II. Methodology Literature search and review

III. Major social and economic effects of shoreline change by type

Property

Shoreline change can cause inconvenience; loss of amenity, and expense to repair and prevent damage. However, as Dilley & Rasid (1990) point out, it usually poses no direct and immediate threat to human life. Erosion, the more widely discussed form of shoreline change, is a low-frequency, continuous hazard that tends to affect areas used primarily for recreation and housing (Dilley & Rasid, 1990). It can be argued that erosion is primarily a problem from a social standpoint rather than a biophysical one (Cooper & McKenna, 2008), since it only becomes an issue when it threatens human infrastructure. Nonetheless it is a hazard to which humans must adapt (Box 2).

The majority of literature found relates to property loss and the effects of shoreline change on property values, with an emphasis on funding mechanisms for property protection through beach nourishment projects (Bin, Kruse, & Landry, 2008; Edwards & Gable, 1991; Kriesel, Keeler, & Landry, 2004; Landry, Keeler, & Kriesel, 2003). To reflect the current state of the literature, this section of this report will focus mainly on the effects of shoreline change on property and property values.

Many questions have been raised about who should pay for shoreline protection initiatives (Dunn, Friedman, & Baish, 2000). Some studies present evidence suggesting that although beaches are valuable resources for entire states, in order to equitably distribute the costs and benefits, local resort communities should provide most of the funding for beach nourishment projects rather than statewide funds (Black, Settle, & Donnelley, 1990). Other studies delve into the issue of whether or not society as a whole (represented by the government) should intervene to assist individuals and businesses who suffer loss through coastal erosion and whether taxpayer-supported remedial action, such as reinforcing seawalls or renourishing beaches, needs to be taken to protect society as a whole from the hazards of shoreline change (Cooper & McKenna, 2008).

Shoreline protection is obviously a large economic commitment irrespective of whether that investment is made by an individual, community, state government, or national government. Yohe et al. (1996) attempted to quantify the economic costs (protection plus abandonment) to coastal structures assuming a one-meter sea-level rise and associated shoreline change. The study estimated costs at approximately $6 billion per year (1990 U.S. dollars) between 1996 and 2100. However, this number represents the market-valued estimates only, which are derived from property-value appreciation, market adaptation, and protection costs. It does not include the lost ecosystem services value of non-market resources, such estuaries and tidal wetlands, or the costs to communities resulting from reductions in coastal economic activities such as fishing, tourism, and recreation. Results generated by the North Atlantic regional study (ERG, 2010a) estimated $3.5 billion (2009 dollars) in public expenditures on coastal erosion between 1990 and 2009 for the North Atlantic region alone.