applying management frameworks: experiences from conscience sites across europe prof a....

Applying Management Frameworks: Experiences from

CONSCIENCE sites across Europe

Prof A. Sánchez-Arcilla, Prof. J.A. Jiménez,

& the CONSCIENCE WP6 team

To test the applicability of the management concepts and models developed within the project (the CONSCIENCE approach).

The field sites are selected to represent the most common European coastal types: sand and gravel/shingle coasts; high-energy open coasts (Atlantic coasts), medium-energy coasts (North Sea coasts, English Channel coasts) and low-energy coasts (Mediterranean, Baltic Sea and Black Sea)  

OBJECTIVES

CONSCIENCE Coastal Sites (6)

1. Dutch coast, NL (North Sea).

2. Hel Peninsula, PO (Baltic Sea).

3. Danube delta stretch, RO (Black Sea).

4. Costa Brava Bays, ES

(Mediterranean Sea).

5. Pevensey Bay, UK (English Channel).

6. Inch Beach, IR (Atlantic Ocean).

S - scale (km)

T -

sca

le (

year

s)

10 210 110 010 -1

10 2

10 1

10 0

10 -1

10 -2

ES2

ES1

ES1 ES2

NL

NL

NL

PL

PL

RO

RO

UK

UK

IR

Pentagonal Approach

Specific – Site – dependent

Measurable – Based on data

Applicable – Local stake-holders

Realistic – Available Info Means/Tools, Laws, Adm.

Time – dependent (t/scales)

A SMART FRAME OF REFERENCE

Pentagonal Approach

Sediment Cell

Favourable Sediment Status:- No deficit- “Natural” deficit

Resilience- Restore Sed. Balance (Artificial Nourishment)- Reduce “intesity” of drivers (Coastal Works)- Space for coastal processes (Re-alignement)

Strategic sediment Reservoirs

Selecting t/s scales

Based on 5 concepts

Frame of Reference

What is the problem Objective

How big is it: C.S Indicators(from Reference State Desired State)

When action is needed ThresholdsWhat action Catalogue + Concepts

How does it work Monitoring

Based on 5 questions

Strategic objective

Tactical objective

2. Benchmarking procedure

3. Intervention 4. Evaluation procedure1. Quantitative State

Concepts

Desired state

Current state

OK?

OK?

Str

ateg

ic

leve

lT

actic

al

leve

lO

pera

tiona

l le

vel

WHY

WHAT

HOWWHEN

WHERE

WHO

Location, scale

The Dutch coast and its three regions.

Long.term resilience coastal foundation 3 sub cells of coastal foundation

Netherlands

CZ ↔ Country Safety

dunesbeach

shore face

MSL

- 20 m

residual strength

basal coast line

coastal foundation

3 different scales in coastal management in the Netherlands. Each scale associated with a specific coastal cell and benchmarking of a specific tactical objective:

Temporal scale: Spatial scale:- Residual strength days meters- Basal Coast Line (BCL) years kilometers- Coastal foundation decades / centuries 10’s / 100’s kilometers

Frame-of-Reference for coastal erosion management in the Netherlands. Question marks indicate issues that are still open for decision making.

Danube Delta in Black Sea. The dotted rectangle indicates the coastal cell (CONSCIENCE Pilot Site).

Location, scale

Sediment transport paths with CERC and wave conditions from SWAN and wind fields

Proposal for strategic sediment reservoirs:

1)sediments blocked by the jetties in the Musura Bay and

2)sediments dredged from the channel and discharged off the littoral system

Lloret de Mar

S’Abanell

Location, scale

0

~ 30,000 m3/y

Problem: Damage of Infrastructures Objective: Enhance safety of infrastructures

Problem: Affectation of beach use Objective: Maintain recreational carrying capacity

FAVOURABLE SEDIMENT STATUS

WINTER (stormy period) – Protecting infrastructures: Volume of sediment required to generate a beach wider than the one to be eroded by storms (Tr to be selected ).

SUMMER (calm period) – Recreational carrying capacity: Volume of sediment required to generate a beach wide enough to accomodate users (~ 30 m ).

~ 0

~ 0

Problem: Damage of Infrastructures Objective: Enhance safety of infrastructures

FAVOURABLE SEDIMENT STATUS

WINTER (stormy period) – Protecting infrastructures: Volume of sediment “properly” distributed along the beach in such a way that the beach is wider than the reach associated to storm impacts (Tr to be selected ).

SUMMER (calm period) – Recreational carrying capacity: Volume of sediment “properly” distributed along the beach in such a way that the beach is wider than a minimum recreational width (~ 30 m ).

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVETo have a sustainable beach

Protection - Recreation

OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVETo maintain beach configuration for IP

OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVETo maintain beach

configuration for CR

QUANTITATIVE STATE CONCEPTSDefinition coastal cell

C. Cell functioningS. Sediment Reservoir?

INDICATORSBeach width (x,t)

BENCHMARKING

FAVOURABLE SEDIMENT STATUS

CURRENTSEDIMENT STATUS

INTERVENTIONBeach nourishment Localized Retreat

Infrastructure reinforcement

EVALUATIONPROCEDURE

OK ?

OK ?

Danube Delta(Romania)

Hel-Peninsula(Poland)

Pevensy(England)

Netherlands Lloret-Blanes(Spain)

Erosion Rates (~) (m/yr)

10 5 1 ArtificiallyReduced

1 (var.in space)

Sed. Deficit (~) (106m3/yr)

1 0.1 – 0.6 0.02 6 (’90 – ’00)12 (’00 – ’10)

0 (Ll)0.03 (Bl)

L – scale (km) 50 35 10 400 2

FavourableSed. Status

Natural Budget

Natural Budget

Maint. Thresh. (volume, width) only last 1 yr

Maintain ’90 state

Maintain beach width / volume

Present Actions

Dredging and disposal outside

CZ

Artificial Nourishment(since 1989)

Annual Nourish.Reshaping

(plan/profile)

Period. Nourishm.Excp. hard works

Re-shaping Nourishment Reinf. Seawall

Sl Transport Rates

(x103m3/yr)

1.500 70Sl CERC ~

10xSlKamph(Sl CERC more

realistic)

15 – 30Groyne

Reduction ≈ 1/5 Formulae

Under-predict

Based on observed changes

30

Main Processes

Breaching Breaching OverwashRoll-back

Flooding Beach Oscillat.River mth. losses

Danube Dlta(Romania)

Hel-Penins.(Poland)

Pevensy(England)

Netherlands C. Brava(Spain)

Strategic Objective (+ preserving CZ)

Sust. Development

Resilience Sustainable Risk

( 400 ~ ּז yrs for breach.)

Flooding Risk up to 4.000 ּז)

yr)

Sustainable functions

(protection, recreation)

Operational Objective

Reduce Erosion

Avoid Breach.

Maintain Width

Hold the line Maintain ’90 shore (Dune) + Coastal Found. (-20m)

Maintain Beach

width

Proposed Solution

Nourishment- From River

Mouth (1/2 deficit)

- No from spit

Nourishmt. - Increase

width

Nourishment -Increase widthReduce Sl with works

Nourishment - Increase

space - Increasing

Vol. with t

NourishmentRe-shaping

(plan /profile)Reduce Sl at

S bound.

Strategic Sediment Reservoirs

2 identified- Bay- River Mouth

3 identified- Harbour

entrance- Bays- Offshore

2 identified- Licensed

offshore areas

1 identified- Dutch

Continental Shelf (> -20m)

1 identified - River Mouth

Danube Δ(Romania)

Hel-Peninsula(Poland)

Pevensy(England)

Netherlands C. Brava (Spain)

CSI Sl

Erosion Rates

Beach width /height

Dune width /height

- Beach width/volum

- 5m contour position (from 2000)

- Dune Vol.- Coastline

(from 1990)- Coastal

Foundation Volume

- Beach width

- Berm height

Knowl. Required

Generic Long-Term data series

Uncertainties - Drivers

(RSLR now 2.8 mm/yr, 15mm/yr in 2100)

- Responses (Sl reduct. ↔ groynes)

- Integration of episodic, mid and long-term scales

- Inner shelf processes (Coastal Foundation)

- Cell barriers (total or partial)- Torrential river input (with submarine canyon)- Joint probability of storm impact for a given configuration

CONCLUSIONS

The CONSCIENCE approach has been verified at different T- and S- scales and for coasts subjected to different processes and problems.

The frame- of- reference is an useful way to approach to managing coastal erosion (provided strategy is defined).

It is possible to define the favourable sediment status for any coast once governing processes are known and objectives are defined (e.g. different status depending on the beach function and scales).

CONSCIENCE papers to be published as an Special Issue of O & C M

EditorialPaper 1. The Conscience frameworkPaper 2. NL case studyPaper 3. PL case study Paper 4. RO case studyPaper 5. UK case studyPaper 6. IR case studyPaper 7. ES case study Paper 8. Set-back linesPaper 9. Erosion science for coastal managementPaper 9. Managing erosion. The Conscience approach