Quick Start

Coastal vulnerability to climate change: A comparative study of cases in the UK, France, and South Africa

Resource System
Coastal landscapes and seascapes, river networks and associated wetlands
Resource Units
Multiple: affordances for human habitation, leisure, fishing, agriculture, trade, freshwater, biodiversity, etc.
Locations
Cornwall coastal regions, including River Tamar catchment, southwest England
Languedoc coastal zone bordering the Mediterranean Sea between Montpellier and the Petite Camargue
Bitou, Knysna, George, Mossel Bay, and Hessequa local municipalities, Eden District municipality, South Africa (South Africa)

This case represents the collaborative effort of an international team focused on studying how coastal regions may respond to climate change as part of the Multi-Scale Adaptations to Climate Change and Social-Ecological Sustainability in Coastal Areas (MAGIC) research project funded by a Belmont grant.  The study involved three sites: Cornwall, England; Languedoc-Roussillon, France; and Eden District, South Africa.  The three study sites were selected based on their history of rapidly changing weather patterns and concomitant increased vulnerability of local populations to climate change-induced severe weather events. This section will provide a brief overview of the biophysical, social, and institutional characteristics of each study area, followed by an overview of the core similarities and interactions of each SES. Further detailed information on the SES dynamics in each region are outlined in separate cases in the SES Library. To go to those cases, follow the "Related Studies and Models" link below. 

Institutional Analysis documents require ASU authorization. Sign in with ASU to access this document.

No coded case data available.

Hover over diagram elements to see descriptions
Resource System

Resource system (natural infrastructure): Terrestrial (including coastal and riparian) land, the watershed and topography (shared). 

Resource Users

There are two main subgroups that are important to this synthesis analysis:

  • A heterogenous mix of urban and rural residents in all three regions, including farmers and seasonal property owners;
  • A significant number of tourists in all three regions.
Public Infrastructure

Hard public infrastructure includes roads, bridges, railways, energy and water delivery systems.

Soft public infrastructure includes laws and regulations related to:

  • Flood water management (at various governance levels)
  • Watershed management (at various governance levels)
  • Coastal zone development (at various governance levels)
Public Infrastructure Providers

Public infrastructure providers in all three study sites include a variety of national, regional, county, metropolitan, and municipal-level government entities which provide funding and implement rules and regulations, including:

  • Elected government representatives at the national, regional, and local government level.
  • Government agencies entasked with watershed management and coastal zone development. 
  • Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
  • Other private and/or public entities and/or hybrids (e.g., British royalty, private operators of railway, and private water provider).
Relationship 1

RU => R:

  • Resource users extract land for a variety of competing consumptive and non-consumptive purposes (urban land development, large infrastructure projects, heritage sites, tourism, biodiversity protection).
  • Ecologically sensitive areas are transformed for urban, agricultural, and other projects.

R => RU (potential disservices/negative feedback):

  • Residents endure losses from extreme flooding and other weather events.
Relationship 2

RU => PIP:

  • Residents in Britain and France participate in public forums (community flood forums and debat public).  No such forum appears to exist in South Africa. 

 

Relationship 3

PIP => PI (soft):

  • The number and complexity of rules governing coastal development has caused a partitioning of actions without consideration of the effect of one rule on others regulating the same area.
  • Lack of aggregation rules to coordinate decision-making authority causing confusion as to who is in charge.
Relationship 4

PIP (hard) => R:

  • Hard human-made infrastructure projects are negatively impacting coastal and riparian ecosystems resulting in reduced buffering capacity and lowered biodiversity.
Relationship 5

PI (soft) => [RU => R]:

  • Failure to monitor and enforce existing coastal development rules and regulations.
Relationship 6

RU => PI (soft):

  • Community members in all three regions feel disempowered and without local control.
Exogenous Drivers (7) - Resource
(none specified)
Exogenous Drivers (7) - Infrastructure
(none specified)
Exogenous Drivers (8) - Users
(none specified)
Exogenous Drivers (8) - Providers
(none specified)
Human Infrastructure (Users)
(none specified)
Human Infrastructure (Providers)
(none specified)