Preamble
The purpose of this two-part report is to inform and inspire action. The reports, commissioned by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, seek to understand how marinerecoverycanbescaledupandsustainedacrosstheUK.Theyexplorethe current landscape of marine conservation and restoration, identify key barriers and opportunities, and provide strategic recommendations for funders, practitioners,andpolicymakers.
This document is the first of two reports. It aims to support funders in designing effective funding strategies that catalyse long-term, systemic change. It also providesinsightsandactsasaresourceforpractitioners.
ThisPartOnereportprovidestheresultsofaseriesofinterviewsandaworkshop with practitioners, as well as a full set of recommendations for funders, government,practitioners,andcommunities.
TheseparatePartTworeportsetsoutatahigh-leveltheUKcontextforthemarine environment and aims to be relevant to the full range of practitioners, from new entrantstoexperiencedspecialists Itaimstoactasacompendiumandgeneral resource.
ExecutiveSummary
Commissioned by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, this report combines interviews, workshops, and research to identify key gaps and priorities for those working to restore marine ecosystems The report providesasuiteofpracticalrecommendations,organisedintotenthematicareas,thataimtohelpfunders, governments,andpractitionerssupportrecoveryatscale.
The UK's marine environment is in severe ecological decline Yet, there is growing momentum for recovery throughconservation,restoration,advocacy,andcommunity-ledaction AcrosstheUK,communities,NGOs, scientists, and policymakers are pioneering efforts to restore marine habitats, advocate for better protection, and reimagine the relationship between people and the sea. From kelp rewilding in Sussex to oysterreefrestorationinScotland,andfromcommunity-ledmarineprotectedareasinArrantolarge-scale seascape initiatives in the Solent, these efforts signal a shift toward integrated, place-based, and collaborativeapproachestomarinerecovery
Alongside this research, a national webinar series was delivered in 2025 through a partnership with the Environment Agency’s ReMeMaRe initiative, and Ocean and Coastal Futures, and engaged over 2,400 practitioners.
KeyFindingsandOpportunities
Takingasystemsview:
Thisreportoutlinesastrategicroadmapforpublic,private,andphilanthropicfunderstoacceleratemarine recovery. It recommends a suite of actions, from directly funding place-based restoration and supporting communities to building essential skills and sector capacity. Crucially, the report emphasises that funders canplayapivotalrolebyenablingcollaborationandconveningkeyplayerstoaddressandovercomethe systemicbarriersthathindermarineecosystemrecovery
Community-Led:
Locally embedded projects are powerful but under-supported. Capacity, marine licensing complexity, lack of guidance & training, and limited access to funding hinder broader participation Community leadership shouldbesupportedandbecentraltoprojectdesignanddelivery
A‘Whole-Seascape’approachtomarineecosystemrecovery:
Conservation and Restoration must address both habitat loss and pressures such as pollution, overfishing, andclimatechange Aseascape-scaleapproachanda‘wholescape’philosophyisessentialtoreconnect fragmented ecosystems and build resilience, with “upstream” pressures targeted and a focus across the land-seadivide.
Advocacy:
Advocating for the policy and legal changes necessary for marine ecosystem recovery is essential but consistentlyunderfundedandoftenoverlookedinfavourof‘active’restorationefforts.Morediversefunders andincreasedfundingareneededtoeffectivelyinfluencechange.
Funding:
Marine restoration funding is fragmented and short-term While new initiatives like SMEEF, Marine Recovery Fund, and Marine Fund Cymru show promise, long-term, coordinated investment is needed across the fundingrealm.Manysmallerorganisations,particularlycommunity-basedgroups,areexcludedfromlongtermfundingopportunitiesastheycanfallbeloweligibilitycriteriathresholds.
InnovationandCollaboration:
Cross-sector collaboration between NGOs, government, industry, funders, and communities is critical to scalingimpact.
Climate-SmartDesign:
Projects must assess climate risks and design for adaptation; however, this research found few projects currently considering the impacts of climate change on their outcomes, often feeling the challenge is too big to address. Interviews suggested widespread scepticism about the climate-related claims of certain "blue carbon" habitats, with a strong call for more evidence and data. More focus should be given to the entire societal benefits of nature recovery like biodiversity, food security, and community well-being ratherthanasingleoutcomelike‘bluecarbon’
Strategic Recommendations
StrategicRecommendations
Theserecommendationsareorganisedintotenstrategicthematicareas,basedontheresultsoftheresearch, interviewsandworkshop.
1.FundingandGrantDesign
Providemulti-yeargrants(5–20years)withstage-gatemodelstomanageriskandtrackprogress
Ensure development phases – where relevant - of at least two years to support scoping, partnership building,andlicensingpreparation.
Consider flexibility on turnover thresholds, legal structures, and enable guarantor partnerships to broadenaccessforsmallerandcommunity-ledorganisations
Encouragesimplifiedapplicationprocessesfororganisationswithlimitedcapacityorexperience
Promoteblendedfinancemodelscombiningpublic,private,andphilanthropicsources.
Establishclearmetricsandadaptablemonitoringframeworksforlong-termprojects.
Supportdiscoveryphasesforearly-stageideadevelopment.
2.CommunityLeadership
Connectorsupportcollaborationsofcommunity-ledprojectstoachieveseascape-scaleimpact
Supportandencouragelocalcommunitiesthatwanttoleadmarinerecoveryprojects
Embed community involvement from project inception and allocate dedicatedbudgets to ensure true participation.
Supporttraining,peer-to-peerlearning,andsharedresourcesforcommunityempowerment
Reframe“passive”activities(eg,MPAmanagement,advocacy)asactiveandimpactful.
Requirelargeseascapeprojectstohavestrongcommunitypartnerships
3.TakingaSystemsView
Fund policy and advocacy initiatives that address barriers to marine ecosystem recovery, aim to reducepressuresandinfluencepolicydecisions.
Encourageprojectsthatintegraterestorationwithpolicychangeandpressurealleviation.
Directmorefundingtowardsprojectsthatadoptacomprehensive,catchment-wideor'whole-scape' approach These initiatives, while requiring more time and resources, could offer greater long-term valueandaddresstheinterconnectednatureofmarinedegradation
Promotecross-ecosystemcollaboration(land–freshwater–marine)for‘wholescape’recovery
Require projects to demonstrate plans to address pressures and include terrestrial and freshwater environmentswhererelevant.
Advocatingforthepolicyandlegalchangesnecessaryformarineecosystemrecoveryisessentialbut consistently underfunded and often overlooked, often in favour of ‘active’ restoration efforts More diverse funders and increased funding is needed to be directed to areas which aim to effectively influencesystemicchangesandtackle policy,regulationorlegalbarriers.
4.Planning,Licensing,andReporting
Funders should actively support initiatives and roles focused on policy advocacy, specifically those aiming to better integrate marine restoration and conservation into marine spatial planning Similarly, funders should collaborate (or pool resources) to tackle systemic barriers, such as improving the regulatoryandlicensingregimes
Improveaccesstostrategicrestorationdataandsupportrobustsiteselection
Providetrainingandguidanceonmarinelicensingprocesses.
Developecosystemfunctionmetricsandsocialequityindicatorsformonitoring
Support capacity building for new entrants and community groups in ecological and socioeconomic planning.
5.Climate-SmartProjectDesign
Encourageapplicantstoassessclimaterisksanddesignforadaptation
Recognisebluecarbonbenefitsasco-benefits,notsoledrivers.
Promoterestorationofclimate-resilienthabitatsandspecies.
Increasefunderawarenessofhowseascape-scalerecoverysupportsclimatemitigationandadaptation
6.CoordinationofFunding
EstablishaUK-widemarinefundersnetworkincludingtrusts,foundations,government,andcorporates
Promoteinformationsharingbetweenfunderstoalignprioritiesandavoidduplication
Matchandaligncapitalandrevenuefunderstosupportfullprojectlifecycles.
Exploreintegratedfundingstreamsthatcombineenvironmentalandcommunitycapacitygoals
7.SustainableFundingandFinance
Promoteblendedfundingmodelstomaximiseefficiencyandimpact. Providetrainingforpractitionersoninnovativefinancemechanisms(eg,bluecarboncredits,ESG investment).
Ensurelong-termfundingformarinerecovery,includingcommunitycapacitybuilding. Improvecoordinationtoreduceprojectburdenandincreaseimpact
Encouragecross-sectorandcross-ecosystemcollaboration,especiallybetweenland,freshwater,and marineactors.
Avoidrequiring“noveltyfornovelty’ssake”inpartnerships;focusonstrategicrationale
Providefundsandallowtimeforrelationshipbuildingthroughdiscovery/developmentphases
Embedexitstrategiesearlyinprojectdesigntoensurelong-termsustainability
Planforcommunityownershipandstewardshippost-project
Considermaintenanceawardstosupportongoingmonitoring,advocacy,andengagementafter projectcompletion.
Continuetosupportwebinars,training,andinformallearningroutes. Facilitatepeer-to-peerlearningacrossdiversepractitioners. Provideaccesstoexpertiseandresourcesthatareotherwisehardtoreach
Introduction
The UK’s marine environment is facing a critical juncture. Since 1970, the nation's marine biodiversity has dropped by 19%, leaving many habitats in poor condition Centuries of degradation have left many of its coastal and marine ecosystems in a state of decline, with native oyster populations reduced by 95%, saltmarshes in England diminished by 85%, and nearly half of the UK’s seagrass meadows lost since the 1930s. These losses are not isolated; they reflect broader systemic pressures including pollution, overexploitation, habitat fragmentation, and the accelerating impacts of climate change. The consequencesareecological,economic,andsocial affectingbiodiversity,carbonsequestration,fisheries, floodresilience,andthewellbeingofcoastalcommunities
While a decline in our marine environment is evident, a powerful movement for recovery is gaining momentum. A wide range of stakeholders across the UK are now pioneering efforts to restore marine habitatsandadvocateforbetterprotection.
This report series, commissioned by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, seeks to understand how marine recovery can be scaled up and sustained across the UK It explores the current landscape of marine conservation and restoration, identifies key barriers and opportunities, and provides strategic recommendations for funders, practitioners, and policymakers. The two-part report is grounded in a comprehensivemethodologythatincludes:
AliteraturereviewofUKmarinerestorationefforts,policyframeworks,andfundingmechanisms(thisis coveredinthePartTworeport)
A national webinar series delivered in partnership with the Environment Agency’s ReMeMaRe initiative andOceanandCoastalFutures,engagingover2,400practitioners.
A series of stakeholder interviews, workshops, and informal conversations with experts, community leaders,funders,andgovernmentrepresentatives(thisreport)
PurposeandScope
The purpose of this report is to inform and inspire action. It aims to support funders in designing effective funding strategies that catalyse long-term, systemic change. It also provides insights and acts as a resource for practitioners. This report attempts be relevant to the full range of funders and practitioners, fromneworsmallentrantstoestablishedorganisations
Thisreportconsidersthebroadersystemofmarinerecovery,includingpolicyadvocacy,sectorconvening, capacitybuilding,activerestoration,conservationinitiatives,andtheintegrationofmarine,freshwater,and terrestrial ecosystems. This holistic work is essential, given that funding for marine, coastal, and estuarine initiatives is still the poor cousin of environmental funding; data published in 2024 by the Environmental Funders Network noted that the 'coastal and marine ecosystems' theme made up just 24% of the total giving The goal is to move from fragmented efforts to a scaled-up, coherent, connected, and resilient marinerecoverymovement.
WhyMarineEcosystemRecoveryMatters
Marine restoration is not just about reversing ecological decline it is about building a future in which nature and people thrive together Healthy marine ecosystems provide essential services: they store carbon, buffer coastlines against storms, support fisheries, and offer cultural and recreational value. Restorationenhancestheseservices,strengthensclimateresilience,andcontributestonationalandglobal biodiversitytargets,includingtheUK’scommitmenttoprotect30%oflandandseaby2030.
Moreover, marine restoration offers a unique opportunity to empower communities Many of the most successfulprojectsarelocallyled,rootedinplace,anddrivenbypeoplewithdeepconnectionstothesea Supportingtheseeffortsrequiresnotonlyfunding,butalsotrust,flexibility,andlong-termcommitment.
AboutPelagos
Pelagosworksattheintersectionofpeopleandtheenvironment,lookingtosolveenvironmentalissuesby addressingsocialones Weareathink-tankfortheocean-focussingonstrategicresearch,ethnography, behaviourchange,storytelling,andcommunityengagement ThePelagosteamblendsexpertise,creativity andcommitment.
The author, David Tudor, is a leading marine management expert with over three decades of global experience at the intersection of people and planet He founded Pelagos, an organisation dedicated to driving positive change His diverse background spans government agencies, NGOs, and consultancies, andhehasprovidedadvisoryexpertisetogovernmentsworldwide.Hiscareerincludesseniorleadershipat The Crown Estate, where he managed portfolios spanning offshore renewable energy and sub-sea infrastructure.DavidwasappointedbytheMinisterforClimateChangetoChairtheWalesCoastsandSeas Partnership
FrancescaRead-CuttingisanOceanResearcheratPelagos Sheexcelsinresearch,writing,andcreatively engaging diverse stakeholders across socio-economic and environmental topics. Francesca completed herMarineBiologydegreewithFirst-ClassHonours.AtPelagos,Francescasupportsthedeliveryofresearch andreports Additionally,FrancescaisaspokespersonforUKYouthForNatureandaTrusteeforYoungSea ChangersScotland,advocatingfortheinclusionofyouthvoicesinenvironmentaldecisionmaking
AboutEsméeFairbairnFoundation
Founded in 1961, Esmée Fairbairn Foundation is one of the UK’s largest independent funders. We aim to improve our natural world, secure a fairer future and strengthen the bonds in communities in the UK. We unlock change by contributing everything we can alongside people and organisations with brilliant ideas whoshareourgoals
Methodology
StakeholderInterviewsandworkshop
A series of in-depth interviews, an in-person workshop, along with informal discussions, were held over severalmonthstoobtainviewsintotheprioritiesforfuturefundingalongsideinsightsintothebarriersand opportunities currently faced by practitioners and wider stakeholders in delivering marine recovery initiatives.
The interviews, conversations and workshop were designed to extract information regarding the optimal elements of marine ecosystem recovery projects – whether these aim to conserve, restore, advocate or inform-alongwiththepitfallsandtheidealfundcomponents,aswellashowtoinvolvecommunitiesand ultimately deliver the desired outcome. Other elements were also central to this work, including understating the whole funding and delivery system, including capacity building, convening, knowledge sharingandpolicyadvocacy,amongothers.
CapacityBuildingandConnection
A webinar series was created, in association with the Environment Agency ReMeMaRe initiative and the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and delivered in 2025 by Ocean and Coastal Futures. The webinars brought together experts and professionals to discuss the practicalities of marine recovery projects, including the necessary political, scientific, and financial support Each session featured presentations followed by a paneldiscussion Theseriescoveredthesefollowingtopics:
1. Seascapescalerestoration
2. Marinepolicy
3 Marinescience
4 Funding(twowebinars)
The goal was to facilitate knowledge sharing, advance the debate on effective restoration and protection, and collectively identify the next steps to achieving healthy seas in the UK. A further aim was to bring togetherthoseengagedwithallaspectsofmarineconservationandrestorationacrosstheUKto: Facilitatethesharingofinformation,knowledge,andexperience, Advancethedebateonhowtodelivermeaningfulmarinerecovery,and Collectivelyidentifythenextstepstowardsachievinghealthyseas.
LiteratureReview
Thecontentofthisreportisbasedonexpertknowledgeandexperienceoftheauthors,conversationswith interviewees, discussions with the funder, as well as examination of extensive written published literature, bothgreyliteratureandpeerreviewed.
ResultsandDiscussion
Resultsanddiscussion
CapacityBuildingandConnection
One of the aims of this project was to connect with practitioners, share knowledge and to communicate with a wide range of interested parties. To achieve this, a collaboration with the Environment Agency’s ReMeMaRe programme was undertaken which embarked on a series of webinars in partnership with Ocean and Coastal Futures. These webinars covered a wide range of marine restoration topics and reachedover2,400practitionersthroughlivestreamandrecordings
Theinformalfeedbackreceivedforthese,thelargenumbersofindividualsregisteringandthecontinuing callformorefrompractitioners,hasillustratedthevalueofsharingresourcesandknowledgewidely.The topicsincludedfinance,science,seascapes,andpolicy.
CapacityBuilding-Reccomendations
Thecontentofthisreportisbasedonexpertknowledgeandexperienceoftheauthors,conversationswith interviewees,discussionswiththefunder,aswellasexaminationofextensivewrittenpublishedliterature, bothgreyliteratureandpeerreviewed.
Continuetobuildupandincreasetheknowledgeofpractitioners,throughformalandinformallearning routes,suchaswebinars/training
Sharepeer-to-peerlearningfromacrossawiderangeofpractitioners
Provideopportunitiesforknowledgeexchangeandlearningbygivingaccesstotopicsandpeoplethat wouldnotnormallybeeasytoaccess.
Stakeholderinterviewsandworkshop
The interviews, conversations and workshop threw up several recurring themes, which brought broad consensus among the stakeholders. There wasn’t, of course, universal agreement of the issues and what neededtobedonetoaddressthem,buttherewerestrongmessagesthatcamethroughconsistently
Below is a list of the themes which were discussed with participants and came through in the discussions, whichisfurtherdiscussedindetailwithrecommendationsundereachtheme.Theserecommendationsare carriedthroughandsummarisedatthestartofthisdocumentintheStrategicRecommendationssection.
1 Community-led&communityinvolvement
2 Funddesign
3. Longerprojectsandmulti-yeargrants
4. TakingaSystemsView
5. Climatesmartprojectdesign
6 Planning,licensingandsiteselection
7 Coordinationoffunding
8 Sustainablefundingandfinance
9. Collaboration
10. Exitstrategyandprojectlegacy
Community-ledprojectsandcommunityinvolvement
Community involvement is highly context and location dependent The stakeholder interviews raised several questions regarding “neo-colonial” approaches to conservation, with some raising historical and culturalsensitivities–particularlyinScotlandandWales–where,forexample,historicallandgrabs,suchas Scottishclearances,caninfluencecommunityreactions.
It seems obvious to most to say, but the criticality of avoiding top-down approaches of community involvement from government or national/international conservation organisations while designing and implementingmarinerecoveryprojectsisparamount.
Some conversations conducted as part of this research highlighted challenges when large NGOs enter communitieswithoutsufficientlocalengagementandareseentobe“parachuting”intocommunities
Authenticity and the true embedding of marine recovery initiatives into a local community is something that many felt was of primary importance. Some interviewees felt that the engagement and consultation that comes from “outside organisations” is simply tokenism, that organisations arrive with their priorities andfundingfromoutsideofthelocalityandwilldrivethroughtheirmissionregardlessoflocalsentiment In many ways, this project delivery of marine recovery is no different to nationally significant infrastructure projects,suchasoffshorewind,whichhavesufferedpreviously(mainlyinthe2010swheresomenearshore projectsstruggledtoachievelocalacceptance).
All that being said, “outsiders” and larger NGOs and government agencies, are mostly adept at ensuring thatprojectsareincreasinglyembeddedinthelocalcommunityneeds
Ultimately, the long-term success of marine recovery efforts especially in nearshore environments dependsonlocalinvolvement.Whenprojectsareembeddedwithincommunities,theygainthelong-term careneededtoproducelastingandimpactfulresults.Manyindividualsthatwereinterviewedandthattook partintheworkshopnotedtherelativelackofaccessibleresourcesandguidanceforcommunities
There was a perceived lack of tools and access to information to help communities understand how to engage or lead meaningfully, whether in active restoration, advocacy, or decision-making. There is guidance that can be found online, much of it aimed at projects in Scotland, such as the Seagrass restorationinScotland–handbookandguidance,theMarineRestorationFrameworkfromNatureScotand the Marine Licensing supplementary guidance for Habitat Restoration Projects from the Scottish Government While there was acknowledgement that this does exist, particularly for Scotland based projects, there was a general feeling from interviewees that they require more assistance. This assistance was not always in the form of guidance from government but sometimes more ad-hoc peer-to-peer or bespokelearningandtraining
Interviewees were asked about a particular focus that may be needed on underrepresented groups or places. There was little conclusive or clear pattern of response, with most focussed on the need to put nature recovery above considerations of which part of the UK to focus on. However, there was a stated desiretoensuretherewasgoodcoverageoftheUKandthatnoareasareexcluded.
Aninterestingpointnotedbyafewinterviewees,wastheincreasingfocuson‘active’restoration,bothfrom fundersandfromcommunityindividualsandgroups Thoseinterviewedunderstoodthevalueofadvocacy andfocussingontheup-streamandpolicyelementsofmarinerecoverythatneedfocusbutareoftennot understoodbyallinlocalcommunities.
While community involvement can lead to stronger local support, it can also dilute or complicate project goals and timelines Collaboration with community members (indeed, similarly with numerous project partners) can lead to slower decision-making. There is a need for strong governance to ensure equity among partners and local communities feel truly part of the project. Numerous interviews noted the point that coastal communities should be involved much more deeply in projects – where there are willing individuals,ofcourse-inthedesignandimplementationofmarinerecoveryprojects
There is often an expectation that local community organisations will eventually take ownership of restoration and conservation projects after the original project has reached its final milestone or funding has ceased. For this to be the case in reality, legacy and exit strategies need to be embedded with expectationsandobjectivesco-created Thisraisesthequestionofwhatarethewaystohelpcommunities beattheheartoflarge-scale,‘seascape’recoveryofthemarineenvironment?
Government targets (such as the Environment Improvement Plan in England), the movement towards ‘seascape’projectsinacademicliteratureandprojectobjectives(e.g.SolentSeascapeandRevitalisingthe Thames), along with the drivers of the climate and nature crises, are leading to an increased focus on connectivityandscaleofmarinerecoveryinitiatives
Community-driven projects are often hyper-local, potentially making it difficult to scale them up for broader impact as isolated pockets can mean that the area will lack the connectivity required for ecosystem recovery However, the connectivity and scale which is driving the focus from funders and project developers alike, can be achieved through community-led initiatives, either through the cooperation of multiple semi-independent projects under one larger umbrella or through partnering with larger organisations acting a ‘guarantor’. There will be a risk of marginalisation and a lack of inclusion of peoplewholiveintheseareasiftherearenotavenuestoleadbutalsotojoinwithotherstoaddscale.
To achieve community-led seascape scale recovery requires innovation from funders and proponents, as well as extensive collaboration between these actors, alongside government, regulators and landowners Thereisperhapsanopportunityandcaseforconnectingseveralcommunity-ledprojectstoachieveseascapescale.
Community-led projects and community involvement -
Recommendations:
Community-led seascape scale projects can be achieved with some fundamental but achievable measuresputinplace,including:
Anemphasisontheimportanceofinvolvingcoastalcommunitiesnotjustinconsultation,butinleading, designingandimplementingprojects
There is a need for increased access to tools and training to help communities understand how to get involvedmeaningfully whetherthroughactiverestoration,advocacy,ordecision-making
Reframing ‘passive’ activities (such as MPA management and advocacy) as “active and impactful” to increasecommunityinteresttogobeyondtheincreasingfocusonrestoration-onlyprojects.
Collaboration between funders, regulators and practitioners to support the specific needs of communitiesinmarinerecoveryprojects
Thisincludesprovidingsupport,resourcesandtimetoencouragesuccessfulproposalsanddelivery.
Examining the criteria required for funding to enable a broader set of groups to engage and be successful, such as lowering annual turnover thresholds (with accompanying mitigation to reduce any increase in risk exposure) and/or providing additional support with the matchmaking with project guarantors ThesepointsweremorefullycoveredintheFundDesignsectionbelow
Connectingorsupportingacollaborationofseparatecommunity-ledprojectstocollectivelyachievea seascapescaleimpact,and/orconsiderrequiringlargeseascapeprojectstohaveastrongcommunity presenceandpartnerwithassociatedbudget
Capacity building is required for community organisations, including training, and wide-ranging support.Somerecommendationsinclude:
Createanetworkofpractitionersforpeer-to-peerlearning Fundtraining,inseveralelementssuchaslicensing,finance,comms Fundpooledresources,tohelpwithcommsandlicensing,forexample.
FundDesign
The literature research is clear that recovery of marine ecosystems is not a simple or quick process To ensure success, time is required to determine the ecosystem function of restored and protected areas; to embed new practices and knowledge in local communities; to create systemic change in the pressure impactinganarea;andtoallowforanyjusttransitiontoanewsustainableeconomy.
Itiscleartoallthatthefundingcyclesofgovernment,philanthropyandcorporateentitiesdonotfitwiththe requirement of marine recovery However, the knowledge of this does not change the reality of organisational priorities, governance, personal preferences and funding cycles that overlay the needs of nature.Therefore,thequestionbecomeswhatcananindividualfunderororganisationdotohelpplaytheir partinovercomingatleastsomeofthesepoints?
The interviews and workshop clearly affirmed that across the board current funding cycles in the marine space were not long enough To embed a project within communities, to try and fail and then retry methods, to see shoots of recovery, then funding needed to go beyond the two or three years commonly seen.
Several interviewees said that projects should be at the very minimum three years in length but that this only really “scratched the surface”, with an almost universal feeling that five years was the minimum for realisticchangetobeseenofanyscale.Thiswouldallowtimeforinitiating,delivering,andbeginningtosee returnsonproject.Ideallymarinerestorationprojectsshouldspan10–20years.Somefunders,forexample, EsméeFairbairnFoundation,donothaveastatedmaximumlengthofproject;however,theytypicallyfund for3to5years
This longer period of grant puts increased risk onto funders by committing them to a grantee for a longer period. Funders should not be locked into a partnership with either underperforming grantees or a project that is found later to have little chance of succeeding in ecosystem recovery. Therefore, it is important to insert clear criteria for success in longer grants, for ‘stage-gates’ to be inserted in the reporting to ensure thatprojectspasstothenextphaseoffundingonceagreedmilestoneshavebeenputinplace Whilethisis normal practice to have such reporting within projects, a move to longer grants makes this even more importanttoensurethattheriskforthegrantgiverismitigated.
Interviewees from smaller organisations expressed some frustration at the entry criteria used to gain accesstofunding Fundershavedifferentbenchmarksandminimumrequirementswhichapplicantsneed to meet to be able to be eligible for funding, with typical parameters including a particular legal/governancestructureandhavingacertainannualturnover.
The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation (EFF), for example, primarily fund organisations with a regular annual turnover of more than £100,000 (although there are exceptions) and the applying organisation must have charitable purposes (but these can include funding structures such as Community Interest Companies) EFFalsogenerallydonotfundcapitalcosts,suchasbuildingsandequipment
Therearemanysmallerorganisations(suchasthosefocussingon-andbasedin-coastalcommunities) whichwillnotmeettheannualturnoverthreshold,thereforecausingsomedisappointmentandfrustration Theargumentcanbeputforwardthatifthresholdsareprohibitivetonewentrantsorsmallerorganisations then funding will continue to be given to the same organisations repeatedly without the introduction of innovativeandnewideasthatafreshperspectivecanbring.
Thresholds, such as a minimum annual turnover, are important for grant funding By setting these requirements, funders can have some assurance that an organisation has the potential operational capacity and proven experience to effectively manage and deliver a project. This helps reduce risk and increases the likelihood of a successful outcome for all involved. A minimum turnover threshold can in many instances (but not all) indicate that the organisation has a healthy financial history, making it less likely that the project will fail due to financial strains Taking on a grant that is too large for their current capacity can lead to project failure, staff burnout, and damage to the organisation's reputation within its communityandwithotherpotentialfunders.
Clearly funders have their own criteria and different thresholds for turnover requirements. This mix of thresholdsthroughoutthefunderlandscapeallowsentryformanyandvariedapplicants However,funding for marine ecosystem recovery projects sits within a small number of organisations; therefore, closer collaboration among these funders – from small to large – could allow project proposers to access the levelappropriatetotheircurrentorganisationalsituationandthenpotentiallyenablethemtoscale-upby leadingontoalargerfunder.
Developmentphase
Another almost universal factor which is seen as crucial for success is a development phase. This shorter phase, often one year of funding, can allow for piloting of ideas and more often the scoping of ideas and some desk research, along with the crucial element of engaging with communities, regulators and other stakeholders It can also allow time for new partnerships and relationships to develop Several funders, includingNationalLotteryHeritageFundandtheEndangeredLandscapeandSeascapeProgramme,utilise development, or planning, phases. This development phase also helps to initiate conversations regarding permissions, licenses and consents that will inevitably be required within the full project. It should not be forgottenthattheapplicationforadevelopmentphase,whileshorter,stillrequiresignificantresources.
It is important that these development phases avoid raising false expectations that funding will definitely continue but also convey that these phases are ultimately exploratory, and should be “no-regrets” The transition to continuation or cessation of the funding relationship needs to be managed carefully and should be clear from the outset that the continuation is dependent on criteria and/or that other funding sources is more suited to the desired project It should also be noted that some projects do not require development phase funding and shouldn’t be forced down this route if there is an established existing projectorthegroundworkhasbeenlaidfromotherpreviousfunds
FundDesign-Recommendations:
Longer funding cycles are needed for projects. A minimum of five years, with an ideal of 10–20 years. While this latter length is somewhat unrealistic in current marine recovery funding programmes, there areexamplesoforganisationsembarkingonmuchlonger-termhorizons
Clearreportingandcriteriaofmilestonesandmeasuresofsuccessisneededforlongergrants.
Theinterviewsandresearchclearlyestablishedthatmarineecosystemrecoveryprojectsrequirelonger timeframesforfundingthaniscurrentlycommonplace Toensurethattherisktofundersthatprojects do not achieve the stated aims, clear monitoring and evaluation frameworks are recommended be establishedand‘stagegates’insertedtoallowforfurtherphasesoffundingtobeunlocked Thesestage gates will focus the monitoring to ensure the progress is quantified. This will also give the required comforttofundersthattheriskoflonger-termfundinghastherequisitelevelofoversightandscrutiny. Clear metrics should be established to allow projects of longer timeframes to pass to the next stage These metrics should be adaptable and dialogue between funder and grantee is encouraged so that thetrendscanbemonitoredandchangesmadetothesuccesscriteriaasprojectsruntheircourse
Minimum turnover thresholds and specifying the organisational legal structure, are hurdles which can prevent new entrants Often new or local community-based organisations will be ineligible due to criteria they cannot meet Risk mitigation should remain, and this report does not suggest exposing funderstounnecessaryriskorincreasingstrainontheirownstaff However,itisimportantthatwaysare foundtoallowtheseorganisationstobeabletoparticipateinmarinerecoveryprojectsandnotonlyto beapartbuttoleadplace-basedinitiatives.Whetherthatrequiresincreaseddue-diligence,additional support,allowingpartnerguarantorsorsomeothersofteningofthecriteria.
FundDesign-Recommendations:
Closer collaboration among small and large funders could allow project proposers to access the level appropriate to their current organisational situation and then potentially enable them to scale-up by leadingontoalargerfunder.
Accessibility: some categories of applicants and types of organisations dominate funding due to their experience with complex proposals Having a simplified process for some organisations that lack scale andexperience,can,forexample,empowerandencouragecommunity-ledprojects
There is great value in having a discovery or development phase before full delivery, to allow for flexibility and reduces risks, indeed it is often crucial to success. It also helps projects that often need a long lead-in time (eg to produce a business case, for procurement, conducting baseline studies and surveys, building a team, and for early licence conversations, for example) Having an open ‘discovery’ phasetoprovidefundstoallowpotentialapplicantstohavetimetocomeupwiththeirideasinavery earlystageisalsotobeencouraged.
Similarly to full project grants, the length of this funding is found to be too short to be as valuable as it couldbe Therefore,aminimumperiodoftwoyearsisrecommendedfordevelopmentphases Flexibility should also be considered; for example, if projects are already part-developed then a development phase should not be mandatory. Equally, if applicants are interested in a pre-development phase of spendingeffortprogressingpartnershipsandbuildingnewrelationshipsbeforedelvingintosurveysand licensingdiscussions(forexample),thenthisshouldbeaccommodatedwherepossible.
Longerprojectsandmulti-yeargrants
Multi-year grants with "stage gates" or "milestone-based funding" are a well-established and increasingly common model for long-term projects, specifically those that are place-based The approach benefits both the funder and the grantee by providing a framework for accountability and adaptive management. Insteadofprovidingalumpsumupfront,thegrantisbrokendownintoaseriesofpayments,or"tranches." Eachtrancheisunlockeduponthesuccessfulcompletionofapredefinedmilestoneorstagegate
An example of milestones applicable to a marine ecosystem recovery project, which are specific, measurable,andverifiableachievements,couldbe:
Completionofafeasibilitystudy.
Securingnecessarypermits
Achievingaspecifictargetforrestoration.
Submissionofadetailedplanforthenextphase
Thisstagegatemodelisusefulasithasthefollowingattributes:
Accountability: The grantee is required to have a clear, realistic plan with defined, measurable outcomes.
Flexibility and Adaptive Management: Instead of a rigid, multi-year plan, stage gates allow for midcourse corrections If a project hits an unforeseen obstacle, the funder can work with the grantee to adjustthemilestonesortimelinebeforereleasingthenexttrancheoffunding.Thisiscrucialforcomplex, long-termenvironmentalprojectswhereconditionscanchange.
Risk Mitigation: If a project fails to meet a milestone, a funder can choose to withhold the remaining funds,minimisingfinancialrisk
BuildingFunder-GranteeTrust:Thismodelfostersapartnershipbasedonsharedgoals.Thefunder'srole shifts to an active partner, offering guidance and support to help the grantee meet the agreed-upon milestones
ExamplesofFunctionalMetrics
Increasingly there is a shift away from measuring the number of hectares or oysters restored, and to consider ecosystem function as a way of measuring progress in certain projects. Moving to ecosystem function metrics is driven by a recognition that an ecosystem can be restored in theory but fail to provide theservicesthatpeopleandnaturedependon.
Metrics focused on ecosystem function evaluate the health and resilience of the entire system, not just its parts They show if a restored habitat is becoming self-sustaining ecosystem that provides essential services.Examplesofthesemetricsinclude:
Biodiversity and Species Diversity: Measuring not just the presence of target species but also the abundance and the overall richness of species A diverse community of organisms indicates a healthy andfunctioningfoodweb
Water Quality: Tracking key indicators like water clarity, nutrient levels, and dissolved oxygen. Improved waterqualityisadirectresultofahealthyecosystem
EcosystemServices:Quantifyingthebenefitstheecosystemprovidestohumans,suchas:
Coastal Protection: Measuring the reduction in wave energy or storm surge height due to restored coralreefsormangroves.
Carbon Sequestration: Calculating the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed and stored by blue carbonhabitats
Fisheries Productivity: Monitoring the increase in fish populations, including the size and diversity of commercially important species, which indicates that the restored area is serving as a healthy nurseryground.
Ecosystem Resilience: Assessing the ability of the restored system to withstand and recover from disturbances like climate change impacts, including ocean acidification, rising temperatures, and extremeweatherevents
ThesecanalsoextendtoSocialEquityexamples,suchas:
CommunityEngagement:
Numberoflocalresidentstrainedandemployedinrestorationandmonitoringefforts
Participationratesincommunityworkshops,decision-makingforums,andproject-relatedevents
Development of alternative livelihoods (e.g., eco-tourism, sustainable aquaculture) that reduce pressureonmarineresources.
InclusivityandGovernance:
Involvement of women, indigenous groups, and other marginalised communities in project leadershipandbenefits
Establishment of effective local governance structures (e.g., marine protected area committees) withclearrulesandenforcement.
Longerprojectsandmulti-yeargrants-Recommendations:
Forlongergrantsofupto10years,considerastage-gatemodeloffundingwithconsiderationgivento co-developingmetricsandtrackingmeasures
For place-based projects, explore the value of moving to an ecosystem function measurement of progress,ratherthantraditionalmeasurementsofprojectsuccess.
TakingaSystemsView
Projects focussed on marine recovery can take many and varied forms, with examples such as: physical restoration of habitats and species (seagrass, for example, sometimes termed ‘active restoration’); communitybasedmarineprotectedareamanagementinitiatives(canbeknownonoccasionas‘passive restoration’); arts-based public engagement; advocacy of specific solutions to tackle pressures (such as the implementation of laws on bottom trawling and reducing sewage pollution into estuaries); and, capacitybuildingplace-basedoceanliteracyprojects,tonameafew.
PolicyandAdvocacy
Some interviewees stated that projects which focus on changing policy and legislation, and using advocacy would bring greater value-for-money than active restoration However, all interviewees saw value in both ‘active’ as well as ‘passive’ forms of marine recovery and saw them as intertwined For example, to achieve the sustainable long-term recovery of a large oyster reef through ‘active restoration’, then the underlying pressures that have either caused the need for restoration or are leading to its continuing degradation must be tackled Whether that is pollution, harmful fishing practices, coastal development or climate change Almost all interviewees stated that advocacy and active restoration should go hand in hand and there are greater opportunities to advocate for policy and legislative change formarineprotection.
Tacklingpressures
Intervieweesuniversallystatedthattheydidnotbelieveitwassensibletowaitforpressurestoberemoved before beginning marine recovery projects However, most also stated that it was pointless not to tackle pressureswhilelivinginhopethatecosystemswouldrecoverwithoutsuchinterventions
There was a belief by some that the issues were “too big” for them to have an impact on at their project scale, such as climate change. Although a sense that community-led pressure removal can be effective, especially when the perceived action from government agencies is slow and local knowledge can prove instrumentalinmobilisingcommunitiestofocusonpositivechange
Fewbelievedtheyhadtheresourcestoputinthelargeamountoftimerequiredtotrytosolvethemultiple pressures impinging on project areas and many thought they lacked the skills and knowledge to do so. Therewasafeelingfromsomeintervieweesthatduetothebroadspectrumofpressuresthattherewasa lack of capacity to deal with all, as well as root issues are often addressed in silos (such as sewage water pollution) and there was a lack of joined up approach to tackle these pressures (from government, NGOs andindustry).
A way to mitigate the impact of the multitude of pressures preventing marine recovery within a specific marine recovery project is to select an optimum site at the outset For example, to screen out the lessfavourablelocations(suchasthosewithseverewaterqualityissues)duringadevelopmentphaseorinthe early-stagesofaproject.Smartsite-selectionisthereforeacriticalfirststeponthejourneytoasuccessful project(seePlanningandLicensingsectionbelow)
A‘wholescape’approach
There is a group of projects that are focussing on addressing upstream environmental pressures (eg, water quality, nutrient loading, sedimentation), with the concept of encapsulating a ‘source-to-sea’ approach.Thismethodfocusesontacklingenvironmentalissuesattheirorigin,orupstream,suchaswater quality, nutrient loading, and sedimentation. The key concept is to create an integrated system that connectsland,freshwater,estuaries,andmarineenvironments
While the idea of managing water on a catchment scale isn't new (for example, the Water Framework Directive aims to improve and protect the water environment on a catchment scale, resulting in the creation of River Basin Management Plans), creating marine recovery initiatives that connect different habitats and species at scale across the land-sea boundary and into freshwater is gaining increasing tractionataprojectlevel [i]
Theauthorssuggestthatmorefundingandattentionshouldbedirectedtowardsprojectsthatencompass the entire marine-estuarine-riverine continuum and connected land areas. This aligns with approaches such as the Local Nature Recovery Strategies and proposals from the Cunliffe Report . The Cunliffe Report argues that a centralized, top-down governance model has failed and that a more localised, regional approachisneededtoeffectivelymanagethecomplexissuesfacingthewatersector [ii]
The concept of a ‘seascape approach’, which restores connectivity and optimal structure-function relationships (i.e. how the physical components and biological components of ecosystems link to ecological processes ), is crucial for successful ecosystem restoration – as illustrated and defined by Preston et al This approach, and that of ‘wholescape’ management of areas, championed by organisations such as WWF and the Catchment Based Approach (CaBA) /Wholescape Approach to Marine Management (WAMM) initiative , takes more time, effort, partners and resources than single ecosystemrecovery. [iii] [iv] [v] [vi]
Combiningdifferentskillsandknowledgeisachallenge,especiallywhereprojectshavebeenstuckinsilos of focusing on single habitats or single ecosystems, often simply because project proposers’ expertise sits inoneareaandtheyareuncomfortablefocussingonwiderecosystemsoutsidetheirspeciality,orbecause afundingcallfocusesonacertainecosystem,suchasmarineorriverine.
The interviews illustrated that the numerous ways of improving the marine and coastal environment can achievetheiraimswhilehavehugedifferencesbetweentheirindividualmethodsandfocus Theconclusion isthatthereisn’tonesolutionorcategoryofprojectthatisbetterthananother,theyaresimplydifferent
TakingaSystemsView-Recommendations:
It is critical to first acknowledge that all project categories from ‘active’ restoration, advocating for legal and policy change, protection and community management to arts-based engagement and ocean literacy have value; there is no single superior solution to tackling the nature and climate crises in the marineenvironment.
Anintegrated‘wholescape’approach:
Increasethefocusonprojectsthatexpandtheirattentionbeyondasinglemarinehabitattoincludethe entire interconnected system from land and freshwater to estuaries and the sea. This integrated approach,whichconsidersthe'wholescape'ofanarea,iscrucialforlong-termsuccess.
Havingsaidtheabove,itisimportanttonotethatthereisstillmeritineffortstoprotectorrestoresingle habitats and species and every initiative has its own intrinsic merits which should not be overlooked eveniftheprimaryfuturefocusisonanintegratedapproach.
Fundersshouldlooktodirecttheireffortstowardsinitiativeswhichareseekingtolink-upandcoordinate across the land-sea interface Funding projects which are at least in-part aimed at addressing both terrestrial,freshwaterandmarinepressureswouldbeoptimal
Direct more funding towards projects that adopt a comprehensive, catchment-wide or 'whole-scape' approach. These initiatives, while requiring more time and resources, could offer greater long-term valueandaddresstheinterconnectednatureofmarinedegradation
Prioritise efforts implementing a ' seascape approach' to restore connectivity and optimal structurefunctionrelationshipsacrossfragmentedecosystemstobuildresilience.
Policy&Advocacy:
Funders should look to support roles that are focussed solely on advocating for changes to policy and legislation which would overcome strategic issues preventing or slowing marine recovery. Such roles could be a pooled or a shared resource acting on behalf of several organisations on common issues ratherthanmultiplerolesinvariousorganisations.
Encourage funders to increase their focus on funding roles which look to influence systemic changes andworkonspecificpolicy,regulationorlegalbarriers
In addition, funders could pool their resources to share the funding of roles so that their silos own are brokendown
Fundingroleswhichaimtoadvocateforpolicychangealongsidethoseconducting‘active’restoration
TakingaSystemsView-Recommendations:
Collaboration:
Encouragecollaborationbetweenexpertsfromdifferentfieldstoovercomethetendencyforprojectsto operate in isolated silos. Combining diverse skills from active restoration to policy and advocacy is essentialforacomprehensiveandeffectiveapproach
Recognisethecurrentlackofcapacity,skills,andknowledgeamongmanyprojectstoeffectivelytackle the multiple, broad spectrum of pressures Address this through shared training, resourcing, and collaborativeinitiatives.
Encourage a joined-up approach and the breaking down of silos among government agencies, NGOs, industry,andlocalcommunitiestotacklecomplex,multiplepressures
Tacklingpressures:
Projects that can clearly demonstrate plans to explore and address the pressures are those which fundersshouldfocuson.
Aimtointegratehands-onrestorationeffortswithadvocacyandpolicy-focusedinitiativestotacklethe underlying causes of degradation, such as pollution Projects should not wait for pressures to be fully removedbeforestartingrestorationbutshouldaddressbothsimultaneously.
To mitigate the impact of numerous pressures, projects should conduct a thorough screening process to select optimal sites at the outset Avoid locations with severe, unmanageable issues, as this significantlyimprovesthechancesofaproject'ssuccessandisacriticalfirststep.
Support community-led initiatives to tackle pressures, as local knowledge and mobilisation can be highlyeffective Thesegrassrootseffortscanbeinstrumentalindrivingpositivechangeatalocalscale
Climatesmartprojectdesign
“Climate-smart” marine nature recovery initiatives are designed to restore marine ecosystems while simultaneouslysupportingadaptationtoandmitigationofclimatechangeimpacts.Theseprojectsaimto enhanceecologicalresilienceandutilisenaturalprocessestoaddressclimate-relatedchallengesinocean andcoastalenvironments[vii].
Someexamplesofclimate-smartdesign
Restorationofbluecarbonhabitats
Coastal ecosystems such as salt marshes and seagrass meadows capture atmospheric carbon. Projectsthatfocusonrestoringthesehabitatscontributetocarbonsequestrationbystoringcarbon
Enhancingresiliencetosea-levelriseandextremeweather
Ecosystem restoration can serve as a natural buffer against coastal hazards. For instance, rehabilitatingoysterreefscanreducewaveenergyandlimitshorelineerosion Similarly,saltmarshes helpstabilisecoastlinesandabsorbfloodwaters.
Establishinghabitatconnectivity
As marine species adjust their distribution in response to warming waters, it becomes essential to create networks of connected habitats. This can be achieved through the strategic placement of MPAs
Selectingclimate-resilientspecies
Restoration efforts may involve choosing species or genetic variants that are more tolerant of changingoceanconditions
Consideringtheimpactsofclimatechangeonmarinerecoveryprojects
Theinterviewsillustratedanalmostuniversallackofconsiderationoftheimpactsofclimatechangeupon theproject’soutcomesandhowtoconsidertheseandadapt Therewasoftenasensethatthereweretoo manyunknownsandthatthe“problemwastoobig”toconsider.
Therewassignificantscepticismamongparticipantsthattheclimate-relatedclaimsofcertainbluecarbon habitats were accurate There was a feeling that more evidence and data were needed to substantiate claims. On occasion, within delivery partnerships there was a sense that climate-smart thinking is present butnotalwayswell-integratedacrossthepartners
Climate-smartprojectdesign-Recommendations:
Encourage applicants to consider how their proposal will be impacted by climate change and what adaptationstheymayneedtomakeduringthelifetimeofthefundingandbeyondtohelpareasadapt toachangingclimate.
Bluecarbonbenefitsshouldbeseenasaco-benefitofmarinerecoveryandfocusshouldbeplacedon the many other benefits of biodiversity enhancement, such as acting as fish nurseries and providing coastalprotection[viii].
Increased consideration from funders that large-scale seascape marine recovery projects help nature andcommunitiesadaptandmitigateclimatechange
Planning,licensingandreporting
Severalrespondentsandintervieweesstatedthattheyfelttherewasalackofstrategicclarityaboutwhere andhowrestorationshouldoccur Somebelievedthatexistingmapsanddataareusefulbuttoohigh-level; theylackeddetailonlandownership,feasibility,andlocalpressures.
However, the intention of the suitability for restoration data and evidence produced by government agenciesandothersistoillustratetheoverallpotentialandtogivepractitionersaguideandassistance It is not meant to be prescriptive at the project level and should not replace the need for detailed site selectionandfeasibilitystudies
Therefore, there is a gap between what is produced at the strategic level and what is required to allow for robust decisions to be made at a project level regarding site selection, risk analysis and licensing applications
Thisgapindataandinformationalsotranslatesonoccasiontoacapacityandknowledgegapinthecase of practitioners and project proposers For example, some community led groups, but not all it should be said,donothavetheexperiencethatsomeofthegovernmentagenciesormarinerecoveryfocussedNGOs possess in terms of site selection and marine licence applications Many need help in ecological and socioeconomicplanningbeforelaunchingprojects.
Several respondents also noted that the marine planning and consenting processes were difficult to navigate,tobudgetforandtoassesstherisksofcompliancealongwiththeriskofachievingaconsent The uncertaintyinmarinelicensingoutcomesduetotherelativelynovelnatureoftheproposalsalongsidethe lack of a bespoke licence for marine recovery activities meant that many felt the policy and planning landscape was not set up to facilitate marine recovery. Many were aware of the existence of written licensing guidance but many also felt that it was on occasion impenetrable to them and their teams The costs, timeframes, risks and uncertainties led some to question whether some groups with intentions to workonmarineconservationandrestorationprojectshadsimplygivenuporput-offfromstartingprojects
In autumn 2025, the Scottish Government launched a consultation on its draft marine and coastal restoration plan and referenced within it is the presumption that, for now at least, the priority will be to explore opportunities to create and fund a support post (or posts) to help projects navigate the current regulatorysystem.However,theconsultationstatesthattheoptiontoconsiderregulatorychangesinfuture remains
MonitoringandReporting
The perception from interviewees of the requirements for reporting to government agencies as part of licenceconditions,aswellasreportingtofundersonthesuccessofprojectsintermsofecosystemrecovery outcomes,wasmixed
The relatively nascent history of marine recovery through active restoration – at least at scale and with a connected seascape in the UK – has meant that reporting to many funders has quite sensibly been given largeflexibilityandmarginforchange Manyintervieweesexpressedgratitudeforthelight-touchshownby some funders in their reporting requirements while others had a very different experience. To be able to demonstrate success and attract future funding, projects need a clear framework for monitoring and evaluatingsuccess
Similarly, projects which are based on advocating for change (for example, campaigning for changes in damaging practices or changes to legislation) also sometimes face difficulty in producing indicators of success due to the long-term and sometimes nebulous world of policy change That isn’t to say that it cannotbeachieved,andthereisclearlyalonghistoryofprojectsdoingjustthis.Manyrespondentspraised thesophisticatednatureofsomefundersandtheirabilitytounderstandthatsuccesscanbemeasuredin the policy sphere by incremental change of so-called multiple small-wins, adding up eventually to stepchange Beingclearonthepathwaytoachievepolicyorpracticechangethroughadvocacyisimportantin marineconservationprojects.
If marine nature recovery projects require a marine licence or other permission, then these consents will almost always come with monitoring and reporting requirements Such requirements – while sometimes appearingoneroustotheapplicant–canhelpinprojectprogressreportingtofunders.
Planning,licensingandreporting-Recommendations:
Funders should actively support initiatives and roles focused on policy advocacy, specifically those aiming to better integrate marine restoration and conservation into marine spatial planning. Similarly, funders should collaborate (or pool resources) to tackle systemic barriers, such as improving the regulatoryandlicensingregimes
Initial site selection is critical for projects, particularly with active restoration of habitats and species Continuing the trend of improving and refining the data, mapping and information produced by governmentonsiteofpotentialandassociatedguidanceonrestorationistobewelcomed
Resources such as the Notion online database produced for this project and MeND are a recent and welcomestepforward.Continuingsupportfortheseistobeencouraged.
Support is needed for those groups embarking on active marine restoration projects to upskill and enablethemtonavigatetheintricaciesofsiteselection Thisisparticularlyimportantfornewentrantsor community groups with little background or experience in restoration; however, it would be equally useful for established NGOs Training, capacity building, knowledge sharing, best-practice understanding,andguidancewouldallbeextremelyvaluable.
Similarly,additionalsupport,trainingandguidanceontheinitialstepsinmarinelicensingprocesswould allownewentrantsandcommunitygroups–again,aswellasseasonedNGOs–tonavigatethemarine permissionspathways.
CoordinationofFunding
Funding for marine conservation and restoration comes from a wide variety of sources: private philanthropy, corporates, trusts and foundations, government, legacies and individual donations, among others Whilefundingformarineissmallerthanterrestrialbasedprojects,asmentionedearlierinthisreport, thefundingcomesfrompublicfunds,philanthropy,trustsandfoundationsandincreasinglycorporates
Severalintervieweesraisedtheissueofthelackofcoordinationoffundingsourcesandthedifficultyoflong termandcontinuationfundingformarineecosystemrecoveryprojects.
Many interviewees had direct or anecdotal experience of projects coming to an end of their funding when the higher ambitions of the overall outcome had yet to be achieved but the individual project objectives had been completed. There were instances of staff leaving projects in the run up to funding ending and momentumbeinglost,whichishardtoregain
Some interviewees also stated that communities can feel abandoned when projects close and the teams and organisations effectively leave the project site. This reinforces the perception from some that organisations,suchaslargerNGOs,imposingoncommunitiesandthenleavingthem‘highanddry’topick upthepieces.
Lineofsightforfuturefundingfromthesamedonororimprovedcoordinationofseveralfunderswithsubtly different aims or funding models would help For example, a funder that focussed on large capital investmentcouldpairwithanotherfunderwhosefocuswasmoreonrevenuestylefundingoronadvocacy andlong-termcommunitywork
Governmentfundingisdependentonpoliticalpriorities,fundingcyclesandpublicprocurementprocesses
Many interviewees talked of funding from government sometimes being available at short notice and having to be spent before the end of financial year. Most grantees felt stated that in such circumstances theytendedtomakeeveryefforttousethemoneyinshorttimescalesratherthanloseitornotreceiveitat allbutitisclearlythenpronetoapotentiallackofstrategicfocuswhenspendingan thedangerisofshorttermandknee-jerkdecisionsonspending
Coordinationoffunding-Recommendations:
EstablishNetworkoffundersformarinerecoveryintheUK Initiateabroad-scalemarinefundersgroup, consisting of not just trusts and foundations but a wider spectrum, including government and corporates,amongothers
Funders to share information more routinely on projects which may not suit one funder but would another.
Matchingandaligningcapitalandrevenuefunderssotheycancooperatetoassistwithallemblements ofaprojectlifespan
Some interviewees expressed an interest in integrated funding streams, ones that combine environmentalandcommunitycapacitygoals Thiscouldbeexploredfurther
Sustainablefundingandfinance
Participants in the interviews and workshops had considerable experience in the various forms of funding andfinancethatcontributedtomarineecosystemrecoveryprojects Intervieweeswerekeentoconveythe message that even with multi-million-pound budgets, projects often remain small-scale due to the high cost and complexity of marine work. This is particularly the case when it comes to capital works and the physicalandactiverestorationofhabitatsandspecies Thecomplexity,uncertaintyanddifficultyofworking in marine and coastal environments means that costs can be considerably higher when compared to terrestrialsitesofcomparablesize Ashasbeenlaidoutinthisreportalready,practitionerswereclearthat tocreateimpactfortheserestorationinitiativesthenlong-terminvestmentisrequired.
For advocacy focussed initiatives, while the scale of the minimum investment required to create a viable project or campaign is clearly less, the difficulty arises in acquiring funds for this often less-tangible but equallylong-termpolicyinfluencingwork.Severalintervieweesexpressedtherelativeavailabilityoffunding forcapitalintensiverestorationworkandthedifficultyinfindingfundingforadvocacywork
Intervieweesweresomewhatdisillusionedbytheshort-termnatureoffunding,whichisinsufficientforlongterm marine conservation and restoration work and often leads to gaps between funding cycles. This can lead to lost momentum, experienced teams disbanding, and good-will within communities and stakeholders dissipating. Again, long-term funding with a line-of-sight to futures revenue and funding streamswasseentobeamissingelementbyrespondents Thelackofanysystematiccoordinationamong funderswasseenasproblematic.
Interviewees expressed a common interest in new models of finance for projects, and saw a role for innovativefunding(forexample,corporateESGfocussed,MarineRecoveryFund),butseveralpeoplestated that Government support is needed to de-risk and guide private investment Interviewees were keen to understand how to leverage new funding, and how could funding be ‘blended’ by combining government, private,andphilanthropicsources
AninterestingexampleofthisfromaterrestrialviewpointcomesundertheUKGovernment’senvironmental land management (ELM) scheme. The Landscape Recovery part of ELM creates funding opportunities for large scale landscape restoration projects delivered through collaboration between multiple landowners / managers. Collaboration can help the accessibility of public or private funding, where potential buyers of environmental services can approach a single entity, making it simpler for the buyer and increases opportunities.
Nearly all the group interviewed were sceptical that credits (whether carbon, biodiversity) will deliver additionalfunding–certainlynotintheshortandmediumtermandsomefeltperhapsnotatall Therewas somewearinessthattheseideashadbeenaroundforsometimewithlittleapparentvisibilitytowhenorif these would create value and bring in available funds There was also a general acknowledgement of a knowledge deficit between many practitioners and those involved more deeply with the finance community
Sustainablefundingandfinance-Recommendations:
Where possible, greater coordination among funders is needed (for example, government, private, philanthropic,trusts,corporates),bothintimingandhowfundscanbeused.
Blended Funding Models: Combining government, private, and philanthropic sources is key to maximisingtheefficiencyoffundraisingandusingthepoolofmoneyavailable
Upskillingandtrainingforpractitionersonthepotentialforinnovativesustainablefinancemechanisms
Longer term funding for marine ecosystem recovery projects (including community capacity building andinvolvement)iscritical.
Better coordination (e.g., pooled funding or shared licensing resources) could reduce project burden andincreaseimpact.
Collaboration
It would almost go without saying that collaboration is key to delivering successful marine ecosystem recovery project Nearly all projects that deliver environmental improvements consist of multiple organisationsthatfulfildifferentskillsets,knowledgeareasandmotivations
Allinterviewstatedthatcollaborationwasessential However,somealsosaidthecollaborationcanleadto slower decision-making and that there is a need for strong evidence to ensure equity among partners whilstmaximisingthebenefitsofdecisionsbeinginformedbymultipleperspectives
Thereareexamplesoffundingcallswhichencourageorevenstipulatethatcollaborationsmustbecreated andsometimesthosecollaborationsbenovel.TheBlueSpaces–WalesinitiativefromtheEsmeeFairbairn Foundation is an example The funding call specifically sought proposals that involve new and unusual collaborations and ambitious partnerships., The goal is to support imaginative approaches to freshwater conservation,emphasisingthattheprojectsshouldbe"pioneering"and"breaknewground"
There was a feeling amongst some interviewees that forced collaborations are counter-productive and mayfalterifnotinstitutionallysupported;forexample,ifon-the-groundpractitionersarecollaboratingbut the organisations are not bought-in Collaborators need time to understand each other’s objectives and ways of working and a development phase can help to establish and cement relationships and potential collaboratorsandtodetermineifaworkingrelationshipislikelytosucceed
Collaboration-Recommendations:
To achieve success in marine recovery, then collaboration is a fundamental to achieve the desired outcomeandprojectgoals
Toachievetrueseascaperecovery–aswellasthewiderneedforrecoveryacrossecosystems,suchas marine and riverine - then collaboration is to be encouraged. This is particularly the case between organisations working in different sectors or ecosystems which do not ordinarily come across each other but which achieving the desired ecosystem recovery outcome would benefit greatly from their coming together While collaboration across land, freshwater and marine is increasing, encouraging furthernewandnovelcollaborationacrosstheseareasistobeencouraged.
Funders should be careful in how they phrase their criteria in encouraging new collaborations, Applicants for funding may strike up a novel collaboration to meet requirements rather than the true needfortheprojectoutcome,orworse,wherepartnershipsare‘forced’betweenorganisationsthatare notwellsuitedorrelationshipsarestrained
Requiringnovel–or“unusual”-collaborationsforthesolereasonofnewnessandwithoutaveryclear rationalefromfundersisnottoberecommended Someintervieweeswereclearinstatingthat‘novelty foritsownsake’wasunhelpful.
The recommended collaboration should therefore be focussed on applicants demonstrating how collaborationacrossdifferentgeographies,knowledgeandskillsetscanbebroughttogethertoachieve successfulprojectsacrosstheland-seainterfaceandbeyond.
Creatingnewpartnershipstoproducerobustandlong-termchangeneedstime.Givingtime–whether through early pilot funding or a development-phase – to help collaboration to embed is to be encouraged.
ExitStrategyandProjectLegacy
Intervieweeswereaskedfortheirexperienceofwell-plannedexitstrategieswhenprojectscometoanend andtheirexamplesofalastinglegacy.
Nearly all interviewees stated that exit strategies were not well planned or executed, and little time was given to deep consideration of this in most funding applications or during the project itself It is understandable, given the focus on trying to successfully plan and launch a new initiative as well as continually seeking new funds that relatively little time is spent on how the legacy of a project will remain Critically, if there is little handover or consideration of how to embed the changes for the long-term then thereisgreatriskofthegoodworkovermanyyearsbeingundone
As part of the literature research, the authors considered the example of the England Woodland Creation Offer(EWCO),akeygovernmentschemeadministeredbytheForestryCommission,designedtoincentivise andsupportthecreationofnewwoodlands Itoperatesonamulti-yearcommitmentwithaclear,phased payment structure to help landowners manage the costs and long-term responsibilities of woodland creation EWCO grants are not a one-off payment; they are a long-term commitment with payments tied tospecificphasesandmilestones.Thegrantagreementtypicallyhastwomainelements:
1.Capital Element: This part of the grant covers the initial costs of woodland establishment, during which allcapitalworksmustbecompleted
2.Maintenance Element: This is a longer-term commitment, typically lasting for 15 years, which provides annualpaymentstosupporttheongoingcareofthenewlyplantedwoodland
Considerationcouldbegiventoexploreifsuchamodelcouldbeappliedtothemarineenvironment,where communities are funded for the long-term ‘maintenance’ of a project that has finished its initial funding cycle.Thislonger-termfundingcouldactasanexit-strategytothemainprojectandallowelementssuch as long-term monitoring, deep community and stakeholder relationship building, and advocacy, to continueasaprojectlegacy.
ExitStrategyandProjectLegacy-Recommendations:
Exitstrategiesareoftengivenrelativelylittlethoughtandsustainingmomentumpost-fundingremainsa challenge.
Manyprojectslackaclearlegacyplan,riskingdataandmomentumlosswhenfundingends.
Legacyandexitstrategiesneedtobeembeddedearlyintoprojectssothatthegoodworkcancontinue post-project,particularlyifcommunitiesareto‘takeownership’andremaincustodians
Consideralong-term‘maintenanceaward’tohelpwiththetransitionfromthemainprojectgrant
i WaterFrameworkDirective:EuropeanCommission
ii.TheIndependentWaterCommission,chairedbySirJonCunliffe
iii NaturalEngland:Thestructureandfunctioningofmarineecosystems:anenvironmentalprotection andmanagementperspective(ENRR699)
iv.Seascapeconnectivity:evidence,knowledgegapsandimplicationsfortemperatecoastalecosystem restorationpracticeandpolicy.NPJOceanSustainability.J.Prestonetal.
v WWFwholescape
vi.CatchmentBasedApproach(CaBA)/WholescapeApproachtoMarineManagement(WAMM)
vii NavigatingChange:TheRoleofClimate-smartMPAsinAchieving30×30” PlymouthMarine laboratoryandBlueMarineFoundation
viii.CarbonRemovalUsingCoastalBlueCarbonEcosystemsIsUncertainandUnreliable,With QuestionableClimaticCost-Effectiveness
