The complexity of quantifying ecosystem services in monetary terms has long been a challenging issue for economists and ecologists. Many case specific valuation studies have been carried out in various parts of the World. Yet, a coherent review on the valuation of coastal ecosystem services (CES), which systematically describes fundamental concepts, analyzes reported applications, and addresses the issue of climate change (CC) impacts on the monetary value of CES is still lacking. Here, we take a step towards addressing this knowledge gap by pursuing a coherent review that aims to provide policy makers and researchers in multidisciplinary teams with a summary of the state-of-the-art and a guideline on the process of economic valuation of CES and potential changes in these values due to CC impacts. The article highlights the main concepts of CES valuation studies and offers a systematic analysis of the best practices by analyzing two global scale and 30 selected local and regional case studies, in which different CES have been valued. Our analysis shows that coral reefs and mangroves are among the most frequently valued ecosystems, while sea-grass beds are the least considered ones. Currently, tourism and recreation services as well as storm protection are two of the most considered services representing higher estimated value than other CES. In terms of the valuation techniques used, avoided damage, replacement and substitute cost method as well as stated preference method are among the most commonly used valuation techniques. Following the above analysis, we propose a methodological framework that provides step-wise guidance and better insight into the linkages between climate change impacts and the monetary value of CES. This highlights two main types of CC impacts on CES: one being the climate regulation services of coastal ecosystems, and the other being the monetary value of services, which is subject to substantial uncertainty. Finally, a systematic four-step approach is proposed to effectively monetize potential CC driven variations in the value of CES.

Infrastructure systems are inextricably tied to society by providing a variety of vital services. These systems play a fundamental role in reducing the vulnerability of communities and increasing their resilience to natural and human-induced hazards. While diverse definitions of the resilience engineering concept exist for the infrastructures, analysing resilience of these systems within cross sectoral and interdisciplinary perspectives remains limited and fragmented in research and practice. This review synthesizes and complements existing knowledge in designing resilient vital infrastructures with the aim to assist researchers and policy makers by identifying: (1) key conceptual tensions and challenges that arise when designing resilient infrastructure systems; (2) engineering and non-engineering based measures to enhance resilience of the vital infrastructures, including the best recent practices available; and (3) opportunities for future research in this field. Results from a systematic literature review combined with expert interviews are integrated into a conceptual framework in which infrastructures are defined as a conglomeration of interdependent social, ecological, and technical systems. Our results indicate that conceptual and practical challenges in designing resilient infrastructures continue to exist, hence these systems are still being built without taking resilience explicitly into account. A review of available measures and recent applications shows that these measures have not been widely applied in designing different systems. To advance our understanding of the resilience engineering concept for infrastructure systems, main pressing topics to address evolve around the: (i) integration of the combined social, ecological and technical resilience of infrastructure systems, focusing on cascading effects of failures and dependencies across these complex systems; and (ii) development of new technology to identify the factors that create different recovery characteristics for these socio-ecological-technical systems.