Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK
Is the coastal future green, grey or hybrid? Diverse perspectives on coastal flood risk management and adaptation in the UK
复制标题
沿海的未来是绿色的、灰色的还是混合的？
DOI：
10.1017/cft.2024.4
复制
发表时间：
2024
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Apine E
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Apine E
气候变化引起的海平面上升加剧了沿海变化，使数百万人面临洪水和海岸侵蚀等沿海灾害的风险。基于自然的解决方案被认为是同时解决沿海灾害风险和实现生物多样性目标的机会。虽然这些解决办法已被纳入气候适应战略，但实施这些计划的人往往仍倾向于采用“硬”工程解决办法。我们试图探索英国沿海洪水风险管理感兴趣的和/或受影响的群体之间的不同观点，利用Q-方法。我们确定了五个方面：（1）绿色实践者;（2）未来规划搬迁者;（3）个案思考者;（4）谨慎的实践者;（5）关注气候变化。所有五个观点都高度重视基于自然的解决方案的共同惠益及其在减少沿海风险方面的作用。没有一个观点优先考虑硬工程解决方案作为英国的主要防洪策略，尽管他们认识到它们在保护重要基础设施方面的作用。不同观点之间的主要分歧在于：（1）是否需要重新安置战略;（2）基于自然的解决方案是否会导致社会不平等。Q方法并没有确定这些观点有多普遍，因此需要进一步研究来评估社会对基于自然的解决方案的接受程度。
Climate change-induced sea level rise has exacerbated coastal change putting millions of people at risk from coastal hazards, such as flooding and coastal erosion. Nature-based solutions have been recognised as an opportunity to simultaneously address the coastal hazard risks and achieve biodiversity goals. While such solutions are included in climate adaptation strategies, “hard” engineered solutions are still often preferred by those implementing the schemes. We sought to explore the diverse perspectives on UK coastal flood risk management among interested and/or affected groups by utilising the Q-methodology. We identified five perspectives: (1) The Pro-Green Practitioners; (2) The Future-Planning Relocators; (3) The Case-by-Case Thinkers; (4) The Cautious Practitioners and (5) The Climate Change Concerned. All five perspectives strongly valued the co-benefits of nature-based solutions and their role in coastal risk reduction. None of the perspectives prioritised hard-engineered solutions as the primary flood protection strategy in the UK, though they recognised their role in protecting essential infrastructure. The main disagreements between perspectives were (1) on the need for relocation strategies, and (2) whether nature-based solutions could cause social inequalities. The Q-methodology does not identify how prevalent such perspectives are, thus further research is needed to assess the social acceptance of nature-based solutions.