Comparing Sea Level Rise Adaptation Strategies in San Diego: An Application of the NOAA Economic Framework

Coastal communities in San Diego County face ever-increasing risks from sea level rise, coastal storm events, flooding, and beach erosion. The potential hazards to this vital, vibrant 70-mile stretch of California coastline compel city planners and decision-makers to develop coastal resilience initiatives by conducting vulnerability assessments and considering potential adaptation strategies. Nexus Planning & Research was tasked with providing a comparative benefit-cost analysis of coastal resilience strategies for participating cities in San Diego County, following the framework outlined in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) funded study, What Will Adaptation Cost? An Economic Framework for Coastal Community Infrastructure (NOAA, 2013). Specifically, we were directed to comparatively assess the trade-offs (spending vs. benefits) of various coastal resilience strategies, as identified by participating jurisdictions. Ultimately, the City of Carlsbad and the City of Del Mar were the two jurisdictions that participated in this study. We evaluated the potential damage or loss to at-risk properties from sea level rise, and the cost of protecting, adapting, or abandoning those properties. The intent of this study is to compare the cost and benefits of sea level rise action scenarios, using benefit-cost ratios. This report is part of a larger, multifaceted project led by the San Diego Regional Climate Collaborative, a partnership of local and regional agencies and groups. The project, Connecting the Dots and Building Coastal Resilience in the San Diego Region, was funded through the NOAA Coastal Resilience Grants Program, a federally funded opportunity for coastal communities to prepare for changing sea levels and extreme storm events.https://digital.sandiego.edu/npi-sdclimate/1010/thumbnail.jp

Engaging stakeholders in research to address water-energy-food (WEF) nexus challenges

The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus has become a popular, and potentially powerful, frame through which to analyse interactions and interdependencies between these three systems. Though the case for transdisciplinary research in this space has been made, the extent of stakeholder engagement in research remains limited with stakeholders most commonly incorporated in research as end-users. Yet, stakeholders interact with nexus issues in a variety of ways, consequently there is much that collaboration might offer to develop nexus research and enhance its application. This paper outlines four aspects of nexus research and considers the value and potential challenges for transdisciplinary research in each. We focus on assessing and visualising nexus systems; understanding governance and capacity building; the importance of scale; and the implications of future change. The paper then proceeds to describe a novel mixed-method study that deeply integrates stakeholder knowledge with insights from multiple disciplines. We argue that mixed-method research designs—in this case orientated around a number of cases studies—are best suited to understanding and addressing real-world nexus challenges, with their inevitable complex, non-linear system characteristics. Moreover, integrating multiple forms of knowledge in the manner described in this paper enables research to assess the potential for, and processes of, scaling-up innovations in the nexus space, to contribute insights to policy and decision making

Defining Original Presentism

It is surprisingly hard to define presentism. Traditional definitions of the view, in terms of tensed existence statements, have turned out not to to be capable of convincingly distinguishing presentism from eternalism. Picking up on a recent proposal by Tallant, I suggest that we need to locate the break between eternalism and presentism on a much more fundamental level. The problem is that presentists have tried to express their view within a framework that is inherently eternalist. I call that framework the Fregean nexus, as it is defined by Frege’s atemporal understanding of predication. In particular, I show that the tense-logical understanding of tense which is treated as common ground in the debate rests on this very same Fregean nexus, and is thus inadequate for a proper definition of presentism. I contrast the Fregean nexus with what I call the original temporal nexus, which is based on an alternative, inherently temporal form of predication. Finally, I propose to define presentism in terms of the original temporal nexus, yielding original presentism. According to original presentism, temporal propositions are distinguished from atemporal ones not by aspects of their content, as they are on views based on the Fregean nexus, but by their form—in particular, by their form of predication

'Quadratic Nexus' and the Process of Democratization and State-Building in Albania and Kosovo:A Comparison

<jats:p>This paper examines the interplay between internal and external actors in the process of democratization and state-building in Albania and Kosovo. It does so by using David J. Smith's “quadratic nexus” that links Brubaker's “triadic nexus” – nationalizing states, national minorities and external national homelands – to the institutions of an ascendant and expansive “Euro-Atlantic space”. The main argument of this paper is twofold. First, it argues the nexus remains a useful framework in the study of state-and nation-building provided that it moves beyond the “civic vs. ethnic” dichotomy. Today, many states with a mixture of civic and multi-ethnic elements involve this relational nexus. Second, while comparing Albania and Kosovo, this paper argues that all the four elements of the nexus have a different impact on the process of state- and nation-building and their relationship is more conflictual in Kosovo than in Albania.</jats:p

Navy Nexus

Shortly after the article that follows was drafted, I was notified that I had been nominated for promotion to vice admiral and assignment as Superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy. This unexpected set of orders will cause me to depart the Naval War College after only one year as its President. Still, and although much remains to be done to keep the college at the top of its game, the organizational and administrative changes its faculty and staff have accomplished over the past twelve months have refined its educational and research programs in significant ways. The article (which collects and elaborates on material that, in some cases, has already appeared in print, including the “President’s Forums” of the Spring and Summer 2014 issues of the Review) serves as evidence of what dedicated professionals can do when motivated by an unrelenting commitment to excellence. If it’s important to the Navy, it is on the agenda at the Naval War College! This is a bold statement, but it is one that can be rather quickly substantiated by even a casual review of what is happening on the busiest educational and research complex in the Navy—the Newport, Rhode Island, campus of the U.S. Naval War College (NWC). Since 1884, the Naval War College has existed as a place to study conflict and to produce leaders who are critical thinkers. As it celebrates its 130th anniversary, the college continues to refine its educational and research programs to meet the demands of the Navy and the national security community. While some of our more traditional offerings, such as our highly regarded Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) programs, are fairly well-known, other programs and initiatives are regaining their intended direct linkage to and support to the fleet. The primary purpose of this article is to highlight the ways in which the Naval War College is helping to prepare and shape the Navy of Tomorrow and how it is significantly supporting the Navy of Today without forgetting the lessons of history