Planning for Climate Change: When the Levee Breaks, Mama You Got to Go
By Sara S. Moore, MPP/ MA, Research Consultant on Climate Change Adaptation.
Last year I became involved in part of the California Climate Vulnerability Assessment, intended to prepare the state for climate change. Before that, I never thought of “human” and “natural” systems as different—they were one integrated system in my mind, people living in nature. However, the State of California separated the various vulnerability assessment studies into two categories—human and natural systems. Within the context of that work I began to hear experts talking about the conflict between planning to protect ecosystems versus people.
Natural system specialists (conservationists, by and large) worry that those prioritizing human communities might ignore the longer term consequences of their actions in terms of preserving the health and integrity of natural systems (which we need for people’s health, ultimately).
On the other side, people-oriented vulnerability experts, such as public health workers, worry that the natural system specialists aren’t taking into account issues of equity and existing, long-term disproportionate impacts that might be exacerbated by climate change planning decisions. They are also concerned that the conservation-oriented approach discounts the public (and very human) elements of planning, such as ensuring a transparent decision-making process and accessible stakeholder hearings. Natural system specialists may lack experience with building public trust in a planning process, and those proficient in planning for human needs may lack the long-term view of the importance of protecting natural systems.
This conflict heats up quickly in the debate of how to approach sea level rise, a problem the Bay Area is facing with these two priorities in mind: preserving human communities and preserving natural systems. We stand on the shore, a bucket of concrete and rebar in one hand, and a bucket of native wetland grasses in the other. Should we wall out the sea or invite it in?
A levee or sea wall system is one approach, and it prioritizes human communities, but at the expense of maintaining the integrity of ecosystems. And, it might not ultimately be a safe alternative. In planning meetings the word “Katrina” is invoked. Behind this word is this question:
The Lower Ninth Ward levee break. Wikipedia Commons.
With climate change, what if another “Katrina” happens here— will the Bay Area be prepared?
The answer is: we’ll see.
Climate change may bring the Bay Area conditions that put our communities more in danger of a “Katrina”-like scenario. San Francisco may not face hurricanes, but as wind and storm regimes shift, and sea levels rise, it might face weather and flood conditions it has never seen before.
However, before diving for the concrete and rebar, it must be remembered what was responsible for the worst of that tragedy—not the storm— the levee failure. In the wake of that failure, an investigative article made this assertion:
“Engineers say that most structures that fail do so not because they're hit by overwhelming forces, but due to flaws that creep in unnoticed during design, construction and upkeep.” (Human Error Blamed for Making New Orleans' Flooding Worse, Dec. 11, 2005).
The question that I pose in response to the Katrina question: what if a massive sea wall system failure happens here? Can we prevent it?
Are there alternatives to relying strictly on sea wall system?
In some cases, natural systems might provide more protection, and both cheaper and more flexible protection, than a sea wall system.
For years before Katrina experts had been publishing warnings about the vulnerability of the levee system, and the need for marshland restoration to buffer the severity of hurricanes (read one article, “Drowning New Orleans,” published in Scientific American in 2001).
The SF Bay Area has options for planning for wetland migration or cultivating other natural buffers. This approach, using natural systems to reduce threats from climate change, is called ecosystem-based adaptation.
Ecosystem‐based adaptation uses biodiversity and ecosystem services in an overall adaptation strategy including the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems to reduce the danger of climate change to people. (Read more about the Convention on Biological Diversity’s definition of ecosystem-based adaptation in this 2009 report)
This concept is usually discussed as an alternative to “hard” or engineered responses like sea walls. Hard approaches are prone to the systematic problems we saw in New Orlean’s levees, can be more expensive to build and maintain than natural approaches, and will only protect the shoreline to a particular level of rising sea water—no further.
However, wetlands restoration and other nature-based approaches cannot be considered a silver bullet for sea level rise. In some places, like around the Bay Area’s airports, only sea walls are likely to save the existing infrastructure. Proposed plans that I have seen show a strategic use of both the strengths of wetlands restoration and sea walls to achieve our minimum necessary level of protection.
Now, a question that lingers in my mind:
What are we going to do with Ocean Beach?
In preparation for writing this post, I asked some local experts their opinion of what we’re going to do about sea level rise and Ocean Beach in San Francisco. One Emergency Services Manager at the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management, Bijan Karimi, said that San Francisco recognizes the potential impacts that climate change might have on weather-related events, with a near-term focus on the problem of flooding. However, the Emergency Management Department of San Francisco has not yet actively begun weighing the alternate paths of either retreat or increased shore armoring to protect the people living in the projected flood zone at Ocean Beach. This encompasses two rows of houses in one high water projection (see more at the visualization tool Cal-Adapt).
The President of the Marin Chapter of the Surfrider Foundation, Scott Tye, says that his organization takes an official stance in favor of a planned retreat from sea level rise, and “armoring the shore is not a viable option.” He points to the managed retreat being conducted at Surfer’s Point project in Ventura (read more about this project here). In that case the city is removing a parking lot, relocating a bicycle path, restoring a beach, and taking other “soft” ecosystem-friendly measures to anticipate future coastal erosion.
But would that work at Ocean Beach? Would homeowners agree to give up their land in return for government compensation? What about the apartment buildings in the projected flood zone which provide subsidized (Section 8) housing to seniors— how could the city ensure that those households were treated fairly?
There is no silver bullet for this problem. We stand on the shore and see the inevitable challenge coming from the sea, a bucket in each hand. What would you do?
+
This is Part Three of Four that Sara Moore will be sharing here on the Open Space blog. Part One can be read here. Part Two is here. Stay tuned for the Part Four next Monday.
One of our strategies is to serve as the central hub for the Bay Area land conservation community. We serve as an essential resource for anyone interested in land conservation in the Bay Area. To that end, we invite others to share their stories here on our blog and amplify them to people around the region who care about this place we call home.
About the author: Sara S. Moore, MPP/ MA, Research Consultant on Climate Change Adaptation. Sara most recently worked at the Zavaleta Lab, UC Santa Cruz, on a component study of the California State Climate Vulnerability Assessment. She graduated from UC Berkeley with a Master of Public Policy and an MA in International and Area Studies with a focus on government climate adaptation policy. Previously, she worked for Pacific Environment as a Russia Program Associate, helping communities protect their local environment in Siberia and the Russian Far East.
For background on the post's title, click here and turn up your volume.