What meaning do individuals give to coastal risks? Contribution of the social representation theory

Lemée, Colin; Guillard, Mary; Fleury‐Bahi, Ghozlane; Krien, Nathalie; Chadenas, Céline; Chauveau, Étienne; Desse, Michel; Coquet, Marie; Lamarre, Mélisande; Navarro, Óscar

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103629

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this kind of area characterised by highly dynamic settlements [64], our study illustrates that coastal erosion leads thus to a rearrangement of relative social vulnerability in the risk zone, as in Densu Delta in Ghana [27]. Image analyses showed that one enclosed parcel originally destined for one villa hosts a dozen makeshift houses a few years later (see Fig.…”

Section: (Im-)mobility Of People In the Risk Zonementioning

confidence: 64%

Perceptions of and responses to coastal erosion risks: The case of Cotonou in Benin

Longueville

Hountondji

Assogba

et al. 2020

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensive erosion has affected the coastal zone of Cotonou for several decades. An analysis of satellite images showed an average coastline retreat of 115 m in the study area over the period 2002-2013 with several hundred houses destroyed. Since 2014, a stabilisation of the coastline is observed. This study aimed at identifying the atrisk population and at analysing the perceptions of people who experience and those who manage coastal erosion risk, as well as the responses adopted. Based on four criteria and their hierarchy, we identified five profiles of inhabitants in this risk zone. (1) Wealthy people who leave the zone when they are affected or (2) fall into the category of people in danger in case they cannot migrate. (3) Fishermen who deliberately stay near the sea. (4) The most precarious people, trapped in the risk zone. Finally, (5) poor newcomers who continually increase the at-risk population. With the recent stabilisation of the coastline, the national authorities manage the "hazard" component of the risk. However, the majority of the population is not serene. The anthropogenic stress linked to evictions gradually replaced the stress to be engulfed by the sea. We conclude that the "vulnerability" component of the risk is not yet resolved. All categories of the population in this sensitive area need to be secured. Cooperation among multiple levels of governance, the application of land use planning regulations and of the Kampala Convention and the involvement of local communities are all measures which will enable to meet this objective.

show abstract

Section: (Im-)mobility Of People In the Risk Zonementioning

confidence: 64%

Perceptions of and responses to coastal erosion risks: The case of Cotonou in Benin

Longueville

Hountondji

Assogba

et al. 2020

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The biggest mismatches between respondents' experiences and estimated risks were due to 1) respondents reporting no erosion where erosion was estimated, 2) respondents reporting no storm damage but the model estimated storm risk, and 3) respondents reporting flooding where there was minimal flood risk estimated. The perception of a risk by non-experts often differs from the perception and knowledge of the experts in the field (Lemeé et al, 2019). Differences in perception are not surprising given that perceptions depend on a person's history, surroundings, values, beliefs, preferences, and knowledge (Bennett, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Property owner shoreline modification decisions vary based on their perceptions of shoreline change and interests in ecological benefits

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even under current sea level conditions, many communities are working to protect their coastlines against flooding and shoreline erosion. Coastal communities often protect their shorelines against excessive erosion by using armoring techniques (e.g., bulkheads, riprap). Yet hardened structures reduce many of the natural adaptive mechanisms present in coastal ecosystems and reduce the sustainability of the coastal system. In contrast, natural and nature-based features (e.g., living shorelines) can better protect coastal properties from storm damage and reduce erosion while also having the potential to adapt to new conditions. Since property owners are installing armoring structures more often than living shorelines, we sought to understand the factors motivating their shoreline modification decision. We surveyed property owners in Virginia, U.S. that applied for a shoreline modification permit. Most property owners, regardless of modification sought, perceive riprap revetment to be effective, able to withstand storm damage, and able to adapt to sea level rise. Interestingly, property owners that sought out living shorelines were not highly confident in living shorelines’ protection benefits. While most property owners perceived the ecological benefits of living shorelines, these benefits did not substantially impact the decision over what type of shoreline modification to implement. Our work highlights pathways that can improve coastal resilience given the important role that shoreline property owner decisions contribute to coastal community resiliency. Our results indicate there is a need to better engage property owners about the protection and adaptation benefits of living shorelines as their perceptions were not aligned with scientific assessments of living shorelines. Concurrently, coastal policies could be strengthened to support more natural approaches to shoreline management, as the more common armoring techniques are not resilient to sea level rise or storm damage.

show abstract

“…Para la zona de estudio, que corresponde a dos áreas protegidas bajo la misma categoría, el análisis se realizó a través de Clasificaciones Jerárquicas Descendentes. Este análisis es de uso frecuente sobre materiales lingüísticos, consignados en respuestas a preguntas abiertas de cuestionarios o entrevistas a profundidad en investigación social especialmente en representaciones sociales (De Alba, 2004), en procesos de investigación socioambiental, como empoderamiento de comunidades en proyectos relacionados con cambio climático en América Latina (Benites-Lazaro L L & Mello-Théry, 2019), riesgos ambientales (Lemée et al, 2019), turismo (Pasquotto Mariani, De Oliveira Arruda, Barbosa de Oliveira da Silva, De Souza Moreira, & Romero de Souza, 2019) y aplicación de políticas agroambientales (Corso, Kephaliacos, & Plumecocq, 2015).…”

Section: Conflictos En La Zona De Estudiounclassified

The biodiversity of food and agriculture (Agrobiodiversity) in the anthropocene: Research advances and conceptual framework

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What meaning do individuals give to coastal risks? Contribution of the social representation theory

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

Perceptions of and responses to coastal erosion risks: The case of Cotonou in Benin

Perceptions of and responses to coastal erosion risks: The case of Cotonou in Benin

Property owner shoreline modification decisions vary based on their perceptions of shoreline change and interests in ecological benefits

The biodiversity of food and agriculture (Agrobiodiversity) in the anthropocene: Research advances and conceptual framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About