A planning strategy for the adaptation of coastal areas to climate change: The Spanish case

A planning strategy for the adaptation of coastal areas to climate change: The Spanish case

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ocean and Coastal Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.c...

876KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean and Coastal Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman

A planning strategy for the adaptation of coastal areas to climate change: The Spanish case Iñigo J. Losadaa,∗, Alexandra Toimila, Angel Muñoz2, Ana P. Garcia-Fletcher2, Pedro Diaz-Simala a 2

Environmental Hydraulics Institute “IHCantabria”, Universidad de Cantabria, Isabel Torres 15, 39011 Santander, Spain Direccion General de Sostenibilidad de la Costa y del Mar, Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition, Plaza de San Juan de la Cruz s/n, 28003, Madrid, Spain

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Climate change Coastal management National adaptation strategy Consultation process Uncertainty

In a context of growing concern about climate change and its potential consequences for coastal systems, adaptation is becoming more important than ever before. This paper presents a national planning framework for adaptation to climate change, which is pioneer in the field as it is multi-sectoral and focuses specifically on coastal areas, pursuing the safety of their communities in an uncertain future. The strategy is statutory as it emanates from the new Spanish Coastal Law, which in addition to many other implications includes the compulsory development of a Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change (SSCACC) and its submission to Strategic Environmental Assessment. This paper covers the fundamental aspects of both the SSCACC and the accompanying Strategic Environmental Study, providing recommendations on the assessment of coastal risks triggered by climate change and extreme events, adaptation and risk reduction planning and implementation, and monitoring. Additionally, this work gives insight into the wide-ranging consultation process carried out prior to the SSCACC's approval and the stakeholders involved, and how the SSCACC handles climate change uncertainty and struggles for overcoming barriers.

1. Introduction Spain has more than 7800 km of coastline, in which rich and unique ecosystems and landscapes coexist with a broad range of human activities, from traditional practices such as fishing (Colla-De-Robertis et al., 2019) to the so-called “sun and beach” tourism (Toimil et al., 2018; Lopez-Doriga et al., 2019), and the maritime transport (CotoMillan et al., 2013). The model of economic development implemented in the past decades alongside the overexploitation of certain resources are seriously jeopardizing the coast, which has increased its exposure and vulnerability rapidly due to the high urban pressure and degradation over the years (Rodriguez-Ramirez et al., 2003; Jimenez et al., 2012). Coastal interventions have been made so far assuming that the coastline would remain stable, that extreme flood events would be within a predictable range based on historical information, and that mean sea level would not change (Milly et al., 2008). However, observations and projections indicate that future climate will not resemble that of the past (Hemer et al., 2013; Camus et al., 2017). Climate change is particularly uncertain towards the latter part of this century and beyond but increasingly manifesting through rising temperatures, sea-level rise (SLR), more frequent storminess, possible changes in ∗

waves and storm surges, and ocean acidification (Wong et al., 2014). Since it is recognized that human pressure and climate change are both altering the coast and creating significant imbalances, understanding these changes and striving to address them through plans and adaptation strategies are of growing urgency for any coastal country, its society, and its coastal natural values (Pinto and Martins, 2013; Losada and Diaz-Simal, 2013). The European climate policy has been largely focused on mitigation for the last decades. However, it was only well after the turn of the century, with increasing evidence of climate change impacts occurring, that adaptation was added to the policy agenda, and EU Member States that include Spain (PNACC, 2006), France (ONERC, 2007) and United Kingdom (DEFRA, 2008) started developing national adaptation plans (Biesbroek et al., 2010; Burton, 2011; Bauer et al., 2012). After publishing the European Commission's Green Paper (CEC, 2007) in June 2007, and the White Paper (CEC, 2009) in April 2009, a framework to reduce EU's vulnerability to climate change impacts was set up, laying the foundation for the Community's policy on adaptation. In April 2013, the EU adopted the European Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, whose primary objective is contributing to a more resilient Europe to climate change and variability, leading to enhance preparedness and response skills to climate change at the local, regional, national and EU

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (I.J. Losada).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.104983 Received 8 April 2019; Received in revised form 2 September 2019; Accepted 11 September 2019 0964-5691/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Iñigo J. Losada, et al., Ocean and Coastal Management, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.104983

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

levels, ensuring a coherence and improving coordination. This European Strategy recognises coastal areas as one of the territories most at risk of being affected by climate change impacts. Therefore, among the actions proposed is to promote adaptation, particularly in the field of cross-border coastal management, with an emphasis on deltas and densely populated coastal cities. The Strategy encompasses the “Climate change adaptation, coastal and marine issues” document bearing climate change effects on coasts and seas, which is related to other EU policies such as the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC), the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC), and the Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning. Since 2004, adaptation to climate change has become a priority objective for Spain, primarily owing to the high vulnerability of the Spanish coast to climate change and variability. In 2006, after a broad consultation process, the Climate Change Adaptation National Plan (PNACC) was approved. The PNACC is the reference framework for coordination between public administrations in the activities associated with impact assessment, vulnerability and climate change adaptation, and it is being implemented through work programs (WP) until 2020. The first and second WP (2006–2009 and 2009–2013, respectively) focus on the need to project climate change-related impact drivers and assess the associated potential coastal impacts. Finally, the third WP (2014–2020) establishes that adaptation requires to be integrated into Spanish laws (i.e., Law 22/1988 on Coasts of 28 July, Law 45/2007 of 13 December on the Sustainable Development of Rural Areas, and Law 31/2013 of 9 December on Environmental Assessment) and highlights the urgency of developing a national strategy specific for coastal adaptation. Over the last decade, there has been a growing scholarly literature on climate change adaptation governance and policymaking aspects. This includes local practice in adaptation planning (Gurran et al., 2013; Ramm et al., 2018), decision support for local-level adaptation implementation (Dannevig and Aall, 2015; Ramm et al., 2017), and local government perspectives on adaptation and statutory frameworks (Manning et al., 2015). Published research that focuses on the national level embodies studies examining the role of national adaptation strategies in adaptation policymaking (Biesbroek et al., 2010; Bauer et al., 2012), and the impacts of national climate policies on cities adaptation and mitigation strategies (Heidrich et al., 2016); comparing multi-sectoral and sectoral adaptation mainstreaming across different countries (Bauer and Steurer, 2015); characterizing uncertainty in climate change adaptation strategies (Refsgaard et al., 2013); and providing guidance for adapting to coastal hazards and sea-level rise (Lawrence et al., 2018). Among those aimed at the national level, only the work developed by Lawrence et al. (2018) focuses specifically on coastal areas. There are other national approaches to coastal adaptation to climate change in the grey literature, including the Australian assessment of climate change risks (Department of Climate Change, 2009). Coastal systems are so far mainly addressed through integrated coastal zone management plans and strategies (Celliers et al., 2013; Pinto and Martins, 2013), which pursue their sustainable development rather than their adaptation to climate change. Furthermore, while considering the effects of climate change in coastal areas is a legal requirement in many countries (Manning et al., 2015; Lawrence et al., 2018), no statutory national coastal adaptation strategy has been officially adopted, published in a scientific paper and authorised. Thus, to the authors’ knowledge, this is the first national planning strategy for the climate change adaptation of coastal areas that is statutory and multi-sectoral; provides recommendations on the diagnosis of climate-related risks; favours adaptation resource, implementation and monitoring; and underwent both public consultation and compulsory Strategic Environmental Assessment. These aspects are covered through the paper, which also discusses the competence problem in Spain, and analyses how the SSCACC deals with uncertainty

and contributes to overcoming adaptation barriers. 2. Background and legal framework In Spain, the most important legal instrument for addressing the problem of climate change on coastal areas is the Law 2/2013 of 29 May on Protection and Sustainable Use of the Coastline (L-MLC88), amending the Law 22/1988 of 28 July on Coasts (LC88) that regulated the Spanish coastal management over 25 years. As stated in Article 1, the LC88 aimed to “define, protect and regulate the use and government policy power on the coastal public property and, in particular, the shores” (B.O.E., 1988), which means that it was primarily designed to administrate the public maritime-terrestrial domain (DPMT) and not the coastal zone in the widest sense (Suarez de Vivero, 1992; Barragan, 2003). Despite being controversial, the LC88 was a significant step forward by mainstreaming environmental management into coastal protection. While previous legislation (e.g., Law 28/1969 of 26 April on Coasts) was mainly focused on promoting tourist industry and property development within the DPMT, enforcing privatization and destruction over a large part of the coast; the LC88 made progress in the delimitation of the DPMT, the restriction of private properties near the DPMT, and the regulation of land uses in this area (Negro et al., 2014), highlighting the ecological and socioeconomic value of the Spanish coastal ecosystems. However, technical, social and economic problems related to expropriation, demolition and the limits of the DPMT (Alfonsea, 2010), the lack of coordination between public administrations (Suarez de Vivero, 1992), and the publication of the Auken report denouncing the impacts of the extensive urbanisation and defending the individual rights of European citizens (Auken, 2009) led to the urgent need for the Spanish Authorities to revise the LC88. The subsequent reform of the LC88 was justified by the need to improve coastal protection, ensure effective legal certainty for owners, and reconcile economic activity and environmental sustainability with each other (Losada and Saavedra, 2013). Although the L-MLC88 was approved without having coastal hazard and risk maps for Spain, it incorporates specific regulations considering the impacts of climate change on the coast. This text is extracted from the L-MLC88 Preamble (Section III): “the Law imposes on the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fishery, Food and Environment the obligation to develop a strategy for the adaptation of the coast to the effects of climate change. This will ensure a rigorous diagnosis of the risks associated with climate change affecting our coastline and a series of measures to mitigate them” (B.O.E., 2013a). Thus, within the following two years from the entry into force of this Law, the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fishery, Food and Environment (MAPAMA)1 was compelled to develop a strategy for adapting the Spanish coast to climate change and submit it to Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). Likewise, according to Article 49 of LC88, the Autonomous Communities (Spanish regions) that hold land belonging to the DPMT under concession shall submit in the same period to the MAPAMA for its approval a Plan to adapt these areas and the built environment on them to the effects of climate change. Besides, the MAPAMA through the Directorate General for Coastal and Marine Sustainability (DGSCS) was urged to develop a Strategic Environmental Study (SES) that involved the identification, description and assessment of any possible significant effect on the environment that arise from the implementation of the Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change (SSCACC), considering reasonable alternatives that are technically and environmentally feasible, and tie in with the objectives and the geographical scope (B.O.E., 2013b).

1 In June 2018, the MAPAMA was dissolved and the Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition (MITECO) and the Spanish Ministry of the Agriculture, Fishery and Food (MAPA) emerged.

2

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

3. The Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to climate change (SSCACC)

knowledge regarding climate drivers and impact assessment on natural and socioeconomic coastal systems, as well as those that lead to sustainable adaptation.

According to the above, the SSCACC was designed to address the legal mandate and is divided into three main parts: (1) diagnosis of the present situation; (2) description of specific objectives, general guidelines and adaptation options underlying the SSCACC; and (3) instructions on implementation and monitoring. The three parts of the SSCACC alongside the most relevant aspects discussed in the SES are described in the subsequent sections.

3.2.2. General guidelines The selection of alternatives and related actions demands a prioritisation based on factors with the highest possible degree of quantification that need to be obtained using homogeneous criteria for the whole Spanish coast, considering uncertainty. It is therefore necessary to define what are the coastal systems and sectors on which to perform the diagnosis; the drivers of change, the scenarios and associated projections to be considered; the impacts to analyse and the level of risk and consequences that are acceptable.

3.1. Diagnosis of the present situation The SSCACC aims to establish a common and agreed methodology for the assessment of impacts of, and vulnerability to, climate change and extreme events along the Spanish coast, identifying risks and negative consequences, and considering uncertainty (further details on the pilot study are provided in Toimil et al., 2017a, 2017b and 2018). This methodology is required to be applied on a coordinated, homogeneous and integrated basis on the coast of Spain in order to provide regular risk diagnoses. This will allow monitoring risk evolution and incorporating updated databases and advances in scientific and technical knowledge.

3.2.2.1. Coastal systems and sectors. According to Wong et al. (2014), coastal systems can be conceptualized as natural and human. While the natural ones refer to coastal features and ecosystems such as hard/soft rocky coasts, beaches, wetlands and saltmarshes, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, aquifers, estuaries and lagoons, and deltas; the human systems include the built environment (e.g., settlements and infrastructure), activities (e.g., tourism, agriculture and livestock), and the institutions that organize activities (e.g., policy and laws). These subsystems/sectors are very diverse and require to be dealt with accordingly. In this regard, the SSCACC sets out a range of specific indicators that allow to quantify their exposure (see Table 1).

3.2. Specific objectives, general guidelines and adaptation options 3.2.1. Specific objectives The overall goals of the SSCACC are building resilience of the Spanish coast to climate change and extreme weather events, and mainstreaming adaptation to climate change into coastal planning and management. These in turn include a set of specific objectives structured into the following blocks:

3.2.2.2. Drivers of change, scenarios and projections. Within the framework of the SSCACC, climate drivers are associated with indicators highly dependent on the impact considered, as well as on the data and methods used to derive historical trends and future changes (see Table 2). Historical trends are obtained using observed or reanalysis time-series, preferably spanning several decades. With respect to the assessment of future changes, while the extrapolation of observed long-term trends can be an appropriated method for the very near-term; projections developed with dynamic (Casas-Prat and Sierra, 2013) and statistical (Camus et al., 2017) downscaling techniques are most recommended for the mid- and long-term. Downscaling techniques allow obtaining regional or local dynamics, essential components of risk assessment, by increasing the resolution of the available Global or Regional Circulation models (GCM and RCM, respectively). In the absence of regional or local projections, or if uncertainty is very large, sensitivity to changes in parameters needs to be considered. Due to the lack of specific high-resolution coastal dynamics-related drivers in GCMs and RCMs, the Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition (MITECO) procured the development of waves, sea-level and sea surface temperature projections along the Spanish coast. The SSCACC does not impose specific scenarios but recommends using the most advanced developments and arguing their adequacy and coherence. For future exposure and vulnerability, it suggests considering projections aligned with different socioeconomic and demographic trajectories where possible. Regarding future climate, it encourages adopting the scenarios compiled by the IPCC in its latest report, which in the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) (IPCC, 2014) are the RCPs (Moss et al., 2010), and including high-end scenarios if appropriately justified. The SSCACC emphasises the need to work with complete SLR distributions and associated uncertainty, highly recommending the use of probabilistic (Kopp et al., 2014) and extraprobabilistic (Le Cozannet et al., 2017) projections.

• Diagnosis. It aims at producing regular diagnoses to identify the most vulnerable areas throughout the Spanish coast. • Participation. It seeks to promote the engagement and mobilization •



• •

of actors with competence and strategic interests on the coast in each of the different phases of the adaptation cycle, and to exploit existing participation mechanisms, or incorporate new ones. Capacity-building and awareness. It strives to help stakeholders involved to become aware of the medium and long-term implications of the effects of climate change on the coast. Besides, it aims to ensure that the different public and private bodies with competence and strategic interests on the coast have the knowledge, tools, training and skills necessary to manage the risks derived from climate change. Adaptation and coordination measures. It intends to build resilience of coastal systems to climate change and extreme events, giving priority to nature-based solutions whenever possible. Besides, the SSCACC seeks to identify, design and implement adaptation options for the DPMT that meet efficiency and sustainability criteria; call for economic analyses that help prioritize investments; ensure planned action in terms of information and methods; and promote regulatory and policy frameworks. The latter contributes to increasing the adaptive capacity of the sectors with a stake on the coast, mainstreaming adaptation to climate change into all plans and programmes with implications for coastal systems, and the inter-territorial solidarity to support adaptation needs along the Spanish coast. Other objectives include, inter alia, the integration of the SSCACC into the PNACC, and the positioning of Spain in line with the EU priorities. Monitoring and evaluation. Coupled with the indicator-based system of the PNACC, it involves incorporating a system for monitoring and evaluating climate change impacts along the Spanish coast. Research. It promotes and encourages initiatives related to climate change research, particularly those that contribute to increasing

3.2.2.3. Impacts. In response to climate change, coastal systems may undergo significant impacts across a wide spectrum of climate-related drivers, from local to global scale (Wong et al., 2014). Potential impacts identified by the SSCACC include but are not limited to permanent inundation and episodic flooding, beach erosion and dune impact, saltwater intrusion and changes in groundwater level, changes in wetlands 3

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Table 1 Systems on which the effects of climate change are considered. Systems

Subsystems

Indicators

Natural

Cliffs

Length of cliff with landslide problems (km) Length of cliff with erosion problems (km) Length of low rocky coast with landslide problems (km) Total number of beaches Length of beaches affected by erosion (km) Average annual retreat (m) Changes in Total Water Level (m) Maximum projected retreat (m) Changes in potential transport (m3) Length of dunes affected by erosion (km) Average annual retreat (m) Maximum projected retreat (m) Changes in potential transport (gr/cm/s) New flooded area per year (m2/year) New dried area per year (m2/year) Total number of water bodies with saltwater intrusion problems Changes in salt wedge extension (km) New flooded area per year (m2/year) New dried area per year (m2/year) Total number of water bodies with salt-water intrusion problems Changes in salt wedge extension (km) New flooded area per year (m2/year) New dried area per year (m2/year) Total number of water bodies with salt-water intrusion problems Changes in salt wedge extension (km) New flooded area per year (m2/year) New dried area per year (m2/year) Total number of water bodies with salt-water intrusion problems Changes in salt wedge extension (km) Changes in the equilibrium volume of the tidal flats (m3) Changes in the equilibrium section of the estuary mouth (m2) Changes in the equilibrium volume of the ebb tidal delta (m3) Variation of the dimensionless number of the stratification (−) Total number of meadows Occupied area with three-year follow-up (m2) Total number of meadows Occupied area with three-year follow-up (m2) Total number of inhabitants on flood-prone areas Urban and concentrated urban area affected by flooding or total flooded area (km2) Transport-related infrastructure affected by flooding or total flooded area (km or km2) Total number of critical energy infrastructures affected Total number of critical drainage infrastructures affected Total number of critical communication infrastructures affected Total number of ports that become inoperative due to climate change Loss of port operation (days) Changes in the overtopping rates of protection structures (m3/m/s) Changes in the stability index of protection structures (−) Total number and percentage (%) of protection structures that lose functionality due to climate change Loss of beach area due to flooding and/or erosion (m2) Potential reduction of the number of users due to loss of beach area (number of users) Industrial area affected by flooding or total flooded area (km2) Agricultural and livestock area affected by flooding or total flooded area (km2)

Low-lying rocky coasts Beaches

Dunes

Wetlands and saltmarshes

Lagoons

Deltas

Estuaries

Seagrass meadows Posidonia oceanica meadows Socio-economic

Population Urban areas Infrastructures

Transport Energy Sanitation Communication Ports Protection structures

Tourist sector Industrial sector Agriculture and livestock sectors

Table 2 Drivers for change considered in the SSCACC. climate drivers

Indicators

trends

Sea level Storms (extra-tropical cyclones) Wind Waves Extreme sea levels

Local or relative sea level Intensity, frequency and track Intensity and direction Intensity and direction Total water level

Historical Historical Historical Historical Historical

Sea surface temperature

Sea temperature measured at surface level Inflow Concentration of CO2, pH

Historical series

Modified and regionalized IPCC recommended values Regionalized values if available or recommended by the IPCC Regionalized values if available or recommended by the IPCC Regionalized values if available or recommended by the IPCC Regionalized values if available or calculated from historical storm surge and wave time-series, and regionalized mean sea-level projections Regionalized values if available or recommended by the IPCC

Historical series Historical series

Regionalized values if available or inferred from precipitation projections Regionalized values if available or recommended by the IPCC

Freshwater supplies Increased concentration of CO2 in the sea

projections series series series series series

4

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Table 3 Impacts considered in the SSCACC. Impacts

Drivers included

Permanent flooding and its consequences Episodic flooding and its consequences Coastal erosion and its impact on dune systems Salt-water intrusion and changes in groundwater level Changes in wetlands and salt-marshes Changes in operability and reliability of protection structures Changes in stratification and circulation patterns Migration and mortality of coastal and transitional water species Changes in water quality and salinity Changes in river sediment supplies Changes in nutrient circulation and supply Changes in water pH

Mean sea level Mean sea level, storm surge and wave contribution to total water level (run-up/set-up) Mean sea level, extreme water levels, waves (wave height and direction), wind Mean sea level, episodic flooding due to extreme events Mean sea level, river flow Mean sea level, extreme water levels, waves (intensity and direction) Mean sea level, river flow, salinity, temperature Temperature mean sea level, extreme events Salinity, temperature, runoff, river flow, extreme events Precipitation, river flow, runoff Runoff, salinity, river flow, temperature Changes in water pH due to CO2 absorption

and saltmarshes, changes in operability and reliability of coastal structures, changes in stratification and circulation patterns, migration and mortality of species, changes in water quality and salinity, alteration of river sediment supply, alteration of circulation and nutrient supply, and changes in water pH (see Table 3).

reversible adaptation based on risk and/or consequences monitoring and multiple interventions. Approaches such as the adaptation pathways (e.g., Haasnoot et al., 2013) hold much promise as involve sequences of adaptation measures governed by turning points, which activate if new or additional action is required. This combines with the systematic monitoring of the adaptation measures implemented to allow analysing their efficiency, functionality, social acceptance and environmental effects. Their efficiency will be even greater if they are functional for a wide range of scenarios through small additional interventions over time. This contributes to dealing with uncertainty; adjusting to both current and future socioeconomic juncture; and benefiting from the evolution of knowledge and technical capacity.

3.2.2.4. Acceptable level of risk and consequences. One of the main challenges to face within a risk assessment is the lack of capacity to assign probabilities of occurrence to hazard and/or vulnerability projections, which combined with exposure give rise to risk (IPCC, 2014). However, by setting a baseline period, it is possible to establish what the increase or decrease in risk is. For each scenario and time horizon considered, the SSCACC sets out the levels of risk described in Table 4. Importantly, effective adaptation requires both learning about potential risks and defining their acceptable level, referring to the state and functionality of the natural and socio-economic systems. Under the same premise, the levels of consequences in the absence of adaptation are provided in Table 5. Based on the above, and prior to defining any possible adaptation measure, two criteria require to be set: 1) the acceptable threshold of variation in the level of risk and/or acceptable consequences for a time horizon; and 2) the approach chosen to keep the levels of risk and/or acceptable consequences below the established thresholds through the implementation of adaptation measures. Regarding the first criteria, the SSCACC opts for maintaining the level of risk of the baseline period, which has been set to the time slice 2010–2014. There were important discussions with different stakeholders in this respect. Conservative non-governmental organisations (NGOs) were more reluctant and demanded to set the acceptable risk target at more stringent levels (i.e., pre-1990s development). However, this was argued not to be feasible due to the high costs that would entail, and the high degree of coastal development achieved. The acceptable threshold defined by the SSCACC responds to the fact that the impacts observed so far on the Spanish coast can be mostly attributed to human action. Concerning the second criteria, the SSCACC promotes flexible and

3.2.3. Adaptation options The objectives of the SSCACC can only be achieved by combining different adaptation options into specific implementation projects. The SSCACC prioritizes options that work for a wide range of scenarios and bring additional benefits beyond the adaptation to climate change itself, considering two different categories. The first is given by the IPCC in AR5 (Noble et al., 2014), in which options are classified according to their physical/structural, social and institutional nature; and into engineering, technology, ecosystems, services, education, information, behaviour, economy, laws and regulation, and governmental policies (denoted hereinafter as Category 1). The second categorisation responds to protection, accommodation and retreat (denoted hereinafter as Category 2), which is consistent with other international strategies and previous IPCC reports. The adaptation options included in the SSCACC are organized in accordance with Category 1 and 2 and summarized in Table 6. These options emerged from the identification of national needs for different sectors and stakeholders. It is noteworthy to mention that some options are interrelated and/or cut across several categories, so these should be considered overlapping rather than discrete, and that are often implemented jointly as part of adaptation projects and plans, which depend on technological capabilities, legal and financial frameworks, and coastal management policies in force at any given time.

Table 4 Levels of risk in absence of adaptation considered by the SSCACC. evel of risk in absence of adaptation

Characteristics

Low

It is defined as systems, areas or sectors on the coast where the increase in the level of risk with respect to the baseline year, whether for an impact or several aggregate impacts, is < 10%. It is defined as systems, areas or sectors on the coast where the increase in the level of risk with respect to the baseline year, whether for an impact or several aggregate impacts, is between 10% and 25%. It is defined as systems, areas or sectors on the coast where the increase in the level of risk with respect to the baseline year, whether for an impact or several aggregate impacts, is between 25% and 60%. It is defined as systems, areas or sectors on the coast where the increase in the level of risk with respect to the baseline year, whether for an impact or several aggregate impacts, is between 60% and 90%. It is defined as systems, areas or sectors on the coast where the increase in the level of risk with respect to the baseline year, whether for an impact or several aggregate impacts, is > 90%.

Medium High Very high Extreme

5

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Table 5 Levels of negative consequences in absence of adaptation considered by the SSCACC. Level of consequences in absence of adaptation

Characteristics

Small

In natural systems: no damage to the state/integrity of the system. Minor damage or changes in functionality/services provided by the system, which can be recovered naturally in the short term. In socio-economic systems: no damage to the state/integrity of the system or negligible economic or functional losses of very short term and easily assumed. In natural systems: no temporary minor damage or damage to the condition/integrity of the system or reductions in functionality/ services provided by the system can be recovered naturally. In socio-economic systems: no temporary minor damage or damage to the integrity of the system or loss of functionality/service or economic benefits that can be restored. In natural systems: direct damage to the state/integrity of the system and significant loss of functionality/services that cannot be 100% restored or require human intervention for recovery. In socio-economic systems: direct and significant damage to the state/integrity of the system and significant temporary or permanent partial loss of functionality/services of the systems, leading to high economic losses and affecting the activity of the population. Recovery is not 100% feasible except in some cases with significant economic costs that cannot be assumed. In natural systems: permanent and non-recoverable loss of habitat, ecosystem or main ecosystem services due to mortality or permanent disappearance of natural conditions for their existence. In socio-economic systems: loss of human lives and loss of state/integrity of the system with definitive cessation of functionality/ services or economic losses that do not allow its recovery in the present conditions.

Moderate

Severe

Irreversible

3.3. Implementation and monitoring

any possible environmental impact and the social acceptance. The SSCACC encourages performing an economic appraisal of the measures deemed. Cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and multi-criteria analysis are some of the standard techniques with their pros and cons, and any single method or option is unlikely to be universally agreed on, less still for their exclusive use in the framework of the SSCACC. The SSCACC includes a mandatory monitoring programme aiming at assessing the degree of attainment of the objectives sought and the effectiveness of the adaptation measures implemented. It sets out a range of follow-up indicators for the general monitoring of the extent of achievement of its implementation, which is provided in Table 7 for the options in Table 6. The SSCACC requires all the implementation projects to incorporate an annex with a description of the environmental

Adaptation barriers and constraints, either technical, financial, economic, environmental or administrative, reveal that not all adaptation options are possible. For a given time horizon and scenario, and for the areas, systems and sectors where the acceptable threshold of risk and/or consequences is exceeded, the SSCACC establishes that possible adaptation options need to be identified and prioritized for implementation. The decision-making framework adopted requires considering the consequences of inaction in the midterm obtained from diagnosis; the viability of achieving the adaptation objectives using a single option, or a combination of them; the added benefits or cobenefits offered by each option; the technical and economic feasibility; Table 6 Adaptation options selected by the SSCACC. Code

Option

Category 1

Category 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Technology, information Technology, information Technology, information, behavior Engineering, ecosystems Engineering Ecosystems Engineering, ecosystems Engineering

Protection, accommodation, retreat Protection, accommodation, retreat Accommodation Protection Protection Protection Protection Protection

Engineering

Protection

Engineering

Accommodation

Engineering, laws and regulation Economy Engineering, behavior Engineering, behavior Behavior Behavior, laws and regulation Ecosystems, laws and regulation, behavior

Accommodation Accommodation Retreat Retreat Retreat Accommodation Retreat

18 19

Diagnosis and risk analysis Systematic monitoring of the coast Early warning systems and evacuation plans Nourishment of beaches and dune systems Creation of artificial beaches and dune systems Conservation and restoration of wetlands and saltmarshes Sediment management Construction of new structures for protection (seawalls, seafront promenades) Construction of new structures or artificial elements to hold the line (dykes, jetties, breakwaters, etc.) Functional and structural adequacy of existing infrastructures and buildings Adequacy codes and regulation Specific insurance premiums Managed realignment of existing structures Managed realignment of existing structures in estuaries Land acquisition Changes in land use Promotion of wetlands and saltmarshes inland migration, and creation of new intertidal areas Capacity building and awareness Overcoming barriers and limitations

Others Others

20

Integrated decision-making

21 22 23 24 25 26

Research Assessment of ecosystem services Relocation Concession management Protected areas Integrated coastal zone management

Education, information Education. Information, laws and regulation, governmental policies and programmes Information. Economy, laws and regulations, governmental policies and programmes Information Information, economy Behavior Administration's policies and programmes Administration's policies and programmes Administration's policies and programmes

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

6

Others Others Others Retreat Accommodation, retreat Others All

7

Diagnosis and risk analysis

Systematic monitoring of the coast

Early warning systems and evacuation plans

Nourishment of beaches and dune systems

Creation of artificial beaches and dune systems

Conservation and restoration of wetlands and saltmarshes

Sediment management

Construction of new structures for protection (seawalls, seafront promenades)

Construction of new structures or artificial elements to hold the line (dykes, jetties, etc.)

Functional and structural adequacy of existing infrastructures and buildings Adequacy codes and regulation Specific insurance premiums

Managed realignment of existing coastal structures

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

13

11 12

Option

Code

Table 7 General follow-up indicators for the adaptation options.

Engineering, behaviour

Engineering, laws and regulation Economy

Engineering

Engineering

Engineering

Engineering, ecosystems

Ecosystems

Engineering

Engineering, ecosystems

Technology, information, behaviour

Technology, information

Technology, information

Category 1

Retreat

Accommodation Accommodation

Accommodation

Protection

Protection

Protection

Protection

Protection

Protection

Protection, accommodation, retreat Accommodation

Protection, accommodation, retreat

Category 2

(continued on next page)

Total number of early warning systems and evacuation plans implemented Length of coastline with early warning systems and evacuation plans (km) Total number of people associated to early warning systems Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of nourished beaches Length of nourished beaches (ml) Area of nourished beaches (m2) Total number of nourished dune systems Sand volumes devoted to beach nourishments (m3) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of nourished beaches Length of nourished beaches (ml) Area of nourished beaches (m2) Total number of nourished dune systems Sand volumes devoted to beach nourishments (m3) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of interventions for wetland and saltmarshes restoration Increased area of wetlands and saltmarshes in conservation or restoration (m2) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of interventions for sediment management Restored sand volumes (m3) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of protection structures constructed Length of coastline protected with new structures (ml) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of protection structures constructed Length of coastline protected with new structures (ml) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of intervened infrastructures Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of modified standards and codes Total number of contributions Total number of specific products generated Length of realigned coastline (km) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%)

- Total number of global diagnosis/assessments carried out - Total number of high-resolution diagnosis/assessments carried out Length of coastline with systematic monitoring (km)

general follow-up indicators

I.J. Losada, et al.

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Option

Managed realignment of existing structures in estuaries

Land acquisition

Changes in land use

Promotion of wetlands and saltmarshes inland migration, and creation of new intertidal areas Capacity building and awareness

Overcoming barriers and limitations

Integrated decision-making

Research

Assessment of ecosystem services

Relocation

Concession management

Protected areas

Integrated coastal zone management

Code

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Table 7 (continued)

8 Administration's policies and programmes

Administration's policies and programmes

Administration's policies and programmes

Behaviour

Information, economy

Information

Education. Information, laws and regulation, governmental policies and programmes Information. Economy, laws and regulations, governmental policies and programmes

Education, information

Ecosystems, laws and regulation, behaviour

Behaviour, laws and regulation

Behaviour

Engineering, behaviour

Category 1

All

Others

Accommodation, retreat

Retreat

Others

Others

Others

Others

Others

Retreat

Accommodation

Retreat

Retreat

Category 2 Length of realigned coastline (km) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Land area acquired for retreat (m2) Investment for land acquisition (€) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Land area with modified use (m2) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) New intertidal area (m2) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of outreach training and awareness-raising events and materials Total number of people involved in outreach, training and awareness-raising events Total number of barriers and constraints identified Total number of barriers and constraints overcome Total number of climate-change mainstreaming processes for decision-making Total number of coordination and social participation meetings Total number of social agents involved Total number of funded, promoted or co-financed research projects Funding for mobilised research (€/year) Total number of natural coastal systems for which ecosystem services have been quantified Area released by relocations (m2) Investment in relocations (€/year) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of concessions amended to promote adaptation Length of coastline affected by changes in the management of concessions to favour adaptation (ml) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of increased protected areas Increased protected areas (km2) Percentage reduction in risk or consequences (%) Total number of projects with an ICZM approach

general follow-up indicators

I.J. Losada, et al.

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Total GHG emissions (Index as a function of base year (1990 except 1995 for fluorinated) = 100) Total emissions of acidifying and eutrophying gases and tropospheric ozone precursors Total particle emissions (AMONG OTHERS) Total number of surface water bodies (rivers, reservoirs) with fluvial-marine influence, in which compliance with the environmental flow regime is controlled Total number of coastal and groundwater bodies with saltwater intrusion problems Total number and percentage (%) of total coastal surface water bodies, assessed in the category of good status or better Total number and percentage (%) with respect to the total of bodies of groundwater that reach good status Total number and percentage (%) of artificial and heavily modified water bodies (waters confined to ports or some coastal water bodies subject to strong hydro-morphological alterations) with good ecological potential and good chemical status Port operating days (days) (AMONG OTHERS) Length of current coastline (km) Regression of the coastline (m) Sedimentary balance of beaches (m3) Length of current coastline corresponding to beaches (km) Sea-level rise (m) Total number and percentage (%) of defence infrastructures installed on the coast Total number and percentage (%) of protection works that lose their functionality due to sea-level rise Area acquired and incorporated into the DPMT (m2) Length delimited (km) Length of implemented maritime structures (m) Protected or rehabilitated area of coastal wetlands and river sections (m2) Protected or rehabilitated area of coastal dune systems (m2) Surface of degraded areas recovered or restored (m2) Flood extent (km2) Water level (m) Total number of people who may be affected Type of economic activity that may be affected (m2/land use) Total number of critical infrastructures affected (AMONG OTHERS) Total number and percentage (%) of protected areas in the coastal and marine stretch in each Autonomous Community Total number of coastal wetlands (coastal stretch and DMPT) Percentage of heavily modified and artificial coastal water bodies by categories of water bodies (%) Total number of programmes plans or actions for monitoring and eradication of invasive alien species in coastal areas (qualitative value) Forest area associated with the coastal stretch and the DPMT (km2) Total number of endangered species of marine fauna associated with the coastal stretch and the DPMT. (AMONG OTHERS) Area of soil affected by erosion (Index as a function of base year (2002) = 100) Evolution of urban land area (Index as a function of base year (2006) = 100) Evolution of Protected Historical Heritage (No. of Properties of Cultural Interest) Total number of projects and total reforestation area that modify the risk of suffering erosive processes. Elimination of longitudinal barriers (ml) Defences recessed (ml) River connected by elimination of transverse barriers (km) Recovery of old watercourses (km) (AMONG OTHERS)

Air-Climate

9

Soil, Geological Heritage, Cultural Heritage and Landscape

Vegetation, Fauna, Ecosystems, Biodiversity

Water, Coasts and Marine Environment

environmental follow-up indicators

Environmental component

Table 8 Environmental follow-up indicators for the adaptation options. value for the baseline period

measured value

expected value

degree of achievement (%)

I.J. Losada, et al.

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

monitoring plan, describing the techniques, frequency, and type of analysis applied to assess the selected indicators, as well as those relevant follow-up indicators proposed by the SSCACC (see Table 8). Table 8 considers observations, the outcome from the initial assessment for the baseline period, which corresponds to the risk target value associated with the alternative selected (this enables to assess the deviation of the target), and the trend of the indicator.

exist on the coast, the plans most closely linked to the Strategy encompass the National Water Quality Plan, the State Plan for Civil Protection against Flood Risk, the Strategic Plan for Natural Heritage and Biodiversity, the Strategic Plan for the Conservation and Rational Use of Wetlands, the Climate Change Adaptation National Plan (PNAC) and Hydrological and Flood Risk Management Plans for Hydrographic Demarcations. Additionally, the application of the SSCACC must be aligned with EU priorities and supra-national plans and programmes such as the European Climate Change Adaptation Strategy at the community level and other regional or cross-border plans such as the Regional Climate Change Adaptation Framework for the Mediterranean Marine and Coastal Areas.

3.4. Finance sources and timing Given the scope and implications of the SSCACC, financing alternatives can be public capital, private investments or a combination of both, depending on the type of adaptation measures to be implemented, as stated in Article 82 of Law 22/1988 of 28 July on Coasts: “The works under the jurisdiction of the State shall be financed by the corresponding budgetary appropriations and, where appropriate, by contributions from Autonomous Communities, Local Corporations, international bodies and private individuals”. Public sources of funding include the MITECO budget lines through the DGSCS and the Spanish Office for Climate Change, Hydrologic Confederations funds, joint action plans within specific bilateral agreements with the Autonomous Communities, European funds that can be potentially applicable to the development of the SSCACC (e.g., Horizon2020, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Maritime and Fisheries fund, and the LIFE Programme), and any other national or international funding sources that envisage, among their goals, promoting adaptation to climate change. Private sources of financing may also contribute to the development of some lines of action set out in the SSCACC. The involvement of Spanish companies in environmental projects and programmes is increasing due to the growing importance of the corporate social responsibility and the associated social and fiscal implications. Additionally, many actions proposed in the SSCACC can be financed through collaboration agreements between the MITECO and private companies, foundations, NGOs, and social works of the banks and other finance corporations, especially those focused on raising awareness, training and education, and research. The MITECO includes annual budgetary allocations for the implementation of adaptation measures through annual or multiannual projects that meet the objectives set in the selected alternative preferably until 2050. The application of the SSCACC will come through regulations and plans for its compulsory implementation and monitoring such as regional strategies at the scale required to make decisions on adaptation solutions. In addition, all coastal protection projects carried out on the coast of Spain must be in line with the principles of the SSCACC and the types of measures proposed therein. The SSCACC foresees regular risk diagnoses alongside the assessment of the effectiveness of the measures implemented within its scope every five years.

4. The Strategic Environmental Study (SES) In what follows, the most relevant aspects of the SES that accompanies the SSCACC are described. 4.1. Sustainability principles The sustainability principles to be achieved with the SSCACC derive from the application of international conventions on environmental protection to which Spain is a contracting party, and from policies, plans, and programmes at community, national, and regional levels, and from present legislation on environmental protection, conservation and defence at community, national, and regional levels. These principles include the rational use of territory and natural resources; the promotion of renewable energies and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; the contribution to the good environmental status of marine and continental waters; the reduction of human-induced erosion and saltwater intrusion; the preservation of ecosystems and coastal landscapes; the prioritisation of Spanish endemic species; the promotion of measures that allow protecting and enhancing coastal cultural heritage; and avoiding new constructions and urban developments in the coastal zone. 4.2. Risk management alternatives for the SSCACC Concerning the definition of the admissible threshold for risk variation, the SES considers three choices: 1) T1: maintaining the risk level of the baseline period; 2) T2: increasing the acceptable risk threshold with respect to that of the baseline period, maintaining at least 80% of the Spanish coast with low-medium risk levels and small-moderate consequences, and without reaching the level of irreversible consequences in the remaining 20% in the worst-case scenario considered by 2100; and 3) T3: increasing the acceptable risk threshold with respect to that of the base period, maintaining at least 60% of the Spanish coast with low-medium risk levels and small-moderate consequences, 30% with medium-high risk levels and moderate-severe consequences, and without reaching the level of irreversible consequences in the remaining 10% in the worst-case scenario considered by 2100. For the implementation of the adaptation measures, the SES considers three alternative strategies: 1) M1: not implementing adaptation measures; 2) M2: risk aversion, anticipating infrequent but far-reaching interventions over time; and 3) M3: flexible adaptation based on risk and consequence monitoring with multiple interventions. While M2 is likely to be most costly and lowest value for money, M3 commits to short-term actions and allows reducing risk iteratively while enabling the most appropriate response to climate change. M3 is easier to be managed, funded and endorsed by society. Fig. 2 and Table 9 reflect both risk thresholds and strategies for implementing adaptation. The first shows a conceptual representation of how the different adaptation pathways unfold over time and the way they deal with risk levels. The second provides the alternatives that can be obtained from the combination of the adaptation pathways and risk

3.5. Interrelationship with other plans and programmes The measures linked to the SSCACC will be implemented in the DPMT as it falls specifically within the competence of the MITECO. However, the SSCACC must be consistent with other plans and programmes for application within the same territorial area, whether they are local, regional, national or supra-national plans or strategies, with which it may overlap or have a connection (see Fig. 1). During the consultations carried out in the early stages, some regional and local administrations identified those plans that overlap with the SSCACC in their territory. They include Autonomous Community Climate Change Strategies or Plans, Territorial Development Plans and guidelines, Natural Resources Development Plans, Coastal Development Plans, Sectoral Territorial Plans (e.g., industry, urbanism, commerce, tourism, education, maritime traffic, transport and communications, fishing) and General Urban Development Plans. However, given the national scope of the SSCACC and the large number of sectors that co10

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

assume risk aversion, seeking to anticipate any potential increase in risks. This requires the need to plan, in the short-term, a set of actions with important environmental, legal, economic and social implications for achieving the environmental objectives over half century; and in the mid-term, if these objectives are to be reached by 2100. In the field of climate change, there is still deep uncertainty on how risk and negative consequences may evolve in the medium and long term, as well as an increasing need for knowledge, data and tools to improve their assessment. Adaptation can lead to undesirable impacts if it is not appropriately designed and implemented. In a context of climate, socioeconomic and demographic uncertainty, lack of knowledge and capabilities, economic and financial constraints, lack of social awareness, and administrative barriers, RMA A13, A23, A33 are suggested by the SES to be the best alternatives in terms of meeting the sustainability principles and environmental objectives established in the SSCACC. They promote flexible adaptation with multiple interventions distributed in space and time alongside systemic monitoring, which is in line with the so-called adaptation pathways (Haasnoot et al., 2013). These strategies allow delaying decisions and keeping future options open until uncertainty is reduced, and they are less vulnerable to the unexpected than risk-averse approaches (Ranger et al., 2013). As illustrated in Fig. 2, intervention or turning points determine the points beyond which strategies are no longer effective (Kwadijk et al., 2010) and new or additional action is required. The importance of a turning point is not about when it is reached but the flexibility of having alternative strategies available if more is learnt or as conditions change (Wong et al., 2014).

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram that illustrates the multi-level interrelationships (overlapping and alignments) between the SSCACC and other plans and programmes.

thresholds, which results in risk management alternatives (RMA) – with their pros and cons (see Table 10). RMA A11, A21, A31 correspond to options in which the SSCACC does not apply. In these cases, only measures set out in strategies, plans and programmes in force, complementary or synergistic with the objectives of the SSCACC, are implemented. A proper design, development and execution of the adaptation measures may allow reducing hazard, exposure and/or vulnerability. However, even if adopting such strategies, plans and programmes in the strictest sense, the effect of climate change will contribute to increasing risk levels so that all or some of the acceptable thresholds T1, T2 and T3 will most likely be exceeded for any scenario and time horizon. The remaining RMA (i.e., A12, A22, A32, A13, A23, A33) consider the resource and implementation of adaptation measures. In either case, the objectives of the SSCACC can only be achieved by combining different adaptation options within adaptation plans. Regardless of the thresholds deemed, RMA A12, A22 and A32

4.3. Most significant effects on the environment with the implementation of the SSCAC Implementing adaptation may produce effects on the environment. The SES proposes the categorisation of options into four groups based on whether: 1) they produce significant unfavourable environmental effects; 2) they do not produce significant environmental effects; 3) they produce favourable environmental effects; and 4) they produce favourable or unfavourable environmental effects against the criteria used for their application. The qualitative assessment of the environmental effects resulting from the implementation of the adaptation options selected by the SSCACC (see Table 6) is provided in Table 11.

Fig. 2. Risk management alternatives proposed for the SSCACC (adapted from Environmental Agency, 2012). 11

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Table 9 Definition of alternatives. Approach

M1

M2

M3

Threshold T1 T2 T3

A11 A21 A31

A12 A22 A32

A13 A23 A33

Table 10 Advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives considered. Alternative A11

A21 A31

Advantages

a threshold of risk and negative consequences such as that of • Establishes the baseline period not imply additional investments due to adaptation needs with • Does respect to the baseline period not imply additional investments due to adaptation needs with • Does respect to the baseline period not imply additional investments due to adaptation needs with • Does respect to the baseline period

Disadvantages

the maintenance of current risk levels entirely to the rigorous application • Entrusts of existing policies, programmes and plans high risk of not being able to maintain the levels of risk and consequences of • Very the baseline period high risk of a general worsening of most of the environmental indicators • Very considered a significant increase in the risk and negative consequences of climate • Implies change impacts with respect to the previous alternative a generalized worsening of most of the environmental indicators considered • Implies a considerable increase in the risk and negative consequences of climate • Implies change impacts with respect to previous alternatives to a general worsening of almost all the environmental indicators considered • Leads to be the worst alternative from the environmental point of view of the latter three alternatives

A12

a threshold of risk and negative consequences such as that of • Establishes the baseline period

reaching irreversible situations in some areas, sectors or systems of the • Admits Spanish coastal stretch investment and great mismatch, probably not bearable with the economic • Great context because it must be implemented in a limited period of time the implementation of adaptation measures with a very high level of • Requires uncertainty of the alternatives considered to the great anticipation with which they must be implemented, the adaptation • Due options will be fundamentally rigid, with engineering solutions prevailing over others to increase safety margins

A22

A32

A13

lower budgetary needs and less adjustment to the economic • Requires context than the previous alternative

lower budgetary needs and less adjustment to the economic • Requires context than the previous alternative

a threshold of risk and negative consequences such as that of • Establishes the baseline period the selection and implementation of measures within a • Encourages reduced uncertainty framework to obtain the maximum benefit from the evolution of knowledge • Allows and technical capabilities from monitoring the evolution of the risk components • Benefits the introduction of more flexible adaptation measures to the • Favours evolution of the different scenarios and with a higher cost-effectiveness

of the adaptation options will have to be oversized with low cost-effectiveness • Many ratios risk of introducing undesirable effects due to maladaptation or unsuccessful • High measures investment and great mismatch, probably not bearable, with the economic • Great context because it must be implemented in a limited period of time but less than the previous alternative

risk of introducing undesirable effects due to maladaptation or unsuccessful • High measures investment and great mismatch, probably not bearable, with the economic • Great context because it must be implemented in a limited period of time but less than the two previous alternatives

risk of introducing undesirable effects due to maladaptation or unsuccessful • High measures not admit reaching irreversible situations in any area, sector or system of the • Does Spanish coastal stretch

ratio

A23

higher budgetary needs and better adjustment to the precise • Requires economic context the selection and implementation of measures within a • Encourages reduced uncertainty framework the introduction of more flexible adaptation measures to the • Favours evolution of the different scenarios and with a higher cost-effectiveness ratio

A33

lower budgetary needs and less adjustment to the economic • Requires context than the previous alternative the selection and implementation of measures within a • Encourages reduced uncertainty framework the introduction of more flexible adaptation measures to the • Favours evolution of the different scenarios and with a higher cost-effectiveness ratio.

lower budgetary needs and less adjustment to the economic • Requires context than the previous alternative

12

a significant increase in the risk and negative consequences of climate • Implies change impacts with respect to the previous alternative a generalized worsening of most of the environmental indicators considered • Implies with respect to the previous alternative

a significant increase in the risk and negative consequences of climate • Implies change impacts with respect to the previous alternative to a general worsening of almost all the environmental indicators considered • Leads to be the worst alternative from the environmental point of view of the latter three reaching irreversible situations in some areas, sectors or systems of the • Admits Spanish coast

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

While for categories 1 to 3 the code used is (−1), (0) and (1), respectively; for category 4, any potential effect on the environment is assumed unknown. Environmental criteria in Table 11 arise from Table 8, where different European environmental strategies, sustainability principles, and environmental objectives alongside their indicators have been correlated. Once the adaptation options that may cause adverse effects on the environment and the unfavourable effects themselves are determined, there is a need to identify preventive, corrective and/or compensatory measures (see Table 12). Among the environmental measures able to counteract the negative effects steaming from the implementation of the SSCACC, those that favour protected areas and the DPMT are preferred.

cooperation and coordination between the National Administration, the Autonomous Communities, the local authorities, and private entities active in coastal areas (e.g., businesses). The selection of the most appropriate adaptation and risk reduction options is of greater complexity due to the high uncertainty in the evolution and accumulation of climate change-driven impacts and risks. In recent years, an expanding body of literature has emerged emphasizing the necessity for more dynamic, adaptive plans that can be adjusted to changing needs and contexts (e.g., Haasnoot et al., 2013; Zandvoort et al., 2017; Ramm et al., 2018). Two fundamental aspects of the SSCACC support the design, development and implementation of adaptation strategies that contribute to dealing with uncertainty. First, promoting flexibility with multiple interventions managed over time, which allows incorporating long-term objectives into short-term actions (Lawrence et al., 2018). Crucial to adaptive planning is systematic monitoring, and the definition of acceptable risk thresholds beyond which communities cannot cope with or costs would become unmanageable; and intervention points beyond with strategies are no longer effective and action is required. However, institutional and social values strongly condition the concept of acceptable/tolerable risk, which is therefore highly contested (Turner et al., 2016); and the identification of early signals and action triggers, and their implementation articulating sequential actions, are still under development. The second aspect is increasing resilience by fostering adaptation options that work properly in the widest range of likely climate conditions and allow coping with the unexpected, including climate change. This is relevant because while future probabilistic projections may be considered, often just one mid-range scenario is used to design protection, which is not adequate to cover significant changes (e.g., the ongoing increase in the likelihood of extreme flood and erosion events) (Manning et al., 2015). Following the categorisation given by Hallegatte (2009), the SSCACC's preferred options include low-regret measures that bring benefits in absence of climate change but also can entail losses (e.g., climate-proofing buildings); reversible strategies that keep the lowest possible cost of being wrong about future changes (e.g., restrictive urban planning); safety margin strategies that reduce vulnerability at low costs (e.g., oversizing drainage infrastructures); and soft strategies based on institutional and/or financial tools (e.g., insurance products), which allow anticipating problems and implementing adequate responses. Another relevant aspect of the SSCACC is its multi-sectoral nature. While there are other multi-sectoral national adaptation strategies (e.g., the German National Adaptation Strategy), none of them is specific for coastal areas. On the positive side, multi-sectoral approaches allow addressing adaptation comprehensively in the greatest possible number of sectors that are of importance to a system (i.e., in this case the coast of Spain), which otherwise would likely be overlooked (Bauer and Steuer, 2015). This inclusive perspective enables to consider potential linkages, synergies and conflicts, contributing to better-informed decision-making and reducing the threat of maladaptation (Celliers et al., 2013). However, the downside might be more general goals and priorities, and less explicit prospects and commitments over long-term timeframes than in sectoral-based approaches (e.g. Bauer and Steuer, 2015). Well-designed strategies require adaptation options that are technically feasible, economically viable, and socially and politically acceptable. However, many barriers can hinder or impede adaptation development and implementation. The most reported barriers and constraints are associated with the institutional and social dimensions of adaptation (Biesbroek et al., 2010). The first includes uncertainty and fragmentation (e.g., Kettle and Dow, 2014); the second involves mismatches between what is politically and socially acceptable and what scientists indicate, different risk perceptions, and the lack of overall awareness and communication with communities and decisionmakers (Manning et al., 2015; Wamsler, 2017). Six aspects related to the development and implementation of the SSCACC are expected to

5. Consultation process Following the review carried out by the Sub-Directorate General for Environmental Assessment, the draft of the SSCACC was sent for consultation to the competent public administrations and to other interested parties such as environmental organisations. Aiming to broadly disseminate the SEA process, the document was available to the public on the MAPAMA website. According to competences and interests, respondents were asked to provide their views and/or make suggestions regarding the potential adverse effects that the SSCACC could have on the environment, and the best way to eliminate or reduce them. Specifically, they were consulted on the following aspects: 1) diagnosis; 2) SSCACC objectives; 3) sustainability principles and environmental objectives; 4) alternatives proposed; 5) effects of the SSCACC on the environment and possible corrective, preventive and compensatory measures to cope with any adverse effect identified; and 6) interrelationship of the SSCACC with other sectoral planning. The response was encouraging, and many replies were received in the space of forty-five days. Of those that did respond, 36% of answers belonged to National Administration agencies, 57% to Autonomous Communities stakeholders, 3% came from local entities, and the remaining 3% came from environmental non-governmental organisations. Several valuable suggestions were incorporated into the SSCACC final document. 6. Discussion Particular features of the management of the Spanish coast are the difficult articulation of competences between stakeholders and the need for an integrated vision that seems at odds with the local implementation of adaptation actions (REAF, 2010). The DPMT is by law responsibility of the National Administration. However, due to the high level of political decentralisation and devolution, the Autonomous Communities (regions) have important competences in terms of coastal planning, urban planning, ports, discharges into the sea and others, which are conferred on them through their respective Statutes of Autonomy and may differ from one region to another. Both the National Administration and the Autonomous Communities must be coordinated and work in conjunction and with the local administrations (municipalities) too, which represent a third party with a stake in the Spanish coast. Local authorities are at the forefront of community decisionmaking (Ramm et al., 2018) and share administrative and regulatory competences in many policy areas that need considerable coordination with upper governance levels. Local competences include public advice on the DPMT, the exploitation of beach services, and the maintenance of beaches safe and clean, always in accordance with the stipulated in the legislation dictated by Statutes of Autonomy of each region. This has resulted in many instances councils addressing climate change and variability effects separately and facing challenges individually in an ad-hoc and inefficient manner. While the mere existence of national strategies does not guarantee local adaptation plans (Heidrich et al., 2016), the SSCACC seeks to be an effective, sound instrument for 13

Reduction of GHG emissions Lower energy consumption Promotion of renewable energies Reduction of air pollution Achieve “good status” of water bodies Maintenance of ecological flows Recovery of marine ecosystems Protection of natural ecosystems and enhancement of the social and economic well-being of coastal regions Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution Preservation and recovery of the natural and landscape values and functions of the coastal stretch Recovery of naturalness in coastal areas degraded or urbanized in excess Protection of the beach as a natural space Recovery of natural open spaces on the waterfront Defence of the integrity of the DPMT and of the zones of servitude and the general use to which they are destined Liberation of occupations located on transit easements and protection in the event of not complying with current legislation Guaranteeing the public use of the seashore and the rest of the DPMT Recovery and improvement of free access, transit and public use of the coast, in those stretches of coastline where there is some privatization of the coast Valuing and restoring ecosystem services and biodiversity Identification of erosion and salinization zones Adoption of appropriate measures to reduce the risks of erosion and salinization and to combat their consequences Protection and presentation of the cultural heritage Reducing the negative consequences of flooding

Environmental criteria

Table 11 Assessment of the adaptation measures and their potential environmental effects.

2 −1 −1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

14 0 0 1 1 0 0 1

0 1

0 0 1

0 1

0

3 −1 −1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 1

0 0 1

1 0

0

4 −1 −1 0 0 0 0 −1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1

0 1

0 0 1

1 0

0

5 −1 −1 0 0 0 0 −1 0 0 −1 1 1 1 1

Adaptation measure code

1 1

1 0 1

1 1

1

6 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

0 1

0 0 1

1 1

0

7 −1 −1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

−1 0 1

1 0

0

8 −1 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 1 0 0 −1 0 −1 1

1 1

−1 0 1

1 0

0

9 −1 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 1 0 0 −1 0 −1 1

1 1

0 0 0

0 0

0

10 −1 −1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

1 1

0 0 1

0 0

0

11 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

1 1

0 0 1

0 0

0

12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 1

0 0 1

1 1

1

13 −1 −1 0 −1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

0 1

0 0 1

1 1

1

14 −1 −1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

0 1

1 0 1

1 1

1

15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0 1

0 0 1

0 0

0

16 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0

0 1

1 0 1

1 1

1

17 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

1 1

1 0 1

0 0

0

18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

1 1

1 0 1

0 0

0

19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

1 1

0 0 1

0 0

0

20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 1

1 1 0

0 0

0

21 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

1 1

1 0 1

0 0

0

22 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

1 1

1 0 1

1 1

1

23 −1 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1

0 1

0 0 1

1 1

1

24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

1 1

1 0 0

0 0

0

25 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

1 1

1 0 1

0 0

0

26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

I.J. Losada, et al.

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Table 12 Expected adverse environmental effects due to the adaptation measures considered. Option 2. Systematic monitoring of the coast 3. Early warning systems 4. Nourishment of beaches and dune systems 5. Creation of artificial beaches and dunes

7. Sediment management

8. Construction of new structures for coastal protection 9. Construction of new structures for holding the line 10. Adaptation of existing infrastructures and buildings 13. Realignment of existing coastal infrastructure

14. Realignment of structures located within estuaries

23. Relocation

Adverse environmental effects

GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption

GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on biodiversity • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects on coastline morphodynamics • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects on biodiversity • Effects on estuary morphodynamics • Effects GHG emissions and energy • Increased consumption on the landscape • Effects • Effects on biodiversity

contribute to overcoming (or reducing) adaptation barriers. First, fostering the cooperation and coordination among governance bodies, from local authorities to the National Administration. Second, promoting the communication between the DGSCS and those policy-coordinating entities with a stake in the coast. Third, mainstreaming of into other national, regional and local policies and plans. Fourth, the public consultation process, which sought the engagement of stakeholders and allowed communities, non-profit organisations, decision makers, and other professional groups (e.g., planners, consultants) evaluating the SSCACC before it was approved in July 2017 (B.O.E., 2017). Five, raising awareness. The DGSCS is mainly responsible for disseminating the SSCACC by various means and guaranteeing the right of public access to environmental information. Finally, involving scientists and policymakers in the design and development process. The SSCACC was conceived and crafted by an expert group with solid backgrounds in hazard and impact modelling, risk assessment and adaptation design and planning, alongside the DGSCS, who supervised the whole process. Importantly, the SSCACC would particularly benefit from recognising and addressing adaptation barriers on a continuous basis, but also from identifying opportunities, which in order to materialise, requires greater level of community engagement and formalised commitments.

Preventive, corrective or compensatory measures

energy-efficient technologies and the widest possible spatial coverage • Use for acceptable uncertainty thresholds for measures of the carbon footprint • Calculation energy-efficient technologies in the assessment and dissemination of • Use the alert of the carbon footprint • Calculation projects to the EIA procedure • Submit out an adequate selection of the deposits • Carry of the carbon footprint • Calculation projects to the EIA procedure • Submit out an adequate selection of the deposits • Carry • Calculation of the carbon footprint projects to the EIA procedure • Submit • Calculation of the carbon footprint

• Submit projects to the EIA procedure • Calculation of the carbon footprint projects to the EIA procedure • Submit • Calculation of the carbon footprint projects to the EIA procedure if required • Submit materials that help reduce emissions • Use of the carbon footprint • Calculation projects to the EIA procedure • Submit • Calculation of the carbon footprint

• Calculation of the carbon footprint projects to the EIA procedure • Submit for locations that minimize impact • Search • Calculation of the carbon footprint

7. Summary and conclusions There is a recognized need for adaptation to climate change, and even more so it is in coastal areas. These zones are highly dynamic, vulnerable, and exposed to the ongoing increase in climate changedriven impacts such as episodic and chronic flooding and erosion. At the same time, they are the most densely populated zones on the Earth's surface, nerve centres of economic activity that vary in nature, and inhabited by rich and unique ecosystems. Adaptation to climate change needs, therefore, to consider the particularities of coastal zones, their multiple functions, systems and coexisting sectors, which are increasingly threatened by climate change, and in particular by sea-level rise. Against this background, the Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change and the accompanying Strategic Environmental Study emerged from the Spanish Coastal Law with the aim to assist coastal policy and decision makers at different governance levels to assess the increasing risks faced by coastal communities, and to plan for, implement and monitor adaptation strategies. The graphical representation of their fundamental components is provided in Fig. 3. This paper touches on many essential issues that are important to be considered when developing planning instruments for coastal adaptation to climate change at the national level and that can be presented as lessons learnt. First, establishing a common and agreed methodology for the assessment of coastal risks associated with climate change and extreme weather events that considers uncertainty. This methodology 15

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

Fig. 3. Graphical representation of the fundamental components of the Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change and the accompanying Strategic Environmental Study.

and Marine Sustainability is also working with research centres on the development of new probabilistic methodologies for assessing climate change impacts in order to reduce uncertainties in future assessments as well as to develop adaptation pathways along the Spanish coast. Third, funding is provided by the Spanish Office for Climate Change for developing adaptation plans for the regional port system, including fishing ports and marinas managed by the Autonomous Communities. Further, specific funds are yearly devoted by the Directorate General for Coastal and Marine Sustainability for increasing coastal resilience mostly by the conservation and restoration of wetlands, saltmarshes and dune restoration projects; aligning codes and regulations affecting coastal areas to mainstream climate change adaptation or increasing protected areas. Once the risk diagnosis phase is completed, the Spanish coast will have a homogeneous climate change risk assessment allowing the implementation of coastal adaptation plans based on a coordinated and efficient decision-making process. All the coastal Autonomous Communities have been actively engaged in the development of a risk assessment and have incorporated climate change as an essential part of their coastal management initiatives. The Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change has contributed to a higher integration in climate change management between the regional entities dealing with climate change (mostly environmental regional ministries) and those responsible for ports and marinas (mostly public work regional ministries), and to mobilize additional resources from the Autonomous Communities for actions leading to increase coastal resilience. Finally, it has played a very relevant role in building awareness on both decision makers and technical staff of the regional administrations as well as on public at large.

requires to be applied on a coordinated and homogeneous basis to provide regular risk diagnosis. Second, identifying and clarifying what needs to be achieved in terms of both overall and specific objectives. Third, determining how best these objectives can be accomplished. Given the particular nature of coastal areas, a multi-sectoral perspective is highly recommended to support sound, integrated policy and decision making. This involves developing guidelines on defining coastal systems and sectors; drivers of change, scenarios and projections; impacts; and the acceptable level of risk and consequences. Fourth, identifying and classifying adaptation options that meet national needs for different sectors and stakeholders. Fifth, providing practical guidance on implementation and monitoring. This should at least include criteria for the prioritisation of adaptation options, and the development of a monitory plan and a range of follow-up indicators. Sixth, developing a Strategic Environmental Study is fundamental to analyse risk management alternatives, identify significant effects on the environment derived from the implementation the planning strategy, and propose preventive, corrective and/or compensatory measures to counteract potential negative impacts. Seventh, the successful development and implementation of planning strategies for coastal adaptation demands strong community and stakeholder's engagement. The pre-approval consultation process and the post-approval dissemination plan may be relevant instruments in this respect. Finally, involving both scientists and policymakers in the planning and development process contribute to ensuring higher degree of political commitment, increasing awareness and understanding of the language of science by decisionmakers, and ultimately improving the chances of success. Since the Spanish Strategy for Coastal Adaptation to Climate Change is still relatively young, it is too early to assess the degree of attainment of the objectives sought. It is presently at the risk diagnosis phase, which is being implemented including three different initiatives. First, the Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition through the Spanish Office for Climate Change is funding and providing support to the assessment of risks from climate change and extreme events along the Spanish coast to be undertaken by each coastal Autonomous Community, taking a pilot study as a reference framework to obtain comparable analyses. Second, as a first step in the risk assessment work the Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition through the Directorate General for Coastal and Marine Sustainability is funding the development of dynamic projections of coastal dynamics (waves, sea level) and sea surface temperature with high spatial resolution along the Spanish coast to be shared with the coastal Autonomous Communities as an input for their assessments. Besides, the Directorate General for Coastal

Declarations of interest None. Acknowledgements The development of the SSCACC was supported by the Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition (MITECO). Iñigo J. Losada, Alexandra Toimil and Pedro Diaz-Simal were partially funded by the Spanish Government through the grant RISKCOADAPT (BIA201789401-R). Alexandra Toimil is also grateful for the financial support obtained from the Universidad de Cantabria through the 2018 Postdoctoral Fellowship Program. Finally, all the authors would like to 16

Ocean and Coastal Management xxx (xxxx) xxxx

I.J. Losada, et al.

acknowledge the comments provided by the stakeholders involved in the consultation process.

change adaptation planning. Environ. Sci. Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci. 2014.08.013. Kopp, R.E., Horton, R.M., Little, C.M., Mitrovica, J.X., Oppenheimer, M., Rasmussen, D.J., Strauss, B.H., Tebalsi, C., 2014. Probabilistic 21st and 22nd century sea-level projections at a global network of tide-gauge sites. Earth Future 2, 383–406. Kwadijk, J.C.J., Haasnoot, M., Mulder, J.P.M., et al., 2010. Using adaptation tipping points to prepare for climate change and sea level rise: a case study in The Netherlands. Wiley Interdiscipl. Rev.: Clim. Change 1 (5), 729–740. Lawrence, J., Bell, R., Blackett, P., et al., 2018. National guidance for adapting to coastal hazards and sea-level rise: anticipating change, when and how to change pathway. Environ. Sci. Policy 82, 100–107. Le Cozannet, G., Manceau, J.-C., Rohmer, J., 2017. Bounding probabilistic sea-level projections within the framework of the possibility theory. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 014012. López-Dóriga, U., Jiménez, J.A., Valdemoro, H.I., Nicholls, R.J., 2019. Impact of sea-level rise on the tourist-carrying capacity of Catalan beaches. Ocean Coast Manag. 170 (15), 40–50. Losada, I.J., Diaz-Simal, P., 2013. Adaptation in coastal areas. In: Routledge Handbook of the Economics of Climate Change and Adaptation. Eds. Anil Markandya, Ibon Galarraga, Elisa Sainz de Murieta. Routledge International, pp. 261–272 ISBN: 978-0415-63311-6. Losada, M.A., Saavedra, P., 2013. Myths and Truths about the Reform of the Coastal Law (In Spanish). Revista de Obras Públicas nº3543, pp. 47–50. Manning, M., Lawrence, J., Kin, D.N., Chapman, R., 2015. Dealing with changing risks: a New Zealand perspective on climate change adaptation. Reg. Environ. Chang. 15, 581–594. Milly, P.C.D., Betancourt, J., Falkenmark, M., et al., 2008. Stationary is dead: wither water management? Science 319 (5863), 573–574. Moss, R.H., Edmonds, J.A., Hibbard, K.A., Manning, M.R., Rose, S.K., van Vuuren, D.P., et al., 2010. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747–756. Negro, V., Lopez-Gutierrez, J.S., Esteban, M.D., Matutano, C., 2014. An analysis of recent changes in Spanish Coastal Law. J. Coast. Res. https://doi.org/10.2112/SI70-076.1. Noble, I.R., Huq, S., Anokhin, Y.A., et al., 2014. Adaptation needs and options. In: Field, C.B. (Ed.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 833–868. ONERC (National Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change - French National Observatory on the Effects of Global Warming), 2007. National Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change (in French). Observatoire National sur les Effectes du Réchauffement Climatique (ONERC). Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development. Pinto, R., Martins, F.C., 2013. The Portuguese national strategi for integrated coastal zone management as a spatial planning instrument to climate change adaptation in the Minho river Estuario (Portugal NW-coastal zone). Environ. Sci. Policy 33, 76–96. PNACC, 2006. Plan Nacional de Adaptación al Cambio Climático. Primer Programa de Trabajo (National Plan for Adaptation to Climate Change. First Working Programme) Spanish Office for Climate Change. Ministry of the Environment. Ramm, T.D., White, C.J., Chan, A.H.C., Watson, C.S., 2017. A review of methodologies applied in Australian practice to evaluate long-term coastal adaptation options. Clim. Risk Manag. 17, 35–51. Ramm, T.D., Watson, C.S., White, C.J., 2018. Strategic adaptation pathway planning to manage sea-level rise and changing coastal flood risk. Environ. Sci. Policy 87, 92–101. Ranger, N., Reeder, T., Lowe, J., 2013. Addressing “deep” uncertainty over long-term climate in major infrastructure projects: four innovations of the Thames Estuary 2100 Project. Euro J. Decis. Process 1, 233–262. REAF, 2010. The distribution of competences regarding the coast (in Spanish). Revista d’estudis autonòmics i federals (abril 2010) 10, 245–285. Refsgaard, J.C., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., Drews, M., et al., 2013. The role of uncertainty in climate change adaptation strategies – a Danish water management example. Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Change 18, 337–359. Rodriguez-Ramirez, A., Ruiz, F., Caceres, L.M., et al., 2003. Analysis of the recent storm record in the southwestern Spanish coast: implications for littoral management. Sci. Total Environ. 303 (3), 189–201. Suárez de Vivero, J.L., 1992. The Spanish shores act and its implications for regional coastal management. Ocean Coast Manag. 18, 307–317. Toimil, A., Losada, I.J., Diaz-Simal, P., et al., 2017a. Multi-sectoral high-resolution assessment of climate change consequences of coastal flooding. Clim. Change 145, 431–444. Toimil, A., Losada, I.J., Camus, P., Diaz-Simal, P., 2017b. Managing coastal erosion under climate change at the regional scale. Coast Eng. 128, 106–122. Toimil, A., Diaz-Simal, P., Losada, I.J., Camus, P., 2018. Estimating the risk of loss of beach recreation value under climate change. Tour. Manag. 68, 387–400. Turner, R.K., Palmieri, M.G., Luisetti, T., 2016. Lessons from the construction of a climate change adaptation plan: a broad wetland case study. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 12 (4), 719–725. Wamsler, C., 2017. Stakeholder involvement in strategic adaptation planning: transdisciplinary and co-production at stake? Environ. Sci. Policy 75, 148–157. Wong, P.P., Losada, I.J., Gattuso, J.-P., et al., 2014. Coastal systems and low-lying areas. In: Field, C.B. (Ed.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. vol. 2014. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 361–409. Zandvoort, M., Campos, I.S., Vizinho, A., et al., 2017. Adaptation pathways in planning for uncertain climate change: applications in Portugal, the Czech Republica and The Netherlands. Environ. Sci. Policy 78, 18–26.

References Alfonsea, F.J.T., 2010. Fourty Years of Coastal Laws in Spain (1969-2009). Investigaciones Geográficas (0213-4691) 52, 167–198 (in Spanish). Auken, 2009. European Parliament Resolution of 26 March 2009 on the Impact of Extensive Urbanisation in Spain on the Individual Rights of European Citizens, the Environment and the Application of Community Law, Based on Petitions Received. (in Spanish) (2008/2248(INI)). Barragán, J.M., 2003. Coastal management in Spain (1975-2000). J. Coast. Res. 19 (2), 314–325. Bauer, A., Steurer, R., 2015. National adaptation strategies, what else? Comparing adaptation mainstreaming in German and Dutch water management. Reg. Environ. Chang. 15, 341–352. Bauer, A., Feichtinger, J., Steurer, R., 2012. The governance of climate change adaptation in 10 OECD countries: challenges and approaches. J. Environ. Plan. Policy Manag. 14, 279–304. Biesbroek, G.R., Swart, R.J., Carter, T.R., et al., 2010. Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies. Glob. Environ. Chang. 20, 440–450. B.O.E., 1988. Law 22/1988 of 28 July on Coasts. (in Spanish). B.O.E., 2013a. Law 2/2013 of 29 May on Protection and Sustainable Use of the Coastline and Amendment of the Law 22/1988 of 28 July on Coasts. (in Spanish). B.O.E., 2013b. Law 21/2013 of 9 December on Environmental Assessment. (in Spanish). B.O.E., 2017. Resolution of 24 july 2017 from the directorate-general for coastal and marine sustainability approving the Spanish strategy for coastal adaptation to. Clim. Change 193, 82026–82027 (in Spanish). Burton, I., 2011. Adaptation to climate change: context, status, and prospects. In: Ford, J.D., Berrang-Ford, L. (Eds.), Climate Change Adaptation in Developed Nations: from Theory to Practice. Springer, Dodrecht, pp. 477–483. Camus, P., Losada, I.J., Izaguirre, C., et al., 2017. Statistical wave climate projections for coastal impact assessments. Earth Future 5. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000609. Casas-Prat, M., Sierra, J.P., 2013. Projected future wave climate in the NW Mediterranean Sea. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 118, 3548–3568. CEC, 2007. Green Paper. From the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Adapting to Climate Change in Europe-Options for EU Action (COM(2007) 354 Final). Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. CEC, 2009. White Paper – Adapting to Climate Change: towards a European Framework for Action (COM(2009) 147 Final). Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. Celliers, L., Rosendo, S., Coetzee, I., Daniels, G., 2013. Pathways of integrated coastal management form national policy to local implementation: enabling climate change adaptation. Mar. Policy 39, 72–86. Colla-De-Robertis, E., Da-Rocha, J.-M., García-Cutrín, J., Gutiérrez, M.-J., Prellezo, R., 2019. A Bayesian estimation of the economic effects of the Common Fisheries Policy on the Galician fleet: a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium approach. Ocean Coast Manag. 167 (1), 137–144. Coto-Millán, P., Casares-Hontañón, P., Castanedo, J., Inglada, V., Mateo-Mantecón, I., Angel-Pesquera, M., Sainz-González, R., 2013. Demand for prot traffic by type of good in Spain: 1995.I-2007.IV. Marit. Econ. Logist. 15 (4), 444–466. Dannevig, H., Aall, C., 2015. The regional level as boundary organization? An analysis of climate change adaptation governance in Norway. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 168–175. DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs), 2008. Adapting to Climate Change in England: A Framework for Action. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), London. Department of Climate Change, 2009. Climate Change Risks to Australia's Coast: a First Pass National Assessment. Department of Climate Change, Australian Government, Canberra. Environmental Agency, 2012. Thames Estuary 2100: managing risks though London and the Thames Estuary. TE2100 Plan 2012. http://brand.environment-agency.gov.uk/ mb/CtyxIR. Gurran, N., Norman, B., Hamin, E., 2013. Climate change adaptation in coastal Australia: an audit of planning practice. Ocean Coast Manag. 86, 100–109. Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., Walker, W.E., der Maat, J., 2013. Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Glob. Environ. Chang. 23, 485–498. Hallegatte, S., 2009. Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Glob. Environ. Chang. 19, 240–247. Heidrich, O., Reckien, D., Olazabal, M., Foley, A., Salvia, M., de Gregorio Hurtado, S., Orru, H., Flacke, J., Geneletti, D., Pietrapertosa, F., Hamann, J.J.-P., Tiwary, A., Feliu, E., Dawson, R.J., 2016. National climate policies across Europe and their impacts on cities strategies. J. Environ. Manag. 168, 36–45. Hemer, M.A., Fan, Y., Mori, N., Semedo, A., Wang, X.L., 2013. Projected changes in wave climate from a multi-model ensemble. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 471–476. IPCC, 2014. Summary for policymakers. In: Field, C.B. (Ed.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1–32. Jiménez, J.A., Sancho-García, A., Bosom, E., et al., 2012. Storm-induced damages along the Catalan coast (NW Mediterranean) during the period 1958–2008. Geomorphology 143–144, 24–33a. Kettle, N.P., Dow, K., 2014. Cross-level differences and similarities in coastal climate

17