We currently face several, interlinked environmental crises, including climate change, habitat destruction and biodiversity loss. However, many governments seem unwilling to take strong and immediate action to address these threats, preferring to promote neoliberal approaches to allow consumers and the general public to make environmentally friendly choices. This is despite neoliberal approaches being much less likely to be successful than government leadership, taxation, subsidies, and legislation in addressing environmental issues. In this study, we examine public perception of environmental threats and solutions to these threats, in a survey, mainly completed in the UK. Climate change is seen as the biggest issue, likely due to recent activist campaigns and subsequent media attention on the issue. Neoliberal attitudes, such as green consumer choices to environmental concerns, do still dominate in a series of possible presented solutions, and score more highly than lifestyle changes such as changing diet. However, when questioned specifically about plastic pollution, government intervention to ban all unnecessary plastic scored very strongly, indicating a shift from a consumer driven response. Furthermore, most participants think they are at best only partly ‘doing their bit’ to protect the environment. The results demonstrate that the public are aware that not enough is happening to protect the environment and provide evidence that there is willingness for stronger government intervention to address environmental issues, although there is potential resistance to major lifestyle changes.

Carbon offsetting is currently a major tool in managing carbon emissions and the drive to Net-Zero. This study aims to identify the offsetting potential of existing conservation schemes, and whether carbon offsetting credits could potentially finance the continued management of the conservation activities. The results from Dorset, in the UK indicate that many existing conservation schemes in woodland, heathland and grasslands can not only enhance biodiversity but also capture significant amounts of carbon. We show that the cost per additional tonne of carbon sequestered as a result of conservation activities varies considerably between different conservation projects. On average, the cost of this offsetting is £80 per tonne CO2e sequestered and ranging between £120 and £0 depending on the project and whether existing biodiversity grants would be available. However, this figure was based on adapting and refining existing conservation projects, and did not involve expensive factors such as purchase of land, which make the prices potentially unrealistic. While the costs identified are higher than many offsetting schemes at present, it could present a useful option for those wishing to localise their offsetting, and could be combined with biodiversity credits or other credit schemes to make the higher costs more attractive.

Artificial reefs have been deployed in multiple regions of the world for different purposes including habitat restoration and protection, biodiversity and fish stock enhancement, fisheries management and recreation. Artificial reefs can be a valuable tool for ecosystem protection and rehabilitation, helping mitigate the effects of anthropogenic impacts that we face today. However, knowledge on artificial reefs is unevenly distributed worldwide, with some regions having much more quality information available and published (e.g. European Mediterranean Sea area), while others, for instance the North-East Atlantic area, do not. Here, we provide a characterization of purposely built artificial reefs in North-East Atlantic area based on all available literature (i.e. research papers and reports), highlighting the needs and gaps that are vital for establishing future perspectives for artificial reef deployment and research. In the North-East Atlantic area, sixty-one purposely built artificial reefs have been deployed since 1970, mostly between the years 1990-2009, with Spain being the country with the highest number of artificial reefs. The most reported purpose for their deployment is fisheries productivity and habitat/species protection, although, most artificial reefs are multipurpose in order to maximise the benefits of a given financial investment. The majority of artificial reefs were submerged at < 50 m, mainly between 10-20 m of depth. The most used designs were cubic blocks and complex designs made by an array of combined shapes, which mostly consist of concrete (79%). From all the analysed data on artificial reefs, 67% of the cases reported surveys to assess biodiversity after the deployment. However, in 26% of those cases, data was not available. When data was available, only 31% of cases reported long-term biomonitoring surveys (3 years or more). Based upon these findings, we noticed a general lack of scientifically robust data, including records of species and abundance of both fish and invertebrates, as well as macroalgae. Preventing an adequate determination of the best balance between shape, construction material and bio-colonization. Critiques and suggestions are discussed in the light of current available data in order to perform more efficient research, evaluation and functioning of future artificial reefs.