Management of the Sustainable Coastline
Analysis of Multi-Purpose Artificial Reef
A research proposal submitted to the Urban Studies and Planning Program
Senior Sequence Class 2011-2012
February 02, 2012
Kosuke Morishima
University of California at San Diego
Urban Studies and Planning Program
USP 187
Email: kosuke06523@yahoo.co.jp
Abstract
In all future projects, people are required to think and respond to the following
question: what should be the relationship between nature and humans? This
question is necessary because global warming is rapidly increasing and the threat
to environmental issues is close to our daily-life. In recent years, one of the most
certain outcomes of global warming is an increase in global sea level. Researchers
have found that this issue causes economic, environmental, and political
problems. Consequently, if the sea level rises, the local government along the
coastal line is threatened with losing the strong tourism and tax revenues. In
addition, by understanding the coastal erosion itself and analyzing the data of
expected of coastal eroded area on beach communities, by using Geographic
Information System (GIS), private property owners and public institutions face
the threat of losing their land and to risk a serious natural disaster. This study
contributes to avoid this tragic situation and to create sustainable beaches. The
“Multi-Purpose Artificial Reef” is one of the very effective and sustainable
solutions, to redevelop beaches both environmentally and economically. This
study examines how the multi-purpose artificial reef works for the threatened
coastline, in order to manage a better coastal line. Also, this study contributes to
the argument that the project of developing coastline, affected by coastal erosion,
has really a significant roll for California government and citizens. Therefore, the
result will be shared with the California government, developers, and planners
who set policies and conduct projects in the coastline, in the future.
Keywords: coastal erosion, multi-purpose artificial reef, sustainable solution,
flooding, Geographic Information System, beach, sea level rise, global warming
1. Introduction
Costal erosion is a global issue. At least seventy percent of sandy beaches around
the world are recessional (Bird, 1985: 219). In the United States, approximately eighty
six percent of the U.S. East coast barrier beaches (excluding evolving spit areas) have
experienced erosion during the past one hundred years (Galgano et al., 2004: 283-284).
Also, this phenomenon took place in California (Moore et al., 1999: 124) and in the Gulf
of Mexico (Morton and McKenna, 1999: 110). These past experiences, regarding the
coastal erosion are, mostly, a natural phenomenon. The important factor when
understanding the issue of the costal erosion and the rising of the sea level is that the
coastal erosion has occurred since long ago as one of many natural phenomena. The
problem on which to focus is the ‘rapidness’ of improving and globally expanding the
phenomenon as a serious environmental issue. Furthermore, the difference of the past
land condition is that the most coastal areas exist as private property. The result of this
environmental issue will heavily impact low-lying areas; at least one hundred million
persons live within one meter of mean sea level and are at increased risk in the coming
decades (Zhang, 2004: 41). The private property owners will be threatened by economic
damages. Moreover, as the beach is lost, fixed structures nearby are increasingly exposed
to the direct impact of storm waves, and will ultimately be damaged or destroyed, unless
expensive protective measures are taken. It has long been speculated that the underlying
rate of long-term sandy beach erosion is two orders of magnitude greater than the rate, if
the sea level rises; thus, any significant increase of sea level has dire consequences for
coastal inhabitants (Zhang, 2004: 42). First, for this study, not only to establish and
develop the valuable policies but also to indicate the direction of projects and policies, it
is very important to create the best sustainable solutions with a clear and well-understood
concept. To decide the basic direction and the concept of the projects and policies, the
understanding of what the costal erosion really is and how it occurs is absolutely
necessary. The important factor, when understanding costal erosion, is that coastal
erosion has occurred since long ago, as one of the many natural phenomena. The problem
that has to be addressed is how fast the serious environmental issue of coastal erosion is
increasing and globally expanding. Global warming causes most of the environmental
problems, and it leads to a variety of the secondary phenomena, such as the sea level
rising and climate changing. Then, the costal erosion, flooding, and other natural disasters
are caused. In addition, by combining theses phenomena with the environmental
problems and density-populated urban areas, the natural disaster expands and accelerates
itself significantly. Also, by analyzing the coastal erosion data with GIS map, the maps
will help planners and developers to easily see and understand how the coastal erosion
will improve in the future. The GIS data shows that areas or hazard zones of both coast
bluff and dune will be eroded by 2100, and which modes of transportation―mostly local
roads, highways, and freeways―will be threatened by issues of coastal erosion. The map
shows that the San Francisco County will be expected largely to be damaged because the
City of San Francisco has developed close to the coastline. Furthermore, the private
property owners will be threatened by the economic damages, and the Great Highway, an
important street for residents living along the coastline, is also threatened. Thus, if this
street will be lost, it is very difficult for the people to live in a coastal area and to escape
from hazards, such as storms and flooding. In addition, as the beach is lost, fixed
structures nearby are increasingly exposed to the direct impact of storm waves, and will
ultimately be damaged or destroyed, unless expensive protective measures are taken.
Therefore, these public buildings and institutions should be moved to a safe area, where
they can be analyzed through the map, or where there are no public buildings vulnerable
to coastal flooding under baseline conditions. Another map estimates the cost for
communities to replace the value of buildings and contents, based on a sea level rise
estimate of 4.6 feet (1.4 meters) by 2100. However, there is a very effective and
sustainable solution not only to stop coastal erosion and to avoid such a tragic situation,
but also develop beach community’s economic condition and local government’s tax
revenues. Multi-purpose artificial reef does represent one of the greatest solutions.
Actually, there are some projects, artificial reefs that have already being tried or
completed. As the result of the multipurpose artificial reef with respect to the recreational
benefits, for instance, tourist expenditure per surf visit day amount to $57.80, of which
about $19 is spent on lodging. Moreover, These economic benefits would support, on a
yearly basis, about 3 jobs and $18,000 in tax revenue – the revenue split would be $7,000
Federal and $11,000 State & Local (Slotkin, Michael). Therefore, the project of creating
sustainable beaches has really important significance on aspects of developing economic
and creating safe community along coastline. Also, the solution, multi-purpose artificial
reef, is sustainable project and makes much economical benefit.
2. Literature Review
In order to examine the importance of developing the eroded coastline, it is
crucial to articulate the best sustainable solutions and to make a clear and wellunderstood assessment. Understanding what costal erosion is and how it occurs is
absolutely necessary in order to encourage the establishment and development of the
valuable policies, as well as to indicate the direction of projects.
Global warming causes most of the environmental problems, and leads to a
variety of the second phenomena, such as the rising of sea level and climate changes.
This is how costal erosion, flooding, and other natural disasters are caused. In addition,
by combining these phenomena with the environmental problems and highly-populated
urban areas, the natural disaster expands and accelerates even more.
Coastal erosion is a natural process influenced by humans; it consists of erosion,
transport, and deposition components that collectively modify coastal landforms (Wilson,
2010: 5). Thus, coastlines have been changing for a long time, and all these processes
differ, both temporally and spatially, while cliffs tend to retreat (Auckland Regional
Council, 2006). The primary factor of the coastal erosion is the climate change (Ramsey
and Bell, 2009: 138). In addition, creating sandy beaches takes several thousands of years
before the rocky material creates any real abundance of sand to fill a beach. Then, when
considering impacts of the sea level rise, it is very important to distinguish inundation (to
cover with water, especially floodwaters) from erosion. Concerning the former, as the sea
level rises, the high water line will migrate landward in proportion to the slope of the
coastal area. In some areas, the slope is very gradual, and impact from the sea level rise
can be severe (Zhang, 2004: 42). A phenomenon such as the erosion of sandy beaches is
a physical process entirely different from inundation. It includes a redistribution of sand
from the beach face to offshore, and it is most commonly carried out during coastal
storms. These storms are caused by a temporary increase of local sea level (the stormgenerated surge above the normal astronomical tide) so that energetic storm waves are
able to attack higher elevations of the beach and the dunes (Zhang, 2004: 42). Sediments,
in these places, are extracted and put into suspension by the waves and carried offshore.
Much of the sand is returned to the beach after the storm, by long-period swell waves,
during normal water level. This phenomenon suggests that water level plays an important
role in beach erosion, for example, a quantitative demonstration of the relationship of
storm erosion magnitude, on the U.S. East coast from northern Eastern, and their
accompanying storm tide amplitude and duration, has been given (Zhang, 2001: 309).
Next, to understanding the coastal erosion and denying that occurs the projects
with a temporary solution, defining the factor, included natural and artificial phenomenon,
of the coastal erosion also contributes to institute the policies and to plan public projects.
By clearing the differences of the factors between natural phenomenon and human
intervention, the public and the private developers and planners can create plans with the
idea of what they should not make or what projects should stop improving. In general,
there are main, seven natural factors: 1) the sand sources and sinks, 2) changes in relative
sea level, 3) geological characteristics of the shore, sand size, density and shape, 4) sandsharing system of beaches, 5) dunes and offshore bars, 6) effects of waves, currents, tides
and wind, and 7) bathymetry of the offshore sea bottom (Turekian et al., 1996). The
research states that there are six other beach erosion factors: 1) effects of human impact,
such as construction of artificial structures, mining of beach sand, offshore dredging, or
building of dams or rivers, 2) loss of sediment offshore, onshore, alongshore and by
attrition, 3) reduction in sediment supply due to deceleration cliff erosion, 4) reduction in
sediment supply from the sea floor, 5) increased storminess in coastal areas or changes in
angle of wave approach, 6) increase in beach saturation due to a higher water table or
increased precipitation (Turekian et al., 1996). Also, there are other six factors which
change through people’s intervention. Three of the main factors should especially be
focused upon, as improvements through people possible. The first factor is the
construction of groins and jetties. They are built on the area of shoreline and set
perpendicular to the coastal line. The purpose of constructing jetties is to protect the
coastal area from the hurricanes, as well as to moderate the radical ocean currents at the
area of a harbor. However, jetties break the continuity of the sand and silts flow. Silt and
sand comes from the river, ‘other beach areas’, ‘bluffs’, and ‘rocky shores’, and then they
flow and move with the sea current. In the case, where the ocean current flows south
from north, silt and sand also flow on the same direction. Also, two jetties are set from
the coastal line to the ocean in front of a harbor or the mouth of a river. In that case, the
jetties stop or break the continuity of the sand flow. Then, silts and sands accumulate at
the north side of the jetties along the beach, and erosion happens at the beach of the south
side of the jetties. The second factor is the dams. The silt and sand that come and
accumulate on the beach flow from the river. However, dams stop that flow on a river, on
its route to the ocean, and silt and sands accumulate at the bottom around the dams. The
sediments that are moved by the water are trapped behind the dam, even though the water
is allowed to flow through, in a controlled fashion. Therefore, this construction becomes
the trap of sediments and deprives the beach of material that could be used to build it up
through wave action.
The main reason why the government would like to save the coastal area from the
environmental issue of coastal erosion is that tourism is one of the most important
economic sectors, worldwide, and few environments are more important for tourism and
recreation than coastal zones. For many centuries, the coast has been a major resource for
recreation, and the intensity and diversity of activities related to it seem to be
continuously growing (Hall, 2001 and Orams, 1999). In the “Sea Level Rise Would Be
Costly In California, Economists Say”, Jason Dearen states that “Economists predict
erosion from rising sea levels could cost California hundreds of millions of dollars in lost
tourism and tax revenues as beaches shrink and buildings would have to be protected,
according to a new report (Dearen, 2011).” Coastal erosion will attack the beaches, and
then will destroy scores of animal habitats. Philip King, the study's author and professor
of economics at San Francisco State, argues that “more than 80 percent of Californians
live in coastal communities, and California's beaches support local economies and critical
natural species (King, 2011)”. According to the article, the pacific Institute has
determined that about half a million people, wetlands, ecosystems and infrastructure are
at risk. They expect that an average projections will find that seas rising 4 to 5 feet by
2100, causing $100 billions in damage (Dearen, 2011). For example, the coastal
community, Venice Beach, could lose up to $440 millions in tourism and tax revenue, if
the sea level rises fifty-five inches by 2100. “The study found sea level rise could cause
$52 million in flood damage to homes in the Venice Beach area, and nearly $39 million
in habitat loses (Dearen, 2011).” Finally, King states that “sea level rise will send
reverberations throughout local and state economies.”
3. Research Strategy
First, this research paper will research the condition of California coastline by
creating maps with using GIS since this condition defines how much the California
coastline will be affected to the coastal erosion and need a new project for improving that
current coastline condition. Then, this paper will focus on a specific project, “multipurpose reefs”, to know the economic benefit. In addition, by analyzing the report of the
case study project on El Segundo Beach in Los Angeles and Narrowneck beach in Gold
Coast, Australia, this research defines positive and negative aspects of the multi-purpose
artificial reef to be a sustainable solution. This research should flexibly fit on the beaches
along the Californian coastline, even for small communities. Since an expected trend of
time in the future, there will be an expectation that the coastal erosion will affect not only
large communities, but also many small communities. Therefore, it will be necessary to
consider whether to manage the precious revenues to control the community, to discuss
and make decision of other new artificial reef project, or to plan projects to create
sustainable communities in the future. These project’s decisions should depend on
economic and geological condition of the property.
To encourage the setting the new multi-purpose artificial reef on California
coastal line, I will create GIS maps. By researching the topography of the California
coastline with GIS, the data will help to know 1) what the coastline and beach condition
are and 2) where the multi-purpose artificial reef will be adopt. The data should be
contained the types of the condition of the beaches are in California and categorized the
beaches in each characteristics of conditions. Then, by organizing the data by Pacific
Institute, which organized the data about the coastal erosion along California coastline, I
will create the map with Arc Map of GIS―show 1) which areas or hazard zones of both
coast bluff and dune will be eroded by 2100, and which transportation―mostly local
roads, highways, and freeways―will be threatened by issues of coastal erosion, 2) the
polygon, with an extent of a 100-year coastal flood, based on FEMA (Federal Emergency
Management Agency) 100-year flood elevations, with a sea-level rise of 1.4 meters (55
inches) (in 2100) (Heberger and Herrera, 2009), and 3) the cost for communities to
replace the value of building and contents. By analyzing the coastal erosion data with
GIS map, the maps will help to understand the conditions of the California coastline and
community. Also, planners and developers will easily see and understand how the coastal
erosion will be reduceed in the future.
Also, by organizing the data in “Feasibility Study of Multi-Purpose Artificial Surf
Refs for Brevard County, Florida (Economic Segment)”, I could analyzes that the
recreational benefit assessment estimates the “new dollars” infused into beach
community due to surf-related tourism, enhancing community income, jobs, and tax
receipts. Brevard County is currently exploring the feasibility of constructing an artificial
surfing reef to provide both shoreline management and surf amenity benefits. This report
creates the chart of conceptualization for recreational benefit assessment and uses the
table of “estimated multi-purpose artificial reef recreational benefits. By these data, the
research leads to estimates the “new dollars” dues to surf-related tourism, enhancing
community income, jobs, and tax receipts. Analyzing this report strongly supports this
paper study from the economical aspect.
In addition, I will analyze the reports of the project by the planner of MultiPurpose Artificial Reef in El Segundo Beach, Los Angeles and Narrowneck beach in
Gold Coast, Australia. Then, I will organize the data of each site of the project. The data
will be contained how the project works as the sustainable solution. Also, by this report
of the case study project in El Segundo Beach in Los Angeles and Narrowneck beach in
Gold Coast, Australia, I will analyze what the current condition of the projects are and
how the project works for redeveloping the beaches. This data advances the research to
create new plans or projects in future to adopt the multi-purpose artificial reef in
California coastline. The reports is shown on the website of planners. By organizing the
analysis of the multipurpose artificial reef by the researcher, I could understand more
about the features of the project and know both positive and negative aspects which I
could not make a list by my own analysis of the planner’s reports. The analysis will help
not only the how the project built but also how the project manage and maintains with
great condition. This analysis is also shown on websites.
Then, by researching the reports by the designers and planners of the multipurpose artificial reef is to understand the entire system of the project; how the projects
works for coastal erosion issue, and on what condition the project can be adopt. The
reason why this project is great for improving coastal erosion is that it is a sustainable
solution. In order to put this sustainable solution more in many places, the case study
projects which already exists and works, should be organized the data why this projects is
sustainable first, and how it work. To understand these questions, the research method is
pointed out the features of the projects.
5. Finding and Analysis
Three maps are the mostly used data from the Pacific Institute, which is a
nonpartisan research group, provide the most used data that works to advance
environmental protection, economic development, and social equity (Pacific Institute).
The first map is “the Coastal Eroded Area (Area Inundated) Map in 2100”, which
contains the following data: Pacific coast bluff and dune erosion hazard zone, and
Transportation in San Francisco. On this map, people can see which areas or hazard
zones of both coast bluff and dune will be eroded by 2100, and which
transportation―mostly local roads, highways, and freeways―will be threatened by
issues of coastal erosion. According to Philip Williams and Associates, the data contained
in the “Pacific coast bluff erosion hazard zone” states that “the bluff and dune hazard
zone dataset for the year 2100 represents the areas vulnerable to erosion with a sea-level
rise of 1.4 meters (Williams and Associates).” The purpose of this data is to estimate the
extent of bluff and dune erosion given a 1.4-meter sea-level rise for the entire California
coast. On the map, red and yellow zones show the bluff and dune erosion hazard zone
given a 1.4-meter sea-level rise for the entire California coast. Especially, the San
Francisco County will be expected, largely, to be damaged because the City of San
Francisco has developed close to the coastline. In addition, the city plays an important
roll in the economic and social aspects of the state of California, and San Francisco’s
population is very large. Furthermore, the private property owners will be threatened by
the economic damages, and the Great Highway, an important street for residents living
along the coastline, is also threatened. Thus, if this street will be lost, it is very difficult
for the people to live in coastal area and to escape from hazards, such as storms and
flooding. As the result of land lost to erosion by backshore type and sea-level-rise
scenario (See Figure 1).
Figure 1: Summary of Land Lost to Erosion
The second map shows the “Flooding Zone Map in 2100”, which contains the
following data: 1) Areas inundated by unimpeded Pacific coastal flooding under a
scenario of 1.4-meter (55-inch) sea-level rise, 2) Schools, police stations, fire stations,
health care facilities vulnerable to coastal flooding under baseline conditions and a 1.4meter sea-level rise scenario. This map shows the polygon, with an extent of a 100-year
coastal flood, based on FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) 100-year flood
elevations, with a sea-level rise of 1.4 meters (55 inches) (in 2100) (Heberger and
Herrera, 2009). The purpose of this polygon layer is to estimate the impact of a 100-year
coastal flood with a sea-level rise of 1.4 meters (4.6 feet) along the California coast. The
reason why the map shows data for the schools, police stations, fire stations, and health
care facilities vulnerable to coastal erosion is that these institutions will play a very
important roll in helping people and managing the community’s safety by controlling the
social system when the flooding happens. As the beach is lost, fixed structures nearby are
increasingly exposed to the direct impact of storm waves, and will ultimately be damaged
or destroyed, unless expensive protective measures are taken. It has long been speculated
that the underlying rate of long-term sandy beach erosion is two orders of magnitude
greater than the rate—if the sea level rises, any significant increase of sea level will have
dire consequences for coastal inhabitants (Zhang, 2004: 42). Therefore, these public
buildings and institutes should be moved to safe area, where can be analyzed with the
map or where does not exist the public buildings, vulnerable to coastal flooding under
baseline conditions. The analysis of this map is that the States of California and the San
Francisco County government should make new policies for protecting these building by
supporting to move to safe area and deny the tragic situation when flooding and storm
happens.
The third map is “the Map of Replacement cost for building and contents by
census block”, which contains the data by the FEMA HAZUZ model. This map shows
the cost for communities to replace the value of building and contents. Phillip King gives
a more specific description of this map and provides data on Torrey Pines City and State
Beach, San Diego County. Based on a sea level rise estimate of 4.6 feet (1.4 meters) by
2100, Torrey Pines City and State Beach could lose: 1) $5 million in damages caused by
a 100-year coastal flood, including damage to homes and contents, cars and roads. 2) $99
million in tourism spending, and local and state tax revenue losses (accumulated between
now and 2100) caused by a narrower, eroded beach attracting fewer visitors. 3) $20.2
million in habitat and recreation losses caused by erosion reducing the beach area by 100
percent. 4) $348.7 million caused by land, road and railway lines lost or damaged by
erosion and subsidence, including damage to the Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis
Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor (Phillip King).
To deny spending these cost for replacement, the California State and some local
government along the coastline need to plan and establish new policies and project to
stop or make coastal erosion slow-down.
Analysis:
While the California Coastal Commission has mapped the locations of shoreline
armoring, the lack of readily available information on the status, height, condition and
life expectancy of these structures makes predicting future erosion difficult. Furthermore,
the present interpretation of the California Coastal Act is to allow shore armoring to
protect any existing structure in danger of erosion. Therefore, new shore protection is
likely in general but difficult to predict specifically. The methodology does not address
the effects of armoring on future erosion (The Pacific Institute).
Future Work:
To improve this study for creating sustainable coastline, there are some
improvements for some future works by analyzing the result and analysis; 1) the
evaluation of management approaches to address the erosion and flood hazards posed by
climate change; 2) the evaluation of alternative bluff erosion way of solution; 3)
application to a range of scenarios; 4) the application to range of scenarios; 5) improved
100-year Total Water Level estimates (The Pacific Institute).
Economic Review:
According to the “Feasibility Study of Multi-Purpose Artificial Surf Reefs for
Brevard County, Florida (Economic Segment)”, Brevard County is currently exploring
the feasibility of constructing an artificial surfing reef to provide both shoreline
management and surf amenity benefits. In pursuit of this task, the County commissioned
a reconnaissance-level feasibility study to assess the economic aspects of the proposed
project. PRÆCIPIO EFS, an economic, financial, and statistical consulting firm, has been
assigned the responsibility for assessing the recreational benefits associated with the
proposed multi-purpose artificial reef (Slotkin: P4).
The conceptualization for recreational benefit assessment is easily grasped from
Figure 4, owing to Crompton (2006). The County, serving as a fiscal agent, utilizes
deferred community income (i.e., taxes) to fund activities or projects that attract
individuals from outside the community. The purpose is simple: tourists spend “new
dollars” which ordinarily would not circulate in the destination community, and thus,
enhance community income, jobs, and tax receipts. Comparing the income accrued from
the tourism activity with the income deferred to promote the endeavor informs whether
the TDC decision was net beneficial.
(START)
Community
residents and
visitors pay taxes
(FINISH)
For community
residents who pay
taxes
To a city council
Which uses them
for tourism
programs,
promotions,
activities, or
facilities
Creating income and
jobs in the local
community
Who spend money
in the local
community
That attract outoftown visitors
Figure 4. Justification of Recreational Benefits. (Crompton, 2006, Journal of Travel
Research)
The recreational benefit assessment estimates the “new dollars” infused into
Brevard County due to surf-related tourism, enhancing community income, jobs, and tax
receipts. With respect to the recreational benefits associated with the proposed artificial
surfing reef, results from this analysis support the following: 1) Exclusive of impacts
from specialty events such as a world-class surf competition, the proposed artificial
surfing reef is expected to draw an additional 2,109 surf visit days per year. 2) Expected
tourist expenditure per surf visit day amounts to $57.80, of which about $19 is spent on
lodging. 3) Exclusive of impacts from specialty events such as a world-class surf
competition, and using an average daily room rate of $95 per night, this impact supports
about 422 room nights per year. 4) Exclusive of impacts from specialty events such as a
world-class surf competition, and assuming a 25-year project life, the present value of the
recreational benefits provided by the proposed artificial surfing reef amount to $920,000.
5) These economic benefits would support, on a yearly basis, about 3 jobs and $18,000 in
tax revenue – the revenue split would be $7,000 at Federal level and $11,000 at the State
& Local level. 6) With respect to special event benefits, and assuming a 25-year project
life, the present value of a sanctioned, 5-star surf competition to be held on the proposed
artificial surfing reef is $1.68 million. 7) Collectively, and assuming a 25-year project
life, the present value of recreational and specialty event benefits associated with project
supported surf amenity amounts to $2.6 million (Slotkin: P6). The surf market is a
burgeoning industry and artificial surfing reefs are a new and innovative technology and
product. Due to the lack of any formal retrospective evaluation on the benefits derived
from previous projects of this nature, very little is known about their commercial
performance; consequently, expected economic values to be derived from artificial
surfing reefs carry significant uncertainty (Slotkin: P8).
ARTIFICIAL SURFING REEF RECREATIONAL BENEFITS:
TABLE 1: Estimated Artificial Surfing Reef Recreational Benefits
1. 2. Yealy
3. 4. Daily
5.
6. Total
Project Capacity Non- Tourist Aggregated
Sales
Year Increase Locals Sales 3.5
Direct
SAM
(NLs) growth/y Sales Daily Multiplier
share
r
Tourist
= 1.5
= 0.25
Sales x
NLs x
Capture
Rate =
90%
1
2
3
4
5
20
21
22
23
24
25
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
8435
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
2,109
$57.80
$59.82
$61.92
$64.08
$66.33
$111.12
$115.01
$119.04
$123.20
$127.51
$131.98
$109,697
$113,537
$117,510
$121,623
$125,880
$210,893
$218,274
$225,914
$233,821
$242,005
$250,475
$164,546
$170,305
$176,266
$182,435
$188,820
$316,339
$327,411
$338,871
$350,731
$363,007
$375,712
7. REC
BENS
(DR = 0)
Tourist
Sales
Daily
Tourist
Sales x
NLs
8. REC
9. REC 10. REC
BENS
BENS
BENS
(DR = 0)
ValueTourist
Tourist Added DR Sales DR
Sales
= 16%
= 16%
Daily
Tourist
Sales
Daily
Tourist
Sales x
NLs
$98,727
$102,183
$105,759
$109,461
$113,292
$189,804
$196,447
$203,322
$210,439
$217,804
$225,427
$121,886
$126,152
$130,567
$135,137
$139,867
$234,326
$242,527
$251,015
$259,801
$268,894
$278,305
$85,110 $105,074
$75,939 $93,751
$67,756 $83,649
$60,454 $74,635
$53,940 $66,592
$9,753 $12,041
$8,702 $10,743
$7,764
$9,586
$6,928
$8,553
$6,181
$7,631
$5,515
$6,809
$744,154 $918,709
The Table 1, “Estimated Artificial Surfing Reef Recreational Benefits”, can create the
model assumption: 1) Yearly capacity increase (column 2) is the product of 33.74
improved surfing days. 2) Non-Local share of visitation (column 3) is imperative due to
the ASR’s open-access provision. 3) Daily tourist sales (column 4) is deconstructed from
the PMG study (and corroborated with literature citations). A 3.5% yearly growth rate is
posited which accounts for inflation (2.5%) and a modest real increase (1%) in daily
purchases. 4) The capture rate of 90% is simulated from an actual IMPLAN run with the
PMG deconstructed sales figures by category. Sales “captured” account for the margining
of retail purchases and constitute the aggregated direct sales effect associated with ASR
induced tourism. Column 5 is the product of columns 3 and 4 multiplied by a factor of
0.9. 5) The Total Sales Effect (column 6) is simply column 5 multiplied by 1.5 and
includes the direct, indirect, and induced effects of tourist purchases. 6) Value-added
recreational benefits are obtained by multiplying column 6 by 0.6 – the value-added ratio
of 60% of the total sales effect is arrived at from an actual IMPLAN run with the PMG
deconstructed sales figures by category. 7) Column 8 is sometimes reported when
assessing economic benefits, and would be an alternative to column 7. No multiplier
effects are included here due to the assumption of full-employment. 8) The economic
benefits derived from an ASR are uncertain and thus a risk adjusted discount rate of 16%
is utilized. This discount rate reflects both a risk-free return (4%) and a risk premium
(12%) commensurate with historic average returns yielded by small company stocks (see
Ibbotson) – that is, investors would require a return of 16% to induce them to invest in
the ASR project, an investment at least as risky as the risk associated with an aggregate
average of small company stocks. Recreational benefit risks associated with this project,
which provide for uncertainty surrounding yearly net cash flows, include the following:
(i) new technology performance, (ii) open-access issues, (iii) economic downturn, (iv)
construction, (v) weather, and (vi) funding – the latter three risks impacting recreational
benefits in possibly delaying the time period in which benefits actualize. Therefore, the
results is that the Present Value of expected recreational benefits aggregated over a 25year time period is about $745,000 under the value-added approach (column 9) and
$920,000 under the tourist sales approach (column 10) (Slotkin: P31).
A Review of Existing Multi-Purpose Artificial Surfing Reefs and the Physical
Properties behind their Function:
The report, “A Review of Existing Multi-Purpose Artificial Surfing Reefs and the
Physical Properties behind their Function”, provides an extensive literature review on the
subject of Multi-Purpose Artificial Surfing Reefs (MPASR) and the physical mechanisms
which control their function. Thus, this research can know positive and negative aspects
of the multi-purpose artificial reef which already exists and works by this report’s
evaluates. One of the great and effective multi-purpose artificial reef projects is that on
the Gold Coast in Australia. However, there is the one multi-purpose artificial reef which
did not work: Pratte’s reef located in El Segundo, California.
The Narrowneck Reef’s the project site is on the North Gold Coast of Australia
and began to improve since 1992. This artificial reef has two important objectives and
several features: the primary objective of the project is to widen the beach and dunes
along the Surfer’s Paradise esplanade, Main Beach and Narrowneck Beach to
accommodate storm erosion and retreat due to sea level rise. The second objective is to
improve surfing conditions and beach amenities.” Also, this artificial reef yields various
benefits: does not cause down drift erosion, has low visual impact, does not restrict
pedestrian flow, does not create hazardous conditions, and meets regulatory body
requirements. In addition, this artificial reef used Geosynthetic sand filled containers
even though a number of alternative construction materials, including rock, and concrete
were used. The reasons for using Geosynthetic sand focus on four features; cost, safety or
public liability, environmental, and ease of removal. Regarding cost, the geosynthetic
structure was approximately half the cost of a similar rock structure. This feature is great
for small communities because most small communities cannot expand high sums of
dollars. For safety and public liability, sand material reduces the risk of injury. In terms
of the environmental aspect, transport of 45,000m3 of rock from quarries along busy city
roads would increase road traffic emissions into the air as well increasing the need for
road maintenance. Also, in terms of monitoring the beach after a storm, it was recognized
that this construction reduced the attack by the storm and the risks of erosion.
Performance Evaluation:
Since 1999, The Gold Coast beaches have been constantly monitored using an
ARGUS Coastal Imaging System. The Water Research Laboratory (WRL) publishes the
results of their analysis at six month intervals. At the end of the most recently published
monitoring report (WRL, 2007), the beach width was nearly the same as at the end of the
initial beach nourishment in 2000. A distinct salient approximately 30m wider than the
adjacent beaches has formed in the lee of the reef. The WRL has concluded that the
cyclical variations in beach width due to seasonal variations in wave climate are an order
of magnitude greater than the slightly erosional overall trend. The Narrowneck Reef has
become a control point for the beaches north of Surfers Paradise and is acting to stabilize
the sediment transport along that stretch of coastline. The actual salient formations are
less than the 78m predicted by the designers. Jackson et al. (2004) attribute this to model
inaccuracies however these predictions were based on the reef being built to the design
specifications. The actual reef is significantly smaller and deeper than designed, as was
described in the previous section.
Ecological Enhancement:
Although ecological enhancement was not intended to be a primary function, the
reef has performed extremely well as a new ecosystem for marine life. The outer layer of
the geotextile bags manufactured by ELCO Solutions Pty Ltd has proven to be a very
good substrate for marine organisms. The National Marine Safety Committee has
concluded that “The biological communities associated with Narrowneck Artificial Reef
appear to enhance biodiversity and productivity at a local scale, and may also contribute
to overall regional productivity.” The reef has become a very popular diving and fishing
site (Jackson et al. 2004).
Pratte’s Reef is located in El Segundo, California near the center of Santa Monica
Bay. Construction was completed in 2001. The primary function of Pratte’s Reef was
surfing enhancement and mitigation for the loss of surf breaks due to the construction of
the El Segundo groin. The reef was the first attempt at a coastal structure designed
specifically for surf enhancement in the United States (Borrero and Nelsen, 2003).
Performance Evaluation:
Pratte’s Reef was not designed for coastal protection. Beach and bathymetric
surveys performed after reef construction showed no appreciable change in the shoreline
morphology. The bathymetric surveys also revealed that the crest height of the reef
diminished rapidly after construction was completed. The reef’s total volume and rapidly
declining crest elevation were too low to have any significant impact on the shoreline.
Dive surveys performed after construction revealed that the polypropylene bags (black)
rapidly deteriorated. The polyester bags (white) remained intact but failed to maintain
their position. Recent observations of Pratte’s Reef reveal that the reef is no longer intact
and has ceased to exist as a viable structure. The majority of the remaining bags has been
covered up by the naturally shifting sand bars and is no longer visible on the seabed
(Borrero and Nelsen, 2003).
Ecological Enhancement:
Although ecological enhancement was not intended to be a primary function, the
reef did perform well as a new ecosystem for marine life before its eventual
disintegration. Dive surveys revealed rapid biological growth on the bags and the
presence of crustaceans while the reef was intact (Borrero and Nelsen, 2003).
Conclusion:
In conclusion, coastal erosion will largely damage communities along the
California Coastline at the economic, environmental, and social levels. The important
factor, when understanding costal erosion, is that coastal erosion has occurred since long
ago as one of the many natural phenomena. The problem that has to be addressed is the
‘rapidness’ of improving, and globally expanding, the phenomenon as a serious
environmental issue of coastal erosion. The three maps will help planners and developers
to create a sustainable coastline in California. The first map, Coastal Eroded Area (Area
Inundated) Map 2100 will help public projects and create policies to indicate denying
temporary public project and estimating policies with a wrong-understanding of the
future. Through the second map, Flooding Zone Map in 2100, the government can expect
to find safety areas where the public, important institutions―such as fire and police
station, and health care facilities―should be set or moved. The third map, the Map of
Replacement cost for building and contents by census blocks, can help people to
understand the many issues of coastal erosion damage communities in the California
coastal area, and the seriousness of such damage. Furthermore, the map is a helpful
resource to people who plan new businesses along the coastline of California. To improve
this study for creating sustainable coastline, there are some improvements for some future
works by analyzing the result and analysis; 1) the evaluation of management approaches
to address the erosion and flood hazards posed by climate change; 2) the evaluation of
alternative bluff erosion way of solution; 3) application to a range of scenarios; 4) the
application to range of scenarios; 5) improved 100-year Total Water Level estimates (The
Pacific Institute).
At the point of view from economic aspects, the multi-purpose artificial reef can
creates the recreational benefit due to surf-related tourism tourism, enhancing community
income, jobs, and tax receipts. With respect to the recreational benefits associated with
the proposed artificial surfing reef. For instance, exclusive of impacts from specialty
events such as a world-class surf competition, the proposed artificial surfing reef is
expected to draw an additional 2,109 surf visit days per year. As the result of the mdel
assumption, the Present Value of expected recreational benefits aggregated over a 25year time period is about $745,000 under the value-added approach and $920,000 under
the tourist sales approach.
The Narrowneck Multi-Purpose Artificial Surfing Reef has performed its function
as a coastal protection structure in spite of the construction deficiencies. The reef has
been successful in stabilizing the adjacent beaches and reducing the longshore sediment
flow. The reef has withstood waves as high as 13m without any significant effect to the
bag placement (Jackson et al., 2007). The reef construction methods were very cost
3
effective, US$50/m , but were not precise enough to build the reef to design
specifications. The reef has been reasonably successful as a surfing enhancement
structure but does not produce high intensity waves during mean wave conditions as per
the original design. The principles of the reef design were sound and could be considered
applicable to Brevard County for coastal protection and surfing enhancement. The
construction method utilized for the Narrowneck Reef is not considered suitable for
Brevard County. The small wave climate at Brevard County (mean Hs ≈ _1m) will
dictate that the reef crest should be located approximately 1.0m below mean sea level to
be effective. The split-hull barge method cannot achieve those design depths. The
inaccuracy inherent in that method will also reduce the surfing enhancement component
of the reef. The Pratte’s Artificial Surfing Reef did not succeed in any measurable way as
a surfing enhancement structure. As stated by Borrero and Nelsen (2003), “The underperformance of Pratte’s Reef as a surf spot can be largely attributed to deficiencies in the
design, rather than other factors such as a poor location or a deficient wave climate”. The
reef design was inadequate as were the construction materials. The reef bags were too
weak and too small to withstand the open ocean forces incident upon them. Figure 4.22
shows a comparison of Pratte’s and Narrowneck Reefs. Pratte’s Reef lacked sufficient
volume or crest width (shore normal) to have any significant effect on the long period
swells which typically produce the best surfing waves. The principles of the reef design
and construction were not sound and should not be considered applicable to Brevard
County for coastal protection or surfing enhancement. Finally, the data of GIS, economic
review and evaluation of the multi-purpose reef which has positive and negative aspects,
defines that California coastline should plan to set the multipurpose artificial reef.
References:
Auckland Regional Council (ARC). (2006). Regional Assessment of Areas Susceptible to
Coastal Erosion. Volume 1. TR 2009/009.
Barry, B., 1995. A Treatise on Social Justice Volume II. Justice as Impartiality.
Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Bird, E.C.F.: 1985, Coastline Changes, Wiley & Sons, New York, 219 pp.
Bin, O. C.E. Landry, C. Ellis, and H. Vogelsong, 2005. Some Consumer Surplus
Estimates for North Carolina
Beaches, Marine Resource Economics 20(2): 145-61.
Beckerman, W., 1999. Sustainable development and our obligations to future
generations.
Dobson, A. (Ed.), Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Sustainability and Social Justice.
Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 71–93.
Elbel, F., 2002. Intergenerational justice. The Social Contract, 13, 12-18.
CLIA, 2008. CLIA cruise market overview - Statistical cruise industry data through
2007. Cruises Lines International Association. Available at
http://www.cruising.org/Press/overview2008
Cooper, J.A.G. and McKenna, J. 2007. Social Justice and coastal defense: the long and
short term perspectives. Geoforum (in press).
Cooper, J.A.G. and McKenna, J. 2008. Concepts of Fairness in Coastal Erosion
Management. Centre for Coastal and Marine Research, School of Environmental
Sciences, University of Ulster,
Coleraine, BT52 1SA, Northern Ireland
Galgano, F. A., Leatherman, S. P., and Douglas, B. C.: 2004, ‘Inlets Dominate U.S. East
Coast Shoreline Change’, J. Coastal Research, in press.
Hall, C.M., 2001. Trends in ocean and coastal tourism: the end of the last frontier? Ocean
& Coastal Management, 44, 601-618.
Hardin, R., 1987. Social justice in the large and small. Social Justice Research, 1, 83
105.
Haynes, K.E., Lall, S.V. and Trice, M.P. 2001. Spatial issues in environmental equity.
International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management,1, 17-31.
Landry, C.E., A.G. Keeler and W. Kriesel, 2003. An Economic Evaluation of Beach
Erosion Management Alternatives, Marine Resource Economics 18(2): 105-127.
Leeworthy, V.R. and Wiley, P.C., 2001. Current participation patterns in marine
recreation. National survey on recreation and the environment 2000. Silver Spring
(Maryland), U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (U.S. Department of
Commerce).
Lew, D.K. and D.M. Larson, 2008. Valuing a Beach Day with a Repeated Nested Logit
Model of Participation, Site
Choice, and Stochastic Time Value, Marine Resource Economics 23(3): 233-252.
Ramsey, D. and Bell, R. (2009). Preparing for coastal change- A guide for local
government in New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand.
Moore, L. J., Benumof, B. T., and Griggs, G. B.: 1999, ‘Coastal Erosion Hazards in Santa
Cruz and San Diego Counties, California’, J. Coastal Research No. 28 (Special Issue),
121–139.
North Norfolk District Council, 2005. Shoreline Management Plan Position Statement.
<http://www.marinet.org.uk/coastaldefences/smp.html#nnd>
Orams, M.B., 1999. Marine tourism: development, impacts and management, London:
Routledge.
Ramsey, D. and Bell, R. (2009). Preparing for coastal change- A guide for local
government in New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand.
Ramsey, D. and Bell, R. (2009). Preparing for coastal change- A guide for local
government in New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand.
Taylor, J.A., Murdock, A.P., Pontee, N.I., 2004. A macroscale analysis of coastal
steepening around the coast of England and Wales. The Geographical Journal, 170 pp.
179-188.
UNESCO, 2007. Case studies on climate change and world heritage. Paris, United Nation
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Wilson, Amanda. 2010. ‘Coastal planning in North Shore City, New Zealand:
Developing responsible coastal erosion policy’. AARES Conference.
Whitehead, J.C., C.F. Dumas, J. Herstine, J. Hill, and B. Buerger, 2008. Valuing beach
access and width with revealed and stated preference data, Marine Resource Economics
23(2): 119-135.
Zhang, K., Douglas, B.C., and Leatherman, S.P.: 2001, ‘Beach Erosion Potential for
Severe Nor’easters’, J. Coastal Research 17, 309-321.
Zhang, K., Douglas, B.C., and Leatherman, S.P. 2004, ‘Global Warming and Costal
Erosion’, Laboratory for coastal Research and International Hurricane Research Center.
Dearen, Jason. “Sea Level Rise Would Be Costly In California, Economists
Say.” TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc. September 14th, 2011. September 30th, 2011.
Heberger, Matthew, and Herrera, Pablo, 2009, California coast 100-year flood with a 1.4
meter sea-level rise, 2100: The Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast,
Pacific Institute, Oakland CA.
Hall, C.M., 2001. Trends in ocean and coastal tourism: the end of the last frontier? Ocean
& Coastal Management, 44, 601-618.
Matthew Heberger, 2009. Vector digital data. Pacific Institute. Oakland CA. “The
Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast”
Orams, M.B., 1999. Marine tourism: development, impacts and management, London:
Routledge.
Pacific Institute. “GIS Data Downlloads”
<http://www.pacinst.org/reports/sea_level_rise/data/index.htm>
Pablo Herrera, “Vulnerable Police Stations, 2100”.
Originator: Matthew Heberger
Originator: Heather Cooley
Originator: Peter Gleick
Originator: Pablo Herrera
Publication_Date: 2009
Title: The Impacts of Sea-Level Rise on the California Coast
Publication_Information:
Publication_Place: Oakland CA
Publisher: Pacific Institute
Wilson, Amanda. 2010. ‘Coastal planning in North Shore City, New Zealand:
Developing responsible coastal erosion policy’. AARES Conference.
Zhang, K., Douglas, B.C., and Leatherman, S.P.: 2001, ‘Beach Erosion Potential for
Severe Nor’easters’, J. Coastal Research 17, 309-321.
Zhang, K., Douglas, B.C., and Leatherman, S.P. 2004, ‘Global Warming and Costal
Erosion’, Laboratory for coastal Research and International Hurricane Research
Center.