Planning for long-term coastal change: Experiences from England and Wales

Shoreline management plans in England and Wales: A scientific and transparent process?

“…This study has provided the first structured quantitative analysis of the scientific underpinning and transparency associated with key policies dictating the future of the coastline in England and Wales, building on more qualitative reviews and critiques such as those by Nicholls et al (2013) [38] and Pontee and Parsons (2012) [51]. Based on a selection of first and second generation SMPs, the study has queried the visibility, clarity and transparency of the evidence base rather than questioning the validity of the preferred policy options themselves.…”

“…Whilst the weak scientific underpinning of the SMP1 plans has been relatively well documented (see, for example: [37]; [38]), and indeed was a key reason for the revision of the plans, as noted above, the limited improvement for the SMP2s was somewhat surprising. This was particularly disappointing given Government efforts to improve the knowledge base through various wide-ranging national projects including FutureCoast [39] and the Foresight Future Flooding Assessment [40] in the intervening period between SMP1 completion and SMP2 preparation [38]. Indeed, Nicolls et al (2013) [38] suggested that this broader swathe of coastal science should provide an adequate framework for coastal decision-making well into the 21 st century.…”

“…This was particularly disappointing given Government efforts to improve the knowledge base through various wide-ranging national projects including FutureCoast [39] and the Foresight Future Flooding Assessment [40] in the intervening period between SMP1 completion and SMP2 preparation [38]. Indeed, Nicolls et al (2013) [38] suggested that this broader swathe of coastal science should provide an adequate framework for coastal decision-making well into the 21 st century. However, the systematic evaluation applied here suggests poorly evidenced data input for some SMP2s including poor referencing and limited acknowledgement of key scientific uncertainties for most policy options at the SD level.…”

“…Cooper et al (2002) [42] noted the elu ta e to o e f o the status uo Hold the Li e to othe poli optio s i "MP s. Whilst the need to maintain protection for extensive coastal conurbations and associated assets could partly explain this, Nicholls et al (2013) [38] have suggested that this trend also arose as a consequence of the engineering-focus of the consultancies (with implied vested interests in the HTL option). Although there were changes in policy in SMP2, the continued dominance of the status uo fo a st et hes of coast is noticeable -thus keepi g the de elop e t-defe d le fo e e i otio .…”

Socio-economic Impacts—Coastal Protection

“…The former is predominantly a planning issue, seeking to reconcile the demands of development with the requirement for adequate protection of the natural environment. In contrast, shoreline management focuses on one aspect of CZM, namely coastal hazards, and concerns efforts to manage flood and erosion risk at the shoreline (Nicholls et al 2013). …”