With the increasing concentration of population and marine industrial activities in coastal areas, marine ecological damage caused by various human activities and unforeseen events has become increasingly severe. Marine ecological damage compensation (MEDC) is a policy designed to regulate and mitigate the ecological impacts of marine development; balance the environmental, economic, and social interests of stakeholders; and ensure the health of marine ecosystems and the sustainable use of marine resources. The MEDC is divided into two modes: compensation in money and compensation in kind, each giving rise to its respective standards: monetary compensation standards and ecological restoration standards. These two compensation standards differ in their theoretical foundations, compensation content, and evaluation methods. Defining the applicable scope and conditions for monetary compensation and ecological restoration is crucial for establishing a scientific, reasonable, and operable MEDC policy. This paper, from a "theory-practice-policy" perspective, begins by comprehensively comparing and analyzing the differences between the two compensation standards in terms of their theoretical basis, compensation content, and assessment methods. Through a survey targeting decision-makers, it further examines the social acceptability of both compensation standards in management practice and discusses their respective advantages and limitations. Finally, from a policy perspective, applicable conditions and selection recommendations for different compensation standards are proposed: ecological restoration compensation is appropriate when the damaged entities include critical biological habitats such as estuaries, intertidal zones, mangroves, seagrass beds, or key species populations and when ecological damage is prolonged and affects a large area. If damaged ecological elements have clear market prices or substitute prices and if the duration of ecological damage is short, with a limited impact area, monetary compensation is recommended. The fundamental principle in choosing between these two compensation standards is to prioritize ecological restoration. If ecological restoration is not feasible, monetary compensation should be based on the ecological damage costs of the development area. Additionally, the socioeconomic conditions of a region experiencing ecological damage should be considered when appropriate compensation standards are selected. The results provide decision-making references for selecting marine ecological damage compensation modes in different application scenarios and offer guidelines for the government in establishing an "adequate compensation and effective restoration" MEDC standard.
