This study challenges the paradigm that salt marsh plants prevent lateral wave-induced erosion along wetland edges by binding soil with live roots and clarifies the role of vegetation in protecting the coast. In both laboratory flume studies and controlled field experiments, we show that common salt marsh plants do not significantly mitigate the total amount of erosion along a wetland edge. We found that the soil type is the primary variable that influences the lateral erosion rate and although plants do not directly reduce wetland edge erosion, they may do so indirectly via modification of soil parameters. We conclude that coastal vegetation is best-suited to modify and control sedimentary dynamics in response to gradual phenomena like sea-level rise or tidal forces, but is less well-suited to resist punctuated disturbances at the seaward margin of salt marshes, specifically breaking waves.

The conservation of coastal ecosystems can provide considerable coastal protection benefits, but this role has not been sufficiently accounted for in coastal planning and engineering. Substantial evidence now exists showing how, and under what conditions, ecosystems can play a valuable function in wave and storm surge attenuation, erosion reduction, and in the longer term maintenance of the coastal profile. Both through their capacity for self repair and recovery, and through the often considerable cobenefits they provide, ecosystems can offer notable advantages over traditional engineering approaches in some settings. They can also be combined in “hybrid” engineering designs. We make 10 recommendations to encourage the utilization of existing knowledge and to improve the incorporation of ecosystems into policy, planning and funding for coastal hazard risk reduction.

The storm surge event that affected the coastal margins of the southern North Sea on 5–6 December 2013 produced the highest still water levels on record at several tide gauges on the UK east coast. On east-facing coasts south of the Humber estuary and north-facing Norfolk, water levels were higher than in the twentieth century benchmark surge event of 31 January–1 February 1953. Maximum significant wave heights were highest off the North Norfolk coast (peak Hs=3.8m offshore, 2.9m inshore) and lowest off the Suffolk coast (Hs=1.5–1.8m inshore); comparable offshore wave heights in 1953 were 7–8m and ca. 3m. The lower wave heights, and their short duration, in 2013 explain both localised breaching, overtopping, and back-barrier flooding associated with gravel ridges and relatively low earthen banks as well as the lack of failure in more highly-engineered coastal defences. On barrier coasts and within estuaries, the signal of maximum runup was highly variable, reflecting the modification of the tide–surge–wave signal by inshore bathymetry and the presence of a range of coastal ecosystems. The landscape impacts of the December 2013 surge included the notching of soft rock cliffs and cliffline retreat; erosion of coastal dunes; and the augmentation or re-activation of barrier island washover deposits. Whilst surge event-related cliff retreat on the rapidly eroding cliffs of the Suffolk coast lay within the natural variability in inter-annual rates of retreat, the impact of the surge on upper beach/sand dune margins produced a pulse of shoreline translation landwards equivalent to about 10years of ‘normal’ shoreline retreat. The study of east coast surges over the last 60years, and the identification of significant phases of landscape change — such as periods of rapid soft rock cliff retreat and the formation of new gravel washovers on barrier islands — points to the importance of high water levels being accompanied by high wave activity. Future developments in early warning systems and evacuation planning require information on the variable impacts of such extreme events