Explaining communities' adaptation strategies for coastal flood risk: Vulnerability and institutional factors

Abstract

Increasing coastal flood risk has prompted a proliferation of cities that are adopting risk reduction and adaptation tools. This article inquires into what types of tools local governments tend to adopt for managing coastal flood risk and the factors that may be influencing these choices; in particular, factors related to hazard vulnerability and institutional capacity. Focusing on 40 diverse coastal communities in a study region in Canada, the study utilised data from the communities' Official Community Plans to characterise their approaches to managing coastal flood risk in terms of land use regulations, construction specifications, and/or structural flood protection tools. The data revealed considerable diversity in the portfolio of tools that the communities have adopted. Tool adoption was found to correlate strongly with hazard vulnerability; that is, communities with similar physical and socioeconomic vulnerability conditions tended to take similar adaptation actions. For example, established communities with highly urbanised coastlines tended to rely on structural flood protection while suburban communities with semi-developed coastlines predominantly utilised land use regulations. Institutional factors such as resource availability and local leadership, which were operationalised using survey data, exhibited surprisingly little correlation with the types of tools that communities adopted.

The Interaction of Resilience Concepts and Flood Adaptation Strategies in Vancouver, British Columbia

“…Categorization of survey responses detailing why we should try to increase our resilience rather than reduce our vulnerability………………………………...…………………58 Around the world, flood risk has become an urgent issue facing governments and coastal residents. Flood losses are set to increase as rising sea levels and climate change-enhanced storms intersect with the global trend of coastal population growth (Chang et al, 2020). In the Canadian context, Vancouver is among the cities at highest risk of future flooding.…”

“…A combination of pressures faced by municipal government in this context are the likely culprit. Flood risk researchers have established that risk reduction efforts inevitably compete with other priorities of local government including housing, economic growth, as well as amenity access which can result in a great deal of interdepartmental conflict and resource allocation challenges(Chang et al, 2020). Based on the lack of consideration of reasonable adaptation alternatives (retreat and avoid approaches), the trajectory of flood policy suggests other priorities have effectively downplayed flood concerns in key areas of Vancouver.…”

Urban Flooding in Vancouver, Canada

“…Vancouver is vulnerable to three forms of flooding: coastal, pluvial, and fluvial. Chang et al (2020) argue that each of these floods has a different impact in terms of the damage it causes, how it occurs, its causes, how it is forecasted, and the type of protection needed to curb it. A fluvial, also known as a riverine flood, is a type of flooding that occurs when water levels in a stream, lake, or river rise and overflow onto the neighboring land, shores, and surrounding banks (Macdonald et al, 2012).…”

Experimental Design of Nature-Based-Solution Considering the Interactions between Submerged Vegetation and Pile Group on the Structure of the River Flow on Sand Beds

“…During floods, bridge damage and their consequent destruction can cause financial losses and disrupt aid to flooded areas due to the wreckage of transportation roads [1,2]. The registered social consequences generated after such extreme events can be irreparable if control measures were not previously and efficiently installed [3,4]. Moreover, sediment transport has other environmental disadvantages, such as pollution mobilization, with a negative impact on aquatic life or agriculture fields [5,6].…”