UN EP
COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT IN
THE MEDITERRANEAN:
AN OVERVIEW
by
Prof. Dr. Erdal Özhan
PAP-4/CE/02/PP.1
Priority Actions Programme
Regional Activity Centre
Ankara/Split, May 2002
COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT IN THE MEDITERRANEAN:
AN OVERVIEW
Prof.Dr. Erdal Özhan
Chairman of MEDCOAST, Professor of Coastal Engineering and Management
Middle East Technical University, 06531 Ankara, Turkey
1.
Introduction
Coastal erosion is one of the most important socio-economical problems that challenge
the capabilities of states and local authorities. Whether it is due to natural or
anthropogenic reasons, coastal erosion causes significant economical losses, social
problems, and ecological damages. The problem of erosion may extend its influence
hundreds of kilometres alongshore in the case of large deltaic areas, and may have
transboundary implications. In the case of pocket beaches on the other hand, it could be a
very local phenomenon affecting only the residents of a nearby town and/or the tourism
industry.
The Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP), an action-oriented co-operative effort among the
riparian countries and the European Union, has the general objective of creating a
healthier Mediterranean environment, resting on the principles of sustainable
development. MAP is a part of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP),
and was its first Regional Seas Programme, set-up in 1975. The Priority Actions
Programme (PAP), implemented by the Regional Activity Centre in Split, Croatia is a
part of MAP, and deals with implementation of priority actions, the most important being
the Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM). PAP wishes to contribute to rational
management of the coastal erosion in the Mediterranean. An Expert Meeting was
organised by PAP/RAC in Split during 10-11 January 2002, with the aim of discussing
the coastal erosion issues in the Mediterranean, and the concrete actions that could be
taken to combat it. This paper was prepared for the purpose of setting the stage for
discussions in the Expert Meeting.
2. The problem of coastal erosion
Coastal erosion is defined as the long term loss of the shore material (volume) relative to
fixed reference line (baseline) and initial reference volume seaward of this line above
some, arbitrary vertical datum (Basco, 1999). Coastal erosion is always accompanied
with the shoreward recession of the shoreline and the loss of land area.
Coastal erosion is usually judged as “critical “ when it presents a serious problem
wherever the rate of erosion, considered in conjunction with economic, industrial,
1
recreational, agricultural, navigational, demographic, ecological and other relevant
factors, indicates that action to remedy (stop or slow down) erosion may be “justified”
In the Mediterranean, coastal erosion has been a longstanding, large-scale issue around
the deltaic areas, such as the deltas of the Nile and Po Rivers, and the smaller deltas like
those of the Albanian rivers. It has also been a major issue at smaller scales, especially in
the municipal or tourist resort beaches along the relatively more densely developed
northern coast, following the flux of people from inland areas to the coast and the boom
of the tourism industry. More than 40 % of beaches in France, Italy and Spain was found
to be confronting erosion in the EU project CORINE completed in 1990. Two graphs
showing the findings of this study for four EU countries of the Mediterranean are given in
Appendix A. These graphs were reconstructed from the figures given in Blue Plan
(1996). One of the graphs provides the lengths of various coast types, and the second
gives the lengths of beaches that are eroding, accreting or in equilibrium. According to
the Atlas of the Italian Beaches (Fierro and Ivaldi, 2001), 27 % of the Italian beaches
which constitute 61 % of the total Italian coastline are retreating, 70 % in equilibrium,
and only 3 % prograding. (The information provided in Fig. 2 in Appendix A somewhat
differs from these percentages).
Damages of coastal erosion may depict itself in the followings (van der Weide et al,
2001)
a. Life of people: This is a serious issue for people living in low-lying lands (below the
sea level) adjacent to seas and oceans such as the Netherlands. It is generally not a
problem in the Mediterranean.
b. Property and associated economical values: Loss of extremely valuable land
(recreational and tourist beaches) and damages to urban infrastructure are important
for the Mediterranean countries.
c. Ecological values: Good examples to this type of damage are turtle nesting beaches
like the Kazanli Beach (Turkey) and several beaches in the Zakynthos Island (Greece)
that have been loosing critical turtle nesting grounds due to anthropogenic erosion.
d. Cultural values: There exist numerous examples to this type of damage all along the
Mediterranean coast in areas where people have settled since ancient times, such as
the Phoenician ruins in Tyre, Lebanon (Özhan, 1993).
3. Causes of coastal erosion
Factors that cause changes (erosion / accretion) in the seabed topography and the time
scales of these changes are summarised in Table 1. Some of these factors (waves,
alongshore currents, rip currents, undertow, overwash) usually combine together to
reshape the sea bottom during a storm, causing an aerial pattern of erosion and accretion
and resulting an overall gain or loss for the volume of beach sand. On the other hand,
variations in the wave conditions (large, short period, small steepness) have seasonal
(cyclic) effects. The type of change due to these factors does not necessarily indicate the
long-term nature of the change, but they contribute to it. The factors that are associated
2
Table 1. Factors that cause changes in the sea bed topography and the time scales
FACTOR
EFFECT
Erosion
Centuries to millennia
COMMENTS
Natural supply from inland or shoreface
and inner shelf sources can contribute to
shoreline stability or accretion
Relative sea level rise
Erosion
Hours to days
Very critical to erosion magnitude
Erosion
Erosion
Hours to months
Hours to months
Individual storms or seasonal effects
Individual storms or seasonal effects
Accretion
Hours to months
Summer conditions
Accretion, no
change,
or erosion
Hours to millennia
Discontinuities (updrift//downdrift) and
nodal points
Sediment supply
Accretion/erosion
(source and sinks)
Sea Level Rise
Phenomenal storm,
storm surge
Large wave height
Short wave period
Waves of small
steepness
Alongshore
currents
Rip currents
Underflow
Inlet presence
Overwash
Wind
Subsidence,
compaction
Tectonic events
TIME SCALE
Decades to millennia
Narrow seaward-flowing, near-bottom
currents may transport significant
Erosion
Hours to months
quantities of sediment during coastal
storms.
Seaward-flowing, near-bottom currents
Erosion
Hours to days
may transport significant quantities of
sediment during coastal storms.
Inlet-adjacent shorelines tend to be
unstable because of fluctuations or
Net erosion;high
Years to centuries
migrations inlet position; net effect of
instability
inlets is erosional owing to sand storage
in tidal shoals.
High tides and waves cause sand
Erosional
Hours to days
transport over barrier beaches
Erosional
Hours to centuries
Sand blown inland from beach
Natural or human-induced withdrawal of
Erosion
Years to millennia
subsurface fluids
Instantaneous, centuries Earthquakes; Elevation or subsidence of
Erosion / Accretion
to millennia
plates
with effects having time scales in the order of years or more (eg. changes in sediment
supply, sea level rise, coastal subsidence and tectonic events) are directly responsible for
the long-term behaviour of the coast.
The natural and anthropogenic causes of coastal erosion in the Mediterranean are not
different from the causes elsewhere. In the followings, the natural events and the
anthropogenic activities that cause coastal erosion are briefly discusses. The references
that are provided indicate the part of the Mediterranean where the mentioned factor is a
primary reason for erosion.
3
The natural causes of long term coastal erosion are the followings:
a. Sea level rise (Pranzini & Rossi, 1995; Khalil, 1997);
b. Coastal subsidence due to tectonic events (Khalil, 1997);
c. Climatic changes (changing of the storm intensities, shift of the dominant storm
directions affecting the approach angle of waves; variation of precipitation and the
river regimes and discharges) (Medina & Lopez, 1997);
d. Increased vegetation cover over the river watersheds due to climatic changes (causing
decreased soil erosion and sediment supplied to the coast);
e. Sediment sinks (presence of offshore canyons, movement to great depths at steep
slopes, wind transport of sand to inland areas) (Golik & Rosen,1999);
f. Changing of river courses and mouths in deltas (PAP/RAC, 2000; Berriolo, Fierro &
Gamboni, 2001)
Anthropogenic causes of long term coastal erosion are more or less parallel to the natural
causes. These are:
a. Decreasing sediment supply by rivers to the coastal physiographic unit (cutting of the
sediment transport by damming the rivers, sand and gravel mining along the river
beds, decreasing the sediment transport efficiency by lowering water discharges due
to increased fresh water use or due to river works such as bank and bed erosion
control) (Simeoni et al., 1997; Eronat, 1999; Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999; PAP/RAC,
2000);
b. Erosion control works and afforestation in coastal and riverine watersheds (Eronat,
1999);
c. Decreasing the volume of sand in the physiographic unit (sand mining from the beach
and dunes, offshore sand mining) (Özhan, 1993; Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999);
d. Alteration of the usual pattern of coastal currents and the associated sediment
transport along and across the shoreline, due to man-made coastal structures and
urban development too close to the shoreline (Silva et al., 1993; Loizidou & Iacovou,
1999; Fatallah & Gueddari, M., 2001, Rakha & Abul-Azm, 2001);
e. Anthropogenic changes made to river courses and mouths in deltas (PAP/RAC, 2000;
Berriolo, Fierro & Gamboni, 2001);
f. Maintenance dredging of approach channels and estuarine inlets;
g. Land subsidence due to anthropogenic effects (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997;
Fierro & Ivaldi, 2001).
In Cyprus for example, dam construction, sand mining, coastal structures and urban
development too close to the shoreline are cited as the factors that have triggered and
accelerated coastal erosion (Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999). Eronat (1999) lists dam
construction, erosion control in the watershed, sand and gravel mining along the river
bed, illegal sand mining from the beach, and construction of coastal structures by
property owners as the main reasons for significant erosion rates that has been observed
in the vicinity of the mouth of the Madra Creek, the northern Aegean coast of Turkey.
Along the coast of the Emilia-Ramagna Region (Adriatic Sea, Italy), the main causes of
coastal erosion are sand and gravel extraction from the river beds, building of river
4
impoundment works, subsidence caused by ground water exploitation and the coastal
structures (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997). Along the Venetian coast of the Adriatic
Sea, the main causes of the erosion by far are said to be the reduction of the sediment
inputs from the rivers and the construction of the jetties at three inlets of the Venice
Lagoon (Silva et al., 1993).
Anthropogenic causes (a), (b), (e) and (f) result in the net erosion of the physiographic
unit; e.g. there appears an overall shoreline recession. Causes (c) and (d) on the other
hand induce shoreline erosion at local scales. These are usually associated with accretion
elsewhere. In the case of cause (c) for example, the shore around the old river mouth
swiftly erodes, whereas the location of the new river mouth accretes. For (d), shoreline
erosion takes place down-coast of the coastal structures (at the side of the net longshore
sediment transport), but a similar rate of accretion occurs up-coast of the coastal
structure.
There are several reasons that decrease the sediment load brought by rivers to the coast.
The most important of these is the construction of dams and engineering works along the
rivers. Dams intercept almost all the sediment brought from upstream sections.
Furthermore, by modifying the water discharge (making it more uniform), the sediment
transport downstream of a dam is also altered and the sediment transport efficiency is
decreased.
In addition to damming of rivers, alterations of the flow regimes by diversions and
engineering works, and modification of the discharge rates and patters are also
responsible for the decreased sediment loads brought to the coast, and thus for coastal
erosion. This is also a significant cause for the Albanian coastal erosion (Simeoni at al,
1997). Darci River was observed to have lost a great part of its discharge rate due to
diversions and upstream water use. This is the main reason behind the recession of the
shoreline next to the river mouth at an annual rate of 1-2 meters. This erosion will
continue until the shoreline and the nearshore topography is changed to have their
equilibrium shapes, which do not yield net sediment transport rates in the alongshore
direction.
Another major cause for decreased sediment input to the coast and the consequent
erosion, is sand and gravel quarries located along the active riverbeds. This activity is
usually not allowed from the beaches, but significance of mining from riverbeds is often
overlooked. For example, sand and gravel extraction from the riverbeds has been a
significant economical activity in Albania (PAP/RAC, 2000), and it is still a legitimate
undertaking in Turkey.
Removal of sand and gravel directly from the coast by illegal quarrying could be a
significant factor triggering coastal erosion and shoreline recession. The shoreline south
of the Town of Tyre in Southern Lebanon receded more than 100 meters in about 20
years due to commercial sand extraction from inshore and the beach face (Özhan, 1993).
5
Topological changes in the seabed slope resulting from offshore sand mining for beach
nourishment have also been criticised for the accelerated shore erosion when the borrow
area is not sufficiently far away from the coast and not at a large enough water depth.
Changing of the river course and location of the mouth in a deltaic coast can be a natural
phenomenon. Simeoni et al. (1997) mentions that several Albanian rivers (e.g. Ishmi,
Shkumbini, Semani, and Vjose) have undergone such changes. Such alterations are
accompanied with local erosion around the old mouths and accretion around the new ones
as mentioned earlier.
For small pocket beaches, sand transported by wind into inland locations (which does not
return back to the beach) may constitute a major sink. Also, mechanical cleaning of
dead Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia ocenica) for aesthetic purposes from the surface
of recreational beaches could cause significant sand losses from the system. The material
removed by special-duty machines was found to contain sand up to 30 percent in some
Italian beaches (Pranzini, 2002).
4. Management of coastal erosion ( Shoreline management)
4.1 Detecting coastal erosion
The locations of the historical coastal erosion and the erosion rates can be estimated by
using the followings:
a. The historical aerial photographs and coastal topographic maps (Preti, Carboni &
Albertazzi, 1997, Golik and Rosen, 1999; Suzen & Özhan, 2000; Berriolo, Fierro &
Gamboni, 2001; Bowman & Pranzini, 2001, Fatallah & Gueddari, M., 2001). These
sources provide information on the past shoreline positions and the rate of shoreline
recession.
b. The old bathymetric maps. Comparison of the successive bathymetric maps provides
information on the regions of erosion and accretion, and their average rates) (Golik
and Rosen, 1999).
c. A numerical model to calculate the sand transport rates from the historical time series
of wave data, and the resulting morphological changes (Golik and Rosen, 1999;
Rakha, & Abul-Azm 2001)
Golik and Rosen (1999) uses all three approaches above in their study on management of
Israeli sand resources.
The present and the future trends of coastal erosion can be monitored through the
following schemes:
a. Visual observations on erosion indicators (location of erosion and in some cases the
rate of shoreline retreat) (PAP/RAC, 2000);
6
b. Shoreline position surveys (location and the rate of shoreline retreat/advance)
(Micallef, 2001);
c. Topographic and bathymetric surveys (zones of erosion and accretion, and their rates)
(Bowman & Pranzini, 2001; Certain, et al., 2001; Delbono et. Al. 2001);
d. Use of aerial digital photography and satellite images (location and the rate of
shoreline retreat/advance) (Eronat, 1999; Suzen & Özhan, 2000).
Cultural features present along the coast (such as the bunkers along the Albanian coast)
serve as useful landmarks for assessing erosion areas, and in some cases the erosion rates
(PAP/RAC, 2000). Although the resolution of the satellite images has become finer in
the recent years and one can obtain shoreline images with an accuracy of 50 cm., the use
of this data in coastal erosion studies still suffers from the inaccuracies inherent in the
analysis. The most important problem encountered is the detection of the exact location
of the shoreline in the image, especially during the stormy periods (when the shore face is
wet due to wave run up) (Golik & Rosen, 1999). Aerial digital photography provides a
fast and reasonably accurate tool for monitoring the shoreline locations along lengthy
stretches of the coast (Edwards et al., 1996; Curr et al., 1997; Eronat, 1999)
.2 Predicting future erosion
Numerical modelling has developed to be a powerful tool for predicting past, present and
future changes in the sea bed topography and shoreline position. The prediction of the
historical changes by numerical models helps to understand the scale and composition of
the factors that contribute to coastal erosion. Knowledge on the present and future
erosion patterns and rates that would occur under different scenarios and strategies is a
very important information that contribute significantly to rational coastal development
plans and management practices.
A coastal morphodynamic model has four components:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Wave prediction and transformation;
Wave breaking and breaker zone hydrodynamics;
Coastal sediment transport;
Morphological changes of the sea bed.
Among these four components, (b) and (c) are the most complicated ones. Modelling of
highly irregular, turbulent water motion in the breaker zone due to wave breaking and
broken waves, and associated sediment transport has been challenging subjects for many
researchers for years (Özhan, 1982, 1983, 1987). Several sediment transport models of
various complexity levels have been developed. The greatest difficulty in using these
models arises from the inadequacy of available information on the parameters that are
required by the models (especially by the comprehensive models).
The simplest and perhaps the most popular model available are the so-called one-line
models of shoreline evolution (Hanson, 1993; Rakha, & Abul-Azm, 2001). This box type
7
model assumes the shape of the seabed as an inclined plane with always the same slope.
The seabed is moved in either direction (towards land or the sea) depending on gradients
of the longshore and cross-shore sand transport rates than enter and leave the “box”.
Consequently, the one-line model predicts only the position of the receding or prograding
shoreline.
A more comprehensive tool is the three-dimensional numerical model that simulates the
evolution of the seabed morphology (Aminti et. Al., 2001). This is a more complex
model and requires significant amount of information to be fed as input.
Numerical morphodynamic models have been used for various purposes. These include
the response of a beach to a proposed defence scheme (coastal structure, nourishment or
both), the quantity and periodicity of beach nourishment, long-term shoreline evolution,
especially around deltaic coasts (Jimenez et al., 1995), and the beach response to external
events such as the sea level rise or decrease in the rate of sediment supply. Physical
morphological models built in laboratories have also been used to study the impacts of a
proposed defence scheme (structures or nourishment) on the beach and sea bottom
topography (Özhan et al., 1987, Özhan, 1988; Özhan 1991, Corsini & Guiducci, 1993;
Ruol et al., 1997).
.3 Responses to coastal erosion
Shoreline management master plans were prepared for three coastal areas of Cyprus by
Delft Hydraulics (the Netherlands) in 1995 (Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999). The main
concepts used in preparing these plans outline more or less the present philosophy of
shoreline management. These concepts are the followings:






Work with the dynamic nature of the coastal environment rather than fighting the
forces of the sea;
Use “soft” engineering measures like beach nourishment where applicable;
Make more environmentally friendly designs of “hard” engineering works like
breakwaters (e.g. minimize the length, lower the crest elevation, make it submerged
where appropriate);
Apply the concept of “retreat” management;
Apply the concept of “do-nothing” option;
Introduce a detailed monitoring program to observe the coastal changes near the
structures.
There are three types of managerial options in response to coastal erosion (Van der
Weide, de Veroeg & Sanyang (2001). These are:



Retreat;
Accommodate for the present;
Defend.
8
The “retreat” option indicates the acceptance on the shoreline erosion as a long-term
phenomenon, and movement of development to inland locations that are sufficiently far
away for not being affected from the ongoing erosion within a reasonable timeframe.
This option is especially meaningful for undeveloped (rural) coasts where not many
people suffer critically from the ongoing erosion. “Accommodate for present option”
could be the rational choice when an important infrastructure (such as a highway) can be
modified with a reasonable budget so that it can be used for an additional period after the
eroding shoreline more or less hits a length of the structure. This option merges with the
“retreat” option in the long run. The “defend” option is the undisputed choice for an
eroding urban coast. It indicates the use of one or more types of structural or nonstructural measures to stabilise the length of the eroding coast facing the urban areas.
The “defend” option may also benefit from improved watershed management practices.
The shoreline management options should pay due attention to the climate change and the
anticipated sea level rise. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the sea level is said to have been
increasing 1 cm/year on the average over the last 8-9 years (Rosen, 2002)
.4 Coastal defence
The defense strategy for an eroding coast may incorporate the so-called “hard” or “soft”
measures, or a combination of them.
The “hard” measure is the generic name given to those using classical coastal structures.
There are several types of structures that have been used to stabilise an eroding beach.
Most commonly used types are groins (Bartoletti et al., 1995), detached breakwaters
(Özhan & Vefai, 1991; Hassan & Baset, 1997), revetments and sea walls. The rubblemound detached breakwaters were widely used along the Italian coast in the past, but
they are no longer popular (Bowman & Pranzini, 2001). The basic function of these
structures is to provide shelter to the segment of the shoreline, which they protect.
Consequently, the protection is limited to this segment. The presence of coastal defence
structures is almost always accompanied with accelerated downcoast erosion. Therefore,
coastal defence structures do not stop beach erosion, but transfer this problem to another
location downcoast. In some applications, the accelerated downcoast erosion is
compensated by beach nourishment (Rakha & Abul-Azm, 2001).
In addition to transferring erosion downcoast of the protected segment, the coastal
defence with hard structures are generally found unattractive by the beach users and are
known to contribute negatively to coastal water quality.
The so-called “soft” coastal defence measures are listed below:



Beach nourishment
Generation of gravel beaches
Low-crested (submerged) structures (breakwaters, groins)
9

Others (dewatering of beach face to decrease erosion-dry beaches, planting
seagrass on the sea bottom)
Beach nourishment, which has been the most important soft defence measure during the
last decades, indicates the process of feeding a beach periodically with material brought
from elsewhere, either to artificially increase the beach area for accommodating a larger
number of beach users, or to compensate for the amount of sand that has been removed
from the area by erosion.
In the USA, a major shift occurred in the late 1960’s from coastal defence utilising hard
structures to beach nourishment. In the mid 1970’s, about 80 % of the budget spent for
shore protection projects carried out by the Federal Agency (USA Army, Corps of
Engineers) was for beach nourishment, and only 20 % was for coastal structures (Basco,
1999). The reason for this change was said to be both ecological and economical.
Beach nourishment became a popular practice in the Mediterranean in the early 1980’s.
Many municipal and tourist beaches in France, Italy and Spain were nourished either to
increase the beach area or to remedy erosion.
Periodic beach nourishment alone could be the only coastal defence measure. In many
cases however, coastal structures and beach nourishment have been used together for the
purpose of decreasing the amount of sand needed and/or to increase the residence time of
the nourished sand (Özhan and Vefai, 1991; Liberatore et al., 1993; Silva et al., 1993;
Bartoletti et al., 1995; Pacini et al., 1997; Ruol et al., 1997; Cipriani et al., 1999).
Marine and land sources of sand have been used as the fill material in beach nourishment,
although the former is more common in the northern Mediterranean countries. The
determination of the marine borrow area is a very critical issue. Several considerations
should be made before deciding on the site. On one hand, this is an economical issue as
the distance from the site of nourishment is a significant factor increasing the project cost.
In the earlier applications of beach nourishment, the borrow sites at depths as shallow as
15 meters had been used. Nowadays, the practice is generally to go to the depths of 30 to
40 meters at the least (Van der Salm & Unal, 2001; Lupino and Ricardi, 2001). There are
two reasons for going to further offshore to get sand. One of these is the long-term
stability of the coastal sea bed topography. The second is the concern for destruction of
the Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) meadows, which is a protected species.
Furthermore, the sea areas that are important for fisheries need to be avoided. The
limiting water depth for sand extraction by present dredgers is about 100 meters (Lupino
& Ricardi, 2001).
In several Mediterranean countries, the projects involving significant amounts of sand
mining from marine areas are subject to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Other
important concerns for the potential marine borrow areas are the grain size distribution
and the material quality. Sand that contains significant amounts of organic material or
toxic substances is not suitable for beach nourishment. As a general rule, the sand used
for nourishment should ideally be slightly coarser than the native material. The
10
percentage of fine material present should be small for the considerations of both the
stability of the fill and the beach water quality (as it causes turbidity). When the sand
deposit that is suitable for nourishment is covered with a thick layer of finer material (silt
and clay), the extraction of sand may not be economically feasible (Golik & Rosen, 1999;
Lupino & Ricardi, 2001), and may not be environmentally viable due to high amounts of
sediment resuspension.
The cost of sand used for beach nourishment is generally high and varies in the
Mediterranean countries. This cost is about 2 US$/m3 in Egypt, 5 US$/m in Israel
(Rosen, 2002), and 12 US$/m in Italy (Cipriani et al., 1999). For the Italian case (Marina
di Massa, the Ligurian Sea) the artificially enlarged square meter surface area of the
beach costs approximately US $ 24. The annual revenues derived from the increased
beach area were estimated to more or less balance the total cost of nourishment (Cipriani
et al., 1999). In two other beach nourishment projects in Italy (Nettuno & Anzio,
Regionale Lazio), the fill material was obtained from dredging of the approach channel of
the Anzio Port. The cost of a cubic meter of sand was US$ 6.5 for Nettuno and US$ 7.4
for Anzio. The payback periods for these two projects were estimated respectively as 3
and 15 years (Van der Salm & Unal, 2001).
The use of gravel instead of sand as the fill material in a beach nourishment project is a
relatively new practice in the Mediterranean. The “gravel beaches” thus created are more
resilient against erosion and may not require further protection by structures even in highenergy coasts (Pacini et al., 1997).
The use of low-crested (submerged) structures in a defence scheme is becoming more and
more popular in the Mediterranean. There already exist several built examples of
submerged detached breakwaters and groins. These structures can be used alone or in
combination with beach nourishment. In the recent years, the traditional building
material of rubble mound has been replaced in some projects by innovative units such as
the sand sacs (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997; Preti, Lamberti & Martinelli, 1997)
5. Environmental impacts and social implications
Coastal defence structures such as groins and detached breakwaters generally increase the
rip currents. In recreational beaches protected by coastal structure, the enhanced rip
currents may be a significant safety issue, being responsible for the case of drowning.
The use of porous and/or submerged detached breakwaters has less pronounced effect on
the rip currents. Such structures increase the water exchange from the protected area, and
thus have a positive effect on coastal water quality. Frihy (2001) reviews the impacts of
various coastal projects carried out along the Egyptian Mediterranean coasts and
identifies their impacts. The impacts include: changing the depositional-hydrodynamic
regime by coastal structure, down-drift erosion to the neighbouring beaches,
sedimentation in lagoons, estuaries and harbour channels, damaging water quality, and
increasing the likelihood of property loss and damages.
11
Beach nourishment may also have important environmental impacts and social
implications. Pollution of water column during dredging / nourishment due to suspension
of fine particles can be a significant issue when the borrow and fill material has
considerable amount of fines or impurities. For instance in Elba Island (Italy), beach
nourishment became a legal issues since the sand used for nourishment contained large
amounts of iron dust, changing the colour of the beach and water. Nourishment of turtle
nesting beaches is a delicate practice. Needless to say, one should avoid the nesting
season (May to September in the Mediterranean) for nourishment. When the colour of
the sand used for beach nourishment in a turtle beach is darker (lighter) than the native
material, the biology of the turtle nesting may be affected due to increased (decreased)
sand temperatures.
An interesting questionnaire study was carried out to understand the level of public
acceptance of the nourished beaches in Catalonia, Spain (Villares et al., 1999). For
different projects, the percent of people that were satisfied with the new nourished beach
varied from 60 to 80 %. It was found that the beach users have concerns on the fill
material characteristics (colour, texture), the loss of beach and underwater flora and
fauna, and the landscape alteration with the new size of the nourished beach.
6. Coastal erosion in the context of integrated coastal management
Both the structural remedies against beach erosion and beach nourishment are costly
interventions. Therefore, they are used in many cases only when the socio-economical
gains from stabilising the shoreline are in excess of the costs involved. For example,
beach nourishment has been extensively carried out in tourist beaches of the northern
Mediterranean coast, since the revenues brought by tourism (which is enhanced by a
larger beach space) offset the cost of beach nourishment. Structural solutions or beach
nourishment are also commonly applied in municipal beaches, since erosion in such
locations could cause damages to city infrastructure (roads, promenades, etc), public and
private property.
A film made by BBC in 1998 addressed the issue of the responsibility of the state for
combating coastal erosion in order to protect private property (a village in the Northeast
coast of England). In the film, the state agencies stabilised a length of the shoreline in
order to protect a state owned industry built adjacent to the shore. The authorities were
not eager to extend the stabilisation works along the shore to protect the village due to
enormous costs involved. The villagers argued that it was the responsibility of the state
to protect their homes, since they were all legally built in the present locations, according
to a land use plan approved by the state authorities. Who should pay for coastal defence
and why? This is definitely an interesting question that carries important socioeconomical implications.
In summary, combating coastal erosion is worthwhile whenever there exist significant
socio-economical reasons. An eroding beach in the wilderness does not call the attention
12
of anyone. Even if it does, it is difficult to convince the financing authorities, if at all
possible, to allocate funds for defending such a beach.
The key issue here is the future development of the land area behind an eroding beach. It
is a very important policy not to allow development (buildings, roads etc) very close to
the shoreline. If the land use plan does not include a sufficiently wide buffer zone where
no development is allowed, it will definitely be necessary sometime in the future to invest
large amounts of money for stabilising an eroding shoreline in order to protect the
developments.
The undeveloped coastal areas are among the extremely valuable resources for a country.
There will be pressures for development of these areas for various economic sectors (such
as tourism, intense mechanised agriculture, aquaculture/mariculture, industry,
transportation, and urbanisation). Consequently, the human activities over such pristine
coastal areas should be very well planned and managed.
Coastal erosion does not only cause the loss of valuable land. It necessitates very
expensive shore protection schemes for saving facilities that had been developed several
years ago. Such situations can only be avoided firstly by knowing the future evolution of
the shoreline, and secondly by following a coastal policy to accommodate the erosionprone areas as the “no development” buffer zones in coastal land use plans. The key
point here is the acceptance of the fact that several segments of the Mediterranean coast
will erode as the consequence of the anthropogenic activities which have already been
taken place at inland locations (building of dams, river diversions, water consumption,
etc.). The erosion process will continue until new equilibrium shapes of the shoreline and
the nearshore topography are formed under the reduced (or completely stopped) sediment
inputs. In the legislation of the Mediterranean countries, there is usually a minimum
width of the shore band where construction is restricted. This width (usually 100 meters)
is not wide enough for a location that undergoes significant erosion.
The coastal strategy, which is briefly described above, has two important requirements.
These are; a) knowledge on the coastal processes and the long-term shoreline evolutions;
b) wise coastal planning supported by a new legislation, and more importantly, the
enforcement these plans.
Going over the anthropogenic causes discusses earlier, it is clearly seen that the lack of
proper coastal and river basin management triggers coastal erosion. Several of these
causes are due to human activities and developments that take place far away from the
coast (building of dams, flow diversions, afforestation works, sand and gravel mining
from river beds). Therefore, proper management of rivers and their watersheds has direct
and strong implications for coastal stability. On the other hand, the presence of
significant coastal erosion should trigger coastal management efforts, not only to develop
and implement a defence scheme in the short run, but to initiate a process by which the
issue of coastal erosion is addressed in a wider sense, involving various stakeholders,
including those who contribute to the causes of erosion, and those who suffer from it.
13
A very significant tool that helps to bring shoreline erosion into the process of coastal
management is the Atlas of Italian Beaches (Fierro and Ivaldi, 2001). This highly
valuable publication (available both as bind volume and in CD) that present 108 charts
covering the whole length of the Italian coastline (approximately 8 000 km long) provides
information on human activities, natural features, coastal hydrodynamics and
sedimentological processes, including the locations where coastal erosion prevails. The
Atlas of Italian Beaches, which is the first of its kind in the Mediterranean region and the
product of a tremendous scientific effort, is an easy-to-use source of information to
coastal policy makers, managers and planners. Another useful management tool is the
coastal GIS database that has been developed by Valpreda et al. (2001) for assessing at
the national scale the vulnerability of the Italian coast against erosion.
7. Conclusions:
The main conclusions of the present review on coastal erosion in the Mediterranean and
the shoreline management practices are the followings:
a. Coastal erosion is a significant coastal management issue in the Mediterranean
region.
b. There has been many expensive mistakes made in past in the name of coastal
protection.
c. Wise land use planning in the coastal zone that incorporates buffer areas for erosion,
expected within a certain time frame is an essential strategy.
d. Numerical models for predicting shoreline and sea bottom topography changes and
remote sensing (satellite imagery, digital aerial photos) for monitoring the coastal
erosion have become important tools. They are often used in conjunction with
shoreline management efforts.
e. The shift for using softer solutions against coastal erosion is in progress. Sand and
gravel nourishment has already become a very significant coastal protection method
along the northern shores.
f. There is a need for basin-wide collaboration for improving the national capabilities in
the following directions:
 · Numerical modelling and prediction of the long term changes in sea bottom
morphology and the shoreline position,
 · Effects of sea level rise on future erosion rates and other impacts,
 · Erosion monitoring methodology including remote sensing,
 · Soft methods of coastal defence, including wise uses of coastal structures,
 · Good practice of beach nourishment,
 · Ecological aspects of coastal erosion,
 · Socio-economic aspects of coastal erosion,
14
g. Working Groups could be formed for collaborative developments in several of these
issues. It is recommended that an international organisation, such as the Priority
Actions Programme Regional Activity Centre of MAP, initiates the formation of such
Working Groups and provides financial support for the costs of collaboration (not for
research).
h. Two priority subjects proposed for the working groups are briefly described in
Appendix B. The titles of these subjects are:


Good practice of beach nourishment and other soft coastal protection methods in the
Mediterranean – Success stories and guidelines.
Methodologies and standards for monitoring shoreline changes by conventional
methods and remote sensing
A timetable suggested for the work of the Working Groups in the next two years is given
in Appendix B.
15
References
Aminti, P. et al.(2001),Human and wave-climate change impacts on the morphodynamics
of the Tombolo di Feniglia (Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1445-1456.
Bartoletti, E., Cipriani, L.E., Dreoni, A.M., Montelatici, M. & Pranzini, E. (1995), Beach
first response to stabilization works: a case study at the Cecina River mouth, Italy,
(E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1173-1187.
Basco, D.R. (1999), Overview of Beach Engineering in the United States of America,
Final Report, Coastal Engineering Centre, Old Dominion University, Virginia,
116 p.
Berriolo, G., Fierro, G. & Gamboni, S. (2001), The evolution of the coast between Cape
Farina and Cape Gamarth (Northern Tunisia), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1497-1502.
Blue Plan (1996), L’érosion cotiere en Méditerranée, A Working Report by R.E.
Quellennec, Sophia Antipolis, January 1996, 43 p.
Bowman, D. & Pranzini, E. (2001), Erosion within a segmented detached breakwater
(Gombo Presidential Villa Beach, Tuscany, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the
Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1479-1488.
Certain, R. et al. (2001), Bottom and shoreline evolution under wave actions at the Beach
of Séte, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1371-1380.
Cipriani, L, Pellicia, F. & Pranzini, E. (1999), Beach nourishment with nearshore
sediments in a highly protected coast, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST
99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal
Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara,
Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1579-1590.
16
Corsini, S. & Guiducci, F. (1993), Coastal Woks improvement by moveable bed models,
(E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean
Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East
Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 973-987.
Curr, R.H.F., Edwards., E, Koh, A., Williams, A.T. and Davies, P. (1997), Analyses of
Mediterranean sand dunes using digital imaging, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the
Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 811-822.
Delbono, I. et al. (2001), Morphological evolution as indicator of coastal processes
(Liguria, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on
the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST
Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 14351443.
Edwards, E., Koh, A., Curr, R.H.F. and Williams, A.T. (1996), Aerial digital
photography: a management tool for sand dunes, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the
International Workshop on ICZM in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea:
Immediate Needs for Research, Education-Training & Implementation,
MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, pp:
171-186.
Eronat, A. H. (1999), Altinova Madra Creek region coastal erosion study, (E. Özhan,
Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean
Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle
East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1525-1540.
Fatallah, S. & Gueddari, M. (2001), Sedimentary processes and shoreline changes along
the Sousse Coast, Eastern Tunisia, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1457-1466.
Fierro, G. & Ivaldi, R. (2001), The Atlas of the Italian Beaches: a review of coastal
processes, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1557-1566.
Frihy O.E. (2001), The necessity of environmental impact (EIA) in implementing coastal
projects: lessons learned from the Egyptian Mediterranean Coast, Ocean &
Coastal Engineering, Elsevier, v: 44, pp: 489-516.
Golik, A. and Rosen, D.S. (1999), Management of Israeli Coastal Sand Resources,
I.O.L.R. Report No. H28/1999, National Institute of Oceanography, Israel
17
Oceanographic and Limnological Research Ltd, Haifa, November 1999, 70 p. +
40 figures.
Hanson, H. (1993), Beach erosion at San Vito La Capo, Sicily, Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.),
Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal
Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical
University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 945-959
Liberatore, G., Gaggio, M. & Preti, M. (1993), Field experience of protected beach
nourishment in Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference
on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST
Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 9891002.
.
Hassan, R.M. and Baset, S.A. (1997), Coastal erosion and protection of Ras El Bar,
Egypt, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1073-1088.
Jimenez, J.A. et al. (1995), Coastal processes along the Ebro, Po and Rhone Deltas, (E.
Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second International Conference on the Mediterranean
Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East
Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 827-840.
Khalil, S.(1997), Critical problems of the Egyptian Mediterranean coastal zones, (E.
Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean
Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East
Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 1, pp: 513-521.
Liberatore, G., Gaggio, M. & Preti, M. (1993), Field experience of protected beach
nourishment in Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference
on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST
Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 9891002.
Loizidou X. I. & Iacovou, N.G. (1999), Anthropogenic coastal erosion and shoreline
management in Cyprus, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS
99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems,
MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v:
3, pp: 1501-1509.
Lupino P. & Riccardi C. (2001), Utilisation of marine sand for beach nourishment in the
western Mediterranean, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International
Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01,
MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v:
3, pp: 1347-1358.
18
Medina, J.M. & Lopez, J.S. (1997), Strong erosion scenario due to disequilibrium of solid
transport rate: the case of Torrox Beach(Malaga), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the
Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1234-1239.
Micallef, A. (2001), Development of a novel approach to beach profiling in the Maltese
Islands, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1359-1369.
Özhan, E.(1982), Laboratory study of breaker type effect on longshore sand transport, (B.M.
Sümer & A. Müller, Eds.), Mechanics of Sediment Transport, Balkema, Amsterdam,
pp: 265-74.
Özhan, E.(1983), Longshore sand transport by irregular waves, Proc. International Conf. on
Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing Countries (COPEDEC), Colombo, Sri
Lanka, vol. 2, pp: 1167-77.
Özhan, E.(1987), Energy flux computations for estimating longshore sand transport rate,
Proc. the Second International Conf. on Coastal and Port Engineering in
Developing Countries (COPEDEC II), Beijing, China, vol. 1, pp: 269-281.
Özhan, E. et al.(1987), Effects of jetty construction on navigability of the Cecina Inlet, Proc.
the Second International Conf. on Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing
Countries (COPEDEC II), Beijing, China, vol. 2, pp: 1447-64.
Özhan, E. (1988), Flow Regimes and Dynamic Equilibrium of Coastal Changes at Köycegiz
Lake Inlet Turkey, Journal of Coastal Engineering, Elsevier, Vol.12, No: 2, pp.1091032, 1988
Özhan E. and Vefai A.R., (1991) The Use of Physical and Mathematical Models for
Designing a Small Artificial Beach Proceedings of Coastal Sediments'91, ASCE,
Vol: 2, pp: 1476-1492, 1991
Özhan, E. (1993), Beach erosion and other management problems in the coastal zone of
Tyre, Southern Lebanon, Unpublished report prepared for Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission (IOC), UNESCO.
Pacini, M, Pranzini, E. & Sirito, G. (1997), Beach nourishment with angular gravel at
Cala Gonone (Eastern Sardinia, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1043-1058.
19
PAP/RAC (2000), Report on the Albanian coastal erosion, PAP / RAC Mission to
Albania to Assess the Problem of Coastal Erosion – Consultants’ Reports, UNEP /
MAP Priority Actions Program Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia, October
2000.
Pranzini, E. & Rossi, L.(1995), Physical model test in the framework of beach
nourishment performance evaluation, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1145-1159.
Pranzini, E. (2002), Personal communication during Expert Meeting on Coastal Erosion,
10-11 January 2002, UNEP / MAP, PAP Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia.
Preti, M, Carboni, E. & Albertazzi, C.(1997), Shore protection planning in EmiliaRamagna Region: a new trend is in act, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1247-1262.
Preti, M, Lamberti, A. & Martinelli, L.(1997), Analysis of sand sac submerged barrier:
case of a beach in Riccione, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International
Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97,
MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v:
2, pp: 1059-1072.
Rakha, K.A. & Abul-Azm, A.G. (2001), Modelling of shoreline changes along the north
western Egyptian coast, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International
Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01,
MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v:
3, pp: 1467-1478
Rosen, D.S. (2002), Personal communication during Expert Meeting on Coastal Erosion,
10-11 January 2002, UNEP / MAP, PAP Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia.
Ruol, P., Capabianco, M. & Tondello, M.(1997), Physical model test in the framework
of beach nourishment performance evaluation, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1073-1088.
Silva, P., Galante, F., Nilo, A. & Powell, K. (1993), Coastal defence and restoration of
the environment in the litorals of the Venice Lagoon, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the
First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1043-1057.
20
Simeoni, U. et al (1997), The coastline of Albania: morphology, evolution and coastal
management issues, In: Transformation and evolution of the Mediterranean
coastline, Eds: F. Briand & A. Moldonado, CIESM Science Series no 3, Monaco.
Süzen, L. and Özhan, E. (2000), Monitoring of shoreline changes around Yesilirmak
Delta by using remote sensing, International MEDCOAST Conference on the Use
of Remote Sensing for Managing Coastal Areas and River Basins, Ispra, Italy,
April 2000.
Valpreda, E. et al. (2001), Coastal erosion susceptibility assessment at national scale: The
Italian case, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1415-1424.
Van der Salm, J. & Ünal, Ö. (2001), Towards a common Mediterranean framework for
potential beach nourishment projects, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth
International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment,
MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1333-1346.
Van der Weide, J., de Veroeg, H. & Sanyang, F (2001), Guidelines for coastal erosion
management, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the
Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1399-1414
Villares, M., Junyent, R. & Gatell, E. (1999), Sustainable beaches along the Spanish
Mediterranean? The risks and the opportunities of regeneration, (E. Özhan, Ed.),
Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean
Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle
East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1609-1622.
21
APPENDIX A
The lengths of various coast types, and the lengths of beaches that are eroding, accreting
or in equilibrium in four. EU countries of the Mediterranean as obtained in the EU project
CORINE (UNEP MAP Blue Plan RAC, 1996).
22
4500
4000
3500
Length (km)
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Greece
France
Italy
Spain
Countries
rocky coast
beaches
muddy coast
artificial coast, excluding ports
Fig. 1: The lengths of various coast types of Greece, France, Italy and Spain
23
1600
1400
Length (km)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Greece
France
Italy
Spain
Countries
Information not avaliable
Stable
Eroding
Accreting
Fig. 2: Stability of beaches of Greece, France, Italy and Spain
24
APPENDIX B
Possibilities for contribution of PAP RAC
Two projects are envisaged that could be led by PAP RAC, and are of regional value to
the Mediterranean community. These are:

Good practice of beach nourishment and other soft coastal protection methods in
the Mediterranean – Success stories and guidelines.
There are several questions that need to be resolved in achieving successful beach
nourishment practices in the Mediterranean countries. They include the characteristics of
the fill material and the borrow area, the type of investigations necessary for selecting the
borrow area, the practice of beach nourishment, environmental impacts and guidelines for
the EIA studies, prediction of the response of beach morphology to nourishment, and
economics of beach nourishment. Additionally, this project will help to enhance the
efforts towards the other soft coastal protection methods in the Mediterranean.

Methodologies and standards for monitoring shoreline changes by conventional
methods and remote sensing
This project may produce a manual that could describe the standards and the procedures
of the field methods for monitoring shoreline changes, together with the available satellite
images that could be used for shoreline monitoring, the practice of airborne digital
photography, the procedures for analysis, and limitations.
Activities proposed for the next two years









Preparation of the project description documents (A short overview describing the
value of the project, objectives, probable products, the role of the contributors, time
schedule (June 2002)
Formation of task forces for both projects (July 2002)
Take off meetings of the task forces to review the process of preparing the guidelines
in each subjects (July 2002)
The first task force meetings to discuss the progress (Oct. 2002, during the
MEDCOAST Workshop Med & Black Sea Beaches, 24-27 October 2002)
The second task force meetings to discuss the progress (Jan. 2003)
The third task force meetings to discuss the contents and the preparation of the final
reports (the guidelines) (June 2003)
Preparation of the draft final report (Oct. 2003)
The fourth task force meeting to review and discuss the draft final report (Nov. 2003)
The project concluding workshop with wider participation of invited experts in
addition to the task force members to present and discuss the guidelines (Final
reports) (January 2004)
25