Timing of deployment does not affect the biodiversity outcomes of ecological enhancement of coastal flood defences in northern Europe

Naylor, Larissa A.; Kosová, E; James, Kelly; Vovides, Alejandra G.; MacArthur, Mairi; Nicholson, Philip J.

doi:10.1016/j.nbsj.2023.100051

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the points of disagreement was that "greening the grey" approach does not contribute significantly to climate adaptation and only improves biodiversity at a small scale. Ecological enhancements (textured tiles or rock positioning) of hard coastal defences have been shown to support more diverse assemblages (e.g., Coombes et al, 2015;MacArthur et al, 2020;Kosová et al, 2023;Naylor et al, 2023). Yet, the patch-scale of enhanced marine artificial structures has been found not to have a universally positive effect on biodiversity (Strain et al, 2020).…”

Section: Opportunities and Limitations Of Coastal Nature-based Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK

Apine,

Stojanovic

2024

Camb. prisms Coast. futures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change-induced sea level rise has exacerbated coastal change putting millions of people at risk from coastal hazards, such as flooding and coastal erosion. Nature-based solutions have been recognised as an opportunity to simultaneously address the coastal hazard risks and achieve biodiversity goals. While such solutions are included in climate adaptation strategies, “hard” engineered solutions are still often preferred by those implementing the schemes. We sought to explore the diverse perspectives on UK coastal flood risk management among interested and/or affected groups by utilising the Q-methodology. We identified five perspectives: (1) The Pro-Green Practitioners; (2) The Future-Planning Relocators; (3) The Case-by-Case Thinkers; (4) The Cautious Practitioners and (5) The Climate Change Concerned. All five perspectives strongly valued the co-benefits of nature-based solutions and their role in coastal risk reduction. None of the perspectives prioritised hard-engineered solutions as the primary flood protection strategy in the UK, though they recognised their role in protecting essential infrastructure. The main disagreements between perspectives were (1) on the need for relocation strategies, and (2) whether nature-based solutions could cause social inequalities. The Q-methodology does not identify how prevalent such perspectives are, thus further research is needed to assess the social acceptance of nature-based solutions.

show abstract

Section: Opportunities and Limitations Of Coastal Nature-based Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK

Apine,

Stojanovic

2024

Camb. prisms Coast. futures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Timing of deployment does not affect the biodiversity outcomes of ecological enhancement of coastal flood defences in northern Europe

Cited by 1 publication

References 38 publications

Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK

Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About