Global sea level is predicted to rise by up to a metre over the next hundred years as a result of climate change. Sea level rise threatens to flood low lying land, accelerate coastal erosion, and encourage saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers.
In the UK sea level rise from vertical land movements already affects the southern and eastern coasts. This will be made worse by the additional sea level rise from climate change. The most vulnerable areas include coastal lowlands especially around the Wash, the Norfolk and Suffolk coasts, areas around Teeside, the South West and coastal Lancashire.
Rising sea level threatens residential property, coastal industries and economies, tourism and wildlife habitats. Most commercial and residential property will be protected by a variety of sea defence measures. However, some of our most valuable coastal habitats and natural features may be progressively lost or drowned, caught between coastal defences and rising sea levels.
Saltmarsh and mudflats - habitats which are vital for coastal protection - are most at risk. They are also home to some of the UK's most important and spectacular wildlife, particularly the thousands of migrating birds such as knot and avocet, which travel hundreds of miles to over-winter in our estuaries. At least 62 Sites of Special Scientific Interest, located in low lying coastal areas of England and Wales, are threatened by sea level rise. Among these are some of the largest wildlife areas in the UK.
Unless urgent action is taken to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases, we will face a substantial bill to shore up our coastal defences. In tandem with slowing down climate change, we must create a new approach to planning in the coastal zone. In particular, there should be no new development in coastal areas at risk from flooding or erosion.
Shoreline management plans are being developed to provide a more sustainable approach to coastal defence. In general they advocate continued protection. However, where it would be too costly to defend land it is possible that the level of protection may be reduced and a more natural approach to coastal defence will be encouraged. While this will benefit adjoining coastal areas and wildlife, some people stand to lose property. Compensation should be available to property owners who stand to lose out from decisions being made in the interest of coastal management as a whole.
Opportunities to replace habitat at risk must be urgently pursued, both to compensate for lost wildlife area, and to provide natural and cost-effective defences to the rising tide.
The coastal zone of the UK is under severe and increasing pressure from rapid urbanisation, pollution, tourism, and port development. Now a new threat in the form of sea level rise from climate change is imminent.
An increase in greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere is predicted to cause climate change and rising global temperatures. This in turn will affect sea level as glaciers and ice-sheets melt and the oceans expand under the new warmer conditions.
Rising seas threaten to inundate low lying land, intensify coastal erosion and encourage saltwater intrusion into coastal and fresh water aquifers. Globally, a rise in sea level of up to one metre over the next hundred years could severely damage human settlements and health, agriculture, freshwater supply, fisheries, and coastal ecosystems.
Some of the poorest nations in the world are threatened the most by climate change. A rise in global sea level of just one metre is thought to threaten the homes of one billion people and a third of the world's crop growing areas, endanger the food supply of 200 million people and could create 50 million environmental refugees[1].
But sea level rise also threatens the UK's coastline. It is widely considered to be one of the most significant of the impacts associated with climate change to threaten this country.
In 1995 the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - the official scientific body assigned to investigate climate change and comprising over 2000 of the world's leading climate and social scientists - delivered a decisive verdict on climate change: that “the balance of evidence suggests a discernable human influence on global climate”[2].
The IPCC predictions suggest that global temperature may increase from 1°C to 3.5°C by 2100. Models project an increase in sea level of between 13cm and 95cm between 1995 and 2100. However, regionally and locally, sea level changes may differ from this global average owing to landmass movements and differing oceanic conditions.
Indeed global sea level is already rising. Over the last 100 years it has risen by between 10 cm and 25 cm. According to the IPCC this is likely to be a reflection of the rise in global temperature that has taken place over the same time period. Even if greenhouse gas emissions are stabilised immediately this rise will continue because there is a lag time between emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and a response from the oceans.
Given that a degree of climate change and sea level rise may now be inevitable, Friends of the Earth has called on the Government to adopt a tough target for reduction of carbon dioxide emissions of 20% by 2005, to alleviate even more serious risks in the future.
In 1996 the Department of the Environment published the most comprehensive assessment to date of the potential impacts on the UK of sea level rise from climate change in a report from its Climate Change Impacts Review group (CCIRG)[3].
Although uncertainty shrouds sea level rise predictions - sea level has varied considerably in the past - the CCIRG scenario represents the current 'best' estimate.
At a regional scale, when calculations are made for vertical land movements, sea level may rise by 50 cm by the 2050s in East Anglia and 25 cm in the north of Scotland. This regional variation is a result of vertical land movements following the last ice age [4].The retreat of ice from the North West, and the resulting removal of ice weight, has caused the land to tilt downwards south of a line running approximately from Teesmouth to Anglesey. These gradual land movements continue to this day.
Map 1. Map of low lying land.
Reproduced with permission from DoE, 1996 [ref 3] . Low land represented by shaded areas
But even more important than the actual rise in sea level is the possible increase in frequency or severity of storm surges, which combined with sea level rise could result in devastating floods.
No one knows how much stormier conditions could get but the 1996 CCIRG scenario predicts an increase in frequency of gales in the UK of up to 30% by the 2050s.
Those areas which appear particularly vulnerable include coastal lowlands around the Wash, the Norfolk and Suffolk coasts, areas in Teeside, the South West and coastal Lancashire (see map 1).
Sea level rise threatens important environmental and economic assets in the coastal zone. Coastal settlements, along with their associated economic activities, are at risk as well as natural habitats, such as wetlands and mudflats.
In the UK over 26 million people live in major urban areas in the coastal zone, 31% of the coast of England and Wales is developed and 40% of UK manufacturing industry is situated on or near the coast[5]. Some 57% of our most productive agricultural land lies below the 5 metre contour line[6] .
Protecting these human assets will be costly, particularly if the effects of climate change are sudden rather than gradual. For example, the coastal land along the central south coast of England has been valued at £5745 million[7]. Nevertheless, where the value of commercial or residential property exceeds the cost of coastal defences, such areas will be protected.
Significant financial implications are associated with an increased likelihood of flooding if sea walls are over-topped or breached. For example, damages associated with the 1990 breaching of the sea wall in Towyn, North Wales totalled £35 million, affected some 1200 properties and caused the evacuation of 3,500 residents.
Recreation and tourism is predicted to become one of the world's largest economic sectors[8] and the coast is one of the most popular destinations for visitors, giving it substantial recreational value. For example, the Norfolk Broads are estimated to be worth between £5 million and 15.5 million per year in recreational and amenity terms [9].
Yet many of the coastal resources which meet such recreational and tourism needs are already under significant pressure from pollution, industrial and residential development, ports and shipping. Sea level rise will exacerbate existing risks[10] and intensify the tension between safeguarding natural resources and economic development.
In coastal East Anglia flooding is an issue never far from people's minds. In 1953 a devastating flood shocked the nation and, in particular, the east coast, where it resulted in over 300 deaths, the evacuation of over twenty thousand people and widespread damage to industry, agricultural land and infrastructure[11]. Floods continue to be a regular event although damage has never been on the same scale because of the defences put in place after the '53 flood. Nevertheless it continues to be described as “Britain's most vulnerable stretch of coastline”[12].
Rising sea levels, from both climate change and vertical land movements, threaten to intensify such flooding. Clearly, numerous settlements exist which must continue to be defended. But sensible planning would dictate that in the future there should be no new house building in low lying land at risk of flooding. Indeed Planning Policy Guidance on the coast notes that “few developments require a coastal location...[and] that there is no reason to expect such areas to accommodate new housing, commercial or industrial development that could well be located inland[13]”.
Yet new houses continue to be built on such land in north east Norfolk. These houses are at risk from flooding if defences are breached. The construction of new properties may require upgrading of existing defences or protection of stretches of coastline formerly unprotected, which costs thousands of pounds. And house owners may be unable to insure their properties because the flood risk is too high.
On the south and east coasts erosion already threatens property, farmland and habitats. Sea level rise from climate change threatens to increase this erosion. On the Norfolk coast at Hemsby, for example, people have had to abandon coastal bungalows swept away by the sea. At Overstrand coastal roads crumbled into the sea as cliffs cut inland and in Happisburgh houses are now perched precariously on soft eroding cliff tops.
However, coastal erosion is not new to the East Anglian coast. Little remains of the medieval settlement of Dunwich in Suffolk, once East Anglia's most important commercial centre and port. Over the past 400 years the coast here has been eroding at an average rate of one metre per year. A Roman shore fort which is thought to have been located here would now be at least one mile out at sea[14].
This erosion over the centuries is a result of natural processes and sea level rise from land movements. However, in recent years the rate of erosion appears to have increased at some points along the coast. The causes are poorly understood but in addition to natural processes and sea level rise, the affects of hard coastal defences are thought to play an important role. Ironically, our attempts to defend against sea level rise may actually add to coastal erosion.
Coastal Defences
Coasts are mobile, dynamic systems which may be eroding, accreting
or stable. But the UK has opted to stabilise much of its coastline with
defences[15] to ensure that people and property are protected
from flooding and coastal erosion. Some 33% of the coastline of England
and Wales is protected by artificial defences and most of these occur
on the East Anglian coastline. Sea defences in England and Wales protect
some 700,000 hectares of agricultural, industrial and residential land
below the 5 metre contour[16].
The vital importance of defending coastal towns and large tracts of valuable agricultural land is recognised. As sea level rises we will have to strengthen and raise some defences. However, fossilising the coast with hard defences, such as concrete sea walls and rock armour, threatens beaches and intertidal habitat and can result in a shift in the problem further round the coast. For example, along the Lincolnshire coast the rate of retreat is as much as 8 metres per year, particularly down-drift of hard defences [17] .
The construction of a small section of defence can have disastrous effects further along the coast. In addition, construction of a sea wall, while protecting the land behind it, may accelerate the erosion of the beach in front of it. This is due to increased wave reflection which ultimately results in the wall being subjected to increased wave attack. As defences are strengthened on one stretch of coast, it may be necessary to strengthen those further round the coast because hard defences interfere with sediment flow. For example, defences south of Folkestone have starved beaches downdrift of sediment, resulting in demand for further defences and beach nourishment[18]. In response Shepway District Council has launched a strategy to protect the Hythe coast which is likely to cost £25 million [19].
While it is now widely recognised that protection at one point may just transfer the problem further round the coast, the Environment Agency (EA) has recently spent £18.5 million on a controversial scheme to build off-shore reefs at Sea Palling in Norfolk to slow erosion and to counter concerns that the Broads will be flooded. The final cost is likely to be around £54 million with 75% met through government funding. Three workers have died during construction and the reefs now represent a danger to tourists because they can be reached at low tide. Furthermore there are real concerns that these defences will merely serve to increase erosion further down the coast [20].
On the densely populated coasts of Kent, Sussex and Hampshire most existing defences will have to be maintained and possibly raised with higher sea levels, and new defences may need to be built, at significant cost. For example, the EA plans to spend £40 million at Pevensey on a sea defence scheme to protect 2000 properties, the A259/A27 roads, a mainline railway, internationally important wetlands in two nature reserves and commercial and recreational areas [21].
Sea defences do not only disrupt natural processes but the materials from which they are made frequently carry wider environmental consequences. In 1996 Eastbourne Borough Council rebuilt its existing oak groynes with new ones made from Greenheart, a tropical hardwood, from Guyana. The perceived need for strengthening sea defences was based on concerns about climate change, sea level rise and a possible increased frequency in storms[22]. The irony of this situation is inescapable. Whilst the Borough Council attempted to address the global environmental problem of climate change it potentially added to it by encouraging tropical deforestation.
Off-shore dredging for marine aggregate
Coastal erosion may also be exacerbated by offshore dredging. In 1995 more than 26 million tonnes of sand and gravel were dredged from offshore Britain with more than 10 million tonnes dredged off the East Anglian coast[23]. Both the roads programme and the construction industry are heavily dependent on supplies of marine aggregates. For every kilometre of motorway, for example, 100,000 tonnes of aggregate are needed [24]. Sourcing aggregate from marine deposits is increasingly seen as a means to partially meet such demand.
The full impact of offshore dredging is unknown but it is implicated in starving the coast of the sediment needed for beach building. Yet in addition to providing building aggregate it is being used to rebuild eroding beaches. Sand has been taken off the Norfolk coast to replace losses at Skegness and Mablethorpe. But this may just encourage erosion further down the East Anglian coast requiring sand to be taken from somewhere else to replace these losses. By the turn of the century the average demand for marine aggregate in the UK is predicted to be 2 million m3 per year just for beach building. On top of this there is likely to be an annual UK demand for 14 million m3 for the construction industry[25].
Although the links are unproven, dredging is thought not only to add to coastal erosion problems but also to damage and destroy coastal fisheries and spawning grounds. People who live on the coast or who depend on fishing for their livelihoods are increasingly questioning the wisdom of offshore dredging.
Yet at the moment the Government view is that until there is clear proof of damage from dredging, no moratorium can be considered [26].
Offshore sand and gravel is a finite resource yet there appears to be little concept of what could constitute a sustainable rate of extraction to ensure protection of coasts and fisheries. And is offshore dredging really the answer for meeting the demands of the construction industry? Re-use and recycling of quarries waste and building rubble could lessen our dependence on primary aggregate.
British people took 18.5 million seaside holidays in England in 1994 - almost 40% of all holiday trips[27]. The north Norfolk coast is an important tourist resource within the county of Norfolk, which in 1993 received 2.9 million visits generating an income of £425 million[28] .
The south coast is densely populated and strongly dependent on tourism. For example, in 1996/97 Eastbourne Borough Council spent £2.8m on tourism related spending (nearly one quarter of total spending)[29].
Any impact on the scenic value of the UK's coasts could impact on tourist revenue. Thriving coastal tourist industries will feel the squeeze as beach area is caught between the rising tide and hard defences creating less space for each visitor. Sandy beaches may become stonier with an increase in storminess resulting from climate change. This may deter visitors. The scenic value of the coast will be diminished if yet more hard defences like concrete sea walls and rock armour become necessary to defend against the rising tide.
Virtually all our coastal nuclear reactors are potentially at risk from sea level rise over the next century[30]. Both Sizewell (east coast) and Dungeness (south coast) nuclear power stations are vulnerable because of sea level rise from climate change and because they are located in areas that are low-lying and gradually subsiding. The Dungeness power station is built on a dynamic shingle spit which is slowly shifting eastwards. Because the spit migrates eastwards, shingle has to be regularly recycled from the east to the west to defend the power station from flooding and erosion. From here it merely washes back east again. If climate change creates higher sea levels and stormier conditions the shingle spit will be under greater attack.
Much of the UK coastline is of great natural beauty and of outstanding importance for wildlife. Yet as we attempt to defend ourselves against rising sea levels, internationally important coastal habitat will be at risk.
A highly varied set of habitats can be found along our coastline - rock cliffs, sand beaches, shingle ridges, saline lagoons, dunes, saltmarshes, intertidal sand and mud flats - and some 10% of the UK's notified nature reserves lie near the coast. Indeed some 62 coastal SSSIs, located in the low- lying land in England and Wales shown in map 1, are potentially threatened by sea level rise. (see map 2 and Appendix A)[31].
The impacts do not stop at the immediate coast. As sea level rises, increased risk of river banks being overtopped and of flooding of adjacent land further up estuaries may occur. Saltwater will penetrate further upstream and inland. This effect will be particularly marked during drought conditions which are increasingly likely under climate change.
Although it is difficult to predict how much coastal habitat could be lost to sea level rise, a study for English Nature[32] reported projected habitat losses from combined natural and human causes in the next 20 years (see Table 1).
Equivalent areas/lengths to those at risk should be set as minimum targets for habitat recreation as mitigation.
Map 2. Coastal SSSIs of low lying land in England and Wales under threat from sea level rise.
Source: Friends of the Earth, 1995 [ref 31]
Table 1. Probable coastal habitat loss in England over the next
20 years from a variety of pressures (Source: Pye and French, 1993,
ref 32).
|
Habitat |
Area/length |
% of resource |
|
sand dunes |
240 ha |
2 |
|
saltmarsh |
2750 ha |
8 |
|
intertidal flats |
10000 ha |
4 |
|
shingle formations |
200 ha |
4 |
|
saline lagoons |
120 ha |
10 |
|
soft cliff |
10 km |
4 |
|
maritime cliff grassland |
150 ha |
? |
|
coastal heath |
50 ha |
? |
Coastal Squeeze
Along a natural coastline the response of habitats to rising sea level would be to slowly retreat inland. However, where land rises rapidly in height this is prevented. Hard coastal defences such as sea walls also prevent this landward movement, resulting in erosion and loss of valuable coastal habitats in front of the sea wall. Loss of such habitats between rising sea levels and hard defences is known as “coastal squeeze”[33].
Over the last 150-200 years many British estuaries have lost between a quarter to a half of their intertidal habitats through a variety of causes[34]. This situation can only be made worse by sea level rise. As shown in Table 1, up to 10,000 hectares of intertidal sand and mudflats, and some 2750 hectares of saltmarsh, are likely to be lost in England alone from erosion caused by sea level rise, increased storm activity and other human pressures[35].
Shingle beaches fringe one-third of Britain's coastline[36] and are at risk from increased sea level and storminess. The same applies to sand dunes, especially small sites. Saline lagoons are particularly threatened as their protective barriers are increasingly likely to be overtopped. Salinisation of wetland systems will cause rapid changes in vegetation, invertebrate and fish communities. Since at least 38 specialist lagoonal species have been identified in Britain,[37] the conservation of lagoons has been identified as of such importance and priority that they are subject to Biodiversity Action Plans (see below).
While all coastal habitats will be affected to some extent, concern has focused on those habitats that support the millions of migratory waders and wildfowl visiting our shores. More than 2.5 million waterfowl over-winter in the UK and nearly 2 million of these feed, rest and shelter on intertidal flats and saltmarshes of estuaries. This represents 40% of all waders in North West Europe[38].
Internationally important areas for birds in the UK which are at risk from sea level rise include the Wash, Thames, Humber and Severn estuaries and the North Norfolk coast[39]. For some migratory birds dependent on the British coast, alarmingly high proportions of their habitat are at risk from sea level rise. This is the case for around 99% of the UK's population of wintering grey plover, 88% of avocet, 75% of dark-bellied brent geese, 64% of knot, 61% of black-tailed godwit and 54% of shelduck[40]. Avocet, little tern and knot are threatened with just a handful of UK estuaries holding 90% of knot populations.
Nearly one third of the UK's redshank population nests on East Anglian saltmarshes which are currently experiencing erosion. Sand and shingle beaches on eroding coastlines support nearly a fifth of UK ringed plovers. Birds that nest close to the high tide mark, for example, little terns, are particularly vulnerable to flooding. Where sea defences breach, saltwater may extend into freshwater habitats killing fish and amphibians such as the natterjack toad.
Of the 106 internationally important sites1 for wintering wildfowl in the UK, 16 are threatened by sea level rise and a further 11 are regarded as vulnerable[41].
One plant species at risk is the shore dock (Rumex rupestris). Despite being supposedly protected by a suite of international directives, shore dock, within Camel Cove SSSI, is threatened by inappropriate coastal defence work. Shore dock is one of Europe's rarest plants, and already on the brink of extinction, yet in March 1997 the Shore dock at Camel Cove was threatened by plans to shore up eroding cliffs below an exclusive hotel in Truro[42]. The Shore dock requires eroding conditions to colonize and survive and so is particularly vulnerable to the building of sea defences. There is a Biodiversity Action Plan for Shore dock (see below).
Sea level rise from climate change may flood and erode coastal areas thought to have been protected in perpetuity as nature reserves. This raises difficult questions about how to respond to the threat of sea level rise to natural areas. Do we allow nature to takes its course or do we try to protect these areas that we value so hughly? This dilemma is well reflected by the north Norfolk coast but it is faced by many reserves around the coast.
The north Norfolk coast is one of England's outstanding areas for wildlife. Its sand flats and shingle, its saltmarshes and its breeding and over-wintering bird populations are internationally important. Virtually all the coast is designated either under domestic or international legislation as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), as a Special Protection Area or as a Biosphere Reserve or Ramsar site. In addition, as part of a complex including the Wash, it is a candidate Special Area of Conservation.
Yet at several points along the north Norfolk coast, habitats back
onto urban areas or higher relief and will be unable to retreat fully
as sea level rises. The major losses will be of freshwater grazing marsh
and reedbeds, amounting to 588 hectares, mainly at Titchwell and Cley-Salthouse[43].
Titchwell is the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds' (RSPB) most
visited reserve and Cley, a reserve owned by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust,
attracts 100, 000 human visitors per year[44]. Both are
threatened by flooding and erosion.
In February 1996 a severe storm broke through the shingle bank at Cley Marshes, one of NWT's finest reserves which attracts 330 bird species per year[45]. Freshwater grazing marshes and reedbeds were inundated with saltwater[46]. Damage was costed at £50,000 and the Trust immediately launched a successful appeal to fund repair work at the site.
Cley is protected under international legislation as a Special Protection Area under the Birds Directive. As such there is a general obligation to protect the reserve. However, given that it is desirable to minimise interference with natural coastal processes, attempts to protect this site in its entirety may prove to be a losing battle. Opportunities must be pursued to create habitat elsewhere along the coast, or even inland, to compensate for what will be inevitably lost. However, habitat recreation is a risky business and in practice many habitats will be difficult to recreate.
Elsewhere in Norfolk, the Broads too are under continued threat from salt water flooding with some 20,000 hectares at risk from flooding if storms breach protective embankments [47]. Over 200km of tidal embankments protect the area but many are old and in a deteriorating condition.
Habitat loss from coastal squeeze could be reduced if more ecologically sensitive policies for coastal defence and management are implemented. Opportunities for replacing hard defences with natural defences such as dunes and saltmarsh should be pursued. These coastal habitats provide natural sea defences by absorbing wave energy and protecting defences further inland from direct wave attack. If existing habitats are protected and new areas created, they will provide two functions; one as a sea defence, the other as a wildlife refuge.
Given that Britain is a small, densely populated island with a relatively large coastline it is not all that surprising that there is a strong desire to protect the coast. However, the cost of defending the entire coast against rising sea levels would be prohibitive and undesirable. Natural coastal areas are already under considerable pressure. Where the coast has little population and land of low value, rather than protecting this land, opportunities to create new habitat should be pursued. Not all habitats can be recreated but saltmarshes, reedbeds and wet grasslands may be.
In order to provide a strategic approach for making decisions on coastal defence management, Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs) are being developed. This co-ordinated approach is hoped to replace past practice where authorities managing their stretch of coastline did so with little consideration for their neighbours. SMPs may recommend four general defence responses[48]:
If decisions are taken which change the way in which specific stretches of coast are protected, some coastal properties may be at risk from flooding or erosion. A mechanism is needed to compensate property owners affected by changes in defence strategies.
The greatest proportion, usually about three quarters, of coast protection costs are met by MAFF. The money available for coast protection works could be used, in addition, for compulsory purchase of property. This would both compensate property owners and remove the need to defend certain stretches of relatively undeveloped coast. To achieve such changes a national coastal strategy is needed to replace our historically piecemeal approach to managing the coast.
To ensure any such compensation system is not abused, new development proposed after a given date should not be eligible for compensation. Planning policy guidance for the coast dictates that “[In] the case of receding cliffs, development should not be allowed to take place in areas where erosion is likely to occur during the lifetime of the building.”
Planning needs to be substantially amended to keep development away from all retreating coasts and to allow for obligations such as Biodiversity Action Plans and the Habitats Directive to be met.
In June 1992, the UK Government signed the Convention on Biological Diversity at Rio. In doing so, it accepted a responsibility to conserve biodiversity in the UK. The UK Government has since committed to delivering a range of targets to conserve and enhance certain species and habitats. As a first step towards protection from a range of threats, action plans have been prepared for an initial 17 species with important coastal populations and four habitats (reedbeds, saline lagoons, coastal and floodplain grazing marsh and seagrass beds) threatened by sea level rise, erosion or inappropriate coastal protection[49].
'Coastal' species with Biodiversity Action Plans. These
species are directly or indirectly threatened by sea level rise, erosion
or coastal defences to protect against erosion or flooding.
Bittern - Aquatic warbler - Sand lizard - Natterjack toad - Allis shad
- Twaite shad - Bright wave moth - Panagaeus crux-major (a ground
beetle) - Medicinal leech - Ivell's sea anemone - Starlet sea anemone
- Narrow-mouthed whorl snail - Eyebrights - Early gentian - Fen orchid
- Shore dock - Petalwort.
A further eight habitats may also be affected by sea level rise and coastal protection works:
Coastal habitats threatened by sea level rise for which habitat
statements have been prepared but not yet accepted by government.
Maritime cliff and slopes - shingle above high tide mark - boulders
and rock above high tide - coastal strandline - saltmarsh - sand dune
- estuaries - inlets and enclosed bays.
With 62 SSSIs on the UK coast threatened, coastal squeeze and inappropriate coastal development and defences are likely to seriously impair the delivery of Biodiversity Action Plans like the one for Shore dock. Government must ensure policies are developed to control new development and defence work to minimise coastal squeeze in order to honour our biodiversity commitments. And to slow down sea level rise, Government must adopt tough targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions and invest in energy efficiency and renewables.
Climate change threatens to intensify sea level rise round the UK coast so try to cut your contribution to greenhouse gas emissions by saving energy and cutting your fuel bills at the same time.
“Advance the existing line”: a strategy to move
the defence of an area seaward of its existing position.
Beach nourishment/recharging: artificially increasing beach
levels with imported beach material thus increasing capacity
to resist wave action.
Breakwater: a natural or man-made barrier for reducing wave
energy.
Climate change: the result of increased levels of greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere mainly from the burning of coal and oil.
Coastal squeeze: the process by which coastal habitats and natural
features are progressively lost or drowned, caught between coastal defences
and rising sea levels.
“Do nothing”: carry out no coastal defence activity except
for safety measures.
Groynes: breakwater of timber, rock or other material built perpendicular
to the coastline to slow down movement of sediment (sand or shingle)
and keep it on the beach.
Hard defences: static shoreline structures such as those constructed
from timber, steel, concrete, asphalt and rubble.
“Hold the existing line”: a strategy to continue to
hold the line of defence where it is.
Seawall: generally vertical wall of stone, concrete or other
material to protect the shoreline from erosion.
Soft defences: mobile responsive defence measures which consist
of sand or shingle e.g. beaches, dunes, banks. They may be natural or
constructed, and may include control structures.
Overtopping: the flow of water over the top of a defence as
a result of wave run-up or surge action.
Retreat the line/managed retreat: a strategy to encourage the
movement of the shoreline landward of its present position in a managed
or controlled manner, hence the term “managed retreat”.
[1] Brown, P. (1996). Global warming. Can Civilization Survive. Blandford:
London.
[2] IPCC (1995). Climate Change 1995. The Science of Climate Change.
Summary for Policy makers. UNEP.
[3] Department of the Environment (DoE) (1996). Review of the Potential
Effects of Climate Change in the United Kingdom. Climate Change Impacts
Review Group. Second Report. HMSO: London.
[4] Shennan, I. (1993). Sea level changes and the threat of coastal
inundation. The Geographical Journal 159, 148-156.
[5] DoE (1991). The Potential Effects of Climate Change in the United
Kingdom. Climate Change Impacts Review Group. First Report. HMSO: London.
[6] Whittle, I.R. (1990). Lands at risk from sea-level rise in the UK.
In: The Greenhouse Effect and Rising Sea Level in the UK. J.C. Doornkamp
(Ed) , M1 Press: Long Eaton.
[7] Ball, J.H., Clark, M.J., Collins, M.B., Gao, S., Ingham, A. and
Ulph, A. (1991). The Economic Consequences of Sea Level Rise on the
Central Southern Coast of England. GeoData Institute Report to MAFF,
University of Southampton. In: DoE (1996). Op cit.
[8] OECD (1993) Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Coastal Zone Management, integrated policies. OECD: Paris.
[9] Bateman, I.J., Langford, I.H., Willis, K.G. Turner, R.K., and Garrod
G.D. (1993). The impacts of changing willingness to pay, question formats
in CVM, CSERGE WP GEC 93-05, CSERGE University of East Anglia, Norwich
and University College London. In: Turner, Adger and Doktor (1995).
Assessing the economic costs of sea level rise. Environment and Planning
A 1995, 27, 1777-1796.
[10] Parry, M. and Duncan, R. (eds) (1995). The Economic Implications
of Climate Change in Britain. Earthscan: London.
[11] Steers J.A. (1953) The east coast floods, January 31-February 1
1953. The Geographical Journal 119, 280-95.
[12] Turner R.K., Adger, N., Doktor, P. (1995). Op cit.
[13] Department of the Environment (1992). Coastal Planning. Planning
Policy Guidance note 20. HMSO: London.
[14] Bacon, J. and Bacon, S. (1984). The Suffolk Shoreline and the Sea.
Segment Publications.
[15] MAFF (1996). Shoreline Management Plans. A guide for coastal defence
authorities. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
[16] Parry, M. and Duncan, R. (1995). The Economic Implications of Climatic
Change in Britain. Earthscan: London.
[17] Pethick, J.S. (1992). Natural Change. In: Coastal Zone Planning
and Management. Thomas Telford, London 49-64.
[18] Beachy Head to South Foreland Shoreline Management Plan. Consultation
Draft. Summary.
[19] Shepway District Council (1993). The Shepway Coastline and the
Hythe Coast Protection Strategy.
[20] Pearce, F. (1996). Crumbling Away. New Scientist, 21/28 December.
[21] Environment Agency news release “Fish forecasts agency's big
spend on Pevensey”, 6 May 1997.
[22] Paterson, M. (unpublished). Understanding Global Environmental
Politics. University of Keele.
[23] Pearce, F. (1996). Op cit.
[24] The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (1997). Mineral Resources
and the Environment. RICS: London.
[25] Child, M. Soft Engineering - a firm future? Civil Engineering,
145.
[26] Gowan, P. (1996). Our Disappearing Coastline. Briefing paper. Unpublished.
[27] DoE (1995) Policy Guidelines for the Coast. London: HMSO.
[28] Pos, J.D., Upton and Harvey (1996). North Norfolk Shoreline Management
Plan. Sheringham to Snettisham Scalp. Final. Volume 1.
[29] Paterson, M. (1997). Op cit.
[30] Hatchwell P.K. (1989). Impacts of sea-level rise and storm surges
on reactor decommissioning: a dilemma for both present and future. Environmental
Resources Unit, University of Salford, Lancashire.
[31] Friends of the Earth (1995). Losing Interest. Friends of the Earth:
London.
[32] Pye, K. and French, P.W. (1993). Targets for coastal habitat recreation.
English Nature Science 13. English Nature: Peterborough.
[33] Burd, F. (1995). Managed Retreat: a practical guide. English Nature:
Peterborough.
[34] European Union for Coastal Conservation (1995). Recommendations
for a European Union Coastal Strategy. European Union for Coastal Conservation,
Birdlife International.
[35] Pye, K. and French, P.W. (1993). Op cit.
[36] Fuller, R.M. (1987). Vegetation establishment on shingle beaches.
Journal of Ecology, 75 (94), 1077-1089.
[37] Pye, K. and French, P.W. (1993). Op cit.
[38] RSPB news. (1997). Resolving the conflict between ports and wildlife,
28 May.
[39] WWF (1996) World Wildlife Fund. Interrupted Flight: Climate Change
Impacts and Bird Migration. WWF: Washington D.C.
[40] Norris, K. and Buisson, R. (1994). Sea-level rise and its impact
upon coastal birds in the UK. RSPB Conservation Review 8, 63-71.
[41] Norris, K. and Buisson, R. (1994). Op cit.
[42] Friends of the Earth (1997). Plan threatens one of Europe's rarest
plants. Press release 20 March 1997.
[43] Brown A.F., Grice P.V., Radley G.P., Leafe R.N., Lambley, P. (1994).
Towards a strategy for the conservation of coastal habitats in North
Norfolk. A discussion paper. English Nature: Peterborough.
[44] Pos, J.D., Upton and Harvey (1996). Op cit.
[45] Pos, J.D., Upton and Harvey (1996). Op cit.
[46] Norfolk Wildlife Trust, pers. comm.
[47] Turner R.K., Adger, N., Doktor, P. (1995). Op cit.
[48] MAFF (1995). Shoreline Management Plans. A guide for coastal defence
authorities. MAFF: London.
[49] Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report. Volume 2: Action Plans
(1995). HMSO: London.
July 1997
Mark Hubbard/Frances MacGuire
Published by Friends of the Earth Ltd
© Friends of the Earth Ltd
Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland
26-28 Underwood Street, London N1 7JQ
Telephone (0171) 490 1555, E-mail: info@foe.co.uk
Printed on 100% recycled paper
Note that some SSSIs are 'shared' by more than one county and that sites in England and Wales only are included.
Avon
Severn estuary
Cheshire
Dee estuary
Mersey estuary
Clywd
Dee estuary
Cumbria
Drigg coast
Duddon estuary
Morecambe Bay
South Walney and Piel Channel flats
Upper Solway flats and marshes
Devon
Exe estuary
Dorset
Poole harbour
Dyfed
Burry inlet and Loughor estuary
Dyfi
East Sussex
Camber Sands and Rye Saltings
Pevensey Levels
Rye harbour
Essex
Benfleet and Southend marshes
Blackwater estuary
Colne estuary
Dengie
Foulness
Hamford Water
Inner Thames marshes
River Crouch marshes
Stour estuary
West Thurrock lagoon and marshes
Gwent
Severn estuary
Gwynedd
Dyfi
Gloucestershire
Severn estuary
Upper Severn estuary
Hampshire
Langstone harbour
Portsmouth harbour
Humberside
Barton and Barrow clay pits
Pyewipe and Cleethorpes coast
Spurnhead to Salt Flat Ends
Upper Humber
The Grues
Kent
Dungeness
Medway estuary and marshes
Sandwich Bay and Hacklinge marshes
South Thames estuary and marshes
Thanet Coast
The Swale
Walland marsh
Lancashire
Lune estuary
Morecambe Bay
Ribble estuary
Lincolnshire
Gibraltar Point
North Linconshire coast
Saltfleetby-Theddlethorpe dunes
The Wash
Merseyside
Ainsdale sand dunes
Altcar sand dunes and foreshore
Dee estuary
Formby sand dunes and foreshore
Mersey estuary
Southport sand dunes and foreshore
Norfolk
Breydon Water
North Norfolk coast
The Wash
Northumberland
Lindisfarne
Northumberland shore
Powys
Dyfi
Suffolk
Alde-Ore estuary
Benacre to Easton Bavents
Deben estuary
Minsmere-Walberswick heaths and marshes
Orwell estuary
Somerset
Bridgewater Bay
Severn estuary
West Glamorgan
Burry inlet and Loughor estuary
West Sussex
Chichester harbour
Pagham harbour
South Glamorgan
Severn estuary
Tyne & Wear
Northumberland shore
return to text
1 A coastal site is designated
to be internationally important for waterfowl if it regularly holds
at least 20,000 waterfowl or 1% of the individuals in a population of
one species or subspecies (Ramsar Convention).
Contact details:
Friends of the Earth
26-28 Underwood St.
LONDON
N1 7JQ
Tel: 020 7490 1555
Fax: 020 7490 0881
Email: info@foe.co.uk
Website: www.foe.co.uk
July 1997
Mark Hubbard/Frances MacGuire
Last modified: December 2001
