Public perception of coastal habitat loss and habitat creation using artificial floating islands in the UK

Autoři: Jessica Ware aff001;  Ruth Callaway aff001
Působiště autorů: Biosciences, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224424


Eco-engineering and the installation of green infrastructure such as artificial floating islands (AFIs), are novel techniques used to support biodiversity. The European Convention on Biological Diversity highlighted the development of green infrastructure as a key method of enhancement in degraded habitats. Research specifically on AFIs in marine environments has largely focused on their ecological functioning role and engineering outcomes, with little consideration for the social benefits or concerns. The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of public perception of coastal habitat loss in the UK and AFIs as a method of habitat creation in coastal environments. This was achieved via a survey, consisting of six closed and two open questions. Of the 200 respondents, 94.5% were concerned about the loss of coastal habitats in the UK, but less than a third were aware of habitat restoration or creation projects in their area of residence. There was a positive correlation between proximity of residency to the coast and knowledge of habitat restoration or creation projects. The majority of the respondents understood the ecological functioning role of AFIs and 62% would preferably want successful plant growth and avian species utilising the AFI. Nearly a third of the respondents had concerns about AFI installations, such as the degradation of the plastic matrix, long term maintenance and disturbance of native species. Despite 90.9% of the respondents supporting the installation of AFIs, the concerns of the public must be addressed during the planning stages of any habitat creation project.

Klíčová slova:

Biodiversity – Birds – Conservation science – Habitats – Invasive species – Islands – Surveys – Wetlands


1. Bulleri F, Chapman MG. The introduction of coastal infrastructure as a driver of change in marine environments. J Appl Ecol. 2010;47(1):26–35.

2. European Environment Agency. EEA Environment Statement 2006. The Changing Faces of Europe’s Coastal Areas. [Internet]. EUR-OP; 2006 [cited 2018 Jul 3]. 1–67 p. Available from:

3. Mercader M, Mercière A, Saragoni G, Cheminée A, Crec’hriou R, Pastor J, et al. Small artificial habitats to enhance the nursery function for juvenile fish in a large commercial port of the Mediterranean. Ecol Eng [Internet]. 2017 Aug [cited 2018 Jun 11];105:78–86. Available from:

4. Sekovski I, Newton A, Dennison WC. Megacities in the coastal zone: Using a driver-pressure-state-impact-response framework to address complex environmental problems. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci. 2012;96(1):48–59.

5. Beck M, Airoldi L. Loss, Status and Trends for Coastal Marine Habitats of Europe [Internet]. 2007. 345–405 p. Available from:

6. Creel L. Ripple effects: Population and coastal regions. Mak link. 2003;8.

7. Firth LB, Knights AM, Bridger D, Evans AJ, Mieszkowska N, Moore PJ, et al. Ocean sprawl: Challenges and opportunities for biodiversity management in a changing world. Oceanogr Mar Biol An Annu Rev. 2016;54(September):193–269.

8. Chapman MG, Underwood AJ. Evaluation of ecological engineering of “armoured” shorelines to improve their value as habitat. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol [Internet]. 2011 Apr 30 [cited 2019 Sep 2];400(1–2):302–13. Available from:

9. Firth LB, Mieszkowska N, Thompson RC, Hawkins SJ. Climate change and adaptational impacts in coastal systems: the case of sea defences. Environ Sci Process Impacts [Internet]. 2013 Aug 21 [cited 2019 Sep 2];15(9):1665. Available from: doi: 10.1039/c3em00313b 23900344

10. Moschella PS, Abbiati M, Åberg P, Airoldi L, Anderson JM, Bacchiocchi F, et al. Low-crested coastal defence structures as artificial habitats for marine life: Using ecological criteria in design. Coast Eng [Internet]. 2005 Nov 1 [cited 2019 Sep 2];52(10–11):1053–71. Available from:

11. Airoldi L, Abbiati M, Beck MW, Hawkins SJ, Jonsson PR, Martin D, et al. An ecological perspective on the deployment and design of low-crested and other hard coastal defence structures. Coast Eng [Internet]. 2005 Nov 1 [cited 2019 Sep 2];52(10–11):1073–87. Available from:

12. Evans AJ, Firth LB, Hawkins SJ, Hall AE, Ironside JE, Thompson RC, et al. From ocean sprawl to blue-green infrastructure–A UK perspective on an issue of global significance. Environ Sci Policy [Internet]. 2019;91(November 2017):60–9. Available from:

13. Nicholls RJ, Cazenave A. Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones. Science [Internet]. 2010 Jun 18 [cited 2019 Sep 2];328(5985):1517–20. Available from: doi: 10.1126/science.1185782 20558707

14. Bader J, Mesquita MDS, Hodges KI, Keenlyside N, Østerhus S, Miles M. A review on Northern Hemisphere sea-ice, storminess and the North Atlantic Oscillation: Observations and projected changes. Atmos Res [Internet]. 2011 Sep 1 [cited 2019 Sep 2];101(4):809–34. Available from:

15. Thompson RC, Crowe TP, Hawkins SJ. Rocky intertidal communities: Past environmental changes, present status and predictions for the next 25 years. Environ Conserv. 2002;29(2):168–91.

16. Mercader M, Mercière A, Saragoni G, Cheminée A, Crec’hriou R, Pastor J, et al. Small artificial habitats to enhance the nursery function for juvenile fish in a large commercial port of the Mediterranean. Ecol Eng [Internet]. 2017;105:78–86. Available from:

17. Neumann B, Vafeidis AT, Zimmermann J, Nicholls RJ. Future coastal population growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding—A global assessment. PLoS One. 2015;10(3).

18. Chapman MG, Blockley DJ. Engineering novel habitats on urban infrastructure to increase intertidal biodiversity. Oecologia. 2009;161(3):625–35. doi: 10.1007/s00442-009-1393-y 19551409

19. McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA, Groffman P, Bohlen P, Pouyat R V., Zipperer WC, et al. Ecosystem processes along an urban-to-rural gradient. Urban Ecosyst [Internet]. 1997 [cited 2019 Aug 19];1(1):21–36. Available from:

20. Marzluff JM. Island biogeography for an urbanizing world: how extinction and colonization may determine biological diversity in human-dominated landscapes. Urban Ecosyst [Internet]. 2005 Jun [cited 2019 Aug 19];8(2):157–77. Available from:

21. Bulleri F, Chapman MG. Intertidal assemblages on artificial and natural habitats in marinas on the north-west coast of Italy. Mar Biol [Internet]. 2004 Aug 10 [cited 2019 Jan 10];145(2):381–91. Available from:

22. Bishop MJ, Mayer-Pinto M, Airoldi L, Firth LB, Morris RL, Loke LHL, et al. Effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity: impacts and solutions. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol [Internet]. 2017 Jul [cited 2018 May 30];492:7–30. Available from:

23. Barbier EB, Hacker SD, Kennedy C, Kock EW, Stier AC, Sillman BR. The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecol Monogr. 2011;81(2):169–93.

24. Lotze HK, Lenihan HS, Bourque BJ, Bradbury RH, Cooke RG, Kay MC, et al. Depletion, degradation, and recovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science [Internet]. 2006 Jun 23 [cited 2018 Jul 5];312(5781):1806–9. Available from: doi: 10.1126/science.1128035 16794081

25. Worm B, Barbier EB, Beaumont N, Duffy JE, Folke C, Halpern BS, et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science [Internet]. 2006 Nov 3 [cited 2018 Jul 5];314(5800):787–90. Available from: doi: 10.1126/science.1132294 17082450

26. Halpern BS, Walbridge. A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems. 2008;319(February):948–53.

27. Chu-Agor ML, Muñoz-Carpena R, Kiker G, Emanuelsson A, Linkov I. Exploring vulnerability of coastal habitats to sea level rise through global sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. 2011 [cited 2018 Oct 8]; Available from:

28. Roberts CM. Connectivity and management of caribbean coral reefs. Science [Internet]. 1997 Nov 21 [cited 2019 Jan 10];278(5342):1454–7. Available from: doi: 10.1126/science.278.5342.1454 9367956

29. Bouchoucha M, Darnaude AM, Gudefin A, Neveu R, Verdoit-Jarraya M, Boissery P, et al. Potential use of marinas as nursery grounds by rocky fishes: Insights from four Diplodus species in the Mediterranean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2016;547:193–209.

30. European Commission. Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Communication [Internet]. 2011;(February):144. Available from:

31. Naylor LA, Coombes MA, Venn O, Roast SD, Thompson RC. Facilitating ecological enhancement of coastal infrastructure: The role of policy, people and planning. Environ Sci Policy. 2012;22:36–46.

32. Strain EMA, Olabarria C, Mayer-Pinto M, Cumbo V, Morris RL, Bugnot AB, et al. Eco-engineering urban infrastructure for marine and coastal biodiversity: Which interventions have the greatest ecological benefit? J Appl Ecol. 2018;55(1):426–41.

33. Defra JNCC. The UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. 2019; Available from:

34. Dafforn KA, Glasby TM, Airoldi L, Rivero NK, Mayer-Pinto M, Johnston EL. Marine urbanization: An ecological framework for designing multifunctional artificial structures. Front Ecol Environ. 2015;13(2):82–90.

35. Morris RL, Deavin G, Hemelryk Donald S, Coleman RA. Eco-engineering in urbanised coastal systems: Consideration of social values. Ecol Manag Restor. 2016;17(1):33–9.

36. Mitsch W.J., Wu X., Nairn R.W., Weihe P.E., Wang N., Deal R., et al. Creating and Restoring Wetlands. Bioscience. 1998;

37. Dafforn KA. Eco-engineering and management strategies for marine infrastructure to reduce establishment and dispersal of non-indigenous species. 2017;8(2):153–61.

38. Strain EMA, Morris RL, Coleman RA, Figueira WF, Steinberg PD, Johnston EL, et al. Increasing microhabitat complexity on seawalls can reduce fish predation on native oysters. Ecol Eng [Internet]. 2018;120:637–44. Available from:

39. Browne MA, Chapman MG. Ecologically Informed Engineering Reduces Loss of Intertidal Biodiversity on Artificial Shorelines. Environ Sci Technol [Internet]. 2011 Oct [cited 2019 Aug 15];45(19):8204–7. Available from: 21875080

40. Morris RL, Chapman MG, Firth LB, Coleman RA. Increasing habitat complexity on seawalls: Investigating large- and small-scale effects on fish assemblages. Ecol Evol. 2017;7(22):9567–79. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3475 29187990

41. Naylor LA, Coombes MA, Venn O, Roast SD, Thompson RC. Facilitating ecological enhancement of coastal infrastructure: The role of policy, people and planning. Environ Sci Policy [Internet]. 2012;22:36–46. Available from:

42. Martins GM, Thompson RC, Neto AI, Hawkins SJ, Jenkins SR. Enhancing stocks of the exploited limpet Patella candei d’Orbigny via modifications in coastal engineering. Biol Conserv [Internet]. 2010 Jan 1 [cited 2019 Aug 15];143(1):203–11. Available from:

43. Browne MA, Chapman MG. Ecologically Informed Engineering Reduces Loss of Intertidal Biodiversity on Artificial Shorelines. Environ Sci Technol [Internet]. 2011 Oct 1 [cited 2018 Jan 3];45(19):8204–7. Available from: doi: 10.1021/es201924b 21875080

44. Connell SD. Floating pontoons create novel habitats for subtidal epibiota. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol. 2000;247(2):183–94. 10742503

45. Connell SD. Urban structures as marine habitats: an experimental comparison of the composition and abundance of subtidal epibiota among pilings, pontoons and rocky reefs. Mar Environ Res [Internet]. 2001 Aug [cited 2018 Oct 23];52(2):115–25. Available from: 11525426

46. Chee SY, Othman AG, Sim YK, Mat Adam AN, Firth LB. Land reclamation and artificial islands: Walking the tightrope between development and conservation. Glob Ecol Conserv [Internet]. 2017 Oct 1 [cited 2019 Oct 10];12:80–95. Available from:

47. Krzemińska AE, Zaręba AD, Dzikowska A, Jarosz KR. Cities of the future—bionic systems of new urban environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res [Internet]. 2019 Mar 7 [cited 2019 Oct 10];26(9):8362–70. Available from:

48. Pavlineri N, Skoulikidis NT, Tsihrintzis VA. Constructed Floating Wetlands: A review of research, design, operation and management aspects, and data meta-analysis. Chem Eng J [Internet]. 2017;308:1120–32. Available from:

49. Yeh N, Yeh P, Chang YH. Artificial floating islands for environmental improvement. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;47:616–22.

50. Frog Environmental. Biohaven Floating Wetland Systems Technical Information. 2016.

51. Chen Z, Cuervo DP, Müller JA, Wiessner A, Köser H, Vymazal J, et al. Hydroponic root mats for wastewater treatment—a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res [Internet]. 2016 Aug 11 [cited 2018 Aug 12];23(16):15911–28. Available from:

52. Frog Environmental. Biohaven Floating Island Product Guide. 2019.

53. Burzaco AL, Frog Environmental. BioHaven floating wetlands. 2016. p. 1.

54. Kato Y, Takemon Y, Hori M. Invertebrate assemblages in relation to habitat types on a floating mat in Mizorogaike Pond, Kyoto, Japan. Limnology [Internet]. 2009 Dec 19 [cited 2019 Aug 20];10(3):167–76. Available from:

55. Shahid MJ, Arslan M, Ali S, Siddique M, Afzal M. Floating Wetlands: A Sustainable Tool for Wastewater Treatment. Clean—Soil, Air, Water. 2018;46(10).

56. Lu HL, Ku CR, Chang YH. Water quality improvement with artificial floating islands. Ecol Eng. 2015;74:371–5.

57. Overton CT, Takekawa JY, Casazza ML, Bui TD, Holyoak M, Strong DR. Sea-level rise and refuge habitats for tidal marsh species: Can artificial islands save the California Ridgway’s rail? Ecol Eng [Internet]. 2015;74:337–44. Available from:

58. Floating Island International. BioHaven ® Living Shorelines BioHaven ® Floating Breakwaters. 2013;1–5.

59. John S, Dodds W. Ecosystems Enhancement Programme (EEP): Tidal Lagoon Power. 2016;(June):1–21.

60. Frog Environmental. Coastal and Inland Erosion Control [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2019 Feb 13]. Available from:

61. Burgess ND, Hirons GJM. Creation and management of artificial nesting sites for wetland Birds. J Environ Manage [Internet]. 1992 Apr 1 [cited 2019 Aug 21];34(4):285–95. Available from:

62. Nall CR, Schläppy ML, Guerin AJ. Characterisation of the biofouling community on a floating wave energy device. Biofouling [Internet]. 2017;33(5):379–96. Available from: 28508709

63. Perkol-Finkel S, Miloh T, Zilman G, Sella I, Benayahu Y. Floating and fixed artificial reefs: the effect of substratum motion on benthic communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2006;317:9–20.

64. Pardue GB. Production Response of the Bluegill Sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque, to Added Attachment Surface for Fish-Food Organisms. Trans Am Fish Soc [Internet]. 1973 Jul [cited 2018 Oct 23];102(3):622–6. Available from:;2

65. Neal JW, Lloyd MC. Response of Fish Populations to Floating Streambed Wetlands. J Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies. 2018;5(2011):64–70.

66. Evans AJ, Garrod B, Firth LB, Hawkins SJ, Morris-Webb ES, Goudge H, et al. Stakeholder priorities for multi-functional coastal defence developments and steps to effective implementation. Mar Policy [Internet]. 2017;75(June 2016):143–55. Available from:

67. Strain EMA, Alexander KA, Kienker S, Morris R, Jarvis R, Coleman R, et al. Urban blue: A global analysis of the factors shaping people’s perceptions of the marine environment and ecological engineering in harbours. Sci Total Environ [Internet]. 2019 Mar 25 [cited 2019 Aug 21];658:1293–305. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.285 30677991

68. Kienker SE, Coleman RA, Morris RL, Steinberg P, Bollard B, Jarvis R, et al. Bringing harbours alive: Assessing the importance of eco-engineered coastal infrastructure for different stakeholders and cities. Mar Policy [Internet]. 2018 Aug 1 [cited 2019 Aug 21];94:238–46. Available from:

69. Shi J, Visschers VHM, Siegrist M. Public Perception of Climate Change: The Importance of Knowledge and Cultural Worldviews. Risk Anal. 2015;35(12):2183–201. doi: 10.1111/risa.12406 26033253

70. von Borgstede C, Andersson M, Johnsson F. Public attitudes to climate change and carbon mitigation—Implications for energy-associated behaviours. Energy Policy [Internet]. 2013 Jun 1 [cited 2019 Apr 9];57:182–93. Available from:

71. Gelcich S, Buckley P, Pinnegar JK, Chilvers J, Lorenzoni I, Terry G, et al. Public awareness, concerns, and priorities about anthropogenic impacts on marine environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111(42):15042–7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1417344111 25288740

72. Hawkins JP, O’Leary BC, Bassett N, Peters H, Rakowski S, Reeve G, et al. Public awareness and attitudes towards marine protection in the United Kingdom. Mar Pollut Bull. 2016;111(1–2):231–6. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.07.003 27393214

73. Horwich RH, Lyon J. Community conservation: practitioners’ answer to critics. Oryx [Internet]. 2007 Jul 17 [cited 2019 Apr 25];41(3):376–85. Available from:

74. Jefferson R, McKinley E, Capstick S, Fletcher S, Griffin H, Milanese M. Understanding audiences: Making public perceptions research matter to marine conservation. Ocean Coast Manag [Internet]. 2015 Oct 1 [cited 2019 Apr 25];115:61–70. Available from:

75. Sayer MDJ, Wilding TA. Planning, licensing, and stakeholder consultation in an artificial reef development: The Loch Linnhe reef, a case study. ICES J Mar Sci. 2002;59(SUPPL.):178–85.

76. Ramos J, Santos MN, Whitmarsh D, Monteiro CC. Stakeholder perceptions regarding the environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Algarve artificial reefs. In: Biodiversity in Enclosed Seas and Artificial Marine Habitats [Internet]. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2007 [cited 2019 Apr 26]. p. 181–91. Available from:

77. Fletcher S, Potts JS, Heeps C, Pike K. Public awareness of marine environmental issues in the UK. Mar Policy. 2009;33(2):370–5.

78. Jefferson RL, Bailey I, Laffoley D d. A, Richards JP, Attrill MJ. Public perceptions of the UK marine environment. Mar Policy [Internet]. 2014;43:327–37. Available from:

79. Chilvers J, Lorenzoni I, Terry G, Buckley P, Pinnegar JK, Gelcich S. Public engagement with marine climate change issues: (Re)framings, understandings and responses. Glob Environ Chang [Internet]. 2014;29:165–79. Available from:

80. Myatt-bell LB, Scrimshaw MD, Lester JN, Potts JS. Public perception of managed realignment: Brancaster. Mar Policy. 2002;26:45–57.

81. Myatt LB, Scrimshaw MD, Lester JN. Public perceptions and attitudes towards an established managed realignment scheme: Orplands, Essex, UK. J Environ Manage. 2003;68(2):173–81. 12781757

82. Tudor DT, Williams AT. Public Perception and Opinion of Visible Beach Aesthetic Pollution: The Utilisation of Photography [Internet]. Vol. 19, Journal of Coastal Research. Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc.; 2006 [cited 2019 Apr 9]. p. 1104–15. Available from:

83. Haggett C. Over the Sea and Far Away? A Consideration of the Planning, Politics and Public Perception of Offshore Wind Farms. J Environ Policy Plan [Internet]. 2008 Sep [cited 2019 Apr 9];10(3):289–306. Available from:

84. Hancock M. Artificial floating islands for nesting Black-throated Divers Gavia arctica in Scotland: construction, use and effect on breeding success. Bird Study [Internet]. 2000 Jul 29 [cited 2018 Jul 31];47(2):165–75. Available from:

85. European Environment Agency. Great Britain shapefile [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2019 May 23]. Available from:

86. UK Postcode. Shapefile of UK administrative counties [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2019 May 10]. Available from:

87. Defra JNCC. The UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. 2019;

88. Ruiz-Orejón LF. Floating plastic debris in the central and western Mediterranean sea: current status and its social perception. TDX (Tesis Dr en Xarxa) [Internet]. 2018 Jul 2 [cited 2019 Apr 26]; Available from:

89. Drosou N, Soetanto R, Hermawan F, Chmutina K, Bosher L, Hatmoko JUD. Key Factors Influencing Wider Adoption of Blue–Green Infrastructure in Developing Cities. Water [Internet]. 2019 Jun 13 [cited 2019 Sep 2];11(6):1234. Available from:

90. Steel BS, Smith C, Opsommer L, Curiel S, Warner-Steel R. Public ocean literacy in the United States. Ocean Coast Manag [Internet]. 2005 Jan 1 [cited 2019 Apr 25];48(2):97–114. Available from:

91. Rispoli D, Hambler C. Attitudes to wetland restoration in Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire, UK. Int J Sci Educ [Internet]. 1999 May [cited 2019 Apr 26];21(5):467–84. Available from:

92. Zhang H, Chen B, Sun Z, Bao Z. Landscape perception and recreation needs in urban green space in Fuyang, Hangzhou, China. Urban For Urban Green [Internet]. 2013 Jan 1 [cited 2019 Apr 26];12(1):44–52. Available from:

93. van den Berg AE, Maas J, Verheij RA, Groenewegen PP. Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health. Soc Sci Med [Internet]. 2010 Apr 1 [cited 2019 Apr 26];70(8):1203–10. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.002 20163905

94. Dobbie M, Green R. Public perceptions of freshwater wetlands in Victoria, Australia. Landsc Urban Plan [Internet]. 2013;110(1):143–54. Available from:

95. Gobster PH, Nassauer JI, Daniel TC, Fry G. The shared landscape: what does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landsc Ecol [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2019 Apr 26];22:959–72. Available from:

96. Nassauer JI. Monitoring the success of metropolitan wetland restorations: cultural sustainability and ecological function. Wetlands [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2019 Apr 26];24(4):756–65. Available from:;sequence=1

97. Gray JDE, O’Neill K, Qiu Z. Coastal residents’ perceptions of the function of and relationship between engineered and natural infrastructure for coastal hazard mitigation. Ocean Coast Manag [Internet]. 2017 Sep 1 [cited 2019 Sep 2];146:144–56. Available from:

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10