Search

This paper focuses upon the new landscape of strategic coastal planning and implementation in England and Wales resulting from the development of shoreline management plans (SMPs) by flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCRM) authorities; the issues raised will be very familiar elsewhere in the world. The real test is how to implement the many measures and management decisions within these SMPs. In many cases, those decisions were difficult to reach; sometimes the result was an uneasy agreement to maintain defences indefinitely, if the funding is available; elsewhere, bold decisions were taken to withdraw maintenance using the 'no active intervention' SMP policy option. This policy is often paraphrased as 'do nothing', but in reality it is usually far from being a passive exercise. Depending on the circumstances and rationale for not intervening, it may entail a lot of work and have many implications. What is the nature of current intervention? Are there existing FCRM assets in place, and if so, will they be dismantled or left to disintegrate? Either way, potential impacts upon public health and safety, the natural environment, coastal processes, amenity and local communities and businesses need attention, and the exercise needs careful planning and engagement. There may be other options to consider, such as the 'localisation' or transfer of assets, and management of them, to third parties - but what are the liabilities associated with this and is it sustainable? A well-planned decommissioning of assets that is written into a SMP in advance is more likely to address these implications successfully, whereas a withdrawal from maintenance in the teeth of local opposition despite an original intention to defend may become complicated. The FCRM community needs to be prepared for these decisions and their consequences in advance. Additionally, is 'no active intervention' compliant with European law? The Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are working with local authorities and other partners on a number of initiatives that will clarify issues, review experience and provide simple, practical guidance to risk management authorities faced with implementing a 'no active intervention' option. This paper will highlight the results and products of some of these initiatives and reflect more widely on the 'deliverability' of SMPs as they stand. 'Doing nothing' at the coast is clearly less relaxing than it sounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Managed realignment often involves the construction of new sea walls at a location behind existing sea walls to create parcels of land that can be flooded to create new inter-tidal environments. It is employed in the UK to improve flood risk management within the context of flood risk management strategies, but so far most emphasis has focused upon creation of new wildlife habitat because this has been where the opportunities and funding have been found. Initial projects were relatively small in scale, but recent projects have been much larger. Scaling up the size of realignments introduces a variety of additional engineering and social challenges and the realignment of Wallasea Island in 2006 is one of the largest. There were a variety of issues encountered during the development of the Wallasea Island realignment that make it a good platform for exploring the issues and some of the solutions that have been found to date. This account describes the project and some of the measures taken to give it as high a level of social acceptability as possible. Such measures include design features for fish nurseries, provision of public access and careful liaison with affected communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]