Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41557806›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026

Mangrove restoration and coastal flood adaptation: A global perspective on the potential for hybrid coastal defenses.

Timothy Tiggeloven, Vincent van Zelst, Eric Mortensen, Bregje K van Wesenbeeck, Thomas A Worthington, Mark Spalding, Hans de Moel, Philip J Ward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Timothy TiggelovenWater and Climate Risk Department, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3029-659X
Vincent van ZelstDeltares, Delft 2600 MH, The Netherlands.
Eric MortensenWater and Climate Risk Department, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The Netherlands.
Bregje K van WesenbeeckDeltares, Delft 2600 MH, The Netherlands.
Thomas A WorthingtonDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EA, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8138-9075
Mark SpaldingDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EA, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9456-4533
Hans de MoelWater and Climate Risk Department, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The Netherlands.
Philip J WardWater and Climate Risk Department, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 HV, The Netherlands.

Funding

EC | ERC | HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council (ERC) 101003276
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To reduce current and future coastal flood risk, it is critical to better understand how adaptation measures, including nature-based solutions, can reduce that risk. Globally, hybrid coastal defenses, including a combination of coastal vegetation, such as salt marshes and mangroves, with a dike or sea wall, have been highlighted as a promising adaptation measure. Here, we present a global-scale assessment of the potential risk reduction from mangrove restoration in combination with foreshore dike systems under scenarios of climate and socioeconomic change. We provide a quantitative assessment of the benefits in terms of reduced economic damage, exposed population, and poverty exposure. We evaluate mangrove restoration fronting dikes by accounting for wave-vegetation interaction. If mangrove foreshore dike systems were established along coastlines susceptible to flooding, restoration could potentially reduce expected annual damage by US$800 million and reduce expected affected population by 140,000 annually. These values increase under future projections. Our benefit-cost analysis finds mangrove restoration economically viable for about half of the subnational regions assessed (85 to 105 out of 208). At the global scale, the benefit-cost ratio under future conditions ranges from 3 to 6, with a net present value between US$44 billion and US$125 billion. Because absolute risk values and benefit-cost analysis do not differentiate between relative wealth impacts, we also estimated restoration impacts across different wealth levels. We show that restoring mangroves disproportionately benefits people with lower incomes, as they are often more exposed to coastal flooding and located in areas suitable for mangrove restoration. As such, mangrove restoration in low- and middle-income countries could contribute to the resilience of people in poverty.

Indexed as

climate adaptationcoastal floodingmangrovesnature-based solutions

Identifiers

PMID41557806
PMCPMC12846779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.