Combining Strategies

The above discussion shows how cost-benefit analysis can be used to compare individual strategies for preparing for sea level rise and related coastal hazards. However, the most cost-effective option is often not a single strategy, but a combination of synergistic strategies. For example, when used alone, breakwaters or artificial reefs can be used to slow coastal erosion, but are not effective at preventing flooding due to sea level rise and storm surge. However, these strategies can be combined with other complementary strategies – such as levees or beach/dune reconstruction – that can mitigate sea level rise and storm surge flooding but are not as good at slowing coastal erosion. Combining strategies can also be an effective way to meet multiple design goals. For example, including a waterfront park in a plan for managed retreat can reduce the exposure of coastal infrastructure to flooding while also fulfilling other goals, such as creating new space for recreation and environmental restoration.

Activate Your Learning

This exercise is not for credit but you are required to understand this material for the formal assessments in this module.

Stakeholders in Ventura, California have chosen to combine several strategies for reducing erosion at Surfer's Point.

×

Figure 12.15: Aerial view of Surfer's Point in Ventura, California.
Credit: Wikipedia Commons: Ventura (Public Domain) CC BY-SA 3.0

Read this NOAA article about their choices, then answer the following questions:

Question 1 - Multiple Choice

According to the article, which of the following decisions by the city increased erosion?

a. Building a bike path
b. Erecting a sea wall
c. Armoring the point with boulders
d. Constructing the fairgrounds

Click for answer

Hide

Question 2 - Multiple Choice

Which of the following was NOT one of the stakeholders mentioned in the article?

a. City of Ventura
b. California Environmental Protection Agency
c. County Fairgrounds
d. California Department of Parks and Recreation
e. California Coastal Commission
f. Ventura Chapter of Surfrider Foundation

Click for answer

Hide

Question 3 - Multiple Choice

The erosion reduction plan that stakeholders agreed to in 2001 combined several strategies. Which of the following strategies were part of the plan?

a. Managed retreat
b. Installing rip rap
c. Restoring beach habitat
d. Beach re-nourishment
e. All of the above
f. A, B, and D
g. A, C, and D

Click for answer

Hide

Question 4 - Multiple Choice

The 1995 working group failed to agree to a plan in part because the County Fairgrounds believed the project's costs would outweigh its benefits. Which cost was of greatest concern to the Fairgrounds?

a. The cost of lost parking
b. The construction costs of $3.8 million
c. The beach re-nourishment cost
d. The cost to remove a dam

Click for answer

Hide

Question 5 - Multiple Choice

According to the article, which of the following was NOT one of the reasons for the success of the plan?

a. The popularity of managed retreat in other communities
b. Grassroots support
c. An inclusive planning process
d. Leadership of the Surfrider Foundation

Click for answer

Hide

In addition to the benefits of implementing complementary strategies in one place, communities should also recognize that the types of strategies that are most beneficial will vary from place to place across the community's jurisdiction – strategies that are highly beneficial in area of the community may not be as beneficial in another, and may even be harmful. Thus, communities should consider adopting not only multiple complementary strategies in one area, but also different sets of complementary strategies for different areas. The next section discusses how communities, governments, and stakeholders can use geographic information systems to better understand how differences in the social and physical landscape across their jurisdiction may affect the suitability of these strategies from place to place.