Workshop summary report

2. Cross-cutting themes

The facilitators synthetized key themes from a total of eight breakout sessions, from the plenary discussion notes, and from the wrap-up discussion notes, in order to identify major themes, findings and concerns. The following is a summary of themes and findings  identified during the course of the three-day workshop.

Sharing knowledge, information, data, and resources across geographies and projects

Shared baseline data, area information, and technical resources from across projects and geographies were identified as critical tools for participants throughout their projects; starting from project conception and planning, through implementation, and completion or ongoing monitoring. In doing so, current and future projects could draw on previously collected data, a vast network of partners, collaborators and community groups could build capacity, and researchers could communicate successes, failures and challenges, promoting national discussions around solutions and activating partnerships. Through this process, participants could develop models and templates for future work of a similar scope or for similar species and environments. Participants suggested the creation of a data management portal to amalgamate all CRF project data in a unified, accessible format. Participants also indicated the need to share information through maps, models, templates, and story-rich, engaging language.

Building strong, genuine relationships

Participants emphasized that sustainable, productive relationships required early development, genuine and formal commitment, and adequate time to evolve naturally. Participants felt that it was important to cultivate relationships with local organizations, government, communities, and Indigenous Peoples to obtain social license, build on existing relationships, and to incorporate local knowledge before starting a project. Collaborating transparently with provincial and municipal governments was seen as a key step to garnering support for project work and expediting permits. Formally incorporating partners and setting clear expectations was suggested to demonstrate commitment and to build trust. CRF funding was critical to committing financially to partnership development through training and capacity building, leading to greater trust and social acceptance of projects.

Establishing the long-term sustainability of projects

Participants found that one of the greatest challenges and one of the most crucial aspects of projects success was long-term sustainability. Long-term monitoring activities were necessary to assessing project success, as most restoration activity benefits required many years before being fully realized. Participants emphasized the importance of establishing partnerships and collaborations to maintain monitoring activities over time and suggested industry partnerships as a means to sustain activities through industry operations. Participants suggested allocating some CRF funding to support long-term management of projects through communities or partner organizations.

Taking into account the fluctuating nature of government funding and priorities

While participants appreciated the current longevity of CRF funding, they also acknowledged that the stability of the CRF funding program was still uncertain and largely dictated by political cycles and priorities. They stressed the importance of seeking additional, long-term funding through partnerships with academia, local government, and industry to maintain project activities in the absence of CRF funding.

Recognizing the value of a project is made up of multiple factors

Participants recognized that the impacts of their projects affected the social, economic and cultural landscape of an area, as well as adjacent and connected ecosystems. Participants had the opportunity to build capacity in communities through employment, capital investment, and mentorship, leading to economic benefits and maintenance of long-term monitoring activities. Through the development of partnerships and collaborations, researchers could better align projects with local priorities and similar research, increasing co-benefits, promoting data sharing, and improving investment in conservation efforts.

Ensuring the flexibility of funding and adaptability of projects

Participants expressed a desire for greater funding flexibility and cited difficulties carrying out required project work, as access to funding often did not align with restoration activity start dates. Access to the full CRF funding amount was suggested to avoid unnecessary loans. They felt that the requirement to spend a certain portion by the end of each fiscal year was a hindrance to strategic and effective spending. Participants agreed that funding roll-over from year to year would ensure appropriate levels of funding for different phases and allow them to respond to unforeseen circumstances. They felt that communications strategies should also be included in funding considerations, as they were integral to obtain the support and trust of communities in a fulsome way.

Building communications, community engagement, and storytelling into projects

Participants saw immense value in telling the story of their project through various means to engage the broader community and to convey the value of the work being done. Many participants agreed that visual representations and storytelling were useful tools to connect with and garner interest from community members in the planning phase. Through storytelling, the project team could bridge communications and knowledge gaps, enhancing stakeholder relationships and increasing community investment in project work over the long-term. Participants suggested allocating a portion of CRF funding to communications and highlighted the importance of sharing success stories to maintain project momentum.

Pursuing more comprehensive, holistic approaches and methodologies

Taking a holistic, watershed management approach to restoration activities was recommended by participants. To avoid unintended consequences and increase co-benefits, many felt it was important to consider the spatial and temporal connectivity of watersheds ecosystems, and lifecycles, as well as anthropogenic impacts. Participants also recognized that project prioritization required a combination of environmental, social, economic, and cultural inputs to better predict the long-term outcomes of restoration work. Participants suggested incorporating a wide variety of metrics, baseline data, and traditional knowledge to assess habitat before implementing a project and highlighted the value of partnerships for data exchange and best practices.

Balancing interests and influences across geographies and jurisdictions

Participants felt it was important to seek balance across jurisdictions, disciplines, geographies, and interests to ensure the long-term success of restoration activities. Project teams had a better understanding of variables affecting the project locale and could plan for the effects of various inputs. This also increased opportunities to access additional resources and funding, exchange data and information, and share resources and capacity. Participants also cited opportunities to partner with other groups doing overlapping or complementary work, coordinate with project teams operating downstream, as well as piggybacking on infrastructure upgrade projects.

3. Breakout sessions

The following is a summary of key points shared by participants in the eight breakout sessions, organized by three topics: partnerships, methodologies, and program effectiveness and design.

3.1 Establishing partnerships and collaborations

Establishing partnerships and collaborating with stakeholders often requires the development of an effective and constructive network with partners, stakeholders or contacts that may be helpful in achieving a project’s goals. In this session, participants explored the role of partners in projects, the benefits of collaborations, the role of CRF funding in facilitating partnerships, mechanisms to maintain long-term partnerships, and the challenges related to establishing collaborative partnerships.

3.1.1 Community building through knowledge sharing

Participants recognized the value in making a positive impact in the broader communities that they worked with and near through education and awareness building. Working with communities to gather input and local knowledge built trust between the project team and community members, as well as between community groups. Community members and groups developed increased confidence in each other as they aligned on a shared goal and developed a deeper understanding and respect for their natural environment. As knowledge and project participation increased, stronger partnerships emerged and there was an increased sense of belonging within the community.

3.1.2 Sharing across networks of partners, collaborators, and potentially other CRF projects and broader community

Given the wide variety of projects carried out by CRF participants, and their broad geographic spread, participants all shared a desire to circulate their knowledge, methodologies, successes, and failures among different groups. In doing do, participants, as well as partners, collaborators, and community groups, built on previously collected data, expedited their own projects, explored potential partnerships and drew on a broader community of experts to innovate solutions. Participants suggested the creation of a data management portal to amalgamate all CRF project data.

3.1.3 Training and capacity building

Participants indicated that partnerships and collaborations were of great importance in regard to technical training and capacity building. Through collaborations with other project groups, participants could leverage staff and resources, building capacity within their team to carry out high-quality data collection. Academic partnerships were acknowledged as highly important for access to additional funding, as well as opportunities to mentor students, increasing the likelihood that work could be carried out in the future.

3.1.4 Genuine and authentic partnerships

Participants felt strongly that for partnerships to be successful and sustainable, they needed to be developed early, over time and genuinely respected. This was especially true of partnerships with local organizations, government, communities, and First Nations, where participants felt it was integral to build on relationships that already existed and to seek local knowledge before starting a project. Collaborating transparently with provincial and municipal governments was seen as a key step to garnering support for project work and expediting permits. Formally incorporating partners and setting clear expectations was suggested to demonstrate commitment and to build trust.

3.1.5 Effectiveness of long-term projects

Establishing partnerships and collaborations was identified as a crucial component of effectively sustaining projects over the long-term, past the time allotment for CRF funding. As genuine relationships were built throughout the project timeline, and capacity increased among partners and collaborators, those groups developed a greater level of mutual understand and buy-in. Project teams could progressively take a smaller role in data collection and analysis, until the project was carried out solely by partner groups. Participants suggested allocating some CRF funding to supporting long-term management of community-led projects, to further demonstrate commitment to formal partnership and collaborator agreements, and to sustain mentorship activities.

3.2 Social license to operate

The level of acceptance and/or approval by local communities and stakeholders of organizations and their operations can be crucial to the success of any project. This session allowed CRF recipients to discuss experiences, challenges and approaches related to obtaining social license to operate, as well as the importance of securing social license.

3.2.1 Social license is essential

Participants agreed that social license was an essential part of any CRF funded project. The process through which social license is obtained should be robust, adaptable and ongoing to ensure that community members and groups are meaningfully consulted and included before implementation, throughout the project, and after completion. Social license was achieved through collaborations and partnerships, which must be supported by a broader communications and engagement strategy. Participants emphasized that an effective communications strategy requires a variety of transmission tools and that information and results should be presented in story-rich language fit for public consumption. Participants also emphasized that social license is crucial to the sustainability of projects upon the termination of CRF funding, as communities are not only the likely long-term stewards of projects, but also have to live with the outcomes of the project.

3.2.2 Building relationships takes time

Participants agreed that building genuine, mutual relationships required time for trust to build naturally and for roles to evolve. Further, adequate time was needed to understand the historical, social and economic significance of different groups, their activities, and their priorities. It also took time to develop meaningful relationships with a multitude of different groups, organizations and institutions, which were integral to collaboration and partnerships across the life of the project.

3.2.3 Build in flexibility (allocation of funds)

Participants expressed a desire for greater funding flexibility in terms of timing and allocation. In order to ensure that each phase of a project was adequately funded and that they could spend more efficiently and respond to unforeseen challenges, participants felt that the ability to move a surplus of funding to a different year was essential. They felt that communications strategies should be included in funding considerations, as they are integral to obtain the support and trust of communities in a fulsome way.

3.3 Shoreline stabilization

Shoreline stabilization techniques are used to stem the gradual, although sometimes rapid, removal of sediments from the shorelines that can negatively impact aquatic environments. A number of CRF projects incorporate these techniques in their restoration efforts. This session presented a forum for participants to discuss factors for success, long-term viability of interventions and the circumstances warranting human relocation.

3.3.1 Cost/Benefit Analysis

Participants recognized that while shoreline stabilization projects are important, the cost of restoration activities must be appropriate for the benefits achieved. Partnerships with municipal and provincial governments, as well as industry, are key to acquiring additional financial resources or aligning on shore stabilization projects to reduce the cost to benefit ratio based on CRF funding. Participants also considered the cost effectiveness of shoreline stabilization relative to relocation but highlighted the importance of addressing the social cost as well as the financial cost.

3.3.2 Size of impact vs capacity of organization

The magnitude of impact that a coastal restoration project could have was wholly dependent on the capacity of the organization carrying out the work. This factor was important to consider when exploring potential shore stabilization projects, as some work required a disproportionate level of resources and capacity from one organization.

3.3.3 Restoration is experimental

Participants recognized that coastal restoration and shoreline stabilization is experimental and requires a large degree of flexibility and adaptability. It is an evolving practice and researchers must be mindful to take the ecosystem in its entirety into consideration so as to avoid unintended consequences relating to adjacent habitats, other species, historically relevant sites and socially important resources.

3.3.4 Sometimes nature wins – but must seriously consider social impact of relocation

Participants acknowledged that while safe human inhabitancy was not always possible despite shoreline stabilization work, the social impacts of relocation had to be considered. They highlighted the need to recognize the intersection between restoration and historical preservation, and to work collaboratively to find socially and environmentally acceptable solutions. Participants emphasized that human relocation required robust engagement with affected communities and a deep understanding of their history on and connection with the land.

3.3.5 Once size does not fit all

Much like the experimental nature of coastal restoration and shoreline stabilization, it is also dictated by the spatial and temporal characteristics of a shoreline. Over time, shorelines may change and erode as a result of anthropogenic impacts, sea level rise, as well as natural phenomena, and stabilization interventions must take the fluidity of shorelines into consideration, as well as climate change.

3.4 Restoration of aquatic habitats

A key benefit of aquatic habitat restoration activities is for species at risk, without which, key aquatic and terrestrial plants and animals may disappear. Participants in this session considered different approaches and methodologies taken to restore aquatic habitats, impacts and benefits on species at risk, complementary restoration activities, challenges and lessons learned.

3.4.1 Coordinating across geographies, jurisdictions, industry, disciplines, and others to align restoration-based goals, objectives and initiatives

Participants recognized the crucial role of coordinating priorities and activities across geographies, jurisdictions, industry, disciplines, and others to align on goals and avoid unintended consequences. In doing so, project teams could access additional resources and funding, exchange data and information, and develop a more comprehensive understanding of the environment they were working in. Additionally, there were opportunities to partner with other groups doing overlapping or complementary work and to coordinate with project teams operating downstream.

3.4.2 Balancing competing multi-jurisdictional and multidisciplinary interests outside of restoration-based work with ecological interests, especially upstream influences

As one aquatic habitat may have various upstream inputs and downstream implications, participants felt it was important to seek balance with regard to competing multi-jurisdictional and multidisciplinary interests. In doing so, project teams had a better understanding of variables affecting the project locale and could plan for the effects of those inputs. Project teams also found opportunities to align restoration work with municipal transportation upgrades, eliminating the need to spend large portions of their budgets on infrastructure-related work.

3.4.3 Exploring more comprehensive approaches, looking at multi-species or watershed level approaches rather than only focusing on specific species

Participants agreed that pursuing a more comprehensive, integrated ecosystem approach was more appropriate than focusing on a single species. Given the low individual numbers of many species at risk and the migratory nature of others, it was difficult to quantify success of restoration activities through one species alone, compounded by a frequent lack of baseline data. Participants suggested using species at risk as indicators or employing a multi-species approach to complement a watershed-level approach in order to afford co-benefits to a wider variety of species. Participants also noted that comprehensive restoration work must go beyond aquatic vegetation restoration.

3.4.4 Prioritizing most impactful projects and recoverable species

Unfortunately, not all species will recover appreciably through restoration efforts and participants recognized the importance of prioritizing projects based on the greatest benefits achieved for the allotted funding envelope. While some projects were important for the continued survival of one species, the potential damage to other species, as well as the greatest benefit to all species had to be considered. Participants also acknowledged that the impact of projects extended beyond the natural ecosystem and that robust consultation with the local community was crucial to select project activities with the greatest environmental and social benefits.

3.4.5 It takes time for the benefits of these projects to be fully realized, long term monitoring is necessary

As the process of aquatic habitat restoration takes places over many years, long-term monitoring was required to assess the full breadth of outcomes of restoration activities. As the complete benefits of restoration work are realized over time, funding can be more strategically allotted to produce the greatest results. Further, monitoring provides foundational baseline for future projects and can aid identifying other factors and stressors affecting the restoration process, reducing the research and financial burden of future works and CRF projects in an area.

3.5 Planning restoration

All CRF projects include some degree of restoration planning that allows stakeholders to identify the current status of an aquatic environment and desired outcomes. In this session, participants discussed the importance of watershed management plans, baseline data requirements, project prioritization, and the role of mapping and GIS modelling in coastal restoration.

3.5.1 Restoration planning requires a mixture of qualitative and quantitative data

Participants agreed that a variety of quantitative and qualitative data was required to plan and carry out successful restoration work. Qualitative data included comprehensive baseline data collected by previous CRF project teams or community groups, hydrological data and other metrics. Quantitative data included a broad variety of inputs, including archival data, community testimony, traditional knowledge, local stories and photos. Establishing a baseline through these means illustrated a more accurate picture of restoration needs and aided in framing the path forward.

3.5.2 Sharing data, information, and resources from across projects and geographies

Shared baseline data, area information and technical resources from across projects and geographies were identified as a valuable tool for participants before they began their projects. Through this process, participants could develop models and templates for future work of the similar scope. Sharing data and data management structure could be useful in unifying data management systems and then eventually representing that data graphically or through interactive maps for use by future project teams and for public education. Participants indicated the need for an information sharing portal to disseminate data, GIS maps, models, templates and other resources.

3.5.3 Establishing partnerships to help develop strategies and sustain projects over the long term

In order to sustain projects past the CRF funding timescale, participants found it was important to develop strong partnerships during the planning phase to create long-term restoration strategies. Given the nature of restoration activities, truly successful projects may require upwards of 10 years of monitoring and maintenance. Building partnerships into each phase of work and then beyond ensured that there were groups or individuals with adequate technical capacity and genuine commitment to the project to continue carrying out the work required.

3.5.4 Through restoration planning and baselining, prioritizing impactful initiatives

Participants agreed that planning and baselining were essential to identifying and prioritizing the most impactful restoration initiatives. Through comprehensive baselining, participants felt they had a strategic basis for decision making in current projects and for future work. Participants felt that baseline data should be multi-faceted, composed of biotic and abiotic factors, anthropogenic impacts and socio-ecocultural considerations. Building on a foundation of baseline data, shovel-ready projects could be implemented, making the best use of CRF funding and meeting the goals set out in an overarching watershed management plan.

3.5.5 Consider how to tell the story of your project through planning, implementation, completion, and beyond

Participants saw immense value in telling the story of their project through various means to engage the broader community and to convey the value of the work being done. Many participants agreed that visual representations and storytelling were useful tools to connect with and garner interest from community members in the planning phase. Through storytelling, the project team could bridge communications and knowledge gaps, enhancing stakeholder relationships and increasing community investment in project work over the long-term. Participants suggested allocating a portion of CRF funding to communications and highlighted the importance of sharing success stories to maintain project momentum.

3.6 Connectivity

Connectivity in an aquatic environment can be impacted by a host of different anthropogenic or natural factors. In either case, CRF projects have tried to address this issue related to connectivity for coastal migratory species. Participants in this session explored strategic prioritization and the impacts of connectivity on the environment, in relation to CRF projects.

3.6.1 Holistic outlook and approach

Taking a watershed management approach to restoration activities was a key recommendation from participants. Many felt it was important to take the spatial and temporal connectivity of watersheds and lifecycles into consideration to avoid unintended consequences and to increase co-benefits. Participants also noted the importance of prioritizing projects based on a combination of total kilometers of restored, social benefits and magnitude of environmental impact. Participants suggested incorporating a wide variety of metrics, baseline data and traditional knowledge to assess habitat before implementing a project.

3.6.2 Priorities depend on values

Participants acknowledged that not all parties involved in the coastal restoration process shared the same values and as a result, their priorities differed. They highlighted the importance of framing restoration activities in a way that would resonate effectively with different groups to garner project acceptance and bolster social and financial support. Understanding the values upon which priorities are founded would lead to more productive discussions and successful outcomes.

3.6.3 Importance of partnerships

Participants emphasized the importance of partnerships for success across all phases of a coastal restoration project. Partnerships with local communities were critical to raise awareness and create buy in, while partnerships with local governments were crucial to obtain additional resources and create alignment on infrastructure projects. Partnerships with Indigenous Peoples were necessary to foster trust, understand aligning or competing priorities, and incorporate traditional knowledge into baseline data. Partnerships with industry were distinctly important regarding resource procurement, as strategic collaboration could lead to project monitoring activities being incorporated into industry operations, sustaining some elements of a project over a much longer period of time.

3.6.4 Long-term sustainability of projects

Long-term project sustainability aided in better understanding the connectivity of ecosystems as a result of sustained monitoring and integrated prioritization. Participants felt that projects were more likely to be successfully sustained past the CRF funding time limit if they were incorporated into other initiatives, particularly those with social impacts. Participants recognized the impacts of climate change as they related to ecosystem connectivity and felt it was crucial to consider how long-term monitoring could also address those impacts. Durable interventions capable of withstanding many years of wear and tear were suggested to improve long-term outcomes.

3.7 CRF Impact

The objectives of the CRF program is to contribute to the mitigation of stressors affecting aquatic habitats and marine life, and to engage Indigenous groups, resource users, local communities in undertaking planning, restoration, capacity building, monitoring, and reporting activities. Monitoring and reporting are essential in determining the efficacy of CRF projects. This session gave participants the opportunity to discuss the role of the program has had nationally, as well as the role monitoring and reporting has had in assessing projects’ impacts.

3.7.1 Time to collect baseline data and conduct larger projects

Through CRF funding, participants had adequate time and resources to conduct robust baseline data collection and to conduct larger, more impactful projects. Baseline data served as the foundation for projects and allowed for researchers to adapt to changes as they came to light through monitoring activities. Through long-term funding, project teams as well as local partners could make sustained, meaningful conservation efforts and can plan for alignment with other initiatives locally and nationally to maintain momentum and increase beneficial impacts.

3.7.2 Time to build relationships

Participants agreed that strong partnerships took time to develop and that CRF funding allowed for those partnerships to develop authentically and mutually. Projects were better equipped and funded to involve community members at the initiation of projects and can in turn could better prioritize project goals based on environmental needs as well as social needs and local priorities. Strong relationships developed over time led to improved community buy-in, which was ultimately beneficial to the long-term sustainability of projects.

3.7.3 Job creation, stability and local capacity building

CRF funded projects created stable employment opportunities in communities, building capacity through training and resource allocation. The long-term nature of funding ensured job security and steady income, leading to individual and collective community economic benefits and greater wellbeing. Long-term job placements allowed for sustained learning and technical skills acquirement, improving individual capacity and that of partner organizations.

3.7.4 Administrative complexity

Participants were concerned about the complexity of tasks and the time required for the administrative work regarding CRF funding applications and reports. Additional time and resources dedicated to administrative tasks left participants with less capacity to complete restoration work. Participants wished for greater flexibility in the reporting process and suggested allocating more autonomy to regions to review and approve reports.

3.7.5 Greater focus on communication and engagement

Given the deep importance of partnerships and collaborators, participants felt that a more substantial emphasis should be placed on communications work and community engagement. Through broad communications and engagement activities, participants felt they could better connect with municipal and local government, educate local communities, and raise awareness among industries that may be producing environmental stressors. They emphasized that engagement with Indigenous Peoples was especially critical in order to incorporate traditional knowledge, align priorities and avoid perpetuating colonial power imbalances. Participants suggested more tailored communications activities to share successes and challenges with other researchers, provide access to data and make call-outs for partners.

3.8 Capacity building

Capacity building with CRF projects often refers to processes that individuals and organizations take to obtain, improve, and retain skills, knowledge, tools, equipment and other resources required to complete projects and sustain ongoing monitoring and other activities. Participants in this session discussed how CRF projects contributed to community capacity building, the benefits of capacity building and approaches for training, and how capacity was maintained beyond CRF funding.

3.8.1 Building skills and capacity to support local economic success and increase employment

As restoration project activities take place, there were various opportunities to integrate community members, in turn supporting employment and local economic success. Participants felt it was important to consider the social and economic impacts of their projects, as well as the environmental benefits. Through technical training, knowledge sharing and mentorship, project teams could provide valuable transferable skills to community members. Community members could seek employment and leverage those acquired skills or increase their chances of obtaining funding for projects of a similar nature due to increased capacity. Further, some projects were monetized to self-sustain over time and provide jobs, revenues and training opportunities to the broader community. In this same vein, local resources such as riparian zone, coastline, marshland and waterways could be further valorized and ultimately protected.

3.8.2 Capacity building for capital investment and organizational capacity, alongside individual capacity building

Participants recognized that the capacity building value of their projects extended beyond technical skill acquisition, to include capital investment opportunities and organizational capacity increases. In instances where communities acquired the necessary tools and equipment to conduct monitoring activities, as well as sampling and other methodologies, that equipment could be used for subsequent projects, leveraged in grant applications or used for other community projects and initiatives. Within organizations and project teams, the CRF funding itself necessitated strong fiscal responsibility and administrative skills, which could be written into grants to increase the likelihood of obtaining future funding.

3.8.3 Communities and organizations benefiting from knowledge transfer and capacity building

Participants recognized that by entering a community, they had an equal opportunity to share knowledge and learn from the communities themselves. This integrated exchange of knowledge was an important factor in successful capacity building as community members and groups came to the table as equal partners alongside researchers and project teams, leading to more effective relationship-building, more in-depth local knowledge, and more relevant restoration project goals and activities. Participants felt that learning from and with communities’ fostered trust between partners, demonstrated ongoing respect, and increased open and timely communication. All participants indicated that this was especially important in terms of Indigenous Peoples and settler relationships.

3.8.4 Dealing with challenges around succession planning

At the culmination of CRF funding, many participants felt that best way to sustain their project work was to hand over responsibilities to community groups, partners and collaborators. There was a consensus that building adequate capacity within these groups was paramount to ensuring long-term, high quality data collection, but participants cited challenges around achieving those goals. Some suggested building succession planning into their project budgets and others deemed living wages and salaries essential to showing commitment to the community and maintaining a high quality of data collection.

3.8.5 Timing is an important consideration and sometimes flexibility is essential

Participants cited difficulties carrying out required project work as access to funding often did not align with restoration activity start dates. Many hoped to have full access to CRF funds at the commencement of their project, as they could avoid taking out loans and lines of credit to fund work in the interim. While participants were grateful to have sustained funding over a period of 1-5 years, they felt hindered by the requirement to spend a certain portion by the end of each fiscal year. There was consensus that funding flexibility and roll-over from year to year would permit more effective spending as some phases of projects required a greater financial contribution than others.