Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

26
Equitable Local Outcomes in Adaptation to SeaLevel Rise Year 1 Project Report 2011 Project Team Jon Barnett Ruth Fincher Anna Hurlimann Nick Osbaldiston Colette Mortreux

Transcript of Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

Page 1: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

Equitable Local Outcomes in Adaptation to Sea‐Level Rise  

Year 1 Project Report 2011  

 Project Team 

Jon Barnett   Ruth Fincher   Anna Hurlimann   Nick Osbaldiston   Colette Mortreux 

Page 2: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

Equitable Local Outcomes in Adaptation to Sea-Level Rise

is a research project funded by the Australian Research Council Linkage Grant scheme, conducted by the University of Melbourne in collaboration with the East Gippsland Shire Council, the Gippsland Coastal Board, the Victorian Department of Planning and Community Development, the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, and Wellington Shire Council.

The research team at the University of Melbourne is: Professor Jon Barnett (Chief Investigator) Professor Ruth Fincher (Chief Investigator) Dr Anna Hurlimann (Chief Investigator) Dr Nick Osbaldiston (Postdoctoral Research Fellow) Ms Colette Mortreux (Research Assistant)

Year 1 Project Report, July 2011 Department of Resource Management and Geography The University of Melbourne Victoria 3010 Australia Tel: +61 3 8344 9311 Fax: +61 3 9349 4218 Web: www.unimelb.edu.au Copyright: The University of Melbourne Printed: July 2011

Page 3: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................... 1

The Problem ......................................................................................... 2

The Project ........................................................................................... 6

Activities to Date .................................................................................. 9

Interim Findings ................................................................................. 11

Future Activities ................................................................................. 17

Summary ............................................................................................ 19

Bibliography ....................................................................................... 20

Page 4: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

1 | P a g e

Introduction This report documents the progress and interim findings after the first year of the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage project on Equitable Local Outcomes in Adaptation to Sea-Level Rise. The report is a scheduled milestone in the project. The report explains the knowledge problem that the project addresses, which is that the social and equity outcomes of different strategies to adapt to sea-level rise along the coast in Gippsland East are not well understood. It then explains how the project seeks to solve this knowledge problem. The report explains the research that has been done thus far, the interim findings to emerge from this research, and plans for the next two years.

Land for sale, Seaspray

Page 5: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

2 | P a g e

The Problem The Gippsland East coast stretches between Port Albert in the west to Victoria’s border with New South Wales to the east. It is largely comprised of sandy beaches and dunes, wetlands, inlets, estuaries, and lakes. It is backed by low-lying coastal plains. Parts of the coast are subsiding due to offshore extractions of oil and gas, as well as extractions of water from aquifers for coal fired power plants in nearby areas. The estimated rate of subsidence along the coast is 50 to 90 cms by the year 2031 (Gippsland Coastal Board (GCB) 2008: 16). These biophysical characteristics make the Gippsland East coast highly sensitive to the effects of sea-level rise, storms, changes in prevailing winds and waves, and subsidence. They create considerable risks for the sustainability of Gippsland’s settlements and ecosystems. Since 1995 a series of research projects has advanced understanding of the risks climate change poses to the morphology of the Gippsland coast (see Table 1), including this eastern portion of it. Indeed, there are few coastal regions in the world that have been so intensively researched with the aim of understanding the impacts of climate change. Most of the research has not examined the risks climate change poses to the things about the coast that people value, for example their homes, communities, jobs, and lifestyles. Nor has it sought to inform decisions about how to adapt so that these risks do not materialize into significant social impacts (but see GCB 2008). There is no simple formula for adapting to sea-level rise. A portfolio of possible actions exists, including building sea-walls, systems of rolling easements, locating new developments behind coastal wetlands, and managed retreat (see Table 7 for adaptation actions mentioned in interviews conducted for this project). However, for most places there are few coherent strategies that are based on adequate knowledge of the risks to be avoided, the people at risk, the goals of adaptation, the decision making process to follow, the costs and ways of meeting them, the institutions to be involved in implementation, the timing of activities, and the policy instruments to be used. In places where societies are rich and technologically advanced, populations are dense, and the value of assets at risk is significantly higher than the costs of protecting them (such as in large cities in industrialized economies) adaptation will simply take the form of engineering coastal defences. This has environmental and economic costs, but the strategy is likely to be legitimate, with minor impacts on social values, and relatively minor consequences for social equity. Beyond these high in value / small in area locations, little is known about strategies to adapt to sea-level rise that will be fair, affordable, and equitable. This situation applies to Gippsland East, as it does in remote coastal places in other developed regions such as Europe, North America, and East Asia.

Page 6: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

3 | P a g e

Table 1 Summary of published research studies relating sea-level rise, and informing

adaptation responses in Gippsland East

Date Title 1995 Assessment of Subsidence Potential Along the Gippsland Coast Due to Subsidence Fluid

Production. Written by Sinclair Knight Mertz for the Victorian Government Department of Natural Resources and the Environment.

1996 Vulnerability of the Gippsland Lakes to climate change. Report # J5022/R1578. Prepared for the Environment Protection Authority by Lawson and Treloar Pty Ltd, and Loder and Bayly Consulting Group.

1999 Comparison of Subsidence throughout the World with the Gippsland Basin. SKM for the Victorian Department of Natural Resources and the Environment.

2001 Gippsland Subsidence Modelling – Yarram. Written by Sinclair Knight Mertz for the Victorian Government Department of Natural Resources and the Environment.

2001 Gippsland Subsidence Modelling – West Golden Beach. Written by Sinclair Knight Mertz for the Victorian Government Department of Natural Resources and the Environment.

2004, June Gippsland Lakes Flood Level Monitoring Project Final Report. Prepared for the East and West Catchment Management Authorities by the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Applied Environmental Hydrology.

2005 Climate change in Eastern Victoria – Stage 1 Report: The effect of climate change on coastal wind and weather patterns. Commissioned by the GCB and written by the CSIRO (McInnes et.al.).

2005 Climate change in Eastern Victoria – Stage 2 Report: The effect of climate change on storm surges. Commissioned by the GCB and written by the CSIRO (McInnes et al.).

2006 Climate change in Eastern Victoria – Stage 3 Report: The effect of climate change on extreme sea levels in Corner Inlet and the Gippsland Lakes. Commissioned by the GCB and written by the CSIRO (McInnes et al.).

2006, February Project final report Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Gippsland. Prepared by Steb Fisher, The Pathfinder Network for the West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority and its project partners.

2006, September Coastal Spaces Landscape Assessment Study. Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment.

2007, May Publication and presentation of flood Visualisation tools for Lakes Entrance:

Wheeler, P., Kunapo, J., Peterson, J. and McMahon, M. (2007) Mapping relative inundation vulnerability of land parcels on low-lying ground: exemplification with a photogrametrically-derived DEM-based model of Lakes Entrance, Victoria, Australia. Spatial Science Institute Biennial International Conference, May 14-18, 2007, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. 902-915.

2007 Climate Change Wave Modelling – Sea Level Rise and Coastal Subsidence: Implications for the geomorphological aspects and associated physical and natural assets of the Gippsland coast. Water Technology for the GCB.

2007 Discussion Paper – Sea Level Change and Costal Subsidence: Implications for geomorphological aspects and associated physical and natural assets of the Gippsland coast. Water Technology and Ethos NRM for the GCB.

2007, November CSIRO report: Simulation of Coastal Subsidence and Storm Wave Inundation Risk in the Gippsland Basin.

2008, May Climate change, sea level rise and coastal subsidence along the Gippsland coast: Implications for geomorphological features, natural values and physical assets Phase 2 – Gippsland climate change study. Written by Eric Sjerp (Ethos NRM) and Allan Charteris (Water Technology).

2008, July Climate Change, Sea Level Rise and Coastal Subsidence along the Gippsland Coast. Gippsland Coastal Board. Final Report, Phase 2 of the Gippsland Climate Change Study.

2008 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Implications: Ninety Mile Beach and Lake Reeve – Honey Suckles to Paradise Beach. Ethos NRM and Water Technology.

The aim of this project is to develop an approach for identifying the social and equity outcomes of various strategies to adapt to sea-level rise, that will apply particularly in areas of low population density where extensive coastal defences are less likely to be

Page 7: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

4 | P a g e

built. It will apply and refine this approach through an examination of the likely social outcomes of a range of adaptation strategies in four coastal communities in Gippsland East. There is for all intents and purposes an adaptation process already occurring in Gippsland East – albeit an ad hoc one. This has been largely implemented through the planning system. Table 2 shows some of the more important policies and decisions that have given rise to this adaptation process, which can be said to have begun in earnest with the 2007 Draft Victorian Coastal Strategy. As we show later in the interim findings section of this report, this process, and in particular the six decisions by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) on appeals brought before them, has given rise to a wide range of local concerns, many of which are about social impacts and equity. Thus we are afforded a glimpse of what the social and equity outcomes of adaptation in Gippsland East are understood currently to be.

Proposed marina development, Port Albert

Table 2 The development of adaptation policy in Gippsland East through planning mechanisms (key legal decisions in bold)

Date Title

2000, August VPP Practice Note: Applying the Flood Provisions in Planning Schemes. Victorian Government Department of Infrastructure.

2002 Gippsland Coastal Board, Integrated coastal planning for Gippsland: coastal action plan. 2004 Climate change in West Gippsland. Department of Sustainability and Environment. 2004 Climate change in East Gippsland. Department of Sustainability and Environment. 2004 Adapting to Climate Change: Enhancing Victoria's Capacity. Department of Sustainability and

Environment. 2006, August Gippsland Coastal Board, Gippsland Estuaries Coastal Action Plan. 2007, March Lakes Entrance Urban Design Framework, Coastal Towns Design Framework Vol. 3. 2007, March Strategic Regional Background Report East Gippsland and Wellington Shires Coastal Towns

Design Framework Vol.1. 2007, October 2007 Draft Victorian Coastal Strategy released for comment - mentions planning for SLR of

“between 0.4 to 0.8m by the end of this century” (p.18). 2008, July 28 VCAT decision: Gippsland Coastal Board v South Gippsland SC & Ors (No 2) [2008] VCAT 1545

Page 8: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

5 | P a g e

Date Title

2008, November Introduction of Wellington Shire Council’s Guidelines for Preparation of a Climate Change (Sea Level Rise) Response Plan.

2008, December 2008 Victorian Coastal Strategy released. States: ‘Adoption of a precautionary strategy suggests that a policy of planning for sea level rise of not less than 0.8m by 2100 should be adopted.’

2008, December 18 Planning Minister’s Ministerial Direction No. 13: Managing Coastal Hazards and the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change.

2008, December General Practice Note: Managing Coastal Hazards and the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change, Department of Planning and Community Development.

2008, December 28 Planning Scheme Amendment (VC52) to clause 15.05-3 of the State Planning Policy Framework. The clause requires the authorities administering planning schemes to make decisions consistent with the Victorian Coastal Strategy. It has since been superseded (see below).

2008, December 23 Coastal Planning Fact Sheet: Managing Coastal Hazards and the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change, Department of Planning and Community Development.

2009, April 27 Amendment C68 to the East Gippsland Planning Scheme (Coastal Landscapes and Urban Settlement Plans) Panel Report – recommendations about climate change and sea level rise.

2009, June 22 Myers v South Gippsland SC [2009] VCAT 1022. Questions if coastal hazard vulnerability assessment is required prior to decision being made on subdivision application. Application of Managing Coastal Hazards and the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change General Practice Note December 2008.

2009, July 16 Ronchi and Anor v Wellington SC [2009] VCAT 1206. Consideration and application of Clause 15.08 relating to the consideration of climate change in a development proposal for two units.

2009, September 25 Owen v Casey CC [2009] VCAT 1946. Consideration and application of Clause 15.08 relating to the consideration of climate change in a development proposal for two units.

2009, November 19 Myers v South Gippsland SC (No 2)[2009] VCAT 2414. Application of Managing Coastal Hazards and the Coastal Impacts of Climate Change General Practice Note December 2008.

2009 Advisory Note: How to Consider a Sea Level Rise along the Victorian Coast. Department of Sustainability and Environment.

2009 Department of Climate Change, Climate Change Adaptation Actions for Local Government 2009, December 17 Letter from the Minister for Water instructing Coastal CMAs to implement the policy of

allowing for 0.8m of mean sea level rise by 2100. 2010, July 28 VCAT decision: Taip v East Gippsland SC [2010] VCAT 1222 2010, July 20 Amendment C68 to the East Gippsland Planning Scheme (Coastal Landscapes and Urban

Settlement Plans) Gazetted. 2010, September 20 Planning Scheme Amendment VC71. Created Clause 13 of the State Planning Policy Framework

Environmental Risks, including Clause 13.01 Climate Change Impacts, and Clause 13.01-1 Coastal Inundation and Erosion.

2010, October Interim planning laws (accounting for sea level rise) for the Lakes Entrance business district.

Page 9: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

6 | P a g e

The Project The aim of this project is to develop an approach for identifying the social and equity outcomes of various strategies to adapt to sea-level rise. This will be achieved on two levels; first, identification of social and equity outcomes specific to the case study communities in the Gippsland East Coastal zone, and second, the development of a general process and principles that non-research intensive institutions, such as local governments, can follow when faced with making difficult choices about adaptation. In meeting the first aim, the project will provide a detailed understanding of the likely social outcomes of various adaptation strategies that could be implemented in the Gippsland East coastal zone at a local level. This will assist state and local government in developing adaptation policies specific to the needs and sensitivities of the zone. Given the lack of empirical studies of this nature in adaptation research, the findings will also contribute to emerging theory on the social and equity dimensions of adaptation. The project, in meeting the second aim, will develop a guide for policy makers in how to address social and equity needs in adaptation policy. Throughout this study we will reflect on what kinds of information, and which processes, matter most, so that we can make recommendations about how governments might go about conducting an effective and efficient self-administered process for making decisions about adaptation with affected communities. We will prepare guidelines that government institutions can follow, highlighting key information needs, important concepts, principles, and useful processes. This will assist future research by providing a methodology for assessing the equity outcomes of adaptation strategies. Four coastal communities in Gippsland East are the sites of the project’s investigation: Lakes Entrance, Port Albert, Seaspray and McLoughlin’s Beach/ Mann’s Beach. The following five steps will be taken to examine their circumstances. 1. An understanding of the exposure and sensitivity to sea-level rise and related climate

risks will be synthesized from existing data prepared by the GCB (see GCB 2008).

2. An assessment of the communities’ adaptive capacity will be conducted. Adaptive capacity is the set of assets and resources needed to adapt, and the ability to employ those resources. Resources include financial, governance, information, social resources, infrastructure, and technology (Adger et al. 2007). Access to these resources is influenced by a range of social, cultural, institutional, and economic factors, and is unequally distributed within and between social groups.

3. Information about the individual and collective preferences, attitudes and values of people exposed to sea-level rise will be developed in order to assess the outcomes of adaptation actions for their well-being, and the likely distribution of outcomes within and between affected communities.

4. A set of adaptation strategies relevant to this context will be determined through advice from technical experts on feasibility and practicability, as well as through

Page 10: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

7 | P a g e

community and stakeholder consultation. Considering these adaptation strategies, social and equity outcomes will be assessed.

5. An assessment of individual and community understandings of the likely social and equity outcomes of various adaptation strategies will be conducted. This is particularly important given the ultimate judges of the success or otherwise of an adaptation action will be the people affected by it. They must therefore be involved in the analysis of the likely outcomes of various adaptation strategies.

Methodology

A combination of methods will be used in this project, informed and guided by the rich body of information collected regarding exposure and sensitivity to risks, adaptive capacity and adaption options, and preferences, attitudes and values. These methods are detailed later in this report, in the section describing future activities. Suffice to say here that data of various kinds will be collected from a range of sources using diverse methods to enable triangulation (cross-checking) of findings. The adaptation capacity of households in the four communities of the study will be considered through use of secondary data and survey interviews, and the values these residents and working people hold about the social and environmental characteristics of their communities will be investigated in focus groups and intercept surveys. Crucial to the success of data collection by the project team is the development of rapport with local communities, civil society leaders, and relevant government staff. The data collection process allows time for this rapport to be built. The commitment of partner organisations is significant here – and indeed the time they have committed to spend on the project is considerable. For further information on the methodology of particular project phases refer to the section of this report on future activities.

The Study Area

As noted, the specific areas of study are the towns of Lakes Entrance, Port Albert, Seaspray and McLoughlin’s/Mann’s Beach (see Table 3). These four study sites were chosen in consultation with the partner organizations for the project, based on: 1) the partner organisations’ identification of these as important places for key learning about social vulnerability and adaptation; 2) knowledge of the towns' physical vulnerability to sea level rise (as identified in GCB (2008)); 3) the potential contrast offered between a larger rural town (Lakes Entrance) and the three smaller settlements, and between places in different shires; and 4) the assumption, based on information provided by the partner organisations and also by our preliminary investigation, that the smaller communities may have lower adaptive capacity, at least as indicated by housing quality and access to community facilities. Table 3 Information about study locations

Town Local Government area No. of occupied (and additional unoccupied) dwellings

Population 2006

Lakes Entrance EGSC 2,378 (759) 5,645

Port Albert WSC 117 (100) 237

Seaspray WSC 81 (198) 178

McLoughlins Beach / Mann’s Beach WSC 62 (60) 255

* Source DPCD (2009) and GCB (2002)

Page 11: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

8 | P a g e

Project phases and timelines

There are seven principal tasks involved in meeting this project’s aim to develop an approach for identifying the social and equity outcomes of various strategies to adapt to sea-level rise. These correspond to seven phases of the research, as shown in Table 4. The first of these -Detailed project design, stakeholder engagement, and policy review, and Planning for Data Collection were scheduled for year one, and have been completed. The last five are scheduled for the coming two years, and are described later in this report. Table 4 Project phases and time lines

Project time-line (in Quarters) / Project Phases

Year One Year Two Year Three Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1. Detailed project design, stakeholder engagement, policy review

Rep 1

2. Planning for data collection 3. Data collection from community and

households. Descriptive analysis of data

Rep 2

4. Review of values at risk from sea level rise

5. Identification of adaptation options 6. Community ranking of adaptation

strategy options.

7. Final report, communication of findings

Rep 3

Page 12: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

9 | P a g e

Activities to Date The project began in June 2010. In this time the original project team of Professor Jon Barnett, Dr Anna Hurlimann and Professor Ruth Fincher has worked to the schedule outlined in the original research proposal submitted to the Australian Research Council. This has included administrative tasks, such as appointing research staff (Dr. Nick Osbaldiston and Ms. Colette Mortreux), finalizing contracts and budgets, and applying for and receiving approval from the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee. In the first year of the project the research team has established a good working relationship with the project partners, which has provided us with increasingly detailed local knowledge, and information about broader policy and social trends that have bearing on vulnerability and adaptation to sea-level rise in the study areas. We have established the project steering committee, comprised of representatives from each partner organisation. The committee met three times in Year 1. Success also depends on understanding the places we are studying in as much detail as possible. Thus Dr Nick Osbaldiston the Postdoctoral Research Fellow working on the project -– has moved his residence to Sale, in order to better observe the study areas and become familiar with local practices. We have conducted reviews of: • materials from national and international sources that are relevant to the project

aims, including material on adaptation to sea-level rise in Australia and abroad, and policies and plans from Gippsland East

• information about social and economic trends for the region and study areas, including census data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics

• the suite of studies from agencies such as CSIRO on the subsidence, wave modeling and sea-level rise projections for the Gippsland Coastline

• local media reports and letters to the editor on the issue of sea-level rise, including in relation to the VCAT decisions (listed in Table 2).

We have interviewed 30 policy actors at length, to develop an understanding of adaptation policy networks, policies and plans, and planning cultures. The organisations represented are shown in Table 5. Each interview lasted an hour, and was transcribed to enable analysis. It is important to note, especially when reading the interim findings, that these interviews were not aimed at getting the views of local people, which is to happen in subsequent phases of the project. We have also observed (often as active participants) adaptation-related events, as shown in Table 6.

Page 13: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

10 | P a g e

Table 5 Interviews in Year One

Organization Number of Interviewees

Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) 3

Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) 3

Gippsland Coastal Board (GCB) 2

East Gippsland Water 1

South Gippsland Water 1

Wellington Shire Council (WSC) 3

East Gippsland Shire Council (EGSC) 2

Gippsland Climate Change Network 1

Gippsland Ports 1

East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 1

West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 1

Local Developers 1

Local Town Planning Organizations 2

Members of Parliament (State, Federal) 1

East Gippsland marketing organizations 1

Gippsland Environment Group 2

National Seachange Taskforce 1

Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency 2

Department of Housing, Communities and Indigenous Affairs 1

Total 30

Table 6 Events observed in Year 1

Gippsland Coastal Board ‘Future Directions’ Workshops

Lakes Entrance Steering Committee Meeting

C33 Amendment Panel Hearings (Yarram/Sale)

The Australian Coastal Councils Conference

C33 Amendment Presentation (Yarram)

Future Coasts ‘Gippsland Lakes and LCCCA Workshop’

Gippsland Trades and Labour Council – Just Transition: Opportunities and Innovation in Gippsland’s Low Carbon Economy Conference

Manns Beach Ratespayers Association Annual General Meeting

Gippsland Climate Change Network Meeting

The presentation of interim findings in the following section is based largely on the results from interviews conducted with stakeholders from government and other organisations that are relevant to the project’s aims, supported by information from the various reviews we have conducted, and from observations of formal and informal local activities.

Page 14: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

11 | P a g e

Interim Findings In this section we present interim findings from the project thus far. The findings are ‘interim’ in the sense that they have emerged from our data collection activities to date, but the additional data to support them fully has not yet been collected since we have not finished our three years of project research and analysis. Therefore we treat these findings as preliminary at this stage, and our interpretation of the data collected in year 1 may change later in the project as we obtain further information about the study areas. The interim nature of the material should be taken into account when reading these findings, and they should not be treated as providing robust information for the purposes of making decisions. It is also important to note that the quotes given are from interviews with policy actors of various kinds, and from stakeholders at various levels of government and agencies (see Table 5). These are people who are knowledgeable about the risks of climate change, and who are engaged with adaptation processes, and many of them live locally, but their responses can not necessarily be read as being representing the views of other groups and individuals in Gippsland East. We present the project’s interim findings in three sets, about actions to adapt to sea-level rise, about existing adaptation processes, and about equity.

Billboard at Lakes Entrance

1. About actions to adapt to sea-level rise

First, as shown in Table 7, respondents in the interviews felt there could be a range of actions taken to adapt to sea-level rise. The actions are loosely clustered into planning based approaches, approaches based around changes in land title, engineering based approaches, and miscellaneous suggestions. Some of these are in action at present, others are hypothetical. These should be read keeping in mind the two subsequent sets of findings we present, about the key concerns of people in Gippsland East about adaptation (and in particular the prevailing planning response summarized in Table 2), and, more specifically, their concerns about the fairness of existing adaptation processes.

Page 15: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

12 | P a g e

Table 7 Adaptation activities mentioned in interviews, categorized by type

Planning based approaches

Victorian Coastal Strategy (‘Plan for sea level rise of not less than 0.8 m by 2100’), and related guidelines, and their effects on planning schemes, and associated VCAT decisions

More prescriptive coastal action plans

State Government provides new land for settlements, and claims land of abandoned areas – ‘a swap’ (i.e. plan new settlements and reclaim old ones)

Long lead-out periods to give people the opportunity to make choices themselves – e.g. give people twenty years to develop a strategy, maybe a relocation strategy, that fits with their life stage and financial circumstances, their preferences and values. Retreat / move towns and settlements

Open up nearby and safer development areas, restrict new developments and upgrades in hazardous locations. Thus development will progressively shift; hazardous locations can still be used for recreational purposes, but capital value shifts from old to new over time

Add climate change overlays into the planning scheme

Climate change risk management plans required for new buildings in WSC, which may transfer risk to developers (but may not remove the risk of compensation to Local Government)

Government buys properties then offers vendors the option of renting back from Government, but with the caveat that Government will periodically review leases

Land title based approaches

Transferable development rights. If people move early they should get 80-100% of value of present property, and/or access to a new block at a subsidised price, and which is available with services. Compensation should decline with increasing time and amount of sea level rise.

Restructuring properties (where possible join blocks together to include more elevated land in a title)

Time-limited permits in areas that are of particular risk (say for 25 to 30 years of use). Restrict life of ownership of new properties, then re-zone land once period of ownership ends (e.g. 25 years as residential, then rezone as commercial, or park).

Caveat on titles that land is or could be subject to inundation, so owner is aware of the risk, develops land at own risk, and is not eligible for compensation (i.e. transfer risk to owners).

Land use titles that are revoked when a physical threshold is reached - a trigger event, e.g. flooding frequency, or erosion level

Engineering based approaches

Sea walls and associated engineering solutions (coastal defences)

Relocate sewerage pumping stations

Block stormwater drains to stop water welling up

Build a lock (barrier) across the entrance to prevent flooding from the sea

New sewerage infrastructure replacing septic tanks, and then in low-lying areas pumping waste water some distance away for treatment

Elevate walls and jetties when rebuilding when at the end of current lifespan (of 20-40 years)

Recycle urban water and use it to maintain freshwater supplies to rivers and wetlands to keep saline incursions at bay

Design replacements or upgrades of assets to allow for functionality given future rises in sea level

Transportable buildings

Miscellaneous

Improve predictions to reduce uncertainty about risks

Retrieve items of cultural heritage (especially Indigenous heritage) value at risk of inundation, and retrieve information from heritage sites before the sites are lost to the sea

Plant species that will be tolerant of changing conditions in the future (like higher salt levels in groundwater)

Shift timing of community events to periods where hazards are fewer (e.g. shift timing of Golden Beach fishing competition from summer to Easter, when fire risk is far lower)

Allow small firms to profit from providing the coastal vulnerability assessments required for planning permits

Page 16: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

13 | P a g e

2. About existing adaptation processes

We have learned from respondents in Gippsland East what their key concerns about adaptation are. Many of these concerns have been influenced by the planning decisions summarized in Table 2. In the absence of these decisions a wider set of responses may have been elicited. The respondents expressed four key concerns about adaptation thus far. First they expressed worry about uncertainty. This problem of uncertainty relates not just to ‘scientific’ uncertainty about the impacts of climate change, but also uncertainty about how decisions around adaptation will be made in the future and which institutions or groups will be responsible for making these decisions. This selection of quotes reveals some dimensions of this issue:

“the thing that … is important, is people’s security in decision-making”

“I don’t think it matters what comes out …. as long as there’s certainty or some clarity for everyone and at the moment there’s not…”

“The big gap for me is the uncertainty now in the Minister for Planning’s area”

[there is a need for] “greater legal certainty or clarity for councils”

“we’ve…created some great economic uncertainty and singled out this region for special attention”

“I think the difficulty is the local government, in East Gippsland Shire in particular, lack of clarity … how do they adapt [and] still allow or facilitate development or town structures and things?”

“‘adhocery’ undermines all of our credibility”

“it’s created great uncertainty for the business, for the building industry in the region, and it’s undermined confidence in that town”.

Second, respondents felt that adaptation had been imposed upon them, in as much as five of the ‘six red dot’ decisions from VCAT on adaptation to sea-level rise (decisions that provide guidance, interest or are of significance to planners and VCAT members) specifically concern the Gippsland East region. For example, they said:

“these issues were as relevant to Elwood and Middle Park as they were to Lakes Entrance and Metung. And if they weren’t considered in that way or if different organizations were dealing with ministers and instructions differently, we in the regional area may well end up being poor cousins with a quite draconian approach that by the time we got to Melbourne…. It’s like the pilot thing, you never want to be the first on board”

[VCAT] “singled out this region for special attention … when really the issue is a national issue and is it a folly to be…making one area suddenly appear less attractive …. The risks that face towns like Lakes Entrance, are no different to the risks that face St Kilda esplanade. But there has been a lot of focus on the regional settings”

Page 17: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

14 | P a g e

Third, the respondents consider this attention to Gippsland East to be unfair in that, relative to other Victorian coastal regions, Gippsland is the region least able to wear the costs of adaptation, as it is the coastal region with the highest levels of social disadvantage, and the lowest rate base. For example, they said:

[in wealthier places, like] “Bellarine, Bayside, Mornington … it’s big money. And so they’re able to have different processes to support their ideas and their work. …. But somewhere like Gippsland, … [there is a] need to support them more in understanding risk and planning for risk”.

“at the moment a lot of policies are driven by Melbourne…. [but]… given the lower land value, given the lower, poorer access to community infrastructure in the rural areas, it will continue to be a challenge to the state and federal governments: how they can deliver equitable solutions that will not be, that will not be seen as an abuse of the coastal community in this case?”

“the city councils there would have a little bit more money to develop asset solutions, but we don’t …. the simple reality [is] that we don’t have as much money …. there is a difference between different regions”

“a very large council like you know the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast, Moreton Bay, the very big, you know, councils in Queensland have got the necessary resources to carry out their own vulnerability assessments and risk analysis in relation to their own local government area. Smaller councils don’t”.

Finally, many respondents reported that the small size of the shire councils means that organization and cooperation among local, state, and federal agencies is very important. However, there is a general feeling that communication and coordination between relevant organisations needs improving. For example, referring to various (here unnamed) organisations, respondents commented that:

“there is a lack of co-ordination and collaboration between the three levels of government”

“they are working at a political level, and personally I don’t see a lot of positive policy coming out”

“there is a culture there from Melbourne …. which is that you are not to have dialogue, …. so right at the fundamental level there is a cultural issue there … there’s no culture of integration”

“it needs some strategic direction from government whether that be state or federal, to say look here’s how to apply it. It’s the same with the flooding stuff”

“there is zero opportunity for negotiation. It’s very black and white. We’re told and we do what we’re told”

“I think the state government is a little bit confused about who’s leading adaptation planning”

“there’s a little bit of confusion. It’s not a bad relationship it’s a, just one of those things where we all have to get on the same page. I think there are some really good people … but I’m not sure how well it all comes together if you like.

Page 18: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

15 | P a g e

I think there are bits and pieces happening all over the place. It is just a little hard to see the logical, the logic of how it’s working and who’s leading it. They may well have a really clear plan but I don’t think it’s, it is not clear”.

3. About adaptation and social equity

We are learning, through the interviews, observations, media, and other documents, that for people in Gippsland East equitable adaptation entail at least four things. First, it is clear that to be equitable adaptation must take time: adaptation to sea level rise is a long journey and the process must recognise this. Numerous respondents thought a fair process would be one in which plenty of time is taken to lay out information, communicate it properly to local people, and then allow many years over which people can adapt to the options physically and economically, and choose those options best suited to their circumstances. Time here means not just time over the coming months and years to determine a suitable process, but also a process implemented over time (people mentioned 25-30 years). For example, respondents referred to: the need for more time for low-income people to consider their options given they have the most to lose and the fewest resources to enable them to act swiftly; a harmful ‘vacuum of knowledge’ between uncertain knowledge about future risks and the need for immediate responses to manage those risks; the time people need to determine the level of risk people can live with; and the need to understand the way impacts may play out over time, and the sequencing of actions to respond to these.

Second, interview respondents felt that equal treatment of all parties subject to the State planning system is required, and that planning guidelines and decisions need to both be universally applicable and to be clear and unambiguous. The fact that some determinations can be interpreted differently was seen to be unfair. For example, respondents referred to different interpretations of the word ‘plan’ (as in plan for sea-level rise) in the Victorian Coastal Strategy (VCS), VCAT decisions, and Catchment Management Authorities’ (CMA) reviews of planning applications from local governments. Some such as local government planners, for example, take ‘plan’ to mean steps taken gradually to adjust, whereas VCAT take it to mean immediate implementation. The July 2010 VCAT decision on Lakes Entrance (Taip v East Gippsland SC) is seen to hinge on the interpretation of the word ‘plan’. In addition, many respondents felt that the VCS and associated guidelines were too vague and did not give sufficient detail to guide local authorities to implement adaptation. This means, among other things, that there is no obvious baseline for measuring compliance, thereby making decisions such as VCAT’s seem arbitrary to some. Third, communicating climate change risks carries with it risks of unfair outcomes. Many people are concerned about the effects of communicating climate change risks on people and places Gippsland East. This is usually in reference to the ‘top-down’ kinds of information that come from governments and climate scientists. In the interviews no-one wanted to specify what kinds of information should be communicated, nor to whom, but they talked in more general terms about the need

Page 19: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

16 | P a g e

for precision in that information, careful thinking about what to communicate and to whom, and caution with regard to unforeseen consequences. Respondents said communities need to be made aware that changes are on the way, but that this should be done slowly, and in a way that involves the media responsibly. There was caution that people in Gippsland East may not be receptive to information about climate change because the information they have received in the past has not been put to them in ways that they can use. There is a general feeling that the language used to communicate climate change requires careful consideration, that more temperate language was required, practical information is necessary, and that presenting climate change as a catastrophe drives away country people who are knowledgeable about their own environments. In interviews it was noted that there may be some unpalatable messages, which will need to be communicated in a manner that is frank and open. That Gippsland East seems to have been portrayed by research, the media, and VCAT as a region highly at risk also seems to many people as being inequitable. Finally, throughout this first year of research a strong message we have received is that local ownership of the adaptation process is the ‘right’ way to proceed. This is a prevailing view - that whatever happens has to be designed and made to work by local people. Almost everyone thinks that this is impeded at present by lack of clarity from upper echelons of government. Nevertheless, there is recognition that locally-driven processes may not be in and of themselves sufficient to achieve certain goals and necessary outcomes, and that support from State and Federal governments, in the form of information, money, and institutional strengthening is also required. There is also awareness that processes of local engagement and decision making must not be superficial, lest those with the largest vested interests or the loudest voices capture the process, and others who have less power, or knowledge, may be excluded. Nevertheless, in interviews people said that adaptation cannot happen unless local institutions ‘take ownership’ of the situation and local interests are taken into account.

The beach at Seaspray

Page 20: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

17 | P a g e

Future Activities As shown in Table 4, there are five phases of this project yet to be completed. These are as follows.

1. Data collection about community and households, and descriptive analysis of data

In year 2 the collection of data about households and social groups residing and working in the study areas will take place. Secondary data will be an important source of data about the economic and social characteristics and capacities of households and social groups in the four communities of focus in the study, as will data from a survey of households. Observation of life in the communities, which began in phase 2, will also continue, so increasing the learning of the project team about the places, values and preferences of local people. These data, overall, will be used to assess local capacity to adapt to sea-level rise, and to start to deduce the values held by community members about their way of life and use of environmental and social features locally. Approximately 50 households will be interviewed from Lakes Entrance, and an equivalent number from across the three small WSC communities (together, not each). The interviews will include questions about key elements of adaptive capacity, including questions about: the number, age and employment status of household members, income, health status and educational attainment, investments and savings, social networks and bonding, insurance cover, access to social services, awareness and perceptions of environmental risks and possible responses, and perceptions of self-empowerment. It will be most important in the data collection process and subsequent analysis to acknowledge differences of gender, age and household type to ensure that there is adequate representation of variably-identified people in the population of individuals interviewed, and that the significance of these and other social categories are understood in the kinds of responses received. The precise geographical and topographical location of households will also be significant, as the environmental risk associated with particular locations can be important and can differentiate the capacity of households to adapt to environmental change. This data collection phase of the study will take 4 to 6 months, allowing for data entry and transcribing. Following the collection of data a descriptive analysis will be made, and a report produced.

2. Review of values at risk from sea- level rise

In the second half of year 2 the project team will review more closely the values in the study area that are at risk from sea-level rise. This will involve close consideration of evidence produced to date. It may involve use of selective focus groups to expand upon points made in the data collection of the previous phase. Here we will be able to say, from our evidence, that local people see certain aspects of their lives and places as highly significant, and that the loss of these things would be regrettable. To test our conclusions for their validity with local people we will conduct quick intercept surveys asking respondents to state how

Page 21: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

18 | P a g e

they respond to various descriptions of the local area and community, and if possible we may conduct talkback sessions on radio for the same purpose.

3. Identification of adaptation strategy options

Drawing on findings from the project team’s previous work (the use of secondary data about households and the household survey, the research into values held locally, and the investigation of relevant planning cultures in Phase 1), the project team will now determine potential adaptation strategies of relevance for these study areas. Technical experts will provide guidance on the feasibility of any technical (infrastructural) response options put forward in interviews with industry partners and stakeholders. This information will sit alongside the social and equity aspects upon which the project team will have focused. The aim of this phase is to ensure that the strategies whose social outcomes we seek to understand are actually technically appropriate and practically feasible (that is, can be implemented within acceptable cost parameters, which we will establish with our local government partner organisations or, as necessary, with Treasury officials with whom our partner organisations are linked). This phase will take 3 months.

4. Community ranking of adaptation strategy options

The final year of the project will begin with a series of focus group meetings, in which participants from the four communities are asked to rank, and then evaluate in discussions, the adaptation strategies identified from our research. Like Tompkins et al. (2008), we consider that evaluation by the community is necessary to finalise the best adaptation options, equitably, for this context. We will conduct focus groups from the Lakes Entrance population, and from across the three smaller communities. The participants for the focus groups do not need to be from households interviewed previously. It is not possible to specify the exact composition of the focus groups at this stage – we leave open the possibility that they may focus on particular issues or adaptation strategies or that they might focus on a particular view that requires elaboration.

5. Final Report

A final report will be produced and communication of the project’s results made to partner organisations.

Page 22: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

19 | P a g e

Summary Much has been achieved in this first year of the project. This was always intended to be a year in which a foundation of relationships and information was established to enable more targeted data collection and insights to emerge in the following years. This foundation phase has been well implemented, and much has been learned about what is a very complex and rapidly evolving situation. There is already a clear sense that adaptation is in some ways unfair, although thus far the prevailing voices we have heard come from policy actors and property developers. In the following year we aim to hear from a far wider and more representative range of people about the social and equity dimensions of adaptation to sea-level rise in Gippsland East. Also, from this first year is emerging a sense of what an equitable adaptation might be, which we will develop further in the coming year, and which hinges on understanding the appropriate temporal landscape for adaptation as much as the spatial landscape. Finally, it seems clear that while it is an integral part of the adaptation process, the present State-derived planning system cannot be the only vehicle through which adaptation is implemented. Planning of this kind is not well suited to deal with the local economic, social and cultural dimensions of adaptation.

Port Albert

Page 23: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

20 | P a g e

Bibliography Adger, N., Agrawala, S., Mirza, M., Conde, C., O’Brien, K., Pulhin, J., Pulwarty, R., Smit, B., and

Takahashi, K. 2007. ‘Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity’, in M. Parry, O. Canziani, J. Palutikof, P. van der Linden and C. Hanson (Eds.), Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 717-743.

Anthoff D, Nicholls R, Tol R & Vafeidis A 2006. ‘Global and regional exposure to large rises in sea-level: a sensitivity analysis’, Tyndall Centre Working Paper No. 96, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Norwich.

Biesbroek R, Swart R, Carter T, Cowan C, Henrichs T, Mela H, Morecroft, M & Rey D 2010. ‘Europe adapts to climate change: Comparing national adaptation strategies’, Global Environmental Change, vol.20, no.3, pp.440-50

Burch, S 2010. ‘Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: Insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada’, Global Environmental Change, vol.20, no.2, pp.287-97.

Cheong, S-M 2011. ‘Policy solutions in the U.S’, Climatic Change, vol.106, no.1, pp. 57-70.

Chouinard O, Plante, S & Martin, G 2008. ‘The community engagement process: A governance approach in adaptation to coastal erosion and flooding in Atlantic Canada’, Canadian Jnl of Regional Science, vol.31, pp.507-520.

Department of Planning and Community Development (2009) Towns in Time: http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/

England, P. & McDonald, J 2009. ‘Local government and climate change’, in D Hodgkinson & R Garner (eds), Australian Climate Change Law and Policy, Thomson Legal and Regulatory, Sydney.

Ethos NRM 2008. Physical impacts of climate change on the Gippsland Lakes, Ethos NRM, Bairnsdale, Victoria

Fankhauser, S1995. ‘Protection versus retreat: the economic costs of sea-level rise’, Environment & Planning A, vol.27, no.2, pp.299-319.

Freij-Ayoub R, Underschultz J, Li F, Trefry C, Hennig A, Otto C & McInnes K 2007. Simulation of coastal subsidence and storm wave inundation risk in the Gippsland Basin, CSIRO Petroleum Report, Bentley, Western Australia.

Gippsland Coastal Board 2002. Integrated coastal planning for Gippsland: Coastal action plan, Gippsland Coastal Board, Bairnsdale, Victoria.

Gippsland Coastal Board 2008. Climate Change, sea Level Rise and coastal subsidence along the Gippsland Coast, Gippsland Coastal Board, Bairnsdale, Victoria.

Hunter J 2010. ‘Estimating sea-level extremes under conditions of uncertain sea-level rise’, Climatic Change, vol.99, no3-4, pp.331-50.

McDonald J 2007. ‘The Adaptation imperative: managing the legal risks of climate change impacts’, in T Bonyhady & P Christoff (eds), Climate Law in Australia, Federation Press, Sydney, pp.124-142

McDonald J 2007. ‘A risky climate for decision-making: the liability of development authorities for climate change impacts’, Environmental and Planning Law Journal, vol.24, no.6, pp.405-17.

McDonald J 2010. ‘Mapping the legal landscape of climate change adaptation’, in T Bonyhady, A Macintosh & J.McDonald (eds), Adapting to Climate Change in Australia: Law and Policy, Federation Press, Sydney, pp.1-37

McDonald J 2010. ‘Paying the price of climate change adaptation: compensation for climate change impacts’, in T Bonyhady, A Macintosh & J McDonald (eds), Adapting to Climate Change in Australia: Law and Policy, Federation Press, Sydney, pp.234-64

Page 24: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

21 | P a g e

McDonald J 2011. ‘The role of law in adapting to climate change’, WIRES Wiley Interdisciplinary Review – Climate Change, vol.2, no.2, pp.283-95.

McInnes KL, Abbs DJ & Bathols JA 2005. Climate change in Eastern Victoria – stage one report: the effect of climate change on coastal wind and weather patterns, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria.

McInnes KL, Macadam I, Hubbert GD, Abbs DJ & Bathols J 2005. Climate change in Eastern Victoria – stage two report: the effect of climate change on storm surges, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria.

McInnes KL, Macadam I & Hubbert GD 2006. Climate change in Eastern Victoria – stage three report: the effect of climate change on extreme sea-levels in Corner Inlet and the Gippsland Lakes, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria.

McInnes KL, Macadam I & O’Grady J 2009. The effect of climate change on extreme sea levels along Victoria’s coast, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria.

Moser S 2005. ‘Impact assessments and policy responses to sea-level rise in three US states: An exploration of human-dimension uncertainties’, Global Environmental Change, vol.15, no.4, pp.353-69.

Moser S & Eckstrom J. 2010. ‘A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation’, PNAS, vol.107, no.51, pp.22026–22031

Rahmstorf S 2010. ‘A new view on sea-level rise’, Nature, vol.4, pp.44-5.

Sinclair Knight Mertz 2001a. Gippsland subsidence modelling – Yarram, prepared for the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Sinclair Knight Mertz, Melbourne, Victoria.

Sinclair Knight Mertz 2001b. Gippsland subsidence modelling – West Golden Beach, prepared for the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Sinclair Knight Mertz, Melbourne, Victoria.

Storbjork S. 2007. ‘Governing climate adaptation in the local arena: challenges of risk management and planning in Sweden’, Local Environment, vol.12, no.5, pp.457-69

Tompkins EL, Boyd E, Nicholson-Cole S, Adger WN, Weatherhead K, Arnell N 2010. ‘Observed adaptation to climate change: UK evidence of transition to a well-adapting society?’, Global Environmental Change, vol.20, no.4, pp.627-35.

Tompkins EL, Few R & Brown K 2008. ‘Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: Incorporating stakeholders’ preferences into coastal planning for climate change’, Journal of Environmental Management, vol.88, no.4, pp.1580-92.

Tribbia J & Moser S 2008. ‘More than information: what coastal managers need to plan for climate change’, Environmental Science & Policy, vol.11, no.4, pp.315-28.

Wellington Shire Council 2008. Climate change and sea level rise implications: Ninety Mile Beach and Lake Reeve - Honeysuckles to Paradise Beach, Wellington Shire Council, Sale, Victoria.

Wheeler, P, Kunapo, J, Peterson, J, McMahon, M & Coller, M 2008. Lakes Entrance flood visualisation, Monash University. http://sahultime.monash.edu.au/LakesEntrance/.

Page 25: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

22 | P a g e

Page 26: Equitable Adaptation Sea Level Rise

Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne

Author/s:

Barnett, Jon; Fincher, Ruth; HURLIMANN, ANNA; Osbaldiston, Nick; MORTREUX,

COLETTE

Title:

Equitable local outcomes in adaptation to sea-level rise: year 1 project report 2011

Date:

2011

Citation:

Barnett, J., Fincher, R., Hurlimann, A., Osbaldiston, N. & Mortreux, C. (2011). Equitable local

outcomes in adaptation to sea-level rise: year 1 project report 2011. Melbourne, Vic.: The

University of Melbourne.

Publication Status:

Published

Persistent Link:

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/39721

File Description:

Equitable local outcomes in adaptation to sea-level rise: year 1 project report 2011