Advertisement

Coastal Erosion and Protection Policies in Europe: From EU Programme (Eurosion and Interreg Projects) to Local Management

  • Giovanni Randazzo
  • Jordi Serra Raventos
  • Lanza Stefania
Chapter
Part of the Coastal Research Library book series (COASTALRL, volume 1000)

Abstract

The European Union, a political entity established in 1952, has undergone continuous expansion of its borders. However, aggregating territories has very different implications from the geographical, the political, or the ethical standpoint. Of the current 27 Member States, 22 open directly onto five different seas. Thus, over the last few decades, there has been an increasing trend of people living along coastal areas. This has caused significant changes to the coastal environment, placing increasing demands on coastal resources and increasing exposure to coastal hazards, such erosion and flooding, these together being considered as among the most serious problems.

Currently, the total coastal area lost in Europe due to marine erosion is estimated to be about 15 km2 per year and the International Commission on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations has estimated that the related cost will average 5.4 billion Euros annually in the period between 1990 and 2020. In this light, the European Commission’s DG Environment with the programme EUROSION sought to analyse the problem as a whole, to identify the causes related to different geographic areas and to outline possible solutions. With the subsequent cross-border programmes (INTERREG and ENPI), the European Union has undertaken the general dissemination of information acquired locally, focusing attention on and expanding knowledge of different situations, including those of social perspectives. EUROSION has tried to transform the conceptual positions related to the problem of coastal erosion, examining the actual effects of the different seas, defining the main causes of erosion, distinguishing between natural and human causes, and referring them to a temporal-spatial scale.

For each coastal system, more than one policy option was specified, but the ramifications have not always been completely clear. In some case studies, coastal-defence policies at a national level have not yet been adopted, leaving management of erosion problems often to local and/or regional authorities (e.g. many Islands and autonomous regions use a regional approach). Generally, however, a dual approach is taken: a proactive approach refers to a policy of anticipating erosion processes whereas a reactive approach refers to the implementing of coastal-defence measures in order to reduce the effects of existing erosion processes.

Within the various geographical areas, levels of attention and response to the problem have differed sharply due to conceptual and cultural differences coupled with variable socioeconomic circumstances. Generally, countries seek to “hold the line” and to avoid realignment; however, in some local circumstances realignment has been possible and in these cases has been supported by adequate rational policy frameworks. Cross-border programs have revealed that implementation at national level has varied and has been discontinuous due both to the local legislative context, but also to a poor ability to transpose the European guidelines.

It can be shown that, even in relation to countering the problems of coastal erosion, at a strategic European level, a truly common policy that clearly states the line to follow is lacking. Consequently, the development of knowledge tools that could solve the problem and provide consistency of approach between countries is difficult to guide and finance. There is a need to adopt a true Coastal Zone Management Plan approach and to provide for costs and benefits at local and regional levels. Beyond the contents of a simple intervention, it is therefore important to aim at an overall development that takes into account the realistic potential and the different potential of various geographical and socio-economic contexts.

Keywords

Sandy Beach Coastal Erosion Integrate Coastal Zone Management Coastal Defence Beach Nourishment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bartlett D, Smith J (2005) GIS for coastal zone management. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernatchez C, Fraser P (2011) Evolution of coastal defence structures and consequences for beach width trends, Québec, Canada. J Coast Res. doi: 10.2112/jcoastres-d-10-00189.1
  3. Chaaban F, Darwishe H, Battiau-Queney Y, Louche B, Masson E, El Khattabi J, Carlier E (2012) Using ArcGISH modelbuilder and aerial photographs to measure coastline retreat and advance: North of France. J Coast Res. doi: 10.2112/jcoastres-d-11-00054.1
  4. Charlier RH, Chaineux MCP, Morcos S (2005) Panorama of the history of coastal protection. J Coast Res 21(1):79–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cipriani LE, Pranzini E (2009) Minimising Conflicts among Stakeholders within a Littoral Cell. In E. Ozhan (Editor) MEDCOAST: 525–536, 10-14 November 2009, Sochi, RussiaGoogle Scholar
  6. Dachev V (2000) Implications of accelerated sea-level rise (ASLR) for Bulgaria. In: Proceedings of the SURVAS expert workshop on European vulnerability and adaptation to impacts of accelerated Sea-Level Rise (ASLR), Hamburg, Germany, pp 25–28Google Scholar
  7. Dailidiene I, Davuliene L, Kelpsaite L, Razinkovas A (2012) Analysis of the climate change in Lithuanian coastal areas of the Baltic Sea. J Coast Res 28(3):557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Er-Raioui H, Bouzid S, Marhraoui M, Saliot A (2009) Hydrocarbon pollution of the Mediterranean coastline of Morocco. Ocean Coast Manage 52:124–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EUROSION (2004) Living with coastal erosion in Europe; sediment and space for sustainability. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  10. EUROSTAT (2009) Nearly half of the population of EU countries with a sea border is located in coastal regions. Agriculture and fisheries – statistics in focus 47/2009. Author: Unit E1, Farms, Agro-environment and rural development. European Communities 2009Google Scholar
  11. GIEC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Gorur N, Tuysuz ZO, Aykol A, Sakinc M, Yigitbac E, Akkok R (1993) Cretaceous red pelagic carbonates of northern Turkey: their place in the opening history of the Black Sea. Eclogae Geologicae Helvetica 86:819–838Google Scholar
  13. Heo J, Kim JH, Kim JW (2009) A new methodology for measuring coastline recession using buffering and non-linear least squares estimation. Int J Geogr Inform Sci 23(9):1165–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Summary for policymakers. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Jeftic L, Milliman JD, Sestini G (1992) Climate change and the Mediterranean. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Keskin S, Pedoja K, Bektas O (2011) Coastal uplift along the Eastern Black Sea coast: new marine terrace data from Eastern Pontides, Trabzon (Turkey). J Coast Res 27(6A):63–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klein RJT, Nicholls RJ, Ragoonaden S, Capobianco M, Aston J, Buckley EN (2001) Technological options for adaptation to climate change in coastal zones. J Coast Res 17(3):531–543Google Scholar
  18. Kliewe H, Janke W (1982) Der holoza¨ne Wasserspiegelanstieg der Ostsee im nordo¨stlichen Ku¨ stengebiet der DDR. Petermann Geogra Mitt 2:65–74Google Scholar
  19. Lanza S, Randazzo G (2012) Tourist-beach protection in north-eastern Sicily (Italy). Journal of Coastal Conservation. Springer Science+Business Media. DOI 10.1007/s11852-012-0217-0Google Scholar
  20. Lemke W (1998) Sedimentation und paläogeographische Entwicklung im westlichen Ostseeraum (Mecklenburger Bucht bis Arkonabecken) vom Ende der Weichselvereisung bis zur Litorina transgression. Mar Sci Rep 31:1–156Google Scholar
  21. MESSINA (2006) Managing European Shorelines and Sharing Information on Nearshore Areas. Four Volumes: (1) Practical Guide Monitoring and Modelling the Shoreline, (2) Practical Guide Valuing the Shoreline, (3) Practical Guide Engineering the shoreline. Introducing environmentally friendly engineering techniques throughout the World, (4) Practical Guide Integrating the Shoreline into spatial policies. DG Environment, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  22. Meyer M, Harff J (2005) Modelling Palaeo coastline changes of the Baltic Sea. J Coast Res 21(3):598–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Montoya F, Galofré J (1997) El Ebro en el Delta. Revista de Obras Publicas 3368:33–46Google Scholar
  24. Nicholls RJ (2007) Adaptation options for coastal areas and infrastructure: an analysis for 2030. Rep Unite Conv Clim Change 14:1–33Google Scholar
  25. Nicholls RJ, Hoozemanbs FMJ (1996) The Mediterranean: vulnerability to coastal implications of climate change. Ocean Coast Mange 31(2–3):105–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Panin N (1999) Global changes, sea level rising and the Danube Delta: risks and responses. GeoEcoMarina 4:19–30Google Scholar
  27. Panin N (2009) Contributions to the study of the sediment sink processes within the Danube – Black Sea system. GeoEcoMarina 15:29–35Google Scholar
  28. Panin N, Popescu I (2007) The northwestern Black Sea: climatic and sea-level changes in the late Quaternary. In: Yanko-Hombach Y, Gilbert AS, Panin N, Dolukhanov P (eds) The Black Sea flood question: changes in coastline, climate, and human settlement. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 387–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pashova L, Jovev I (2007) Geoid modeling for the Black Sea and future prospects. In: Guedes Soares C, Kolev P (eds) Maritime industry, ocean engineering and coastal resources. Taylor & Francis Group, London, pp 761–768Google Scholar
  30. Paskoff R (1998) Les littoraux. Impact des aménagements sur leur évolution, 3rd edn. Armand Colin, ParisGoogle Scholar
  31. Plan Bleu (2006) A sustainable future for the Mediterranean: the blue plan’s environment and development outlook – executive summary. Plan Bleu, Regional Activity Centre. Reports related to Coastal AreasGoogle Scholar
  32. Randazzo G, Stanley DJ, Di Geronimo SI Amore C (1998) Human-Induced Sedimentological Changes in Manzala Lagoon, Nile Delta, Egypt. Environmental Geology 36(3-4):235–258Google Scholar
  33. Randazzo G, Lanza S (2011) Improvements to a Coastal Management Plan in Sicily (Italy): new approaches to borrow sediment management. J Coast Res Spec (64):1357–1361Google Scholar
  34. Roebeling PC, Coelho CD, Reis EM (2011) Coastal erosion and coastal defense interventions: a cost-benefit analysis. J Coast Res SI 64:1415–1419Google Scholar
  35. Rovira A. Batalla R, Sala M (2003) Sediment budget of the Mediterranean Lower Tordera River (NE Iberian Peninsula). In IAHS Pub 278:341–345Google Scholar
  36. Richards JA, Nicholls RJ (2009) Impacts of climate change in coastal systems in Europe. PESETA-Coastal Systems study. JRC European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  37. Serra Raventos J (1997) El sistema sedimentario del Delta del Ebro. Revista de Obras Públicas 3368:15–22Google Scholar
  38. Serra Raventos J (2004) Stiges, EUROSION Case Study. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  39. Small C, Nicholls RJ (2003) A global analysis of human settlement in coastal zones. J Coast Res 19(3):584–599Google Scholar
  40. Spadini G, Robinson A, Cloetingh S (1996) Western versus Eastern Black Sea tectonic evolution: pre-rift lithospheric controls on basin formation. Tectonophys Dyn Ext Basins Invers Tecton 266(1–4):139–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stanchev H (2009) Studying coastline length through GIS techniques approach: a case of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. CR Acad Bulg Sci 62(4):507–514Google Scholar
  42. Stanchev H, Palazov A, Stancheva M, Aposto Lov A (2011a) Determination of the Black Sea area and coastline length using GIS methods and Landsat 7 satellite images. Geo-EcoMarina 17:27–31Google Scholar
  43. Stanchev H, Palazov A, Stancheva M (2011b) 3D GIS model for flood risk assessment of Varna Bay due to extreme sea level rise. J Coast Res SI56:1597–1601Google Scholar
  44. Stancheva M (2005) Technogenous impact on the Bulgarian Black Sea coast – State and problems. Proc Inst Oceanol 5:215–229Google Scholar
  45. Stancheva M, Marinski J (2007) Coastal defense activities along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast – Methods for protection or degradation? Coastal structures 2007. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference, Venice, Italy, pp 480–489Google Scholar
  46. Stokkom H, Stokman G, Hovenier J (1993) Quantitative use of passive optical remote sensing over coastal and inland water bodies. Int J Remote Sens 14:541–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Warrick RA, Le Provost C, Meier MF, Oerlemans J, Woodworth PL (1996) Changes in sea level. In: Houghton JT, Meira Filho LG, Callander BA, Harris N, Kattenburg A, Maskell K (eds) Climate change 1995, the science of climatic change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 359–405Google Scholar
  48. Zhang WY, Harff J, Schneider R, Wu CY (2011) A multi-scale centennial morphodynamic model for the southern Baltic coast. J Coast Res 27(5):890–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Randazzo
    • 1
  • Jordi Serra Raventos
    • 2
  • Lanza Stefania
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze della TerraUniversità degli Studi di MessinaMessinaItaly
  2. 2.Department d’Estratigrafia, Paleontologia i Geociències MarinesUniversitat de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations