authorities create Coastal Management Programs (CMPs), comprehensive long-term strategies to assess risks and opportunities, evaluate options (including budget and funding), and to implement plans with continued monitoring and evaluation1. The Coalition on Dignified Climate Relocation includes community leaders, researchers, and advocates around the world and work focuses on maintaining autonomy and dignity for communities likely forced to relocate due to climate change28.
Implementation Resources
‡ Resources with a focus on equity.
NOAA OCM-CZMP About - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Office for Coastal Management. (n.d.). About the National Coastal Zone Management Program. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
NOAA-Sea Grant - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Sea Grant. (n.d.). National Sea Grant College Program. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
CSO-About - Coastal States Organization (CSO). (n.d.). About us. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
Coastal Resilience - Coastal Resilience. (n.d.). About. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
IPCC-Coastal Zone Management 2018 - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); FAR Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies. (2018). 5. Coastal zone management. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
Footnotes
* Journal subscription may be required for access.
1 Toledo 2025 - Toledo, I., Laino, E., Iglesias, G., Palazón, A., & Aragonés, L. (2025). Local authorities or national frameworks? A global review on coastal protection policies. Environmental Development, 53, 101119.
2 Powell 2019 - Powell, E. J., Tyrrell, M. C., Milliken, A., Tirpak, J. M., & Staudinger, M. D. (2019). A review of coastal management approaches to support the integration of ecological and human community planning for climate change. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 23(1), 1–18.
3 Sandifer 2023 - Sandifer, P. A. (2023). Linking coastal environmental and health observations for human wellbeing. Frontiers in Public Health, 11.
4 Fox 2023 - Fox, N., Tilt, J. H., Ruggiero, P., Stanton, K., & Bolte, J. (2023). Toward equitable coastal community resilience: Incorporating principles of equity and justice in coastal hazard adaptation. Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures, 1, e36.
5 Nicholas Institute-Karasik 2023 - Karasik, R., Pickle, A., O’Shea, M., Reilly, K., Bruce, M., Earnhardt, R., & Ahmed, I. (2023). State of the coast: A review of coastal management policies for six states. Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability.
6 Powell 2018 - Powell D, Pacula RL, Jacobson M. Do medical marijuana laws reduce addictions and deaths related to pain killers? Journal of Health Economics. 2018;58:29-42.
7 Annis 2017 - Annis, G. M., Pearsall, D. R., Kahl, K. J., Washburn, E. L., May, C. A., Taylor, R. F., Cole, J. B., Ewert, D. N., Game, E. T., & Doran, P. J. (2017). Designing coastal conservation to deliver ecosystem and human well-being benefits. PLOS ONE, 12(2), e0172458.
8 Sutton-Grier 2019 - Sutton-Grier, A. E., & Sandifer, P. A. (2019). Conservation of wetlands and other coastal ecosystems: A commentary on their value to protect biodiversity, reduce disaster impacts, and promote human health and well-being. Wetlands, 39(6), 1295–1302.
9 Blythe 2020 - Blythe, J., Armitage, D., Alonso, G., Campbell, D., Esteves Dias, A. C., Epstein, G., Marschke, M., & Nayak, P. (2020). Frontiers in coastal well-being and ecosystem services research: A systematic review. Ocean & Coastal Management, 185, 105028.
10 Costanza 2021 - Costanza, R., Anderson, S. J., Sutton, P., Mulder, K., Mulder, O., Kubiszewski, I., Wang, X., Liu, X., Pérez-Maqueo, O., Luisa Martinez, M., Jarvis, D., & Dee, G. (2021). The global value of coastal wetlands for storm protection. Global Environmental Change, 70, 102328.
11 Project Drawdown-Coastal Wetlands - Project Drawdown. (n.d.). Protect coastal wetlands. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
12 Spidalieri 2020 - Spidalieri, K. (2020). Where the wetlands are—and where they are going: Legal and policy tools for facilitating coastal ecosystem migration in response to sea-level rise. Wetlands, 40(6), 1765–1776.
13 Gittman 2019 - Gittman, R. K., Baillie, C. J., Arkema, K. K., Bennett, R. O., Benoit, J., Blitch, S., Brun, J., Chatwin, A., Colden, A., Dausman, A., DeAngelis, B., Herold, N., Henkel, J., Houge, R., Howard, R., Hughes, A. R., Scyphers, S. B., Shostik, T., Sutton-Grier, A., & Grabowski, J. H. (2019). Voluntary restoration: Mitigation’s silent partner in the quest to reverse coastal wetland loss in the USA. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6.
14 NOAA OCM-CZMP - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Office for Coastal Management. (n.d.). Coastal Zone Management Program. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
15 US EPA-Green Coasts - United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA); Green Infrastructure and Extreme Weather. (n.d.). Protect coasts. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
16 USGS-CASCS - United States Geological Survey (USGS). (n.d.). Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs). Retrieved December 4, 2025.
17 NOAA-Sea Grant - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Sea Grant. (n.d.). National Sea Grant College Program. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
18 NCSU-NCSG - North Carolina State University (NCSU). (n.d.). Sea Grant North Carolina. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
19 Coastal Resilience - Coastal Resilience. (n.d.). About. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
20 NCDEQ-Resiliency - North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ); Division of Coastal Management. (n.d.). Coastal resiliency. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
21 CSO-About - Coastal States Organization (CSO). (n.d.). About us. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
22 RAE-About - Restore America’s Estuaries (RAE). (n.d.). About. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
23 RAE-Coastal FY26 - Restore America’s Estuaries (RAE). (n.d.). About. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
24 CCA-About - California Coastkeeper Alliance (CCA). (n.d.). About us. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
25 UN SDG 14 - United Nations; Sustainable Development Goals. (n.d.). Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
26 IPCC-Publication - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (n.d.). Publication. Retrieved December 4, 2025.
27 Adapt LandSea - National Environmental Science Program Australia. Adapt Land&Sea. (n.d.). Retrieved December 4, 2025.
28 CDCR - Coalition on Dignified Climate Relocation (CDCR). (2026). About the coalition. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
29 Hauer 2016 - Hauer, M. E., Evans, J. M., & Mishra, D. R. (2016). Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nature Climate Change, 6, 691–695.
30 Brookings-Vajjhala 2023 - Vajjhala, S., Martin, A., Kane, J. W., Tomer, A., Schuetz, J., Donoghoe, M., Maxim, R., & Briggs, X. de S. (2023, October 6). Around the halls: Brookings scholars discuss the White House’s new National Climate Resilience Framework. Brookings.
31 NZ NSC-Seas - New Zealand National Science Challenges (NZ NSC). (n.d.). Sustainable Seas Challenge: Why do we need EBM? Retrieved January 28, 2026.
32 Ferrara 2024 - Ferrara, E., Marco, R. D., Zappacosta, A., Filograsso, I., & Sinjari, B. (2024). Integrating coastal cultural heritage, blue economy, and one health: A holistic framework for sustainable coastal management. 3rd International Conference on Visual Pattern Extraction and Recognition for Cultural Heritage Understanding. VIPERC 2024.
33 Parsons 2021 - Parsons, M., Taylor, L., & Crease, R. (2021). Indigenous environmental justice within marine ecosystems: A systematic review of the literature on indigenous peoples’ involvement in marine governance and management. Sustainability, 13(8), 4217.
34 Dick 2012 - Dick, J., Stephenson, J., Moller, H., & Turner, R. (2012). Listening to the kaitiaki: Consequences of the loss of abundance and biodiversity of coastal ecosystems in Aotearoa New Zealand. Mai Journal, 1(2), 117–130.
35 Dannenberg 2019 - Dannenberg, A. L., Frumkin, H., Hess, J. J. & Ebi, K. L. (2019). Managed retreat as a strategy for climate change adaptation in small communities: Public health implications. Climatic Change, 153, 1–14.
36 Winter 2023 - Winter, K. B., Vaughan, M. B., Kurashima, N., Wann, L., Cadiz, E., Kawelo, A. H., Cypher, M., Kaluhiwa, L., & Springer, H. K. (2023). Indigenous stewardship through novel approaches to collaborative management in Hawaiʻi. Ecology and Society, 28(1).
37 Siders 2019 - Siders, A.R. (2019). Managed retreat in the United States. One Earth, 1(2), 216-225.
38 Gold 2024 - Gold, A. C. (2024). How wet must a wetland be to have federal protections in post-Sackett U.S.? Science, 385(6716), 1450–1453.
39 IDRP-Ferris 2025 - Ferris, E., Bower, E., & Weerasinghe, S. (2025, October 30). Revisiting the 2015 guidance on planned relocations: A decade of progress and future horizons. IDRP, Climate, Disaster Risk Reduction and Management, Solutions. Researching Internal Displacement. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
40 US DOI-Relocation 2024 - United States Department of the Interior (US DOI). (2024, December 9). Press release: New interagency resources highlight opportunities for federal support of voluntary community-driven relocation due to severe environmental hazards from climate change. Retrieved January 28, 2026.
Related What Works for Health Strategies
To see all strategies:
countyhealthrankings.org/whatworks