ABSTRACT
Living shorelines aim to enhance the resilience of coastlines to hazards while simultaneously delivering co-benefits such as carbon sequestration. Despite the potential ecological and socio-economic benefits of living shorelines over conventional engineered coastal protection structures, application is limited globally. Australia has a long and diverse coastline that provides prime opportunities for living shorelines using beaches and dunes, vegetation, and biogenic reefs, which may be either natural ('soft' approach) or with an engineered structural component ('hybrid' approach). Published scientific studies, however, have indicated limited use of living shorelines for coastal protection in Australia. In response, we combined a national survey and interviews of coastal practitioners and a grey and peer-reviewed literature search to (1) identify barriers to living shoreline implementation; and (2) create a database of living shoreline projects in Australia based on sources other than scientific literature. Projects included were those that had either a primary or secondary goal of protection of coastal assets from erosion and/or flooding. We identified 138 living shoreline projects in Australia through the means sampled starting in 1970; with the number of projects increasing through time particularly since 2000. Over half of the total projects (59 %) were considered to be successful according to their initial stated objective (i.e., reducing hazard risk) and 18 % of projects could not be assessed for their success based on the information available. Seventy percent of projects received formal or informal monitoring. Even in the absence of peer-reviewed support for living shoreline construction in Australia, we discovered local and regional increases in their use. This suggests that coastal practitioners are learning on-the-ground, however more generally it was stated that few examples of living shorelines are being made available, suggesting a barrier in information sharing among agencies at a broader scale. A database of living shoreline projects can increase knowledge among practitioners globally to develop best practice that informs technical guidelines for different approaches and helps focus attention on areas for further research.
Subject(s)
Carbon Sequestration , Floods , AustraliaABSTRACT
Management responsibilities for the system of marine national parks and sanctuaries declared in Victoria, Australia in 2002 have created imperatives for robust, scientifically defendable approaches to identifying threats to valued ecological attributes of the parks, setting management priorities, and developing monitoring systems. We are developing a protocol for ecological risk assessment in the parks that has due regard for the perception of risks by individuals, and ensures that stakeholder values are an intrinsic part of decision making. The inclusive and transparent protocol provides an opportunity for stakeholder involvement in the identification of valued attributes, as well as in the assessment of associated risks. Our approach brings together ideas about how science enters the community engagement domain in ways that promote collaboration and transparency in decision making. A series of stakeholder workshops across the state drew on the expertise of agency staff, community groups, fishers, industry representatives, academics, and knowledgeable park neighbors to identify hazards of major concern in the parks. Many hazards involved predictable, tangible threats like pollution and exotic species, but the approach also identified a number of less obvious threats related to governance issues and the knowledge-base for the parks. Importantly, the workshops with their broad range of stakeholders identified threats not previously considered by the management agency in its internal assessments, and several of these "new" threats are already the subject of action by the agency. The deliberate incorporation of local knowledge and local networks in the risk assessment process also provided opportunities for greater engagement of stakeholders with the management agency.
