Climatic Change

, Volume 124, Issue 1–2, pp 9–20 | Cite as

Managing shoreline retreat: a US perspective

Essay

Abstract

As sea level rises, coastal communities will face increased risks of flooding, storm surge, and inundation. In some areas, structural protective measures will be built, and for some properties, accommodation to sea level rise may be possible. For other areas, however, some form of retreat will be either preferred on economic or sociopolitical grounds or required given fiscal constraints. This paper considers how society can proactively manage shoreline retreat in those locations where it is deemed the preferable policy. A three-part strategy is proposed: (1) reduce new development in the highest-risk areas; (2) adopt policies that allow for expected and orderly removal or modification of development as inundation occurs; and (3) take advantage of disasters to implement managed retreat approaches. Specific policies are recommended and the challenges of institutional change discussed.

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 Policy 14:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bamber JL, Aspinall WP (2012) An expert judgement assessment of future sea level rise from the ice sheets. Nat Clim Chang. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1778 Google Scholar
  3. Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (1993) Agendas and instability in American politics. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(14):8086–8091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooper JAG, McKenna J (2008) Social justice in coastal erosion management: the temporal and spatial dimensions. Geoforum 39(1):294–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cummins JD, Suher M, Zanjani G (2010) Federal financial exposure to natural catastrophe risk. In: Lucas D (ed) Measuring and managing federal financial risk. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois,Google Scholar
  7. FEMA (1983) The 100-year base flood standard and the floodplain management executive order: a review prepared for the Office of Management and Budget by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DC, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  8. FEMA (2008) Missouri flood buyouts save lives, heartache and money. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, September 1Google Scholar
  9. Godschalk DR, Norton R, Richardson C, Salvesen D (2000) Avoiding coastal hazard areas: best state mitigation practices. Environ Geosci 7(1):13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grannis J (2011) Adaptation tool kit: sea-level rise and coastal land use. Georgetown Climate Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. IPCC (2012) In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF et al (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation: a special report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith H, Braman D (2010) Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J Risk Res 14:147–174Google Scholar
  13. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Kingdon JW (1984) Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Little, Brown, & Co, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. Kousky C, Shabman L (2012) The realities of federal disaster aid. RFF Issue Brief. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Kousky C, Luttmer E, Zeckhauser R (2006) Private investment and government protection. J Risk Uncertain 33(1):73–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kousky C, Walsh S, Zeckhauser R (2007) Options contracts for contingent takings. Issues in legal scholarship catastrophic risks: prevention, compensation, and recovery (article 2)Google Scholar
  18. Kousky C, Kunreuther H (2013) Addressing affordability in the National Flood Insurance Program. RFF Issue Brief 13–02. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, and Risk Management and Decision Processes Center, Wharton School, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuran T, Sunstein CR (1999) Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Rev 51(4):683–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kydland FE, Prescott EC (1977) Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency of optimal plans. J Polit Econ 85(3):473–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewis DA (2012) The relocation of development from coastal hazards through publicly funded aquisition programs: examples and lessons from the Gulf coast. Sea Grant Law Policy J 5(1):98–139Google Scholar
  22. Macintosh A (2013) Coastal climate hazards and urban planning: how planning responses can lead to maladaptation. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18:1035–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marshall GR (2013) Transaction costs, collective action and adaptation in managing complex social–ecological systems. Ecol Econ 88:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McGuire CJ (2013) Adapting to sea level rise in the coastal zone. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  25. McLaughlin RJ (2011) Rolling easements as a response to sea level rise in coastal Texas: current status of the law after Severance v. Patterson. J Land Use 26(2):365–394Google Scholar
  26. Moser SC, Ekstrom JA (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107(51):22026–22031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nice DC (1994) Policy innovation in state government. Iowa State University Press, AmesGoogle Scholar
  28. Nicholls RJ, Cazenave A (2010) Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones. Science 328(5985):1517–1520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. North DC (1990) A transaction cost theory of politics. J Theor Polit 2(4):355–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nyhan B, Reifler J (2010) When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit Behav 32(2):303–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ostrom E (1999) Institutional rational choice: an assessment of the institutional analysis and development framework. In: Sabatier PA (ed) Theories of the Policy Process. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, pp 35–71Google Scholar
  32. Peloso ME, Caldwell MR (2011) Dynamic property rights: the public trust doctrine and takings in a changing climate. Stanf Environ Law J 30(1):51–120Google Scholar
  33. Pilkey OH, Cooper JAG (2004) Society and sea level rise. Science 303(5665):1781–1782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pilkey OH, Young RS (2005) Will Hurricane Katrina impact shoreline management? Here’s why it should. J Coast Res 21(6):iii–ixGoogle Scholar
  35. Platt RH, Salvesen D, Baldwin GHI (2002) Rebuilding the North Carolina coast after Hurricane Fran: did public regulations matter? Coast Manag 30:249–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rittel HW, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruppert T (2010–2011) Reasonable investment-backed expectations: should notice of rising seas lead to falling expectations for caostal property purchasers? J Land Use Environ Law 26(2):39–276Google Scholar
  38. Sea Level Rise Task Force (2010) New York State Sea Level Rise Task Force Report to the legislature. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith JB (1997) Setting priorities for adapting to climate change. Glob Environ Chang 7(3):251–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smithers J, Smit B (1997) Human adaptation to climatic variability and change. Glob Environ Chang 7(2):129–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. SPUR (2012) Ocean beach master plan. San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  42. Strauss BH, Ziemlinski R, Weiss JL, Overpeck JT (2012) Tidally adjusted estimates of topographic vulnerability to sea level rise and flooding for the contiguous United States. Environ Res Lett 7(1):014033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. The Heinz Center (2000) Evaluation of erosion hazards. The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  44. Titus JG (1990) Strategies for adapting to the greenhouse effect. J Am Planning Assoc Summer 56(3):311–323Google Scholar
  45. Titus JG (1998) Rising seas, coastal erosion, and the takings clause: how to save wetlands and beaches without hurting property owners. Maryland Law Rev 57(4):1279–1399Google Scholar
  46. Titus JG (2010) Rolling easements. Climate Ready Estuaries Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC Google Scholar
  47. Titus JG, Hudgens DE, Trescott DL, Craghan M, Nuckols WH, Hershner CH, Kassakian JM, Linn CJ, Merritt PG, McCue TM, O’Connell JF, Tanski J, Wang J (2009) State and local governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast. Environ Res Lett 4:044008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tol RSJ, Bohn M, Downing TE, Guillerminet M-L, Hizsnyik E, Kasperson R, Lonsdale K, Mays C, Nicholls RJ, Olsthoorn AA, Pfeifle G, Poumadere M, Toth FL, Vafeidis A, van der Werff PE, Yetkiner IH (2006) Adaptation to five metres of sea level rise. J Risk Res 9(5):467–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. True JL, Jones BD, Baumgartner FR (1999) Punctuated-equlibrium theory: explaining stability and change in American policymaking. In: Sabatier PA (ed) Theories of the policy process. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 35–71Google Scholar
  50. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 5:207–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. U.S. Climate Change Science Program (2009) Coastal sensitivity to sea-level rise: a focus on the Mid-Atlantic region. Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.1. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Resources for the FutureWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations