Last
week I had the pleasure of joining a group of flood risk mitigation and coastal adaptation
experts for the 4th Gilbert F. White National Flood Policy Forum entitled:
"Human Adjustments in Coasts -
Adaptive Management in Response to Changing Hazards, Risks, and Ecosystems"
in Washington, DC.
Photo: (from left to right): Nick Hardiman, Coastal Policy Advisor, Environment Agency, UK; Margaret Davidson, Acting Director, Office of Ocean Coastal Resource Mgt., NOAA; Denise Reed, Chief Scientist, Water Institute of the Gulf; Larry Larson, ASFPM Senior Policy Advisor; Roy Wright, FEMA; and John Miller, New Jersey Association for Floodplain Management, Princeton Hydro.
Many of
the participants in the Forum prepared a short paper to help shape the discussions on human adjustments to coasts. The
compendium of papers is available on the ASFPM Foundation website. Below I have included the paper I submitted for the Forum.
Ensuring Resilient
Coastal Communities and Ecosystems: The
Time Is Now to Act
Udvardy Consulting
As 2012 was coming to a close so, too, were the United
Nations’ climate talks. These talks underscored
the fact that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has, for
the past two decades, underestimated the impacts of climate change. For example, the loss of the extreme melting
of summer Arctic sea ice is now 50 years ahead of the schedule that the IPCC
has been predicting; more current projections anticipate that the Arctic is likely
to have completely ice-free summers within 20 years.[1]
Such underestimations of the timing and
impacts of climate change impede the ability of governments around the world to
adapt to these changing conditions in ways that will properly safeguard
communities and ecosystems.[2]
Indeed, as we have seen most recently
with Hurricane Sandy, Americans, particularly those living on the coast have
been hit hard by extreme weather events.
While the full cost estimates of Hurricane Sandy have yet to be
finalized, preliminary
data for 2012 indicates that there were eleven extreme climate events that were
estimated to cost over $1billion in losses.[3]
The
risks to, and the vulnerability of our coasts is significant and increasing. Some five million people live within four
feet of the high-tide level along America’s coastlines, and their population
growth is rapidly outpacing other regions.
Furthermore, sea level has risen over the last century at twice the rate
that was projected by the IPCC, and storm surge and habitat loss are increasing. [4] Finally, coastal habitat provides a large
percentage of ecosystem services, yet they are particularly vulnerable to
sea-level rise and more severe storms.[5]
So
how well is the nation doing on adaptation?
Only thirty-two states have completed Climate Action Plans and only
fifteen states have completed Climate Adaptation Plans. Four states have plans in progress.[8] Moreover, many State Hazard Mitigation Plans
are in need of significant improvement. The
nation’s experts agree that “barriers to
implementation of these activities are significant” and that current
efforts are “insufficient to avoid
increasingly serious impacts of climate change that have large social,
environmental, and economic consequences.”[9] Generally, these barriers fall into three
general categories: misguided or
obsolete policy and legislation at the federal, state, and local levels;
financial considerations; and shortfalls in disseminating the proper studies
and other relevant data.
While
the facts and figures are alarming, the good news is that there are many
methods by which we can increase the level of adaptation to ensure more
resilient communities and ecosystems along our coasts. The objective of the recommendations that are
set out below is to ensure that planning and management of communities and
ecosystems reflects the interdependence of coastal communities on their natural
areas, the vital connections between riverine and coastal ecosystems, and the
immense value that healthy coastal ecosystems provide to the economy.
Increasing Financial Pathways
§ State
legislatures should establish a “Rainy Day” Fund to ensure money is set aside
for recovery and adaptation after extreme events. The North Carolina legislature passed such a
fund in 1999 after Hurricane Floyd and appropriated $836 million to remap
floodplains and to create open space, among many other measures.[10]
§ States should
pass constitutional amendments to establish a natural resources trust fund. The
Iowa Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund Amendment passed successfully in 2010 and
allows for the use of 3/8ths of one cent of the next sales tax increase. This could generate an up to $150 million a
year.
§ Because slowing
and reversing habitat loss and fragmentation is one of the main goals to ensure
fish, wildlife and ecosystems adapt to climate change, State legislatures
should appropriate funds to conserve the priority habitats in their State
Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs).[11] An increase of the current $9 billion that is
spent annually nationwide is needed to provide the funds to conserve an
additional 12% which would protect all of the priority terrestrial habitat
areas in SWAPs.[12]
§ Cities should
establish stormwater utility fees to help fund flood and coastal planning and
adaptation measures.
Strengthening Policy and Legislation
Federal
§
Congress
should pass a stand-alone version of the natural resource adaptation provisions
included in S.1881, the Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment Act (SAFE
Act), to establish a national adaptation strategy, to set planning requirements
for all States to complete Climate Action Plans and Climate Adaptation Plans, and to identify specific federal
programs to implement natural resources adaptation measures.[13]
§ Congress should
pass legislation to limit federal investment within our nation’s floodplains
and to assist in conserving, restoring, and planning for these sensitive and
risk-prone areas, using the Coastal Barriers Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982, as a
model.
§ Congress should direct NOAA to
develop a “Riverine County Snapshots” similar to their “Coastal County
Snapshots” and
should
direct NOAA to formalize the Habitat Blueprint, a framework to improve habitat
for fisheries, marine life, and coastal communities, in the Fisheries Habitat
Policy.
§ Congress must
pass a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that safeguards communities and
the natural ecosystems upon which they depend.
In particular, language should direct the Corps of Engineers to improve
flood recovery efforts by requiring the Corps to utilize PL 8499 funds for
levee setbacks and nonstructural measures.[14]
§ The Administration
should update the Principles and Guidelines to prioritize federal investment in
federal water resources projects that “work with nature”, such as allowing room
for rivers through levee setbacks.[15]
§ The
Administration should update Executive Order 11988: “Floodplain Management” and
Executive Order 11990: “Protection of Wetlands”
to respond to impacts from climate change and human activities in these
sensitive and critical areas.
§ The Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should comply with the Stafford Act and
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 by approving only State Hazard Mitigation Plans
that adequately address climate change. To clarify this, FEMA should also amend
its regulations and release guidance to States.[16]
§ The Congressionally established
Technical Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) should provide recommendations to
FEMA on improving flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) including sea-level rise,
erosion, and natural areas and should address all of the recommendations
provided by the National Academies.[17]
State
§ States should
pass legislation to limit hard coastal armoring and to favor nature-based flood
control or “living shorelines”, such as what Maryland did with its Living
Shoreline Protection Act.
§
State
legislatures should require agencies to link multiple planning efforts by 2015
to coordinate with the SWAP update deadline.
This means linking the hazard mitigation, the disaster recovery
operations, and wildlife planning through the implementation of the state’s
pre-existing state hazard mitigation plan.[18]
§
State
legislatures should require that local governments’ comprehensive land-use
plans be consistent with the state land use plan. Only four states—Hawaii,
Oregon, Washington, and Florida— currently require this consistency.[19]
Local
§ Cities and
Counties should establish model sea level rise (“SLR”) ordinances that should
include the following components: (1) an
expansion of flood boundaries that will increase with SLR to protect more
effectively people living in harm’s way and (2) different SLR zones so that communities
in sensitive coastal areas provide incentives to induce retreat from the most
sensitive areas to the less sensitive areas, as well as regulation directed
toward fortifying infrastructure and other structures.[20]
Accelerating Data and Communication
§ The
Administration should establish a “Climate Ready Rivers” program similar to the
Environmental Protection Agency’s “Climate Ready Estuaries” Program.
§ Congress should
pass legislation to establish a national natural hazards, disaster-related
database and website and should charge a taskforce with developing a
methodology to document losses and damages from extreme events that includes
the loss of ecosystem services. The
website should be a one-stop shop for climate adaptation and natural hazards
and should include other important resources such as adaptation case studies
and model Hazard Mitigation Plans.
§ The
Administration should establish a national taskforce consisting of multiple
agencies to continue the Technical Input to the 2013 National Climate
Assessment work on ecosystem services to help communicate the cost effectiveness
of investing in our natural areas.
In
summary, the “new normal” of frequent and extreme weather events necessitates an
expedited, all-hands-on approach to implementing adaptation measures. To make communities and ecosystems more
resilient to the next extreme event, we need leadership at all levels of
government to implement financial and regulatory incentives and state-of-the-art
data and communication. While climate
change, to some extent, is incremental, its effects are already measurable and
producing impacts on our coastlines now.
Prompt action is necessary to protect lives, property, and vital
habitats.
[2] See The
Daily Climate’s article by Glenn Scherer: “Special Report:
IPCC, assessing climate risks, consistently underestimates”
[4] See
National Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee’s (NCADAC)
release of The Draft Third
National Climate Assessment Report
p. 10, finding #11, and note 5, at p.4-1.
[5] M.D. Staudinger,
Grimm, N.B., Staudt, A., Carter, S.L., Chapin, F.S., Kareiva, P., Ruckelshaus,
M., Stein, B.A. 2012. Impacts of
Climate Change on Biodiversity, Ecosystems, and Ecosystem Services: Technical
Input to the 2013 National Climate Assessment. Cooperative Report to the 2013
National Climate Assessment. 296 p.
[6] Ibid., 5, Table 4.1, (Sifleet and
others, 2011) and (U.S. ACE 2006), respectfully.
[7] Ibid., 3, Chapter 25. Coastal Zone Development and
Ecosystems. Also see: Batker,
D. I. De la Torre, R. Costanza, P. Swedeen, J. Day, R. Boumans, and K.
Bagstad. Earth Economics. Gaining
Ground. Wetlands, Hurricanes and the Economy: The Value of Restoring the
Mississippi River Delta.
[12] See Our
Nation’s Wildlife Habitats: A Synthesis of Research Findings and
Recommendations. September 1, 2010. Sponsored by Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation.
[13] Ibid., 5, p. 6-10
[14] See The Water Protection Network’s November 29, 2012
letter from 95 Water Protection Network Members to Senate EPW Committee Urging
Reforms.
[15] The Administration
released a draft update of the Principles and Guidelines in 2009 but the
Administration has yet to release the final guidelines.
[18] Smith, Gavin.
2012. State Disaster
Recovery Planning Guide. UNC, Chapel Hill. Also see Kihslinger, R., D.
Salvesen, and T. Lee. 2010. Combining Habitat Conservation and Natural
Hazards: Issues and Opportunities. The National Wetlands Newsletter.
[19] Van Hemert,
J. 2010. FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT CIRCA
2050: The View from the Land Use Planner’s Vantage Point. ASFPM GFW Forum.
[20] Georgetown Climate Center’s ZONING FOR
SEA-LEVEL RISE: A Model Sea-Level Rise Ordinance and Case Study of
Implementation Barriers in Maryland.
