Estimating global damages from sea level rise with the Coastal Impact and Adaptation Model (CIAM)

Abstract

Coastal sector impacts from sea level rise (SLR) are a key component of the projected economic damages of climate change, a major input to decision-making and design of climate policy. Moreover, the ultimate global costs to coastal resources will depend strongly on adaptation, society’s response to cope with the local impacts. This paper presents a new open-source optimization model to assess global coastal impacts from SLR from the perspective of economic efficiency. The Coastal Impact and Adaptation Model (CIAM) determines the optimal strategy for adaptation at the local level, evaluating over 12,000 coastal segments, as described in the DIVA database (Vafeidis et al. 2006), based on their socioeconomic characteristics and the potential impacts of relative sea level rise and uncertain sea level extremes. A deterministic application of CIAM demonstrates the model’s ability to assess local impacts and direct costs, choose the least-cost adaptation, and estimate global net damages for several climate scenarios that account for both global and local components of SLR (Kopp et al. 2014). CIAM finds that there is large potential for coastal adaptation to reduce the expected impacts of SLR compared to the alternative of no adaptation, lowering global net present costs through 2100 by a factor of seven to less than $1.7 trillion, although this does not include initial transition costs to overcome an under-adapted current state. In addition to producing aggregate estimates, CIAM results can also be interpreted at the local level, where retreat (e.g., relocate inland) is often a more cost-effective adaptation strategy than protect (e.g., construct physical defenses).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. 1.

    This same inertia also means that past warming has already locked-in future SLR (that cannot be avoided even with aggressive greenhouse gas mitigation); this commitment to near-term rise means that coastal adaptation will be an essential part of society’s response to SLR. Adaptation and mitigation are complementary policies for climate change in general, and for coastal impacts in particular.

  2. 2.

    It is not fully understood whether the tail of the storm surge distribution will be further influenced by climate change (Grinsted et al. 2013) or other factors such as SLR, bathymetry, water depth, or wetland effects.

  3. 3.

    Fankhauser’s reduced-form cost-benefit rule has been formalized in the FUND model (Tol 1996), which has been used for numerous analyses of the economic impacts of SLR (e.g., Darwin and Tol 2001; Nicholls et al. 2008; Tol 2007; Anthoff et al. 2010).

  4. 4.

    Prior to DIVA, the original global coastal dataset was the Global Vulnerability Analysis (GVA), consisting of 192 coastal segments (Hoozemans et al. 1993). Despite this pioneering effort, country-level resolution is not sufficient to inform adaptation decisions that are inherently local. Advances in computing technology and remote sensing have enabled more detailed and accurate coastal datasets.

  5. 5.

    CIAM models public adaptation and assumes the entire coastal segment acts in unison (as if it was enforced by policy), rather than account for heterogeneity in adaptation strategy (e.g., sorting behavior). Furthermore, the decision of one segment is assumed to have no bearing on neighboring segments.

  6. 6.

    Although perfect foresight is unrealistic, this simplified construction of SLR ‘learning’ follows from the relatively smooth near-term rise driven by thermal inertia, whereas other climate changes are likely to be more abrupt or difficult to detect (e.g., thermohaline circulation; Keller et al. 2008).

  7. 7.

    The adaptation planning period (Δt) is assumed to be 40 years; a 100-year period is considered as a sensitivity analysis, given major coastal defense structures may be planned for a longer duration.

  8. 8.

    Descriptions of the database and the integrated model can be found in Hinkel and Klein (2009), Vafeidis et al. (2008). The CIAM framework presented here has been independently developed based on the publicly-released DIVA database v1.5.5 (DINAS COAST Consortium 2006).

  9. 9.

    Although capital formation and production functions may change in a warming world, and these shifts would have significant implications for impact assessments, this is beyond the scope of this analysis.

  10. 10.

    Coastal protection is generalized in CIAM as a sea wall, regardless of the specific defense installed (e.g., dike, revetment, floodgate, etc.) or whether soft measures (e.g., beach nourishment) would better suit the location.

  11. 11.

    In addition to omitting potential damages resulting from this residual vulnerability, protection may have negative externalities such as inhibiting public shore access and increased erosion that are not accounted for in the current model.

  12. 12.

    This current treatment makes generalized assumptions about key factors related to tidal range and sediment supply, but could be improved to better capture the physical processes (as done with DIVA in McFadden et al. 2007), as discussed in the Supplementary Material.

  13. 13.

    In contrast to this simplification, Grinsted et al. (2013) present a nonstationary distribution and estimate how the frequency of extreme surges could change with warming. This topic remains for future CIAM studies.

  14. 14.

    It is worth noting that although RCPs may imply different (though unspecified) socioeconomic pathways, this study does not consider alternative socioeconomic projections, although Hinkel et al. (2014) have shown such drivers may affect coastal impacts over time.

References

  1. Anthoff D, Nicholls RJ, Tol RSJ (2010) The economic impact of substantial sea-level rise. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 15:321–335

  2. Applegate PJ, Parizek BR, Nicholas RE, Alley RB, Keller K (2014) Increasing temperature forcing reduces the Greenland Ice Sheet’s response time scale. Clim Dyn 2100 45(7):2001–2011

  3. Bosello F, Roson R, Tol RSJ (2007) Economy-wide estimates of the implications of climate change: sea level rise. Environ Resour Econ 37(3):549–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brander LM, Florax RJGM, Vermaat JE (2006) The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ Resour Econ 33(2):223–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Church JA, Clark PU (2013) Sea level change. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley P (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis, chap 13. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  6. Darwin R, Tol RSJ (2001) Estimates of the economic effects of sea level rise. Environ Resour Econ 19:113–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Deke O, Hooss KG, Kasten C, Klepper G, Springer K (2001) Economic impact of climate change: simulations with a regionalized climate-economy model. Tech. rep., Kiel Working Papers

  8. DINAS COAST Consortium (2006) Diva v1.5.5. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dronkers J, Gilbert JTE, Butler LW, Carey JJ, Campbell J, James E, Mckenzie C, Misdorp R, Quin N, Ries KL, Schroder PC, Spradley JR, Titus JG, Vallianos L, Dadelszen JV (1990) Strategies for adaption to sea level rise. Tech. rep., Coastal zone management subgroup. International Panel on Climate Change

  10. Fankhauser S (1995) Protection versus retreat: the economic costs of sea-level rise. Environ Plan A 27(2):299–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fankhauser S, McDermott TK (2014) Understanding the adaptation deficit: why are poor countries more vulnerable to climate events than rich countries? Glob Environ Chang 27:9–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grinsted A, Moore JC, Jevrejeva S (2013) Projected Atlantic hurricane surge threat from rising temperatures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1–5

  13. Hillen M, Jonkman S, Kanning W, Kok M, Geldenhuys M, Stive M (2010) Coastal defence cost estimates: case study of the Netherlands, New Orleans and Vietnam. Commun Hydraul Geotech Eng 1:1–85

  14. Hinkel J, Klein R (2009) Integrating knowledge to assess coastal vulnerability to sea-level rise: the development of the DIVA tool. Glob Environ Chang 19:384–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hinkel J, Brown S, Exner L (2012) Sea-level rise impacts on Africa and the effects of mitigation and adaptation: an application of DIVA. Reg Environ Chang 12:207–224

  16. Hinkel J, van Vuuren D, Nicholls RJ, Klein R (2013) The effects of adaptation and mitigation on coastal flood impacts during the 21st century. An application of the DIVA and IMAGE models. Clim Chang 117:783–794

  17. Hinkel J, Lincke D, Vafeidis AT, Perrette M, Nicholls RJ, Tol RSJ, Marzeiong B, Fettweish X, Ionescuc C, Levermann A (2014) Coastal flood damage and adaptation costs under 21st century sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111(9):3292–3297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoozemans F, Marchand M, Pennekamp H (1993) A global vulnerability analysis: vulnerability assessment for population, coastal wetlands and rice production on a global scale

  19. Keller K, McInerney D, Bradford DF (2008) Carbon dioxide sequestration: how much and when? Clim Chang 88(3–4):267–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kopp RE, Horton R, Little C, Mitrovica JX, Oppenheimer M, Rasmussen DJ, Strauss BH, Tebald C (2014) Probabilistic 21st and 22nd century sea-level projections at a global network of tide-gauge sites. Earth’s Future 2:383–406

  21. Lempert R, Sriver R, Keller K, RAND (2012) Characterizing uncertain sea level rise projections to support investment decisions. Tech. rep., California Energy Commission

  22. McFadden L, Spencer T, Nicholls RJ (2007) Broad-scale modelling of coastal wetlands: what is required? Hydrobiologia 577:5–15

  23. Meinshausen M, Smith SJ, Calvin K, Daniel JS, Kainuma MLT, Lamarque JF, Matsumoto K, Montzka SA, Raper SCB, Riahi K et al (2011) The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Clim Chang 109(1–2):213–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nicholls RJ (2004) Coastal flooding and wetland loss in the 21st century: changes under the SRES climate and socio-economic scenarios. Glob Environ Chang 14:69–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nicholls RJ, Wong PP, Burket VR, Codignotto J, Hay JE, McLean RF, Ragoonaden S, Woodroffe CD (2007) Coastal systems and low-lying areas. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, pp 315–356

  26. Nicholls RJ, Tol RSJ, Vafeidis AT (2008) Global estimates of the impact of a collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet: an application of FUND. Clim Chang 91 (1–2):171–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schneider SH, Chen RS (1980) Physical factors and climatic impact. Annu Rev Energy

  28. Sugiyama M, Nicholls RJ, Vafeidis A (2008) Estimating the economic cost of sea-level rise

  29. Tebaldi C, Strauss B, Zervas C (2012) Modelling sea level rise impacts on storm surges along US coasts. Environ Res Lett 7:014032

  30. Titus JG, Park RA, Leatherman SP, Weggel JR, Greene MS, Mausel PW, Brown S, Gaunt C, Trehan M, Yohe G (1991) Greenhouse effect and sea level rise: the cost of holding back the sea. Coast Manag 19(2):171–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tol RSJ (1996) The damage costs of climate change towards a dynamic representation. Ecol Econ 19(1):67–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tol RSJ (2007) The double trade-off between adaptation and mitigation for sea level rise: an application of FUND. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 12:741–753

  33. Vafeidis A, Boot G, Cox J, Maatens R, McFadden L, Nicholls RJ, Spencer T, Tol RSJ (2006) The DIVA database documentation. DINAS-COAST Consortium

  34. Vafeidis AT, Nicholls RJ, McFadden L, Tol RS, Hinkel J, Spencer T, Grashoff PS, Boot G, Klein RJ (2008) A new global coastal database for impact and vulnerability analysis to sea-level rise. J Coast Res 917–924

  35. van Danzig D (1956) Economic decision problems for flood prevention. Econometrica 24(3):276–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wong PP, Losada I, Gattuso J, Hinkel J, Khattabi A, McInnes K, Saito Y, Sallenger A (2014) Coastal systems and low-lying areas. In: Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability, chap 5. Cambridge University Press, pp 361–409

  37. Yohe G (1990) The cost of not holding back the sea: toward a national sample of economic vulnerability. Coast Manag 18(4):403–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yohe G, Tol R (2002) Indicators for social and economic coping capacity—moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Chang 2002(12):25–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Yohe GW, Neumann JE, Ameden H (1995) Assessing the economic cost of greenhouse-induced sea level rise methods and application in support of a national survey. J Environ Econ Manag 29:S78–S97

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the US DOE, Integrated Assessment Research Program, Grant No. DE-SC005171. The work has benefited from many constructive discussions with my PhD adviser John Weyant, as well as feedback from Klaus Keller, Robert Mendelsohn, Steven Rose, Thomas Rutherford and participants of the SEEPAC and PERR seminars at Stanford University. I thank Robert Kopp and collaborators for making their sea level projections and model code available and for answering questions about implementation. Geoffrey Blanford, Klaus Keller, Claude Reichard, Richard Tol, John Weyant and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments on the manuscript. All errors and opinions are mine.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Delavane B. Diaz.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(PDF 8.74 MB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Diaz, D.B. Estimating global damages from sea level rise with the Coastal Impact and Adaptation Model (CIAM). Climatic Change 137, 143–156 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1675-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Adaptation Strategy
  • Flood Damage
  • Representative Concentration Pathway
  • Computable General Equilibrium
  • Vertical Land Movement