While SLR projections are valuable as a general indicator, how will these
projections translate, together with possible changes of storm activities,
into future coastal erosion rates? The goal of our team is enhancing managers'
ability to analyze and use climate relevant information in their decision making
through sustained science- decision makers interactions. Manager input has
been an important part of the CSCOR North Carolina Sea Level Rise program from
the beginning of planning. North Carolina managers were involved in:
- The first technical advisory committee (TAC) responsible for
planning the program location and the science-manager planning workshop
- The science-managers workshop held in February 2004 in Beaufort
had over 50 local scientists and managers determine the research and management
gaps in understanding shoreline change due to sea level rise. A White Paper
was the product of this Workshop, available on our website.
- In
our proposal review panel, that choose the funded proposals
- In
our second TAC which decided how to integrate the 3 funded proposals and
the NOAA physical model into one major model product.
- The
purpose of this workshop to help the NOAA and its research partners (East
Carolina University, University of North Carolina, University if South Carolina,
and Vanderbilt) communicate with managers. The products of the NOAA are being
designed with your input and for your ease. Product utility is our goal in
designing our final modeling and mapping products.
The fact that scientific
output doesn't easily or directly match the information needs that could inform
management decisions. Improving this linkage is the ultimate goal of this workshop.
Low Regrets
By making coastal and floodplain development more resistant to storms and
flooding, state and local governments must use conscious planning to increase
society's resilience in face of change. One choice for future planning is a
goal of “low regrets”. Low Regrets proponents encourage decision makers
to incorporate safety buffers in the course of regular infrastructure upgrading
and maintenance such as replacement of sewer pipes and long term development
planning and siting. For example, decision makers can account for more extreme
run off and higher sea levels in the case where present day weather extremes
cause damages and during recovery period. Opportunities may exist to rebuild
in a way that is informed by the possibility of climate change (Luers, 2006).
“Main-stream” climate risk
Sea level rise is slowly progressing, long term, common place and, by itself,
is rather unspectacular. Thus this largely invisible problem is hard to separate
from or perceived as merely aggravating other more apparent coastal processes
such as coastal erosion flooding, or salt water intrusion
Currently planning for episodic/short-term events, such as coastal storms,
is better than for long-term gradual processes. Long term change impacts are
often ignored and the impacts of and responses to slow-onset and slowly progressing
threats tend to be under-studied (Moser, 2005). However, since climate change
will exacerbate many existing resource management risks, even in the short
term, climate is likely to aggravate conditions.
There is a growing recognition in the scientific literature of the importance
of viewing climate change within the context of multiple interacting stressors.
Thus, state and local governments need to integrate or “mainstream” climate
risk into ongoing decision and management processes (IPCC, 2001b). By focusing
on manager's information needs, with the help of scientific input, state and
local governments should take climate and projections of a higher sea level
rise into account when making decisions for development, planning, and supporting
diverse economic activity in the coastal zone.
Societal responses to global change entail the largest uncertainty. All experts
agree that the greatest unknowns are embedded in the human dynamics leading
to vulnerabilities and various responses (mitigation and adaptation) (Moser,
2005).
Specify questions that need answering
Uncertainties can be viewed as obstacles and even those who want to start
planning— decision making and proactive planning for climate change would prefer
location specific and temporally more resolved and more reliable data. Scientists
must know the specific management information needed. Translation
is needed of projected SLR and changes in coastal ocean and wave climate into
shoreline retreat, beach erosion and bluff retreat to help determine set back
distances.
Denial is Shortsighted
Long term changes can result in adjustment to coastal landform that are not
anticipated by local users even though they may accept short term variation
as the norm (Penthick, 2001). Thus, as a general rule, no-hardening rules and
improved planning along estuarine shorelines have not been put in place or
strictly enforced in US to assure the viability of estuaries and the ability
of coastal wetlands to move landward as SL rises (Moser, 2005). Wetland losses
in Louisiana, Maryland and other places in the Gulf region and mid Atlantic
have been attributed in part to sea level rise (Burkett, 2000)
However, it is starting to be recognized by planners that severe loss of shore
front development and coastal habitats can only be avoided or postponed through
rules that recognize a changing shoreline— set back regulations if founded
on a moving baseline (periodically remapped) in combination with a retreat
policy can postpone the effects of SLR.
No action =
fewer choices for future generations
Although the presently we don't know the exact extent of SLR is still tentative,
and more research is needed into the mechanisms and impacts lf accelerated
sealevel is needed, it can be stated that many coastal areas run high risks
when no planning measures are taken in the short run. Climate change is making
the existing statistics on expected high water levels and storm events less
reliable and even if weather statistics remain unchanged the impact of storm
surges will increases due to slr.
If an area fails to consider the response options with a long lead time, it
will leave future generations with a more limited range of options to choose
from. Because some response options both technical and institutional take decades
to become fully effective (Vellinga and Klein, 1993).
Related Content
Related Links