Protection of existing coastal zones has become an enormous issue in the United States and around the world. At least half of the world's population resides and works within shorelines or coastal zones around the world, and climate change and rising sea levels are now threatening to disrupt and erode these areas more frequently and severely (Fabbri, pg.51). The encroachment of urban development and the alteration of natural processes in coastal zones forecast severe problems including loss of land, water pollution, damaged ecosystems, severe property damage, and various health risks. Despite the recognition of these serious disruptions and risks, there is no determined consensus on how to best preserve the coastlines and limit the social, environmental and economic costs.
Figures released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change state that sea levels have risen between 10 and 20 centimeters in the past century, and they predict that levels are currently rising by approximately 2cm per year (OutThereNews, pg.1). Due to the fact that there has always been the ebb and flow of the oceans, coastlines by nature are ephemeral, as they shift and redeposit the shoreline slowly but continuously. However, because of the enormous social, cultural, and economic value of the existing coastal conditions, there is a tremendous effort to preserve shoreline just as it is. As the Journal of Coastal Research points out, "development along the shore places the desires of man in direct opposition to the natural trends of nature (to erode, transport, and deposit coastal lands)" (Pope, pg.704).
There are two basic natural forces causing the erosion of beaches and coastline. One is sea level rise, which pushes the reaches of the ocean water further up the slope of the shore causing gravity to pull the sand back into the water. The second is storms, which are the major catalyst for erosion shoreline depletion. Storms, depending duration and intensity, can knock back protective barrier reefs and can wash enormous amounts of loose sand from existing beaches. However, the real cause of these coastal problems is more a result of human activity than other factor. As Daniel points out, "the problem lies in the fact that as humans locate houses, highways, and seawalls along a beach, shoreline retreat is blocked. The beach then backs up against these objects, having nowhere else to retreat" (Daniel, pg.88). This is where the economic and social value of these human structures is pitted against the natural retreat of the shoreline. According to Daniel the issue becomes "whether society should save the beaches or the buildings" (Daniel, pg.88).
Another conflict that surfaces here regards the financial burden of preserving beachfront property. Our coastal zones are most always a public good, and are sometimes a private good to the particular landowner as well. Who should pay for the preservation of the coastline? Certainly if the beaches are predominantly privately owned, than the general public should not be burdened by paying for preservation of someone else's property.
Several of the initial problems concerning beach erosion are further compounded by other human activities. Development and deforestation has exacerbated the problems as grasses and trees along the coasts hold the soil and sand in place during storms, limiting the retreat of the beaches. As Osha Gray Davidson points out in The Enchanted Braid, common sea grasses such as Thalassia can limit damage to the beach as "the sea grass blades act as speed bumps for currents and waves, slowing them down and trapping sediments" (Davidson, pg.66). Attempts to preserve these sea grasses and coastal forests often run into opposition from developers and loggers. While it is difficult to assess the environmental value of the presence of sea grasses and coastal trees, Davidson cites a case in Bacuit Bay at the northern tip of Palawan where banning logging outright actually caused a two-fold increase. The total cost avoidance of logging damages combined with heightened revenues from fishing and tourism industries caused this favorable solution (Davidson, pg.174).
Karen Fabbri has studied different methodologies for effective coastal zone management, and published her findings in the journal of Ocean and Coastal Management in 1998. Fabbri takes a broad approach to identify all of the problems associated with the over-development of coastal areas and the subsequent erosion. She cites the greatest negative impacts as "improper industrial and human waste management, accelerated erosion and deposition, eutrophication, destruction of marine life and overall decrease of biodiversity" (Fabbri, pg.51). In assessing these negative impacts, Fabbri employs an ecosystem approach that considers the various linkages between the impacts and the various conflicting actions that cause them. Fabbri identifies the difficulty in developing quantitative data for actions and impacts that are largely qualitative by nature. Fabbri utilizes an approach that seeks to adequately weigh these qualitative values and formulate a model in which "socioeconomic, biotic and geomorphologic indicators are used to describe the state of the environmental quality of the coastal zone. They are subsequently used to summarize the negative impacts which may prevail and/or are likely to occur as a result of development activity" (Fabbri, pg.59).
Heather Daniel grappled with some of the same methodological issues in her study. Daniel illustrates the three basic approaches for protecting against coastline erosion and shoreline property damage: hard stabilization, soft stabilization, and relocation of threatened structures. Hard stabilization commonly involves the construction of "seawalls, bulkheads, revetments, sandbags, and gabions" (Daniel, pg.90). Generally these structures are designed to absorb some or all of the impact of waves crashing along the shoreline. This is done either at the edge of the actual beach or further out in the water to break up the incoming waves before they reach the shore. Hard stabilization methods have been moderately successful, but often come with a considerable downside including their large financial expense, adverse effects on neighboring beaches, and degraded beach aesthetics (Daniel, pg.91).
Soft stabilization techniques generally consist of depositing sand from elsewhere to supplement an eroding beach. This process adds to the size of the physical beach and provides a greater buffer for shoreline structures. Usually the sand is gathered from other offshore deposits or inland sand source. This process does halt the erosion temporarily, and improves recreation without all of the obtrusive environmental effects of hard stabilization. However, it has proven to be quite inefficient and again causes adverse effects to adjacent beaches, such as increased wave potency. Over 100 beaches on the United States eastern coastline have employed this strategy, but the statistical success in unimpressive. On these beaches, 26% saw their imported sand disappear after just one year, and in only 12% of the cases did the replenished beaches last for more than five years. The average span of effectiveness for the soft stabilized, replenished beaches was only two to three years (Daniel, pg.92).
The other viable option is relocation of threatened structures. Obviously this is rarely popular with private homeowners and businesses because of the expense. However this option poses minimal environmental damage and is usually a one-time expense if the relocation is done properly. Abandonment of threatened coastline structures is another option that may be cheaper for the private landowner, but becomes a considerable public cost. All three of these methodologies usually exist as a combination of private and public investment, but there is considerable controversy as to whether the public should assist in relocation of private interests that may have been ill-conceived to begin with considering their proximity to the ocean. Hard stabilization, soft stabilization, and relocation are all methods that are currently being employed, but it remains unclear which of these methods, or which combination, is the best management practice for coastal erosion situations. Perhaps measures to preserve the natural remedies for beach erosion, such as the protective shoreline vegetation and coastal forests described by Davidson, should be factored more prominently into these methodologies.
Despite of the potential management alternatives, the basic conflict between the natural fluctuation of the seas and particular human interests remains. Heather Daniel illustrates this conflict stating that "the dynamic nature of the coastline, the tremendous value of properties along the coast, and the economic value of the coastal tourism industry combine to create a natural resources management problem that is particularly difficult to address." (Daniel, pg.87-88). A greater understanding and respect of the natural fluctuations of the beaches and coastlines may likely yield more proactive solutions than the inefficient methods that currently attempt to alter these natural processes.
Next Article
Previous Article
Return to Topic Menu
It is 8:28:22 PM on Sunday, November 22, 2009. Last Update: Wednesday, October 30, 2002