Advertisement

Evaluating Broadscale Morphological Change in the Coastal Zone Using a Logic-Based Behavioural Systems Approach

  • Susan Hanson
  • Jon French
  • Tom Spencer
  • Iain Brown
  • Robert J. Nicholls
  • William J. Sutherland
  • Peter Balson
Part of the Advances in Global Change Research book series (AGLO, volume 49)

Abstract

Climate change will have pervasive effects on the world’s coasts, but at broad scales these changes have typically proven difficult to analyse in a quantifiable manner. Consequently, individual management decisions are often taken without consideration of the wider, regional coastal system with its physical linkages between geomorphological elements.

In this chapter, this concern is addressed using an outcome-driven deductive methodology. This provides a qualitative analysis based on geomorphological principles and expert knowledge. A coastal classification, based on generic coastal elements, is used to define the active coastal system with and without coastal management. Potential outcomes (futures) for these elements are then described based on the current understanding of geomorphological processes which are then linked with external drivers using a Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework. The uncertainty in future geomorphological change is then described using likelihoods for these possible responses based on individual or consensus expert judgement captured within a simple, transparent matrix.

The methodology provides a whole system level of analysis. It allows different views on system dynamics to be articulated and captured in terms of broadscale patterns of potential geomorphological futures. It is also beneficial as a precursor to more quantitative models as it provides a framework for interaction between actors with interests in the coastal zone, promoting a more strategic shared understanding of the coastal system. This simplification of the coastal system to key responses and their relationship to external drivers also has advantages for communication with non-experts, promoting confidence in the decision-making process. The methodology is demonstrated in an analysis of part of the English coastal sediment cell 3 which covers the coastline of Norfolk and Suffolk, on the east coast of the UK.

In terms of the Tyndall Coastal Simulator, this study was used to characterise the broad behaviours of the coastal geomorphic system in the region around our main focus in North Norfolk. The method allows the main geomorphic processes and interactions, which need to be considered quantitatively, to be identified. This stage of assessment, which has often been omitted, is an important step for future studies. The methods used here also link strongly to the wetland and habitat analysis described in Chap.  6.

Keywords

System-based behavioural approach Outcome-driven modelling Likelihood matrix Regional coastal classification Coastal evolution Coastal management policy 

References

  1. Atkins, J. P., Burdon, D., Elliott, M., & Gregory, A. J. (2011). Management of the marine environment: Integrating ecosystem services and societal benefits with the DPSIR framework in a systems approach. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 62(2), 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bird, E. C. F. (2000). Coastal geomorphology: An introduction. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  3. Borja, A. (2006). The European Water Framework Directive and the DPSIR, a methodological approach to assess the risk of failing to achieve good ecological status. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 66(1–2), 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouma, J. A., Kuik, O., & Dekker, A. G. (2011). Assessing the value of Earth Observation for managing coral reefs: An example from the Great Barrier Reef. Science of the Total Environment, 409(21), 4497–4503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brooks, S. M., & Spencer, T. (2010). Temporal and spatial variations in recession rates and sediment release from soft rock cliffs, Suffolk coast, UK. Geomorphology, 124(1–2), 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, I. (2006). Modelling future landscape change on coastal floodplains using a rule-based GIS. Environmental Modelling and Software, 21(10), 1479–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruun, P., & Gerritsen, F. (1960). Stability of tidal inlets. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  8. Burgess, K., Jay, H., Hosking, A., & Pinto, F. T. (2004). Futurecoast: Predicting the future coastal evolution of England and Wales. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 10(1), 65–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chau, K. (2006). A review on the integration of artificial intelligence into coastal modeling. Journal of Environmental Management, 80(1), 47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooper, N. J., Hooke, J. M., & Bray, M. J. (2001). Predicting coastal evolution using a sediment budget approach: A case study from southern England. Ocean and Coastal Management, 44(11–12), 711–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cowell, P., Stive, M. J. F., Niedoroda, A. W., De Vriend, H. J., Swift, D. J. P., Kaminsky, G. M., et al. (2003). The coastal-tract (part 1): A conceptual approach to aggregated modelling of low order coastal change. Journal of Coastal Research, 19(4), 812–827.Google Scholar
  12. DEFRA. (2006). Shoreline management plan guidance. London: Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).Google Scholar
  13. Deng, Y., Sadiq, R., Jiang, W., & Tesfamariam, S. (2011). Risk analysis in a linguistic environment: A fuzzy evidential reasoning-based approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(12), 15438–15446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. EEA. (2007). The DPSIR framework used by the EEA. Retrieved January 5, 2011, March 2012, from http://root-devel.ew.eea.europa.eu/ia2dec/knowledge_base/Frameworks/doc101182
  15. EstSim Consortium. (2007). Development and demonstration of systems-based estuary simulators (EstSim). London: Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Environment Agency (EA).Google Scholar
  16. European Commission. (1992). Habitats directive. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  17. Finkl, C. W. (2004). Coastal classification: Systematic approaches to consider in the development of a comprehensive scheme. Journal of Coastal Research, 20(1), 166–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freckleton, R. P., Sutherland, W. J., Watkinson, A. R., & Queenborough, S. A. (2011). Density-structured models for plant population dynamics. American Naturalist, 177(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenlaw, M. E., Roff, J. C., Redden, A. M., & Allard, K. A. (2011). Coastal zone planning: A geophysical classification of inlets to define ecological representation. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 21(5), 448–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson, S., Nicholls, R. J., Balson, P., Brown, I., French, J. F., Spencer, T., et al. (2007). Capturing coastal morphological change within regional integrated assessment: An outcome-driven fuzzy logic approach (Working Paper, 113). Norwich: Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.Google Scholar
  21. Hanson, S., Nicholls, R. J., Balson, P., Brown, I., French, J. R., Spencer, T., et al. (2010). Capturing coastal geomorphological change within regional integrated assessment: An outcome-driven fuzzy logic approach. Journal of Coastal Research, 26(5), 831–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hartley, L., & Pontee, N. (2008). Assessing breaching risk in coastal gravel barriers. Proceedings of the ICE - Maritime Engineering, 161(4), 143–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Helming, K., Diehl, K., Bach, H., Dilly, O., Koenig, B., Kuhlman, T., et al. (2011). Ex ante impact assessment of policies affecting land use, Part A: Analytical framework. Ecology and Society, 16(1), 27.Google Scholar
  24. HR Wallingford. (2002). Sediment transport report. Report EX4526 (Report no. EX 4526). Wallingford: HR Wallingford.Google Scholar
  25. HR Wallingford, ABPMer, & Pethick, J. (2006). Review and formalisation of geomorphological concepts and approaches for estuaries. London: Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Environment Agency (EA).Google Scholar
  26. Karageorgis, A. P., Kapsimalis, V., Kontogianni, A., Skourtos, M., Turner, K. R., & Salomons, W. (2006). Impact of 100-year human interventions on the deltaic coastal zone of the Inner Thermaikos Gulf (Greece): A DPSIR framework analysis. Environmental Management, 38(2), 304–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. King, C. A. M. (1972). Beaches and coasts. Gordonsville: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. McRobie, A., Spencer, T., & Gerritsen, H. (2005). The big flood: North Sea storm surge. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 363(1831), 1263–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mikhailova, M. (2008). Hydrological and morphological features of river mouths of different types (the Columbia estuary and the Fraser delta as examples). Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, 46(4), 4–1111.Google Scholar
  30. Motyka, J. M., & Brampton, A. H. (1993). Coastal management: Mapping of littoral cells (Report no. SR328). Wallingford: HR Wallingford.Google Scholar
  31. Muir Wood, R., & Bateman, W. (2005). Uncertainties and constraints on breaching and their implications for flood loss estimation. Philosophical Transactions. Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, 363(1831), 1423–1430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nguyen, H. T. (1997). Fuzzy sets and probability. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 90(2), 129–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Oliver, I. (2002). An expert panel-based approach to the assessment of vegetation condition within the context of biodiversity conservation: Stage 1: The identification of condition indicators. Ecological Indicators, 2(3), 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Omann, I., Stocker, A., & Jaeger, J. (2009). Climate change as a threat to biodiversity: An application of the DPSIR approach. Ecological Economics, 69(1), 24–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Orford, J. D., Carter, R. W. G., McKenna, J., & Jennings, S. C. (1995). The relationship between the rate of mesoscale sea-level rise and the rate of retreat of swash-aligned gravel-dominated barriers. Marine Geology, 124(1–4), 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pethick, J. (1984). An introduction to coastal geomorphology. Baltimore: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  37. Pontee, N. I. (2005). Management implications of coastal change in Suffolk. Proceedings of the ICE - Maritime Engineering, 158(MA2), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spencer, T., & Brooks, S. M. (2012). Methodologies for measuring and modelling change in coastal saline lagoons under historic and accelerated sea-level rise, Suffolk coast, eastern England. Hydrobiologia, 693(1), 99–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Steers, J. A. (1946). The coastline of England and Wales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Sutherland, W. J. (2006). Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: A review of the methods. Journal of Applied Ecology, 43(4), 599–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Taylor, C. M., & Hasting, A. (2004). Finding optimal control strategies for invasive species: A density-structured model for Spartina alterniflora. Journal of Applied Ecology, 41(6), 1049–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Whitehouse, R., Balson, P., Beech, N., Brampton, A., Blott, S., Burningham, H., et al. (2009). Characterisation and prediction of large-scale, long-term change of coastal geomorphological behaviours. Bristol: Environment Agency.Google Scholar
  43. Woodroffe, C. D. (2002). Coasts. Form process and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan Hanson
    • 1
  • Jon French
    • 2
  • Tom Spencer
    • 3
  • Iain Brown
    • 4
  • Robert J. Nicholls
    • 5
  • William J. Sutherland
    • 6
  • Peter Balson
    • 7
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and the EnvironmentUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Coastal and Estuarine Research Unit, Department of GeographyUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Cambridge Coastal Research Unit, Department of GeographyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  4. 4.The James Hutton InstituteAberdeenUK
  5. 5.Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Faculty of Engineering and the EnvironmentUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  6. 6.Conservation Science Group, Department of ZoologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  7. 7.Formerly of British Geological SurveyKingsley Dunham CentreNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations