Maladaptation and moving from coastal hazards: A global comparison of retreat and relocation strategies

Abstract

Because climate change is advancing quickly, existing institutions are pressed to change their aims and to take up adaptation efforts. This study analyzes the strategies institutions are using to retreat and relocate people and activities from coastal hazards. A basic principle in adaptation and sustainability is to avoid displacing harms over time and space. This is difficult for an institution built to sustain intensive uses of the coast or to work within the borders of a municipality or state. We collected coastal projects around the world and analyzed how their moving strategies were structured to manage conditions over time and space. Two problems with institutions stood out. First, sponsoring institutions provided funding or organizing support for some sites, but many of their largest projects were emergency retreats done only after people suffered disasters. Second, most institutions sponsored retreat-only projects that left individuals, households, and small enterprises to handle relocation on their own. The lack of support for moving across space also applies to people who organized their own retreats and relocations. In sorting moving strategies by type, we found three strategic purposes: to avoid harming the site after retreat, to avoid harming people who retreat, or to avoid harming the relocation sites (including harms to people already living or working there, harms to people who relocate there, and harms to a site’s environment). Moving strategies were structured to meet one or two of these strategic purposes, but none attempted all three. Moving may seem the safest approach for adapting to coastal hazards. But organizers should acknowledge whether a moving project will manage adaptation over time and across space and name the tasks they won’t manage.