On an island: coping with sea level rise

by Bryan Walker on March 9, 2011

A recent Rowntree Foundation report on the vulnerability to the effects of climate change by mid-century of Britain’s coastal communities has attracted some media attention. It struck me as underlining the relevance of one of the chapters in the book Adapting to Climate Change which I recently reviewed on Hot Topic. The chapter, on adaptive governance for a changing coastline, noted a strategic shift in national coastal management policy in England away from investing in expensive ‘hard’ engineered defence towards designing a more naturally functioning coastline. This means that many coastal communities now face great unease and anxiety about their future, since the new policy preferences for retreat and realignment mean no future guarantees for protection.

[See end for comments by Gareth.]

Although Adapting to Climate Change focuses on the British situation there is obvious relevance for many countries where rising sea level and storm surge will affect existing coastal communities and I thought it worth traversing more fully than was possible in my review the governance issues raised by the authors, Sophie Nicholson-Cole and Tim O’Riordan.

They regard governance as dysfunctional at present and failing to create the conditions for adaptation. There is need for improved basic scientific knowledge to begin with, relating to specific communities facing serious impacts. But sensitive social and economic factors also contribute to the vulnerability of the communities and their uncertain futures. Many English coastal towns are marked by physical isolation, high deprivation levels, poor quality housing, an imbalance of older people and fragile economies.

The change in national coastal defence policy does not entertain compensation for people whose homes, lands and businesses may soon be lost to the sea. Additionally, there is no adaptation strategy, policy, funding or mechanisms to enable a transition to a different coastline by supporting people whose lives and properties will be affected by coastal change. The prospect is frightening for residents and has led to much local uncertainty, mistrust, anger and anxiety.

Current coastal management is extremely complex and fragmented, with many bodies having functions not coordinated or integrated. Sectoral fragmentation is also rife. Longer term planning is extremely difficult under those circumstances. The authors stress the need for a mechanism which will connect currently disjointed stakeholders and address common concerns. Efforts are being made in that direction but have serious resistance to overcome.

Local communities, unsurprisingly, often express strong wishes to see the status quo maintained and coastal protection continued. This underlines the need for community involvement in the development of options for future management of the coast. Coastal retreat and realignment is a serious matter. Such options challenge people’s powerful identities, senses of place and their attachments to their surroundings and the places in which they presently live. The alternatives are unfamiliar and even considering them can bring about extreme anxiety as well as an aggressive fighting spirit.

The authors observe that communities cannot be expected to adapt to a very different coastline until there is fair treatment and a supported transition by way of a comprehensive and trustworthy adaptation process.  This means planning for both the short and long term. For this planning the authors look to a partnership model of governance combining public, private and civil society into coordinating arrangements which will help address the tension between national strategic frameworks and local flexibility for delivery.

It all looks obvious enough when explained, but the UK won’t be the only country in the world that isn’t ready with governance structures adequate to the magnitude of the task of coastal adaptation. In many countries politicians have hardly come to terms with climate change itself let alone the massive adaptive strategies that are now unavoidable. Indeed, one wonders whether it will take the obvious necessity of adaptation planning to finally bring home to some the unpleasant reality of climate change, and hopefully to jolt them into mitigation policies which may yet stave off the worst impacts.

Gareth adds: The Rowntree Foundation report, Impacts of climate change on disadvantaged UK coastal communities, by Mary Zsamboky, Amalia Fernández-Bilbao, David Smith, Jasper Knight and James Allan [summary, full report] caught my attention because by some strange serendipity two of the four case studies in the report are of parts of the UK that I know well. I spent a couple of childhood years on Benbecula, a flat island sandwiched between North & South Uist in the Outer Hebrides, and my mother’s family comes from Llanelli in South Wales. When the report talks about the beaches retreating on the western shores of Benbecula, I can picture those dazzling white sands backed by high dunes, lapped by azure water. And the Loughor estuary between Llanelli and the Gower peninsula was where my father went fishing while we were on holiday with my grandparents, where cockles were harvested at low tide for sale in the markets of Swansea and Cardiff (cue Dylan Thomas). It too is threatened by the loss of beaches and dunes, vulnerable to storm damage, and with little active planning for a future where sea level rise by 2080 is expected to “exceed 1 m and a rise of 2 m cannot be excluded”, and intense storms are expected to become more common. As Bryan points out, planning for and coping with these sorts of issues is not going to be easy, especially in vulnerable communities where resources are limited. Well worth a read.

Key points (from the summary):

Coastal areas are vulnerable to climate change because of rising sea levels and wave heights and accelerated coastal erosion – especially communities relying on the immediate coastal area for their residence, communications and economic and social activities.

Many are also vulnerable to climate change because of socio-economic issues such as high proportions of older residents and transient populations, low employment levels and high seasonality of work, physical isolation and poor transport links.

There was a lack of understanding in disadvantaged coastal communities of the range of possible climate change impacts they face and how to respond appropriately. They were more concerned about pressing day-to-day issues such as their income or employment. Residents who had experienced severe events (storms, flooding) had greater awareness of climate change.

Actions needed for coastal communities to adapt to climate change include:

  • improved communication of risks and impacts;
  • more adaptive local and national institutions;
  • ensuring that new development and infrastructure planning takes climate change into account to avoid putting more people at risk;
  • increasing capacity to prepare for climate risks and recover from specific events;
  • developing better targeted support for those most vulnerable.
  • The new localism agenda puts an onus on communities and local areas to lead on tackling issues affecting them. But the study found that disadvantaged coastal communities and their local authorities may not be well equipped to do so without considerable support, including funding, from central government.

[David Gilmour]

{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }

Bob Bingham March 9, 2011 at 11:00 pm

So far sea level rise is only 150mm and only going up at 3.5mm a year but it is accelerating and we only need a one meter rise for it to be catastrophic. Check the East coast of the UK and Holland plus California and other strategic and low lying areas.
https://sites.google.com/site/globalwarmingsimplified/the-situation-today

adelady March 10, 2011 at 6:26 am

Bob. I recall reading something about post-glacial uplift in Scotland – a long-term consequence of coming out of the last ice age – causing simultaneous downward pressure on more southerly coasts in England, not sure about Wales. The whole land mass is tiliting, ever so slowly, to the south.

So whatever the global SLR is, many English coastal communities will see much more encroachment of the sea locally than the rest of the world will.

Mike Palin March 10, 2011 at 7:19 am
Bryan Walker March 10, 2011 at 8:39 am

Some of the material in the document Mike links to was briefly highlighted in this earlier Hot Topic post.

Kiwiiano March 10, 2011 at 10:04 pm

There’s a flurry of excitement in Christchurch at the moment for reconstructing the city but they are steadfastly ignoring the stench of peanuts from the fact that the high-tide mark in the Avon River is within the CBD, between the Kilmore & Barbados St bridges.
If Hansen’s predictions of the effect of the present record atmospheric CO2 levels once the planet’s inertia has been overcome are anything to go by, our future coastline will be Ohoka, Harewood, HeiHei, Rolleston, Burnham.

Gareth March 10, 2011 at 10:19 pm

Certainly, if we want to build a city for the next 150 years, we need to take sea level rise into account. Be a shame if the CBD was turning into a salt marsh…

John D March 11, 2011 at 12:05 pm

From what I hear from my friends in Christchurch, the only flurry of excitement is every time a magnitude 4 aftershock rolls through (at a rate of several a day)

I don’t hear much excitement from those 10,000 homeowners who will have their houses demolished.

Much of the city is stuffed and will never be rebuilt

bill March 11, 2011 at 12:57 pm
adelady March 11, 2011 at 2:35 am

Don’t nkow how accurate these maps are, but there’s certainly some clear indications about which areas are most likely at risk from 1-2 metres of SLR. You have to do a fair bit of arrow pushing to get to the detailed map of Christchurch from here –
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/sealevel?lat=-24.287&lng=132.188

but it certainly looks a lot like the same map for Adelaide. “Seaside” suburbs will be in a very different place with just 1-2 metres of SLR.

Bryan Walker March 11, 2011 at 7:53 am

The implications of sea level rise for NZ cities hardly bear thinking about – which is perhaps why they are not much thought about. The likely post-earthquake relocations currently being signalled for some areas of Christchurch are comparatively minor alongside what may need to be faced in coming decades. Claims that climate change mitigation now is too disturbing to our economy to be undertaken with any determined purpose will look pretty silly alongside the economic upheavals which will result for the country if enormous effort has to be put into defending against or retreating from the rising sea.

veryred March 11, 2011 at 7:41 pm

Auckland City has really grasped the nettle when it comes to potential sea level rises.

Recently granted consent for a subdivision of waterfront property on Waiheke Island where around 50% of each of the four sections are less than 2m above high tide. These are sections that will require septic systems!

There is a serious disjunct between source agencies like NIWA and the planners and administrators in the system.

Previous post:

Next post: