Realignment in low-lying coastal areas: UK experiences

Abstract

The present paper reviews the context of realignment in the UK from both a coastal process and policy context, and explains the approaches that can be adopted to implement realignment. A number of case studies are then presented covering both estuarine managed realignment schemes involving the removal of flood embankments; and natural barriers beaches where realignment is likely. The paper demonstrates that while realignment leads to more natural coasts, such approaches are not without their disadvantages. The breaching of coastal defences, be they natural or man-made, has environmental, social and economic implications. Although policies involving realignment might be the most sustainable solutions in theory, this does not mean that they will be immediately embraced by the public, when they have come to expect continued flood protection. It is suggested that the promulgation of policies involving realignment requires a number of elements including increasing public awareness of coastal change, floodproofing properties, providing temporary defence measures, restricting the development of new properties and considering governmental compensation for affected home owners.

Cross-sectoral interactions of adaptation and mitigation measures

“…NB this is based on evidence found from the review and a fuller version of the 6 Industrial users 6 Freshwater wetlands 6 Habitats Inland surface waters 6 Mires, bogs and fens 6 Grasslands and tall forb habitats 6 Heathland, scrub and tundra 6 Woodland and forest 6 Sparsely/unvegetated areas Reptiles / Amphibians 6 1 each of these subjects was searched against each adaptation in the column to the right. 2 each of these adaptation terms was searched against the additional term Climate change adaptation 3 each of these mitigation terms was searched against each of the additional mitigation terms 4 each of these subjects was searched against each adaptation and mitigation term 5 each of these adaptation terms was searched against the additional adaptation terms 6 each of these subjects was searched again each of the mitigation and additional mitigation terms 49,50,51 Loss of agricultural land 42,50 Increase carbon sequestration 42,43,52 ; increase in CH 4 and N 2 O emissions Managed realignment…”

“…Long-term improvement in water quality 56 ; short-term may be negative, 53,57 Increased habitat 39,58 ; benefits most species 59 Increase/decrease urban protection 60,61 Loss of agricultural land 50,62,63 Increase carbon sequestration 42 ; increase in CH 4 and N 2 O emissions 53,55 Managed retreat Possible short-term reduction in water quality followed by overall improvement 64 Habitat gains 47 /loss 58,65 ; benefits most species Increase/decrease urban protection 60,61 Loss of agricultural land 62,63 Increase carbon sequestration 42 ; increase in CH 4 [66][67][68] ; fish nursery ground 69 ; increase in algae, but can prevent species settling on structure 67 ; coastal squeeze 70 …”

Managed retreat of settlements and infrastructures: ecological restoration as an opportunity to overcome maladaptive coastal development in France

“…It is also based on experimental findings from other countries, thanks to exchanges with the U.K. Environment Agency (Pontee ; Creed et al ; Rocle & Salles ). The law will introduce “zones of authorization for resilient and temporary activities,” a new type of land lease designed for vulnerable coastal strips.…”

Impact of Management Regime and Regime Change on Gravel Barrier Response to a Major Storm Surge

“…Furthermore, and partly as a result of the high cost associated with interventionist management, there is a growing preference within coastal risk management for less interventionist management regimes, incorporating natural processes [35][36][37][38]. The proposed benefits include an inherent ability to self-repair and recover from external disturbances such as storm damage [39], an ability to provide a multiplicity of benefits [40], and sustainability under uncertain future environmental conditions [41,42].…”