Search

Coastal communities and their environments are facing unprecedented changes, with climate change driving rising global mean sea level, exacerbating extreme sea level events, and increasing hazards. Whilst adaptations to change have been central to coastal life for millennia, climate change brings a speed and intensity of change not previously experienced. Researchers are noting that adaptations are needed that are large scale and systemic with significant changes to lives and livelihoods – Transformational Adaptations – yet there is little evidence of this in practice, and there remains an operationalisation gap between ambitions and actions. This paper uses a qualitative case study method to assess how existing policy may enable and inhibit local stakeholder involvement in transformational adaptation in English coastal flood and erosion risk management. Through twenty interviews with coastal management stakeholders, the capacity for local coastal management stakeholders to initiate transformational adaptation and the perceived involvement of residents are analysed. The results indicate that transformational adaptation remains a distant aspiration in the English coastal management system, with local stakeholders possessing limited capacity to initiate it. The perceived role for residents in adaptation processes is often focused on their being recipients of adaptation interventions, and there are a range of barriers to their further involvement. The paper concludes that despite the theoretical interest in transformational adaptation, there is limited evidence its implementation in English coastal flood and erosion risk management, and there are multiple priority areas for policy development to support capacity for engaged transformational adaptation practices in coastal management contexts. • There are few examples of transformational adaptation in the English coastal flood and erosion risk management. • The perceived role for residents in adaptation processes is often focused on their being recipients of interventions. • There are a range of barriers for local stakeholders to develop and enact coastal adaptation policy or practice. • There are multiple priorities for policy development to support capacity for engaged transformational adaptation practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of microplastic pollution has seen an increasing focus over the last decade, both as a scientific research topic and due to intensive media interest. Despite this, there has been, until recently, a relative paucity of data relating to the volume and type of microplastics in the marine environment. The Cell 1 Regional Coastal Monitoring Programme, which covers approximately 300 km of the northeast England coastline, has recently collected subtidal sediment samples from the bed of the North Sea and analysed these for particle size distribution and microplastic content. This paper presents the results of this analysis along with a literature review of the sources, movements and concentration of microplastics in the marine environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

The North Norfolk coast is a naturally eroding coastline that has been subject to various management strategies over time, many of which have impeded its natural evolution. The Kelling to Lowestoft-Ness Shoreline Management Plan underpins management of the North Norfolk coast, advocating policies of managed realignment and no active intervention for much of this coastline. Implementation of these policies would give rise to significant loss of housing in North Norfolk during the course of this century. This has caused intense conflict between local communities and coastal planners, with the former feeling abandoned to the vagaries of natural coastal processes. Coastal planners need to work closely with local communities to implement a long-term vision for a sustainable coast. The issues of conflicting land-use planning policies and compensation for affected communities must be addressed. The wider implications of current management strategies are not fully understood and may, in some cases, be unsustainable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coastal dunes play an important role in coastal erosion risk management, where they act as a dynamic natural sea defence line. Formby coast is part of the Sefton coast in the Northwest of England and is one of the largest and most rapidly evolving sand dune systems in the UK. Such dune systems require continuous comprehensive monitoring activity to understand their dynamics. In this research, we investigate the use of airborne LiDAR digital terrain model DTMs for monitoring the dynamics of the sand dunes at Formby between 1999 and 2020. We found that the rate of elevation change for the beach and the dune areas ranges from −0.78 to 0.02 m/year and −0.92 to 0.73 m/year, respectively. The beach and the frontal dunes have had significant sand erosion, while the inner dunes gained sand during the measurement period. Vegetated areas remained unchanged due to the impact of vegetation in stabilizing the movement of the dunes. Formby beach had a volume loss of about 907,000 m3 in the last 21 years, while the dunes had a volume increase of about 1,049,000 m3 over the same period. The total volume of the entire dune system, consisting of both the beach and dune areas, remained unchanged, which indicates that the growth of the inland dunes is fed by sand from the beach. All the volumetric changes occurred due to sand redistribution within the system, with erosion along the beach, and deposition and erosion in the dune areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]