Advancing disaster risk reduction through the integration of science, design, and policy into eco-engineering and several global resource frames

By the later part of the 21st Century, our planet will be faced with compelling climatic circumstances requiring tradeoffs to maintain viable environmental conditions and standards of living. The prognosis for people near coastlines and waterways is particularly dire without decisive actions that capitalize on shared strengths such as ecosystems. One clear opportunity is the regenerative services and co-benefits of natural infrastructure that reduce the impacts of environmental disasters as magnified by climatic change. Certainly, nature-based solutions are increasingly being viewed as critical actions to reduce societal risk. However, to advance the use of natural infrastructure through eco-engineering, there is a need to clarify the science regarding risk reduction effectiveness, develop agreeable principles, standards, and designs, and grow a demonstration site network responsive to circumstances faced by communities around the globe. In addition, there is a need to consider the legal, policy, and regulatory obstacles and opportunities for natural infrastructure within local to national contexts (i.e., science-based building codes, architectural design criteria, incentive policies, etc.). Ultimately, the integration of science, designs, and policy coupled with installation within several globally recognized resource frames (IWRM, ICZM, etc.) will help establish eco-engineering standards. Supportive coastal, river, and urban examples from around the world are used to illustrate the current state of knowledge, model this integration of science, design, and policy, serve as initial “benchmark site”, and finally help define guiding principles for the emerging field of eco-engineering

Nature-Based solutions in coastal and estuarine areas of Europe

ABSTRACT: Momentum for sustainable and climate resilience solutions for coastal protection are growing globally given the pressing need to prevent further loss of biodiversity and ecosystems while meeting the climate change adaptation and mitigation goals. Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) represent an opportunity to align environmental and resilience goals, at a time of strained budgets in a global context and when short-term needs may run counter to long-term goals. In Europe, NbS fit the mandates of major EU environmental and climate change policies by restoring biodiversity and enhancing climate-resilience and carbon sequestration. Previous studies have compiled scientific evidence about hydro-meteorological hazards for the use of NbS. However, their implementation at scale is still lacking. As the knowledge and experience with NbS for adaptation to natural hazards and climate change increases, it becomes more important to draw lessons learned and insights for replicating and scaling up NbS, especially in coastal areas where their implementation is still limited compared to other environments. This study analyzed NbS case studies across European coastal and estuarine areas to draw key lessons, understand better the current status of implementation, and identify key challenges and gaps. From a total of 59 NbS case studies associated with flooding, erosion and biodiversity loss, results show an increase in NbS implementation since 1990s, but most rapidly between 2005 and 2015. Most of the case studies are hybrid solutions employing wetlands, predominantly located in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Netherlands. Funding of NbS is largely from public sources, and rarely come from a single or a private source. Three-quarters of the case studies reported monitoring activities, but more than half did not disclose quantitative results related to effectiveness against flooding and/or erosion. The need to improve coastal defenses was indicated as the main motivation for NbS implementation over traditional structures, while sustainability was the most mentioned additional reason. Although a variety of co-benefits and lessons learned was identified, clearer descriptions and enhanced details of such information are required. There is a need for tools and strategies to expand knowledge sharing of lessons learned to enable further replication of successful cases in other areas.This research was carried out with the contribution of the LIFE Programme of the European Union to the Project ADAPTABLUES (ref. LIFE18 CCA/ES/001160

Quantifying the Coastal Hazard Risk Reduction Benefits of Coral Reef Restoration in the U.S. Virgin Islands

Coastal habitat restoration, especially of coral reef ecosystems, can significantly reduce the exposure of coastal communities to natural hazards and, consequently, the risk of wave-driven flooding. Likewise, reef degradation can increase coastal flood risks to people and property. In this study, the valuation of coral reefs in the United States Virgin Islands (USVI), along the coasts of St. Croix, St. John, and St. Thomas, demonstrated the social and economic benefits provided by these natural defenses. Across the territory, more than 481 people and 31.2 million of infrastructure were estimated to receive protection from coral reefs per year (2010 U.S. dollars). In 2017, Hurricanes Irma and Maria significantly damaged coral reefs throughout the archipelago. By combining engineering, ecological, geospatial, social, and economic data and tools, this study provided a rigorous valuation of where potential coral reef restoration projects could help rebuild these damaged habitats and decrease the risks from coastal hazards faced by USVI’s reef-fronted communities. Multiple restoration scenarios were considered in the analysis, two of which are detailed in this report. These include (1) ‘Ecological’ restoration, where restoration creates a structure that is 0.25 m high and 25-m-wide reef, and (2) ‘Hybrid’ restoration, where restoration creates a structure that is 1.25 m high and 5 m wide. There are many ways that such structures could be developed. In the hydrodynamic analyses, there are no assumptions about how the restoration is developed. Many practitioners of both coral (and oyster reef) restoration consider that a reef height of 0.25 m might be delivered from planting corals alone and that 1.25 m might require a combination of artificial structures and coral planting. In a third scenario, the analysis investigated the reduction of protection benefits that would occur through the reduction of 1 meter of naturally occurring reef height due to reef degradation. The reduction of protection due to the loss of reefs can also be interpreted as the protection value of the existing reefs. In all studied restoration scenarios, it was assumed that the planting of corals would enhance hydrodynamic roughness, effectively dissipating incident wave energy and reducing the potential for coastal flooding. A standardized approach was employed to strategically locate potential restoration projects along the entire linear extent of existing reefs bordering the USVI, and to identify where coral reef restoration could offer valuable benefits in flood reduction. Potential restoration projects were only located within the existing distribution of reefs across the region, even though numerous sites were positioned far offshore (2-3 km), and some were at relatively deep depths (up to 7 m). Risk-based valuation approaches were followed to delineate flood zones at a 10 m2 resolution along the entire region's reef-lined shorelines for all the potential coral reef restoration scenarios. These were subsequently compared to flood zones without coral reef restoration. The potential reduction in coastal flood risk provided by coral reef restoration, and the protection value of existing reefs, were quantified utilizing the latest information available at the time of analysis from the U.S. Census Bureau, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and Bureau of Economic Analysis for return-interval storm events. The change in Expected Annual Damages (EAD), a metric indicating the annual protection gained due to coral reef restoration, was calculated based on the damages associated with each storm probability. The findings suggest that the benefits of reef restoration are spatially variable within the USVI. In some areas, the analysis showed limited benefits from reef restoration, which may be attributed to the depth or offshore distances of proposed restoration sites. However, there were a number of key areas where reef restoration could have substantial benefits for flood risk reduction. The annual flood risk reduction attributed to potential ‘ecological’ coral reef restoration in the USVI was 99 people and 6.1 million (2010 U.S. dollars). The Benefit-to-Cost Ratio (BCR) for this restoration approach was found to be larger than 1 (i.e., cost-effective) along 11% of the St. Croix coastline, 4.9% of the St. John coastline, and 8.7% of the St. Thomas coastline. This analysis offers stakeholders and decision-makers a spatially explicit and rigorous evaluation that illustrates how, where, and when potential coral reef restoration efforts in St. Croix, St. John, and St. Thomas could be instrumental to reducing coastal storm-induced flooding. Understanding areas where reef management, recovery, and restoration could effectively reduce climate hazard-related risks is crucial to protect and enhance the resilience of coastal communities in USVI

Editorial: Nature-based solutions for natural hazards and climate change

No abstract available

The Risk Reduction Benefits of the Mesoamerican Reef in Mexico

Coastal development and climate change are dramatically increasing the risks of flooding, erosion, and extreme weather events. Coral reefs and other coastal ecosystems act as natural defenses against coastal hazards, but their degradation increases risk to people and property. Environmental degradation, however, has rarely been quantified as a driver of coastal risk. In Quintana Roo, Mexico, a region on the Mexican Caribbean coast with an annual tourism economy of 10 billion USD, coral reefs constitute a natural barrier against flooding from hurricanes. This study spatially quantifies the risk reduction benefits of the Mesoamerican Reef in Quintana Roo for people, buildings, and hotel infrastructure. The risk reduction benefits are substantial. For example, the reefs prevented 43% additional damage during Hurricane Dean in (2007) and provide nowadays hazard risk reduction for 4.3% of the people, 1.9% of the built capital, and 2.4% of the hotel infrastructure, per year. The annual benefits are estimated in 4,600 people, 42 million USD damage prevention for buildings, and 20.8 million USD for hotel infrastructure. The study also compares the risk reduction of coral reefs with (i) the protection offered by dunes and (ii) the increase in coastal risk from sealevel rise (SLR). The risk reduction of dunes is more critical where there are no coral reefs offshore and for small return-periods storms. Sea-level rise, however, will make the more frequent storms more impactful and will drive significant increases in annual expected damages across the region. However, we demonstrate that, in coral reef environments, the contribution of reef degradation to coastal risk is larger than the expected increase in risk from SLR. However, the spatial distribution of the risk reduction benefits from reefs differs for people and infrastructure, and in particular for hotels, which receive the most protection from reefs. Furthermore, many sections present larger benefits than the typical costs of restoration. This valuation makes a compelling case for protecting and maintaining this natural infrastructure for its risk reduction service, but also allows the development of piloting innovative strategies, such as risk finance and insurance strategies, that can align environmental and risk management goals

Comparative Coastal Risk Index (CCRI): A multidisciplinary risk index for Latin America and the Caribbean

As the world's population grows to a projected 11.2 billion by 2100, the number of people living in low-lying areas exposed to coastal hazards is projected to increase. Critical infrastructure and valuable assets continue to be placed in vulnerable areas, and in recent years, millions of people have been displaced by natural hazards. Impacts from coastal hazards depend on the number of people, value of assets, and presence of critical resources in harm's way. Risks related to natural hazards are determined by a complex interaction between physical hazards, the vulnerability of a society or social-ecological system and its exposure to such hazards. Moreover, these risks are amplified by challenging socioeconomic dynamics, including poorly planned urban development, income inequality, and poverty. This study employs a combination of machine learning clustering techniques (Self Organizing Maps and K-Means) and a spatial index, to assess coastal risks in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) on a comparative scale. The proposed method meets multiple objectives, including the identification of hotspots and key drivers of coastal risk, and the ability to process large-volume multidimensional and multivariate datasets, effectively reducing sixteen variables related to coastal hazards, geographic exposure, and socioeconomic vulnerability, into a single index. Our results demonstrate that in LAC, more than 500,000 people live in areas where coastal hazards, exposure (of people, assets and ecosystems) and poverty converge, creating the ideal conditions for a perfect storm. Hotspot locations of coastal risk, identified by the proposed Comparative Coastal Risk Index (CCRI), contain more than 300,00 people and include: El Oro, Ecuador; Sinaloa, Mexico; Usulutan, El Salvador; and Chiapas, Mexico. Our results provide important insights into potential adaptation alternatives that could reduce the impacts of future hazards. Effective adaptation options must not only focus on developing coastal defenses, but also on improving practices and policies related to urban development, agricultural land use, and conservation, as well as ameliorating socioeconomic conditions

Effects of climate change on exposure to coastal flooding in Latin America and the Caribbean

This study considers and compares several of the most important factors contributing to coastal flooding in Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) while accounting for the variations of these factors with location and time. The study assesses the populations, the land areas and the built capital exposed at present and at the middle and end of the 21st century for a set of scenarios that include both climatic and non-climatic drivers. Climatic drivers include global mean sea level, natural modes of climate variability such as El Niño, natural subsidence, and extreme sea levels resulting from the combination of projected local sea-level rise, storm surges and wave setup. Population is the only human-related driver accounted for in the future. Without adaptation, more than 4 million inhabitants will be exposed to flooding from relative sea-level rise by the end of the century, assuming the 8.5 W m−2 trajectory of the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), or RCP8.5. However, the contributions from El Niño events substantially raise the threat in several Pacific-coast countries of the region and sooner than previously anticipated. At the tropical Pacific coastlines, the exposure by the mid-century for an event similar to El Niño 1998 would be comparable to that of the RCP4.5 relative sea-level rise by the end of the century. Furthermore, more than 7.5 million inhabitants, 42,600 km2 and built capital valued at 334 billion USD are currently situated at elevations below the 100-year extreme sea level. With sea levels rising and the population increasing, it is estimated that more than 9 million inhabitants will be exposed by the end of the century for either of the RCPs considered. The spatial distribution of exposure and the comparison of scenarios and timeframes can serve as a guide in future adaptation and risk reduction policies in the region

Fishers who rely on mangroves: Modelling and mapping the global intensity of mangrove-associated fisheries

Mangroves are critical nursery habitats for fish and invertebrates, providing livelihoods for many coastal communities. Despite their importance, there is currently no estimate of the number of fishers engaged in mangrove associated fisheries, nor on the fishing intensity associated with mangroves at a global scale. We address these gaps by developing a global model of mangrove associated fisher numbers and mangrove fishing intensity. To develop the model, we undertook a three-round Delphi process with mangrove fisheries experts to identify the key drivers of mangrove fishing intensity. We then developed a conceptual model of intensity of mangrove fishing using those factors identified both as being important and for which appropriate global data could be found or developed. These factors were non-urban population, distance to market, distance to mangroves and other fishing grounds, and storm events. By projecting this conceptual model using geospatial datasets, we were able to estimate the number and distribution of mangrove associated fishers and the intensity of fishing in mangroves. We estimate there are 4.1 million mangrove associated fishers globally, with the highest number of mangrove fishers found in Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Brazil. Mangrove fishing intensity was greatest throughout Asia, and to a lesser extent West and Central Africa, and Central and South America

Fishers who rely on mangroves: Modelling and mapping the global intensity of mangrove-associated fisheries

Mangroves are critical nursery habitats for fish and invertebrates, providing livelihoods for many coastal communities. Despite their importance, there is currently no estimate of the number of fishers engaged in mangrove associated fisheries, nor on the fishing intensity associated with mangroves at a global scale. We address these gaps by developing a global model of mangrove associated fisher numbers and mangrove fishing intensity. To develop the model, we undertook a three-round Delphi process with mangrove fisheries experts to identify the key drivers of mangrove fishing intensity. We then developed a conceptual model of intensity of mangrove fishing using those factors identified both as being important and for which appropriate global data could be found or developed. These factors were non-urban population, distance to market, distance to mangroves and other fishing grounds, and storm events. By projecting this conceptual model using geospatial datasets, we were able to estimate the number and distribution of mangrove associated fishers and the intensity of fishing in mangroves. We estimate there are 4.1 million mangrove associated fishers globally, with the highest number of mangrove fishers found in Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Brazil. Mangrove fishing intensity was greatest throughout Asia, and to a lesser extent West and Central Africa, and Central and South America

Editorial: Adaptation to Coastal Climate Change and Sea-Level Rise

Climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every inhabited region across the globe [...