Cited by 43Coastal and Marine ManagementCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsEnvironmental Conservation and Management

Balancing the Need to Develop Coastal Areas with the Desire for an Ecologically Functioning Coastal Environment: Is Net Ecosystem Improvement Possible?

Thom, R.M., Williams, G.W., Diefenderfer, H.L.·2005·Restoration Ecology

Abstract

The global human population is growing exponentially, close to a majority lives and works near the coast, and coastal commerce and development are critical to the economies of many nations. Hence, coastal areas will continue to be a major focus of development and economic activity. People desire the economic advantages provided by coastal development along with the fisheries and social commodities supported by estuarine and coastal ecosystems. Because of these facts, we view the challenge of balancing coastal development with enhancing nearshore marine and estuarine ecosystems (i.e., net ecosystem improvement) as the top priority for coastal researchers in this century. Our restoration research in Pacific Northwest estuaries and participation in nearshore project design and impact mitigation has largely dealt with these competing goals. To this end, we have applied conceptual models, comprehensive assessment methods, and principles of restoration ecology, conservation biology, and adaptive management to incorporate science into decisions about uses of estuarine systems. Case studies of Bainbridge Island and the Columbia River demonstrate the use of objective, defensible methods to prioritize tidally influenced shorelines and habitats (i.e., riparian forests, marshes, unvegetated flats, rocky shores, seagrass meadows, kelp forests) for preservation, conservation, and restoration. Case studies of Clinton, Washington, and Port Townsend, Washington, demonstrate the incorporation…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1526-100x.2005.00024.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thom, R. M., Williams, G. W., & Diefenderfer, H. L.
Affiliations
Battelle (US)
Corresponding author
Thom, R.M.
Venue
Restoration Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-03
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
193-203
ISSN
  • 1061-2971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-100X
OpenAlex
W2026854808
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
14.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Restoration Ecology (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Coastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Conservation and Management
Keywords
coastal development, estuarine restoration, nearshore ecosystems, adaptive management, habitat prioritization, riparian forest, marshes, seagrass meadows, kelp forests, impact mitigation, no net loss, Bainbridge Island, Columbia River, Pacific Northwest estuaries

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review