Advertisement

Governance and stakeholder perspectives of managed re-alignment: adapting to sea level rise in the Inner Forth estuary, Scotland

  • Anja Helena LiskiEmail author
  • Pontus Ambros
  • Marc J. Metzger
  • Kimberly A. Nicholas
  • A. Meriwether W. Wilson
  • Torsten Krause
Original Article

Abstract

With climate change, coastal areas are faced with unprecedented sea level rise and flooding, raising questions as to how societies will choose to adapt. One option is to strengthen existing sea walls to maintain current land uses; however, scientists, policy-makers and conservationists increasingly see the benefits of managed realignment, which is a nature-based coastal adaptation that involves the conversion of reclaimed farmland back to wetlands, allowing periodic local flooding in designated areas to reduce the risk of flooding downstream. We interviewed 16 local organisations, landowners and farmers and held workshops with 109 citizens living the Inner Forth estuary in eastern Scotland, to examine how managed realignment is supported by stakeholder attitudes and their engagement. Most of the farmers we interviewed prefer strengthened sea walls, to maintain their livelihoods and agricultural heritage. Citizens and local organisations were mainly supportive of managed realignment, because it provided wildlife and flood regulation benefits. However, we identified several barriers that could present obstacles to implementing managed realignment, for example, uncertainty whether it would support their principles of economic and rational decision-making. Our findings suggest that the local capacity to cope with rising sea levels is limited by lack of engagement with all relevant stakeholder groups, the limited scope of existing stakeholder partnerships and poor short-term funding prospects of landscape partnerships that would facilitate collaboration and discussion. We suggest that including citizens, landowners, farmers and industries would strengthen existing stakeholder deliberation and collaboration, and support the Inner Forth’s transition towards a more sustainable future shoreline.

Keywords

Managed realignment Climate change adaptation Nature-based solutions Wetland restoration Participatory research Coastal management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thank you to all the people living and working in the Inner Forth for their time and help with the interviews and workshops. Thank you to both David Anderson (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) and Neville Makan (Scottish Natural Heritage) who have supported us in the Inner Forth. Thank you to the workshop facilitators Aster De Vries Lentsch, Isobel Jones, Jakob Assmann, Ben Garlick and Rachael Scrimgeour. Thank you also to the workshop transcribers Kathleen Allen and Isabel Hoffman.

Funding information

The project was funded by the European Commission FP7 under Grant Agreement FP7-ENV-2012-308393-2 (OPERAs).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

We obtained informed consent from all research participants and adequately handled their confidentiality, in line with the School of Geosciences (University of Edinburgh) Research Ethics Procedure. For the citizen workshops, the research plan was reviewed and approved by the School of Geosciences Ethics Committee, and permission was obtained for photography and filming. Prior to the stakeholder interviews, participants provided consent to how the data would be used.

References

  1. Abel N, Gorddard R, Harman B, Leitch A, Langridge J, Ryan A, Heyenga S (2011) Sea level rise, coastal development and planned retreat: analytical framework, governance principles and an Australian case study. Environ Sci Pol 14:279–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adam P (2002) Saltmarshes in a time of change. Environ Conserv 29:39–61.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892902000048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agardy T, Alder J, Dayton P, Curran S, Kitchingman A, Wilson M, Catenazzi (2005) Coastal systems. In: Millennium ecosystem assessment. ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends assessment. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, p 37Google Scholar
  4. Akompab DA, Bi P, Williams S, Saniotis A, Walker I, Augoustinos M (2013) Engaging stakeholders in an adaptation process: governance and institutional arrangements in heat-health policy development in Adelaide, Australia. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18:1001–1018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-012-9404-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ambros P (2016) Bridging to the common ground, adapting to climate change through sustainable estuarine land use: a study of the Inner Forth. Master Thesis Lund University Centre for Sustainability Science, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  6. Anguelovski I, Carmin J (2011) Something borrowed, everything new: innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 3:169–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aronson J, Clewell AF, Blignaut JN, Milton SJ (2006) Ecological restoration: a new frontier for nature conservation and economics. J Nat Conserv 14:135–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2006.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aradóttir Á, Petursdottir T, Halldorsson G, Svavarsdóttir K, Arnalds O (2013) Drivers of ecological restoration: Lessons from a century of restoration in Iceland. Ecol Soc 18:33.  https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05946-180433
  9. Aylett A (2010) Conflict, collaboration and climate change: participatory democracy and urban environmental struggles in Durban, South Africa. Int J Urban Reg Res 34:478–495.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00964.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Babbie ER (2013) The practice of social research. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyes SJ, Elliott M (2014) Marine legislation – the ultimate ‘horrendogram’: international law, European directives & national implementation. Marine Poll Bull 86:39–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.06.055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boyes SJ, Elliott M (2015) The excessive complexity of national marine governance systems – has this decreased in England since the introduction of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009? Mar Policy 51:57–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.07.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chmura GL, Anisfeld SC, Cahoon DR, Lynch JC (2003) Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 17.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GB001917 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. City of Edinburgh Council (2016) Local flood risk management plan. http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/7455/draft_local_flood_risk_management_plan. Accessed 23 Jan 2018
  15. Clewell AF, Aronson J (2006) Motivations for the restoration of ecosystems. Cons Biol 20:420–428.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00340.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ClimateXChange (2016) Flooding and infrastructure. ClimateXChange secretariat. http://www.climatexchange.org.uk/adapting-to-climate-change/indicators-and-trends/flooding-and-infrastructure. Accessed 16 June 2017
  17. Colclough S, Fonseca L, Astley T, Thomas K, Watts W (2005) Fish utilisation of managed realignments. Fish Manag Ecol 12:351–360.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2400.2005.00467.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davidson MD (2013) On the relation between ecosystem services, intrinsic value, existence value and economic valuation. Ecol Econ 95:171–177.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.09.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dodman D, Mitlin D (2013) Challenges for community-based adaptation: discovering the potential for transformation. J Int Dev 25:640–659.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.1772 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doody JP (2004) ‘Coastal Squeeze’: an historical perspective. J Coast Conserv 10:129–138.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02818949 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Doody JP (2013) Coastal squeeze and managed realignment in southeast England, does it tell us anything about the future? Ocean Coast Manag 79:34–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.05.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Durham E, Baker H, Smith M, Moore E, Morgan V (2014) The BiodivERsA Stakeholder Engagement Handbook. BiodivERsA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  23. Esteves LS, Thomas K (2014) Managed realignment in practice in the UK: results from two independent surveys. J Coast Res 70:407–413.  https://doi.org/10.2112/SI70-069.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. European Commission (2013) Share of population in coastal regions living within 50km from the coastline by NUTS3 regions. Eurostat. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Share_of_population_in_coastal_regions_living_within_50km_from_the_coastline_by_NUTS3_regions.png#filehistory. Accessed 16 June 2017
  25. Few R, Brown K, Tompkins EL (2007) Public participation and climate change adaptation: avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Clim Pol 7:46–59.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2007.9685637 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Foster NM, Hudson MD, Bray S, Nicholls RJ (2013) Intertidal mudflat and saltmarsh conservation and sustainable use in the UK: a review. J Environ Manag 126:96–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.04.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Scottish Government (2014) Scottish planning policy. Scottish Government. http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/5823. Accessed 16 June 2017
  28. Granderson AA (2014) Making sense of climate change risks and responses at the community level: a cultural-political lens. Clim Risk Manag 3:55–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2014.05.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hansen M, Ramasar V, Buchanan K (2014) Localising global environmental governance norms: implications for justice. In: Sowman M, Wynberg R (eds) Governance for justice and environmental sustainability: lessons across natural resource sectors in sub-Saharan Africa. Routledge. pp 43–62Google Scholar
  30. Jones N, Clark J (2014) Social capital and the public acceptability of climate change adaptation policies: a case study in Romney Marsh, UK. Clim Chang 123:133–145.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-1049-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kenter JO (2014) Valuing the inner forth. Final report for the inner forth landscape initiative. http://innerforthlandscape.co.uk/files/KenterValuingtheInnerForth.pdf Accessed 28 Jan 2018
  32. King SE, Lester JN (1995) The value of salt marsh as a sea defence. Mar Pollut Bull 30:180–189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-326X(94)00173-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koontz TM (2014) Social learning in collaborative watershed planning: the importance of process control and efficacy. J Environ Plan Manag 57:1572–1593.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2013.820658 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ledoux L, Cornell S, O’Riordan T, Harvey R, Banyard L (2005) Towards sustainable flood and coastal management: identifying drivers of, and obstacles to, managed realignment. Land Use Policy 22:129–144.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lesnikowski AC, Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, Barrera M, Heymann J (2015) How are we adapting to climate change? A global assessment. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 20:277–293.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-013-9491-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liski AH, Koetse MJ, Metzger MJ (2019) Addressing awareness gaps in environmental valuation: choice experiments with citizens in the Inner Forth, Scotland. Reg Environ Change  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-01458-4
  37. Lowe JA, Howard TP, Pardaens A, Tinker J, Holt J, Wakelin S, Milne G, Leake J, Wolf J, Horsburgh K, Reeder T, Jenkins G, Ridley J, Dye S, Bradley S (2009) UK climate projections science report: marine and coastal projections. Met Office Hadley Centre. http://ukclimateprojections.metoffice.gov.uk/media.jsp?mediaid=87905&. Accessed 19 Aug 2017
  38. Luisetti T, Turner RK, Bateman IJ, Morse-Jones S, Adams C, Fonseca L (2011) Coastal and marine ecosystem services valuation for policy and management: managed realignment case studies in England. Ocean Coast Manag 54:212–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Macalister T (2016) Longannet power station closes ending coal power use in Scotland. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/24/longannet-power-station-closes-coal-power-scotland. Accessed 19 Aug 2017
  40. MacDonald MA, de Ruyck C, Field RH, Bedford A and Bradbury RB (2017) Benefits of coastal managed realignment for society: evidence from ecosystem service assessments in two UK regions. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2017.09.007
  41. Martín-López B, Gómez-Baggethun E, García-Llorente M, Montes C (2014) Trade-offs across value-domains in ecosystem services assessment. Ecol Indic 1:220–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McGranahan G, Balk D, Anderson B (2007) The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environ Urban 19:17–37.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247807076960 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Midgley S, McGlashan DJ (2004) Planning and management of a proposed managed realignment project: Bothkennar, Forth Estuary, Scotland. Mar Policy 28:429–435.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2003.10.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Möller I, Kudella M, Rupprecht F, Spencer T, Paul M, Van Wesenbeeck BK, Wolters G, Jensen K, Bouma TJ, Miranda-Lange M, Schimmels S (2014) Wave attenuation over coastal salt marshes under storm surge conditions. Nat Geosci 7:727–731.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Morelli F, Tryjanowski P, Benedetti Y (2016) Differences between niches of anthropocentric and biocentric conservationists: wearing old clothes to look modern? J Nat Conserv 34:101–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2016.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Morris RKA (2013) Managed realignment as a tool for compensatory habitat creation – a re-appraisal. Ocean Coast Manag 73:82–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.12.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Myatt LB, Scrimshaw MD, Lester JN (2003) Public perceptions and attitudes towards an established managed realignment scheme: Orplands, Essex, UK. J Environ Manag 68:173–181.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4797(03)00065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Myatt-Bell LB, Scrimshaw MD, Lester JN, Potts JS (2002) Public perception of managed realignment: Brancaster West Marsh, North Norfolk, UK. Mar Policy 26:45–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-597X(01)00033-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. North D (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oxford English Dictionary Online (2017a) Norm, n.1. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/128266. Accessed 21 June 2017
  51. Oxford English Dictionary Online (2017b) Institution, n. Oxford University Press. http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/97110. Accessed 21 June 2017
  52. Petts J (2007) Learning about learning: lessons from public engagement and deliberation on urban river restoration. Geogr J 173:300–311.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2007.00254.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pirie D (2017) Taking stock - where we are now. Conference presentation at the sniffer flood risk management conference 2017. Sniffer. https://www.sniffer.org.uk/flood-risk-management-conference-2017. Accessed 16 June 2017
  54. Rennie AF, Hansom JD (2011) Sea level trend reversal: land uplift outpaced by sea level rise on Scotland’s coast. Geomorphology 125:193–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.09.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Roca E, Villares M (2012) Public perceptions of managed realignment strategies: the case study of the Ebro Delta in the Mediterranean basin. Ocean Coast Manag 60:38–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Roebeling PC, Costa L, Magalhães-Filho L, Tekken V (2013) Ecosystem service value losses from coastal erosion in Europe: historical trends and future projections. J Coast Conserv 17:389–395.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-013-0235-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rogers S, Kaiser M, Jennings S (1998) Ecosystem effects of demersal fishing: a European perspective. In: Dorsey EM, Pederson J (eds) Effects of fishing gear on the sea floor of New England. Conservation Law Foundation, Boston, pp 68–79Google Scholar
  58. Scavia D, Field JC, Boesch DF, Buddemeier RW, Burkett V, Cayan DR, Fogarty M, Harwell MA, Howarth RW, Mason C, Reed DJ, Royer TC, Sallenger AH, Titus JG (2002) Climate change impacts on U. S. Coastal and marine ecosystems. Estuaries 25:149–164.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scottish Government (2016a) Draft Budget 2016. http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2015/12/9056/8. Accessed 11th October 2017
  60. Scottish Government (2016b) Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. Scottish Government. http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Environment/Water/Flooding/FRMAct. Accessed 16.06.2017
  61. Scottish Natural Heritage (2011) Firth of Forth - site of special scientific interest: site management statement. Scottish Natural Heritage. http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/siteinfo.jsp?pa_code=8163#links. Accessed 19 August 2017
  62. Small C, Nicholls RJ (2003) A global analysis of human settlement in coastal zones. J Coast Res 19:584–599Google Scholar
  63. Smout TC, Stewart M (2012) The Firth of Forth: An Environmental History. Birlinn, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  64. Spalding MD, McIvor AL, Beck MW, Koch EW, Möller I, Reed DJ, Rubinoff P, Spencer T, Tolhurst TJ, Wamsley TV, Wesenbeeck BK (2014) Coastal ecosystems: a critical element of risk reduction. Conserv Lett 7:293–301.  https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Spencer KL, Harvey GL (2012) Understanding system disturbance and ecosystem services in restored saltmarshes: integrating physical and biogeochemical processes. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 106:23–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2012.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tippett J, Searle B, Pahl-Wostl C, Rees Y (2005) Social learning in public participation in river basin management—early findings from HarmoniCOP European case studies. Environ Sci Pol 8:287–299.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2005.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Turner RK, Burgess D, Hadley D, Coombes E, Jackson N (2007) A cost-benefit appraisal of coastal managed realignment policy. Glob Environ Chang 17:397–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Turner RK, Palmieri MG, Luisetti T (2016) Lessons from the construction of a climate change adaptation plan: a Broads wetland case study. Integr Environ Assess Manag 12:719–725.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1774 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. UK Committee on Climate Change (2016) UK Climate Risk Assessment 2017. Committee on climate change. https://www.theccc.org.uk/uk-climate-change-risk-assessment-2017. Accessed 16 June 2017
  70. Wamsler C (2017) Stakeholder involvement in strategic adaptation planning: Transdisciplinarity and co-production at stake? Environ Sci Pol 75:148–157.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.03.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wamsler C, Brink E (2014) Interfacing citizens’ and institutions’ practice and responsibilities for climate change adaptation. Urban Climate 7:64–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2013.10.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weesie PDM, Van Andel J (2008) An integrated framework for the instrumental valuation of nature. Restor Ecol 16:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2007.00353.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wiering MA, Arts BJM (2006) Discursive shifts in Dutch River management: “deep” institutional change or adaptation strategy? Hydrobiol 565:327–338.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-005-5923-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Williamson O (2000) The new institutional economics: taking stock, looking ahead. J Econ Lit 38:595–613.  https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.38.3.595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhu X, Linham MM, Nicholls RJ (2010) Technologies for climate change adaptation-coastal erosion and flooding. Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, Risø Nationallaboratoriet for Bæredygtig Energ. http://www.tech-action.org/Publications/TNA-Guidebooks. Accessed 19 August 2017

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of GeosciencesUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Centre for Sustainability StudiesLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations