The Hong Kong startup combines 3D-printed reef tiles, biodiversity monitoring and long-term data to help companies manage their impact on marine ecosystems.
Updated
August 7, 2026 4:10 AM
Young corals growing on Archireef's 3D-printed terracotta reef tiles beneath the sea. IMAGE: ARCHIREFF
Anyone who has snorkeled over a coral reef has probably admired its vibrant colours and the marine life swimming between its branches. What is less visible is how easily these ecosystems can be damaged. Rising ocean temperatures and pollution continue to put reefs under pressure, while coastal development creates another threat. Construction can stir up sediment that settles on corals, blocking the sunlight they need and making it harder for damaged reefs to recover.
Protecting marine ecosystems is becoming a shared responsibility. Alongside scientists, governments and conservation groups, businesses whose operations affect the ocean are increasingly expected to understand, manage and reduce their environmental impact. They must also show regulators, banks and investors that they are meeting their environmental commitments.
Archireef helps businesses meet those demands. Founded by Vriko Yu, the Hong Kong-rooted B2B startup specializes in marine ecosystem restoration and ocean nature risk management. Drawing on years of research at the University of Hong Kong, Yu built the company to help organisations understand, measure and reduce their impact on marine ecosystems.
Yu describes Archireef as an “end-to-end ocean nature risk management company”.
“What we offer them is a credible way to meet those obligations and stand behind the results,” she says.
One of the company’s main tools for restoring damaged marine ecosystems is its flagship 3D-printed terracotta reef tile. The tiles provide a stable foundation where young corals can attach, grow and survive over time.
Archireef chose terracotta instead of concrete and other conventional materials because it is pH-neutral and does not release harmful chemicals into the water. Its surface also gives corals a suitable place to attach naturally.
Before placing a single tile in the ocean, the team studies the proposed restoration site to determine whether recovery is possible. It assesses the water quality, biodiversity and general health of the ecosystem. As Yu explains, restoration should begin only where nature has a realistic chance to recover.
“Restoration isn’t about replacing nature or engineering a reef into existence. It is about removing the barriers and giving a degraded system the conditions it needs to begin recovering on its own”, she says.
Once the team selects a site, divers carefully place the tiles on the seabed. Their curves, ridges and crevices imitate the structure of a natural coral reef, creating sheltered spaces for marine species. The design also helps limit sediment build-up, which can block sunlight and smother young corals.
.webp)
Archireef adjusts the shape of its reef tiles for each project.
“There’s no universal reef, so there’s no universal tile”, Yu says.
Instead of producing one standard model, the company adapts each design to the coral species, water conditions and surrounding marine environment. A coral restoration project in Hong Kong may therefore require a different tile from one in Saudi Arabia, even when the same manufacturing process is used.
“The biggest adaptation from site to site is usually the match between design, species and environment, not the manufacturing itself ”, Yu explains.
Although the reef tile is Archireef’s most recognizable innovation, Yu sees it as one part of a much broader service.
“The reef tile gets the attention because it’s tangible,” she says. “But the real product is the proof — defensible, audit-ready evidence of nature recovery that an organization can put in a disclosure and stand behind under scrutiny”.
Producing that evidence requires years of biodiversity monitoring. Long after the reef tiles have been installed, Archireef continues to track coral survival and the health of the surrounding marine ecosystem. Its monitoring methods include ecological surveys, AI-assisted species recognition, photogrammetry and environmental DNA testing.
Photogrammetry uses photographs to produce detailed 3D models of the reef. These models allow the team to measure changes in coral growth and reef structure over time.
Environmental DNA, commonly known as eDNA, offers another way to monitor marine biodiversity. Traditional ecological surveys often depend on divers recording the species they can see. eDNA testing instead examines traces of genetic material left in the water by marine organisms, including skin cells, mucus and waste.
By analyzing these traces, Archireef can detect species that may be hidden, difficult to identify or absent during a dive. This gives the company a more complete picture of the ecosystem and how it is changing.
For Archireef, the success of a coral reef restoration project is determined by what happens several years after installation.
“The indicators that matter aren’t the ones that look good on deployment day”, Yu says. “They’re the ones that show, two, three and five years on, whether a genuine ecosystem is establishing and sustaining itself”.
At the company’s first restoration site in Hoi Ha Wan, Hong Kong, around 90% of the transplanted corals remained alive four years after deployment. The long-term survival rate suggests that the ecosystem is recovering rather than simply appearing healthy during the early stages of the project.
Results like these have helped Archireef move beyond academic research and secure collaborations across the public and private sectors. In Hong Kong, the company has worked with government departments and public organisations responsible for coastal infrastructure and marine conservation.
Keep Reading
A global survey shows robot anxiety drops when people encounter robots in real life
Updated
April 1, 2026 8:55 AM
Ameca the humanoid robot, featuring a grey rubber face. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
People often assume robots make people uneasy everywhere. But a new global study suggests something more nuanced. Robot anxiety tends to be highest in places where people rarely see robots in real life. Where robots are more visible, attitudes are often far more positive. That insight comes from a global study by Hexagon AB, which surveyed 18,000 participants across nine major markets. The research explored how adults and children think about robots and how those views change depending on everyday exposure.
In the United Kingdom, anxiety about robots is the highest among the countries studied. Around 52% of adults say they feel worried that something might go wrong when they think about interacting with or working alongside robots. South Korea sits at the other end of the spectrum, with only 29% reporting similar concerns. One factor appears to explain much of the gap: familiarity.
British adults are among the least likely to have encountered robots in real life. Only about 30% say they have seen or used one. In contrast, countries where robots are more visible tend to report greater comfort. China offers the clearest example. Around 75% of adults there say they have seen or interacted with robots. At the same time, 81% say they feel excited about the technology’s future potential.
The study suggests that attitudes toward robots are not fixed. Instead, they shift depending on where people encounter them and what tasks they perform. When robots are seen solving clear, practical problems, confidence tends to rise.
Across the surveyed countries, adults report the highest comfort levels with robots working in factories and warehouses. Around 63% say they are comfortable with robots in those environments. These are settings where tasks are clearly defined and safety standards are well understood. Acceptance drops in more personal spaces. Only 46% say they feel comfortable with robots in the home, while comfort falls further to 39% when robots are imagined in classrooms.
In other words, context matters. People appear more willing to accept robots when they take on physically demanding or dangerous work. Half of the respondents say improved safety is one of the main advantages of robotics in those environments. A similar share point to productivity gains as another benefit. Another finding challenges a common assumption about public fears. Job loss is often described as the biggest concern surrounding robotics. But the study suggests security risk worries people more.
Around 51% of adults say their biggest concern about robots at work is the possibility that the machines could be hacked or misused. That fear outweighs worries about physical malfunction or injury, which stand at 41%. Concerns about being replaced at work appear at the same level.
For many respondents, the issue is not simply whether robots can perform tasks. It is whether the systems controlling them are secure. According to researchers involved in the study, these concerns reflect how people evaluate emerging technologies. Instead of having a single opinion about robotics, people tend to judge each situation individually.
A robot helping assemble products in a factory may feel acceptable. The same technology operating in more sensitive environments can raise different questions. Dr. Jim Everett, an associate professor in moral psychology, says trust in artificial intelligence and robotics is often misunderstood. People are not simply asking whether they trust the technology, he notes. They are thinking about specific tools performing specific roles.
A robot assisting in a classroom or helping in healthcare carries different expectations than an AI system used in defense or surveillance. Even though these technologies are often grouped together in public debates, people evaluate them differently depending on their purpose.
Finally, the study also highlights another important factor shaping public attitudes: experience. When people actually encounter robots, fear often declines. Michael Szollosy, a robotics researcher involved in the project, says reactions tend to change quickly when individuals meet a robot for the first time.
The idea of an autonomous machine can feel intimidating in theory. But when people see a small service robot or an industrial machine performing a straightforward task, the reaction is often much calmer. Exposure can shift perceptions from abstract fears to practical understanding.
That shift matters because robotics is moving steadily into everyday environments. From manufacturing and logistics to healthcare and public services, machines capable of autonomous or semi-autonomous work are becoming more common.
As that happens, the study suggests public confidence may depend less on technical breakthroughs and more on visibility and transparency. Burkhard Boeckem, chief technology officer at Hexagon AB, argues that trust grows when people understand what robots are designed to do and where their limits lie.
Anxiety tends to increase when systems feel invisible or poorly understood. Clear boundaries and clear explanations can have the opposite effect. When people see robots working safely alongside humans, performing well-defined tasks and operating within clear rules, the technology becomes easier to accept.
In that sense, the future of robotics may depend as much on public familiarity as on engineering. The machines themselves are advancing quickly. But the relationship between humans and robots is still being negotiated. For now, the study offers a simple insight: the more people encounter robots in everyday life, the less mysterious they become. And once the mystery fades, the conversation often changes from fear to curiosity.