KELP AS A
NATURAL CLIMATE
SOLUTION
Highlighting Kelp Adaptation and Mitigation
Opportunities and Gaps

is a challenge that threatens
sustainable development and ecologicalsecurity globally (Yin et al., 2023). Greenhous e
gas emissions (carbon dioxide [CO2], methane[CH4] and nitrous oxide [N2O]) f rom f ossil f uels,
def orestation, unsustainable f arming methods
and other anthropogenic activities contribute to
the ef f ects of climate change (Evseeva et al.,2021). Climate changes can lead to various
environmental impacts globally, such as sealevel rise, changes in weather events (e.g.
f looding, droughts, ocean acidif ication, heatwaves) and changes in biodiversity/extinction
episodes (Evseeva et al., 2021). According to
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Annual Climate Reportof 2023, the average rate of land and oceanic
temperature combined has increased by
0.06°C per decade since 1850. The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chang e(IPCC) has also noted that greenhouse housegas emissions via human activities havecausedincreases
inglobalsurf ace
temperatures to 1.1°C (IPCC, 2023). To keep
the global surf ace temperatures below 2°C,
there needs to be a reduction in emissions andthe removal of GHGs f rom the atmosphere(Waring et al., 2023). Finding various strategies
to adapt to as well as mitigate (Figure 1) the
impacts of climate change is important f or theef f ective management and conservation of ourecosystems (Patel et al., 2024). Adaptation
strategies ref er to the actions that cancontribute to reducing the vulnerability andenhancing the adaptive capacity of ecosystems
and people to climate change, whereas
mitigation strategies prevent or decrease theamount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
emitted into the atmosphere to reduce theimpacts of climate change.

Figure 1: Adaptation and mitigation strategies for reducing the effects ofclimate change.

The United Nations (UN) Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD) developed theKunming-Montreal
GlobalBiodiversity
Framework, which has been adopted by over
200 countries worldwide to address thebiodiversity crisis and the overall ef f ects ofclimate change (Gurney et al., 2023). SouthAf rica is committed to achieving Target 3 of thisf ramework, which aims to conserve 30% ofEarth’s marine and terrestrial areas by 2030
(30x30 target) (Eckert et al., 2023; Gurney etal., 2023). By applying the ‘White Paper onConservation and Sustainable Use of SouthAf rica's Biodiversity’ policy, South Af rica is also
committed to conserving the country’s richbiodiversity and ecological structure that
supports ecosystem f unctioning f or the
livelihoods and well-being of people and nature.
South Af rica has the third highest level ofmarine species endemism in the world andhomes over 900 species (Amosu et al., 2013).
Like many coastal regions, South Af rica
depends on ocean resources to supp ort its
economic development (Loureiro et al., 2022).
South Af rica aims to achieve an estimatednational gross domestic product (GDP)contribution of up to ZAR 177 billion andprovide between 800 000 to one million jobs by2033 (Vrey, 2019; DFFE, 2020; Loureiro et al.,2022).
The sustainable use of South Af rica’s oceans
and coasts has the potential increase GDP by
approximately $9 billion. South Af rica’s
coastline spans almost 3000 km and an
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) that ranges
nearly 1.5 million square kilometres, to promote
ocean economic expansion that drives
economic development and f ood security as
well as contributes to the overall National
Development Plan (NDP) (Vrey, 2019). In 2014,
the South Af rican government developed an
initiative called Operation Phakisa which aims
to unlock the socio-economic potential of thecountry’s seascapes by implementing policies
and programmes more ef f iciently andef f ectively to generate employment as well as
alleviate poverty and social inequality (Findlay
and Bohler-Muller, 2018; Vrey, 2019; Loureiro
et al., 2022). By 2019, through the Operation
Phakisa initiatives, the government unlocked
investments of almost ZAR 30 billion and over7000 jobs were created in the ocean economy(SAIMI, 2021). This initiative strategicallyprioritises an environmentally sustainable,
adaptable, low-carbon economy and society(Loureiro et al., 2022).

1

in South Af rica
have been estimated to cover a total area of~19 800 ha, f or mangroves (2 087 ha), salt
marshes (14 713 ha) and macrophytes (3 039
ha). The IPCC recognises blue carbon
ecosystems f or their climate mitigation value,
these ecosystems meet the requirements f or
actionable climate mitigation policies and canbe included in international climate actionplans. Countries that have accepted the Paris
Agreement compile the Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs), which describe theiref f orts to address mitigation and adaptation ofclimate change. The NDCs outline the actions
to be taken by a country to meet the voluntarycommitments to reducing GHG emissions orincrease rates of carbon sequestration. SouthAf rica does not specif ically include blue carbon
ecosystems as part of mitigation or adaptation
strategies in their NDC, however, coastal
wetlands are included in the adaptation sectionof the NDCs. There is a f ocus on conservationand management, protection and restoration ofthese ecosystems in the NDC. Furthermore,international and national commitments havebeen made by South Af rica towards GHG
mitigation and a revised NDC target of 398–510
MtCO2e f or 2025 and 350–420 MtCO2e f or2030 has been submitted. As part of thevisionary statement of the country’s long -term
strategy, South Af rica had stated its intention tocommit to a net zero CO2 target by 2050 (DFFE,
2021).

In 2017, a Natural Climate Solution (NCS )concept was developed by researchers andconservation practitioners to assist in adapting
existing knowledge to climate change actionplans (Ellis et al., 2023). Natural climate
solutions are initiatives aiming to protect,
restore and improve the management of ourenvironment (Figure 2) (Schulte et al., 2022;
Ellis et al., 2023). This concept also addresses
sustainable development goals (SDGs) andencourages the empowerment of local
communities (Duarte et al., 2021; Howard et al.,2023; Waring et al., 2023). Encouraging the
local communities to engage with the NCS
initiatives not only contributes to humancapacity development but can also enhanc e
their environmental outcomes (Waring et al.,2023).

Figure 2: Natural Climate Solutions to assist in reducing the impacts of climatechange.

Macroalgae, also known as seaweed, f orm theworld’s largest and most productive coastal
ecosystems (Duarte et al., 2020) andsubsequently contribute signif icantly to oceanic
productivity (Howard et al., 2023). Kelp arelarge brown algae that usually f orm large
f orests in the ocean and provide various
ecosystem services and benef its to humanity
and nature (Rothman, 2015; Duarte, 2017).
Kelp f orests also support numerous ecological,
social and economic benef its (Figure 3),
including commercial f isheries, carbon storage
and f lux, mariculture, job creation, biodiversity
conservation and shoreline protection (Blamey
and Bolton, 2017).

Figure 3: Kelp provides many ecological, social, and economic benefits toecosystems.

2

Biodiversity Benefits of Kelp
Kelp provides various biodiversity benef its thataf f ect the overall species abundance, richness,
biomass and f unctional diversity (e.g.
ecological f unction and behavioural traits) of
ecosystems (Smale et al., 2013; Steneck andJohnson, 2014; Forbes et al., 2022). Kelp also
creates complex ecosystems by providing
shelter, attachment sites, nursery sites,
protection and nutrition to many organisms
such as invertebrates, f ish, mammals andseabirds (Anderson et al., 2006; Forbes et al.,2022). Kelp subsequently provides many direct
and indirect benef its f or humans throughsustainable kelp harvesting (providing job
opportunities), commercial and recreational
f ishing, and tourism activities (Blamey and
Bolton, 2017; Forbes et al., 2022).

Figure 4: The De Winton's Golden Mole is an example offauna that benefit of kelp.

Kelp Restoration
Macroalgae restoration initiatives are f ewer
than
other
coastalecosystems (e.g.
mangroves, seagrass meadows, oyster reef s)(Duarte et al., 2020; Eger et al., 2020; Morris etal., 2020). However, some of the restoration
initiatives conducted thus f ar cannot match thescale of degradation or loss that occurs (Morris
et al., 2020). Restoration ef f orts of macroalgal
ecosystems have only gained momentum since
the beginning of the 21st century (Duarte et al.,2020).
There are two main techniques used f or kelp
restoration:
1) Seeding - involves cultivating or spreading
kelp seeds or gametophytes in the ocean. Thismethod is benef icial because it requires f ewer
resources and can be grown in large quantities.
2) Transplanting - the introduction of mature
kelp into the ocean. This approach isadvantageous because kelp at older lif e stages
is more resistant to stressors resulting in higher
survival rates.

The primary reason f or large-scale kelp f orest
restoration ef f orts is due to the high economic
value associated with kelp -derived products
and the f isheries industries that they support(Blamey and Bolton, 2017) and creates theopportunity potentially f or carbon storage
benef its.

Kelp provides several socio-economic benef its
to the local communities and the commercial
market (Blamey and Bolton, 2017). The majorsocial benef its that kelp f arming has on local
communities is creating various sustainable job
opportunities and the inclusion of women in theworkf orce (social equality) (Sultana et al.,2023). Kelp is a commercially important
seaweed with various applications in f ood,
nutritional supplements, cosmetics, andagriculture (Morais et al., 2020; Zhang et al.,2022; Sultana et al., 2023). Kelp is abundant inminerals, vitamins and proteins, making it ahighly nutritional f ood source (Morais et al.,2020; Zhang et al., 2022; Sultana et al., 2023).
Seaweed aquaculture provides renewable andnutrient-rich f ood options that require minimal
land, water, and f ertilizer inputs, making it asustainable f ood source (Sultana et al., 2023).
It has been used to produce high value liquid
f ertilizers, used f or plants and as abalone f eed(dried pellets) (Msuya et al. 2022) and has uses
f or thepharmaceuticalindustry
andbiodegradable plastic production (Anderson etal., 2003; Troell et al., 2006; Blamey and
Bolton, 2017; Sultana et al., 2023;).
Certain seaweeds (e.g. ground dried kelp) havealso been used in livestock f eed with potential
benef its of reducing methane emissions (Kinely
et al., 2020; Morais et al., 2020). One of themost harmf ul impacts to the ocean is plastic
pollution which is particularly evident in ports
and bays. Green production methods are more
viableandsustainableincreating
biodegradable plastics (Bioplastics). Seaweeds
can f orm f ilms that are either directly f rom the
plant
or
the
plant-derivatives(agar,
carrageenan and alginate) which can be usedin the development of bioplastics (Lim et al.,2021), however, f urther research on this needs
to be conducted.

Recent studies have shown that NCS canpotentially stabilize our climate by reducing
global GHG emissions by one-third (Griscom etal., 2017) and storing carbon ef f iciently (Ellis etal., 2023). Carbon dioxide that is absorbed and3stored by the ocean is ref erred to as ‘blue
carbon’ (Macreadie et al., 2019). Coastal blue
carbon is CO2 that is mostly sequestrated anddissolved directly into the ocean and smaller
amounts are stored in underwater sediments,
vegetation and the soils of mangroves as well
as salt marshes and seagrasses (Bertram et al.,2021; Pessarrodona et al., 2023). Blue carbon
ecosystems have the potential to store two
to five times more carbon in their soils perunit area than terrestrial ecosystem s(Donato et al., 2011; Macreadie et al., 2021).
Theref ore,loss anddegradation (e.g.
def orestation, dredging, eutrophicatio n) of
coastal blue carbon ecosystems contribute
substantially to the high amount of carbon
dioxide emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere(Pendleton et al., 2012; Adams et al., 2019;
Hilmi et al., 2021). Blue carbon ecosystems
play vital roles in the natural carbon cycle,
theref ore, it is important to include adaptation
strategies to protect and restore theseecosystems as they have many other benef its
f or biodiversity conservation, water quality,
storm surge protection and the livelihoods of
local communities (Adams et al., 2019; Howard
et al., 2023).
assistindistinguishing the dif f erent ecosystems (Figure5) and their potential to sequester and store
carbon to mitigate the ef f ects of climate change(Howard et al., 2023).

Five main criteria classif y blue carbon
pathways:
1) Potential f or climate mitigation is quantif iable.
2) Impacts the actions have on overall humanhealth and well-being.
3) Maintenance or enhancement of theecosystem’s natural state and f unction.
4) Potential f or inclusion in the blue carbon
policy f rameworks.
5) If the prior criteria are unknown, f ind theknowledge gaps that require f urther research.

Figure 5: Blue carbon pathways categorized according to an ecosystems ability tosequester and store carbon.

Although coastal wetlands (mangroves, tidal
marshes, sea meadow grasses) can sequester
large amounts of carbon compared to the otherecosystems (Duarte et al., 2005; Howard et al.,2017; Lovelock and Duarte, 2019; FilbeeDexter and Wernberg, 2020), there needs to be
more f ocus placed on ref orestation andaf f orestation solutions, as these have thelargest potential to remove carbon dioxide fromthe atmosphere (Griscom et al., 2017; Troell etal., 2022).

Figure 6: Carbon sequestration and storage pathways using kelp in marine ecosystems.

4

A recent study suggested that carbon export via
macroalgae is widespread across all major
oceanographic basins (Ortega et al., 2019).
Macroalgae (especially kelp) can produce
many ‘usef ul’ compounds and assist in carbon
burial in sediments or transported to deep sea
systems and stored long-term (Lovelock andDuarte, 2019). Macroalgae experience naturaldegradation throughout its lif ecycle, theref ore
carbon stored in the plant biomass is thentransported to other parts of the ocean (Figure
6).

To date, the kelp market in South Af rica isf ocused on f resh kelp and beach-cast kelp
harvesting. However, there is a growing interest
in diversif ying through methods such as kelp
aquaculture with the total market value of kelp
as abalone f eed currently estimated at ZAR 9.8
million. Studies indicate there is potential f or
sea-based kelp f arming, particularly in
Saldanha Bay on the West Coast of SouthAf rica. While large-scale commercial kelp
f arming has not been f ully implemented yet inSouth Af rica, ongoing experiments in Saldanha
Bay may lead the way f or its f uture
development. In South Af rica, relatively f ew
other macroalgae species are harvested in thewild f or commercial purposes, but establishingsustainable management guidelines in suchcases is paramount to ensure the long -term
viability of the resource (Adams et al., 2019).
Kelp Blue Namibia (Pty) Ltd has conducted a
successf ul pilot test to grow giant kelp in
Lüderitz, Namibia, achieving growth rates of 45 m in three months (Petrick, 2020). As ofJanuary 2024, Kelp Blue has ventured into
establishing two large-scale (up to 9000 ha)of f shore kelp f arms (Petrick, 2020). The kelp
canopy will be harvested regularly to produce
various value-added products (e.g. agricultural
growth biostimulants) (Petrick, 2020). The
project has many other benef its (such as job
creation, carbon sequestration, and potential
boosts in marine biodiversity and commercial
f ish stocks) (Petrick, 2020), however, two of the
major concerns of this project is 1) Kelp Blue isutilizing a non-native species, Macrocystsis
pyrifera (Petrick, 2020). There are many risks tointroducing a new species into the system (e.g.
biosecurity risks) that can negatively impact theecosystem. 2) There is also no verif ication yetof the blue carbon sequestered. Theref ore,
extensive environmental monitoring andmanagement
areimportant f actors to
implement (Petrick, 2020).

In the Northern Cape, there is an opportunity forlong-term development of the aquaculture
sector, particularly in Port Nolloth’s registeredaquaculture
zone,
which
is
currently
undeveloped.
The
challengeisthat
environmental authorizations must be renewed
to develop new aquaculture activities within thiszone. Several environmental policy challenges
hinder an enabling environment include
obtaining permits and licenses f rom the port
authorities to conduct aquaculture-related
activities as currently these activities can only
be conducted within ports or bays. Policy
adjustments are essential to support of f shore
aquaculture. However, a draf t Aquaculture
Development Bill was published f or publiccomments, due January 2024, this proposed
Bill aims to rectif y historical imbalances inaccessing aquaculture opportunities and create
an enabling environment f or the industry, tostimulate sector growth and development,
boost investor conf idence, and ultimately
create employment opportunities. The Bill iscurrently in Parliament awaiting approval.

There is great variability in the transportation of
the carbon to carbon sinks, this depends on
local f actors (e.g. seasonal variability) which
requiresextensivemodellingandenvironmental data to estimate (Howard et al.,2023). Studying the kelp locations wherecarbon storage and sequestration occurs (e.g.
open ocean, deep sea sediments andcontinental shelf ) is of ten consideredchallenging and expensive, theref ore, obtaining
sequestration and storage estimates of theselocations become limited and poorly quantif ied(Krause-Jensen and Duarte 2016; Howard etal., 2023). Future research needs to examine
the export and burial rates of kelp stored in theseabed to better understand the total amount ofcarbonsequesteredbykelp
f orests(Pessarrodona et al., 2023; Searle, 2024).
Marine species and Carbon
Investigating the inf luence that marine f aunahas on carbon f luxes is a challenge as the exact
amounts of carbon that these organisms
contribute to the ecosystems is poorly
quantif ied (Saba et al., 2021; Eger et al., 2022).

5

3) South Africa Kelp and Carbon
The lack of available data on the amount ofcarbon f ixed by kelp species in South Af rica. A
recent study showed GIS biomass surveys ofthe three concession areas (15, 16 and 19)
along the west coast of South Af rica which wereused to estimate the amount of carbon that canpotentially be sequestered. The estimation
demonstrated that the kelp f orests in theseconcession areas have the potential ofsequestrating carbon, however, the amount ofcarbon sequestered will vary between the areas(Searle, 2024). It is important to map the f ull
extent of South Af rica’s kelp biomass including
deepwater kelp ecosystems and understanding
the restoration potential f or areas that haveexperienced decline in kelp.
4) Monitoring and Verification
It is essential to set up a monitoring, reportingand verif ication (MRV) system particularly f or
carbon in deepwater and the seabed as this willassist in understanding carbon sequestrationand storage potential. The MRVs will also assist
in identif ying blue carbon capacity areas thatneed protection and restoration (Searle, 2024).
5) Socio-Economic Benefits
Research in understanding the economic andsocial constructs of these coastal communities
isimportantwhen
initiating
kelp
restoration/mitigation projects. This can help
unlock maximum utilization of kelp benef its
within these communities. Promoting f or humancapacity and economic development can help
these communities thrive.
6) Climate Change Impacts
Climate change can also directly or indirectly
af f ect kelp ecosystems. Kelp is sensitive tochanges in seawater temperature, thisultimately may cause redistribution of kelp
(Smale, 2020), theref ore, af f ecting not only themarine lif e but also the livelihoods of coastal
communities. Increasing temperatures may
also af f ect other f actors such as nutrients, lightavailability, ocean currents, prevalence of
pathogens and overgrowth of epiphytes(Smale, 2020) which are detrimental to thef unctioning of kelp ecosystems. Temperature
has also shown to af f ect the strength anddirection of ecological interactions such ascompetition and grazing (increased grazingpressure) which can af f ect overall population
dynamics (Kordas et al., 2011; Smale, 2020).

References
Adams, J.B., Raw, J.L., Mbense, S.P., Bornman,
T.G., Rajkaran, A., van Niekerk, L., 2019. Climatechange and South Africa's blue carbon
ecosystems. Report to
Water
Research
Commission.
Anderson, R.J., Bolton, J.J., Molloy, F.J., Rotmann,
K.W.G., 2003. Commercial seaweed production
and research in southern Africa. In: Chapman,
A.R.O., Anderson, R.J., Vreeland, V.J., Davison,
I.R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th International
Seaweed Symposium. Oxford University Press,
pp. 1–12.
Anderson, R.J., Rothman, M.D., Share, A.,
Drummond, H., 2006. Harvesting of the kelp
Ecklonia maxima in South African affects its threeobligate, red algal epiphytes. Journal of Applied
Phycology 18, 343–349.
Aquaculture Development Bill Draft. 2023. Available:
http://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_docume
nt/202311/4973gon4098.pdf. Accessed (29 April
2024)
Bertram, C., Quaas, M., Reusch, T. B. H., Vafeidis,
A. T., Wolff, C., Rickels, W., 2021. The blue carbon
wealth of nations. Nature Climate Change 11(8),704–709.
Blamey, L.K., Bolton, J.J., 2017. The economic valueof South African kelp forests and temperate reefs:
Past, present and future. Journal of Marine
Systems 188, 172-181.
Department of Forestry, Fisheries and theEnvironment (DFFE), 2020. Towards a South
African Oceans Economy Master Plan (Draft V3.0).
pp 1-34.
Department of Forestry, Fisheries and theEnvironment (DFFE), 2021. Scoping Study: A Blue
Carbon Sinks Assessment for South Africa.
Pretoria. South Africa.
Donato, D.C., Kauffman, J.B., Murdiyarso, D.,
Kurnianto, S., Stidaham, M., Kanninen, M., 2011.
Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests inthe tropics. Nature Geoscience 4, 293-296.
Duarte, C.M., Middelburg, J.J., Caraco, N., 2005.
Major role of marine vegetation on the oceaniccarbon cycle. Biogeosciences 2(1), 1–8.
Duarte, C.M., 2017. Reviews and syntheses: hidden
forests, therole of vegetated coastal habitats in theocean carbon budget. Biogeosciences 14, 301310.
Duarte, C.M., Agusti, S., Barbier, E., Britten,
G.L., Castilla,
J.C., Gattuso,
J.P., Fulweiler,
R.W., Hughes, T.P., Knowlton, N., Lovelock,C.E., Lotze, H.K., Predragovic, M., Poloczanska,
E., Roberts, C., Worm, B., 2020. Rebuilding
marine life. Nature 580, 39–51.
Duarte, C.M., Bruhn, A., and Krause-Jensen, D.,
2021. A seaweed aquaculture imperative to meetglobal sustainability targets. Nature Sustainability(Springer Science and Business Media LLC), 1–9.
Eckert, I., Brown, A., Caron, D., Riva, F., Pollock,L.J., 2023. 30x30 biodiversity gains rely on national
coordination. Nature Communications 14, 7113.
Eger, A.M., Vergés, A., Choi, C.G., Christie,
H.C., Coleman,
M.A., Fagerli,
C.W., Fujita,
D., Hasegawa,
M., Kim,
J.H., Mayer-Pinto,
M., Reed, D.C., Steinberg, P.D., Marzinelli, E.M.,
2020. Financial and institutional support are

6

importantforlarge-scale
kelp
forestrestoration. Frontiers in Marine Science 7, 535277.
Eger, A.M., Marzinelli, E.M., Christie, H., Fagerli,
C.W., Fujita, D., Gonzalez, A.P., Hong, S.W., Kim,
J.H., Lee,
L.C., Mchugh,T.A., Nishihara,
G.N., Tatsumi, M., Steinberg, P.D., Vergés, A.,
2022. Global kelp forest restoration: past lessons,present status, and future directions. Biological
Reviews 97, 1449–1475.
Ellis, P.W., Page, A.M., Wood, S., Fargione, J.,
Masuda, Y.J., Denney, V.C, Moore, C., Kroeger,T., Griscom, B., Sanderman, J., Atleo, T., Cortez,
R., Leavitt, S., Cook-Patton, S.C., 2024. The
principles of natural climate solutions. Nature
Communications 15, 547.
Evseeva, O., Evseeva, S., Dudarenko, T., 2021. The
impact of human activity on the global warming.
E3S Web of Conferences 284. 11017.
Filbee-Dexter, K., Wernberg, T., 2020. Substantial
blue carbon in overlooked Australian kelp forests.
Scientific Reports 10(1).
Findlay, K., Bohler-Muller, N., 2018. South Africa’s
Ocean economy and Operation Phakisa. In:
Bohler-Muller N, Attri VN, editors. The blue
economy handbook of the Indian Ocean region.
Africa Institute of South Africa. p. 231–255.
Forbes, H., Shelamoff, V., Visch, W., Layton, C.,
2022. Farms and forests: evaluating thebiodiversity benefits of kelp aquaculture. Journal ofApplied Phycology 34, 3059–3067.
Griscom, B.W., Adams, J, Ellis, P.W., Houghton,
R.A., Lomax, G., Miteva, D.A., Schlesinger, W.H.,
Shoch, D., Siikamäki, J.V., Smith, P., Woodbury,P., Zganjar, C., Blackman, A., Campari, J., Conant,R.T., Delgado, C., Elias, P., Gopalakrishna, T.,
Hamsik, M.R., Herrero, M., Kiesecker, J., Landis
E., Laestadius, L., Leavitt, S.M., Minnemeyer, S.,
Polasky, S., Potapov, P., Putz, F.E., Sanderman,
J., Silvius, M., Wollenberg, E., Fargione, J., 2017.
Natural climate solutions. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 114(44), 1164511650.
Gurney, G.G., Adams, V.M., Alvarez-Romero, J.G.,
Claudet, J., 2023. Area-based conservation:
Taking stock and looking ahead. One Earth 6(2),98-104.
Hilmi, N., Chami, R., Sutherland, M.D., Hall-Spencer,
J.M., Lebleu, L., Benitez, M.B., Levin, L.A., 2021.
The role of blue carbon in climate change
mitigation and carbon stock conservation. Frontiersin Climate 3.
Howard, J.L., Creed, J.C., Aguiar, M.V.P.,
Fouqurean, J.W., 2017. CO2 released bycarbonate sediment production in some coastal
areas may offset the benefits of seagrass "Blue
Carbon" storage, Limnology and Oceanography
63(1), 160–172.
Howard, J., Sutton-Grier, A.E., Smart, L.S., Lopes,
C.C., Hamilton, J., Kleypas, J., Simpson, S.,
McGowan, J., Pessarrodona, A., Alleway, H.K.,
Landis, E., 2023. Blue carbon pathways for climate
mitigation: Known, emerging and unlikely. Marine
Policy 156, 105788.
IPCC, 2023. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate
Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution ofWorking Groups I, II and III to the Sixth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team,
RomeroJ.H.L.,(eds.)].
IPCC,
Geneva,Switzerland, pp. 1-34.
Kinley, R., Martinez-Fernandez, G., Matthew, M., deNys, R., Magnusson, M., Tomkins, W. 2020.
Mitigating the carbon footprint and improving
productivity of ruminant livestock agriculture using
a red seaweed. Journal of Cleaner Production 259.
Kordas,R.L., Harley,
C.D.G., O'Connor,
M.I., 2011. Community ecology in a warming
world: the influence of temperature on interspecificinteractions in marine systems. Journal of
Experimental
MarineBiologyandEcology 400, 218–26.
Krause-Jensen, D., Duarte, C.M., 2016. Substantial
role ofmacroalgae inmarine carbon
sequestration. Nature Geoscience 9(10), 737–742.
Lim, C., Yusoff, S., Ng, C., Lim, P., Ching, Y.,
2021. Bioplastic
made
from
seaweedpolysaccharides
with
green
production
methods. Journal of Environmental Chemical
Engineering 9(5), 105895.
Loureiro TG, Du Plessis N, Findlay K., 2019. Into theblue – The blue economy model in Operation
Phakisa ‘Unlocking the Ocean Economy’
Programme. South African Journal of Science
118(11/12), 14664.
Lovelock, C.E., Duarte, C.M. (2019). Dimensions ofblue carbon and emerging perspectives. Biological
Letters 15, 20180781.
Macreadie, P. I., Anton, A., Raven, J. A., Beaumont,N., Connolly, R. M., Friess, D. A., Kelleway, J. J.,
Kennedy, H., Kuwae, T., Lavery, P. S., Lovelock,
C. E., Smale, D. A., Apostolaki, E. T., Atwood, T.
B., Baldock, J., Bianchi, T. S., Chmura, G. L., Eyre,
B. D., Fourqurean, J. W., Hall-Spencer, J.M.,
Huxman, M., Hendriks, I.E., Krause-Jensen, D.,
Laffoley, D., Luisetti, T., Marba, N., Masque, P.,
McGlathery, K.J., Megonigal, J.P., Murdiyarso, D.,
Russell, B.D., Santos, R., Serranom, O., Silliman,
B.R., Watanabe, K., Duarte, C. M. (2019). The
futureofBlue
Carbonscience. Nature
Communications 10(1).
Msuya, F.E., Bolton, JJ., Pascal, F., Narrain, K.,
Nyonje, B., Cottier-Cook, E.J., 2022. Seaweedfarming in Africa: current status and future
potential. Journal of Appl Phycology 34, 985–1005.
Morais, T., Inácio, A., Coutinho, T., Ministro, M.,
Cotas, J., Pereira, L., Bahcevandziev, K., 2020.
Seaweed Potential in the Animal Feed: A
Review. Journal of Marine Science andEngineering 8(8), 559.
Morris, R.L., Graham, T.D.J., Kelvin, J., Ghisalberti,
M., Swearer, S.E., 2020. Kelp beds as coastal
protection: wave attenuation of Ecklonia radiata ina shallow coastal bay. Annals of Botany 125(2),235-246.
NOAA National Centers for Environmental
Information, Monthly Global Climate Report for
Annual 2023, published online January 2024,
retrieved
on
April
29,
2024.
from https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitorin
g/monthly-report/global/202313.
Ortega, A., Geraldi, N. R., Alam, I., Kamau, A. A.,
Acinas, S. G., Logares, R., Gasol, J.M., Massana,R., Krause-Jensen, D., Duarte, C.M., 2019.
Important contribution of macroalgae to oceanic7carbon sequestration. Nature Geoscience 12, 748–
754.
Patel, S., Dey, A., Chaturvedi, A., Sharma, A., Singh,
R., 2024. Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies
Under Climate Change Scenario. In: Kumar, P.,
Aishwarya (eds). Technological Approaches for
Climate Smart Agriculture.
Pendleton, L., Donato, D.C., Murray, B.C., Crooks,
S., Jenkins, W.A., Sifleet, S., Craft, C., Fourqurean,
J.W., Kauffman, J.B., Marba, N., Megonigal, P.,
Podgeon, E., Herr, D., Gordon, D., Baldera, A.,
2012. Estimating global "blue carbon" emissions
from conversion and degradation of vegetatedcoastal ecosystems. PLoS One 7, e43542.
Pessarrodona, A., Franco-Santos, R.M., Wright,
L.S., Vanderklift, M.A., Howard, J., Pidgeon, E.,
Wernberg, T., Filbee-Dexter, K., 2023. Carbon
sequestration and climate change mitigation using
macroalgae: a state of knowledge review.
Biological Reviews 98, 1945-1971.
Petrick, W., 2020. EIA scoping & impact assessment
report for the proposed kelp cultivation pilot projectnear Lüderitz, Karas region. Kelp Blue Namibia(Pty) Ltd.
Rothman, M.D., 2015. The Phylogeny, Biology and
Biogeography of the Southern African Kelps
Ecklonia maxima and Laminaria pallida. PhD
thesis. Department of Biological Sciences,
University of Cape Town.
Saba, G.K., Burd, A.B., Dunne, J.P., HernandezLeon, S., Martin, A.H., Rose, K.A., Salisbury, J.,
Steinberg, D.K., Trueman, C.N., Wilson, R.W.,
Wilson, S.E., 2021, Toward a better understandingof fish-based contribution to ocean carbon flux.
Limnology and Oceanography 66(5), 1639-1664.
Schulte, I., Eggers, J., O Nielsen, J., Fuss, S., 2022.
What influences the implementation of natural
climate solutions? A systematic map and review ofthe evidence. Environmental Research Letters 17,
013002.
Searle, L. 2024. The blue carbon potential of the kelp
in Concession Area 15, 16 and 19. Deliverable 4.
RFP
No:
Biomass-Survey.
Unpublished
Manuscript.
Smale, D.A., Burrows, M.T., Moore, P., O’Connor,N., Hawkinu, S.J., 2013. Threats and knowledge
gaps for ecosystem services provided by kelp
forests: a northeast Atlantic perspective. Ecology
and Evolution, 3: 4016–4038.
Smale, D.A., 2020. Impacts of ocean warming on
kelp forest ecosystems. New Phytologist
Foundation, 225: 1447-1454.
South African International Marine Institute (SAIMI),
2021. Partners in growing – Blue Economy.
Brochure. pp. 1-13.
Steneck, R.S., Johnson, C.R., 2014. Kelp forests:
dynamic patterns, processes, and feedbacks. In:
Bertness, M.D., Bruno, J.F., Silliman, B.R.,
Stachowicz, J.J., (eds). Marine community ecology
and conservation. Sinauer Associates, Inc.,
Massachusetts, pp 315–336.
Sultana, F., Wahab, M.A., Nahiduzzaman, M.,
Mohiuddin, M., Iqbal, M.Z., Shakil, A., Mamun, A.,
Khan, M.S.R., Wong, L., Asaduzzaman, M., 2023.
Seaweed farming for food and nutritional security,
climate change mitigation and adaptation, andwomen empowerment: A review. Aquaculture andFisheries 8(5), 463-480.
Troell, M., Robertson-Andersson, D., Anderson,
R.J., Bolton, J.J., Maneveldt, G., Halling, C.,
Probyn, T., 2006. Abalone farming in South Africa:
an overview with perspectives on kelp resources,
abalone feed, potential for on-farm seaweed
production and socio-economic importance.
Aquaculture 257(1), 266–281.
Troell, M., Henriksson, P. J., Buschmann, A.,
Chopin, T., Quahe, S., 2022. Farming the ocean–seaweeds as a quick fix for the climate? Taylor &Francis, 1–11.
Very, F., 2019. Operation Phakisa: Reflections uponan Ambitious Maritime-Led Government Initiative.
South African Journal of Military Studies 72(2), 87105.
Waring, B.G., Gurgel, A., Köberle, A.C., Paltsev, S.,
Rogelj J., 2023. Natural Climate Solutions mustembrace multiple perspectives to ensure synergy
with sustainable development. Frontiers in Climate
5, 1216175.
Yin, C., Pereira, P., Zhao, W., Barcelo, D., 2023.
Natural climate solutions. The way forward.
Geography and sustainability 4(2), 179-182.
Zhang, L., Liao, W., Huang, Y., Wen, Y., Chu, Y.,
Zhao, C., 2022. Global seaweed farming andprocessing in the past 20 years. Food Production,
Processing and Nutrition 4, 23.

8