CHAPTER 5 COASTAL AREA PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

Thematic paper: Coastal area planning and management with a focus on disaster management and the protective role of coastal forests and trees

__________
¹ Planwest Partners, United States.

• Phase III: Institutional Issues (to encourage planting of forests and trees as part of coastal management and cost–benefit analysis to assist decision-makers to evaluate forest and tree planting programmes in relation to local social, economic and environmental priorities)

2 Phase I: Hazard vulnerability and risk assessments

Phase I establishes the baseline context for integrated decision-making. It consists of four parts:

Part I: Define the boundaries of the project area (entire country, one community, etc.)

Part II: Hazard identification

Part III: Vulnerability assessment

Part IV: Risk assessment

2.1 Part I: Define the boundaries of the project area

Objectives: The coastal hazard assessment will be used as the foundation for long-term coastal management planning. Because of the multipurpose, multisectoral uses to which the assessment will be applied, a map of the study area is important.

Define mapping protocols: Define scale and reconcile data sets for baseline variables and features for orientation which could include:

·         coastline and offshore limits of interest;

• waterbodies (rivers, lakes, other inland waterbodies);
• topography;
• major ecosystem features (forests, dunes, others);
• major transportation linkages that may constrain the area available for planting; and
• land uses that impact (or possibly encroach into) ecosystems.

Table 5.1 Key hazard identification

Define incidence of previous disasters and document impacts: There are extensive data on damage from the 2004 tsunami. In addition to the tsunami, it is important to analyse damage from lesser, but more frequent, events to begin assessing cumulative past losses. An electronic version of data sets will facilitate correlation of multiple variables using GIS. In some cases GIS maps may not be available, in which case it will be necessary to rely on qualitative information such as oral histories. For each hazard, variables could include, but not be limited to:

• inundation boundaries;
• other location indicators; and
• general characteristics including, but not limited to, secondary effects such as location of scour, sediment transport and others.

2.3 Part III: Vulnerability assessment

Objectives: The vulnerability assessment identifies features that are susceptible to damage including ecosystems and artificial structures. Societal variables, including demographic profiles and sites of potential human mortality such as hospitals and schools, are also defined.

Identify and characterize impacts from prior events: Within the area identified during the Hazard Analysis, identify and characterize damage and impacts of prior disasters as well as those impacts that can be expected from future events such as coastal flooding, riverine flooding, landslides, cyclones and tsunamis.

Figure 5.2 Wave intensity and inundation area may vary significantly depending on whether the coastal area is relatively straight, or whether waves are refracted off points or headlands, or funnelled into narrow bays

Some harbours may be in protected locations from the standpoint of wind energy because they are in narrow bays or have headlands that dissipate wind energy. On the other hand, such features can also focus or amplify the wave, in which case tsunami energy is focused against the infrastructure, causing extensive damage to harbour facilities and boats. This appears to have been the experience of Hamatsumae on Okushiri Island, Japan, in 1993. Tsunamis treat rivers the same as harbours; once they enter the mouth, the wave travels significant distances upriver.

Sri Lanka’s southeast coast, which is characterized by riverine estuaries, narrow-mouthed bays and lagoons bordered by sand dunes, flat sandy beaches and headlands, experienced significant damage from the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. In four case study locations that suffered particularly severe damage, nearshore transformation processes interacted with the shoreline geometry. In each location, tsunami waves were funnelled into a narrow bay or lagoon where the younger sand dunes in low-lying land between older dunes were breached. The combined interaction contributed to extensive damage to buildings and the devastation of vegetation, including mangroves, palm trees and shrubs (Hettiarachchi and Samarawickrama, 2006; Jinadasa and Wijerathne, 2005).

Plate 5.1 Smooth low-lying lands and young dune areas are particularly vulnerable because of the lack of frictional dissipation. Note the sparse vegetation and lack of low-lying undergrowth (shrubs and grasses)

Tsunami effects are also increased in the lee of circular-shaped islands, as demonstrated by the devastation to Aone on Okushiri Island in 1993, and Babi Island in Indonesia (Yeh et al., 1994).

Ecosystem features (offshore and onshore): Ecological features in the offshore and nearshore environments have dual importance because: (a) they are prone to damage — such as coral reefs, dunes and vegetation including trees, shrubs and grasses; and (b) they can reduce damage farther inland. They are the first line of protection against most coastal hazards because they create friction, thereby mitigating the forces of strong winds and waves.

Offshore:

• Coral reefs
• Reefs constitute natural breakwaters that can reduce coastal erosion.
• The health of coral is indicative of many phenomena which need to be examined. For example, erosion elsewhere can result in sediment, which is being transported and deposited on the reef; unhealthy reefs can also be indicative of poor water quality, or of extreme turbulence during cyclone flooding.
• Sand dunes, berms, wetlands and marshes
• The presence and condition of dunes and/or berms/wetlands reduce impact and velocity.
• The health of dunes and berms is indicative of various phenomena, including sediment transport, and deposition rate influenced by erosion, or (conversely) the stabilizing influence of planting programmes.
• Indications of bank erosion from scouring
• Scouring and bank erosion impact vegetation by undercutting the buffer from direct wave impacts. It also results in sediment transport which can negatively impact the microecosystem.

Plate 5.2 Coastal bank erosion

• Assessment of forests and other vegetation
• Presence and characterization, including recent changes of vegetation: dune grasses and creepers; shrub forests; paddy fields etc.

Plate 5.3 Multiple varieties of littoral woodlands and dense vegetation can be effective in stabilizing soil and retarding erosion, thereby protecting inland uses (note the relatively straight coastal configuration)

Artificial features (land use and infrastructure): Land-use patterns are a reflection of changing demographics and settlement trends. In some instances,  lack of institutional oversight contributes to, or even creates, unsafe conditions by allowing such practices as encroachment into floodplains, inadequate drainage provisions, filling of wetlands and destruction of coastal vegetation, including dune grasses and mangrove forests. All of the above practices may further exacerbate the impacts of natural hazards including slope instability, erosion and siltation which, in turn, lead to increased frequency and losses from small- and medium-size disasters.

Current conditions and practices must be documented as benchmarks that can be compared with past land-use patterns. To monitor trends, the documentation will identify changes that have occurred during a specified time period, for example, over the last 25 years. Land management practices that could influence the future will also be identified, for example, encroaching urbanization which threatens forested lands.

Inventory elements include:

• Land use
• Built up areas including houses, hotels and related uses;
• Changes in land use (e.g. abandoned fields, or paddies) or proposed changes (e.g. new hotels or harbour facilities);
• Schools, hospitals, other buildings with potential human mortality or community importance;
• Paddies and agriculture;
• Cultural and archaeological sites.
• Infrastructure
• Major roadways and railroads;
• Ports and fishing harbours;
• Coastal and shore protection (seawalls, dykes, etc);
• Others.
• Interactions
• Interactions between the components of the coastal management area are important to identify. Such interactions include utilization patterns of the various ecosystem regions.

Plate 5.4 One aspect of land use is access. Without proper guidance, access to beaches can destroy dune vegetation

2.4 Part IV: Risk assessment: potential loss assessment

Objectives: Risk provides the basis for decision-making and institutional acceptance of protective measures. Risk is calculated by correlating information derived from the Hazard Assessment and the Vulnerability Assessment, i.e. Hazard + Vulnerability = Risk. The characteristics of risk are then analysed in terms of estimated probability of occurrence, magnitude and incidence of losses, which can be calculated both in quantitative or qualitative terms.

Synthesis (“hot spots”): Spatially correlate hazards and designate “hot spots” where multiple occurrences or types of events occur, for example, coastal erosion or coastal flooding.

Calculate probability of occurrence: Frequency of events is an important indicator of both past and future loss patterns. Because cumulative implications are important, the analysis must consider not only a large event such as a cyclone or tsunami, but also multiple and less severe events such as winter storms. Annualized losses over a ten- or 20-year time frame from lesser events may equal or even exceed the losses from a large event.

The probability of occurrence is based on frequency, as documented by historical records and scientific evidence. The time period for re-occurrence is based on criteria selected for a specific plan, for example over 30 years, the frequency that an event may occur will be of high, medium or low probability

Plate 5.5 The risk assessment correlates conditions such as levelled dunes and removal of vegetation prior to the tsunami with damage to homes, livelihoods (fishing) and ecosystems (erosion, destruction of trees)

3 Phase II: Mitigation strategy planning

Phase II establishes the means to reduce the risk of losses. Such loss reduction is achieved through the application of mitigation tools and implementation strategies that address risk characteristics that are defined during the risk assessment. The Mitigation Phase consists of two parts: Part I: Identify mitigation tools; Part II: Evaluate and select mitigation tools.

3.1 Part I: Identify mitigation tools

Objectives: A variety of actions to reduce the likelihood of losses are identified. Specific objectives and implementation priorities are tailored to community needs and the characteristics of hazard exposure.

Engineered approaches: Engineered barriers must be able to withstand overtopping wave forces at crest level. Such barriers are expected to remain stable during the progression of the storm event, including during tsunami runup and rundown. If such a system is breached at a weak point, there is a high possibility of progressive collapse leading to greater inundation.

Breakwaters and seawalls: A breakwater is an offshore structure providing protection from wave energy or by deflecting currents. A seawall is a hard coastal defense constructed onshore to prevent the passage of waves and to dissipate energy. Modern seawalls tend to be curved to deflect wave energy back, thereby reducing forces. In the event of overtopping, designs typically incorporate drainage systems.

Seawalls can be effective defenses in the short term. In the long term, however, the backwash tends to be reflected to the beach material beneath and in front of the seawall, which is erosive. Specific design solutions and ongoing maintenance are important considerations to reduce such negative effects.

Dykes and levees: A dyke (also known as a levee) is an artificial earthen wall built along the edge of a body of water such as a river or the sea to prevent flooding. Dykes are often found where low banks or dunes are not strong enough to protect against flooding. Dykes and levees require regular maintenance, which, if neglected, can have disastrous consequences.

Revetments: Revetments on banks or bluffs are placed in such a way as to absorb the energy of incoming waves. They may be either watertight, covering the slope completely, or porous, to allow water to filter through after the wave energy has been dissipated.

Waves break on revetments as they would on an unprotected bank or bluff, and water runs up the slope. The extent of runup can be reduced by using stone or other irregular or rough-surfaced construction materials.

Plate 5.6 Breakwaters and revetments are often used to protect critical infrastructure such as boat harbours and coastal roadways

Ecosystem management: Ecosystem management, including the use of vegetation, has been recognized as an important means to reduce exposure to multiple hazards. Non-structural tools through ecosystem management create friction to slow velocity; they constitute porous barriers against wind and waves (Urban Development Authority, 2006). The underlying purpose is to prevent or reduce the erosion of coastlines, estuaries and riverbanks through three main processes:

• Functioning as a porous buffer by creating friction, thereby reducing wave action and current energy.

• Binding and stabilization of the substrate by plant roots and deposited vegetative matter to reduce erosion.
• Trapping of sediments.

Enhance coral reefs: Coral reefs are the first line of defense to attenuate wave energy.

Preserve and enhance dune formation and sand bars: Dune formation and restoration is achieved by stabilizing the soil. The first colonizers on bare sand are a species of plants known as creepers. Wind-borne sand collects in and around them as they grow, forming small hummocks, which are then colonized by fresh seedlings. Gradually sandy hillocks are formed and additional species colonize and stabilize the sand, preventing wind-induced erosion. Gradually, the soil quality improves to establish suitable conditions for the growth of more substantial shrubs, which in turn create favourable conditions for the growth of trees.

Planned forests (porous barriers): Dense plantings of trees (planned forests) have multiple functions. The natural porous structure of littoral woodlands with deep roots generates a stable barrier against wind and wave forces. They can be an efficient natural energy absorber of steady flows and long waves. They are also an effective means to stabilize banks from erosion and scouring. Such stabilization will also reduce downstream siltation (Urban Development Authority, 2006).

Many communities impacted by the Indian Ocean tsunami have cited the presence of mangroves as positive contributions to the mitigation of wave velocity and amplitude. It is essential to recognize that some species of mangroves are more appropriate than others, because each species has differing characteristics. It is also vital to consider that the geometry of the site will influence the behaviour of the vegetation.

When the 1998 Papua New Guinea tsunami occurred, many people were killed or maimed as they became impaled on splintered mangrove trees. Others took refuge in palm trees that became flying missiles when uprooted. Reports indicate that people who took refuge in Casuarina trees survived (Dengler and Preuss, 1999). A number of uncertainties remain to be investigated, including whether the palm trees were shallow-rooted or whether the instability resulted from geological conditions such as a shallow clay layer, or the width of the forest was too narrow.

Plate 5.7 Mangroves splintered by the 1998 Papua New Guinea tsunami injured or killed many victims. Damaged trees in frontal tiers of the forest apparently protected those further back

Wetlands: Wetlands of various types provide coastal protection functions which are similar to the protective functions of vegetation. Both features create friction, which slows the speed of the waves. They also create opportunities for water detention and retention. 

Table 5.4 Correlating goals with alternative mitigation tools
(using a tsunami as a sample hazard)

3.1 Part II: Selecting and evaluating integrative mitigation strategies

Objectives: Mitigation strategies are typically hybrid approaches that combine a number of measures to maximize benefits while addressing the unique characteristics and requirements of a site and a community. It is incumbent on each community to identify alternative actions potentially appropriate to its requirements, and to evaluate these strategies in relation to its unique priorities.

Integrative mitigation strategies: No mitigation tool is responsive to all hazards or appropriate for all locations. Hybrid approaches integrate diverse tools, for example, forest planting with land use and infrastructure planning and vegetation management programmes.

Mitigation entails difficult choices between competing claims on fragile areas. Choices will involve trade-offs and the need to reconcile opportunities for ecosystem enhancement or restoration such as forests, preserving wetlands, re-establishing dunes or mangroves; securing infrastructure; and re-establishing tourist, agricultural or fishing industries.

Evaluation criteria must address such variables as frequency of hazard occurrence, as well as consequences which are quantifiable (for example, the number of hectares of destroyed ecosystems, potential lives lost, cost to construct and maintain) and others that are qualitative (for example, social dislocation and opportunity costs in terms of lost opportunities).

A word of caution at this point is important. Land-use decisions pertaining to the coastal zone are invariably complex and often highly politicized. The thumbnail summaries below are only intended to exemplify complex considerations addressed by the decision-making process. They therefore do not capture the subtleties of political processes that erupt over allocation of scarce land uses.

Case study #1: Hilo, Hawaii Tsunami Reconstruction: Central Urban Core

Background

In 1946, Hilo, Hawaii, was struck by a tsunami generated by an earthquake in the Aleutian Islands; it was struck again in 1960 by a tsunami generated by the great Chilean earthquake. Both events inflicted significant damage on Hilo’s downtown urban core, located at the head of Hilo Bay. Because of its crescent shape, wave forces were focused at the narrow end of the bay. In both events, the tsunami overtopped the Hilo breakwater.

The two Hilo case studies illustrate differing approaches to hazard mitigation that have been adopted for Hilo’s coast. The differences, in part, reflect different timing for plan preparation; Project A was prepared in the immediate recovery period after the 1960 tsunami, while Project B (located outside of the urban renewal area but within the tsunami experience area) was prepared approximately 18 years after the tsunami.

Mitigation concept

Figure 5.3 Hilo Redevelopment Proposal included plans for a tsunami forest (prepared in 1960, included in Hawaii County, 1974)

Project status and evaluation considerations

Breakwater: Prior to the tsunami, Hilo was protected by a breakwater that had been designed and constructed against winter storms. It had been constructed between 1908 and 1929 upon a submerged reef in Hilo Bay. Immediately after the tsunami, the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) approved funding to extend the breakwater by 4 000 feet (1 219 metres) and raised its height to 20 feet (six metres) above mean sea level. During the 1960s and 1970s, the community debated the advisability of increasing the breakwater height, because modification of the breakwater would become a strong visual statement. Public opinion viewed the breakwater as a “towering” wall that would block views to sea. Business interests also questioned the aesthetics of the breakwater, which they feared could negatively impact tourism. While the controversy brewed, the COE continued to evaluate the economics of the breakwater, including the inability to assure complete protection from another seismic wave. In the late 1970s, the tsunami breakwater was de-authorized.

Outcome: Not implemented.

Mall and civic centre: A high percentage of Hilo’s commercial and office space was destroyed by the tsunami, thus, the top priority of decision-makers responsible for recovery was economic recovery. To stimulate the “rebirth” of the city, Kaiko’o Mall and a new county office complex were developed upland of the old town centre, on land that was elevated with fill.

Outcome: Implemented.

Community park: The Bayfront Park was developed on land that was mandated to remain as open space under the redevelopment plan. The park became an important site for a wide range of community activities. The open space was also considered to be the visual connection between the town and the bay.

Outcome: Implemented.

Tsunami forest: The tsunami forest consisted of a dense band of tall trees to create friction and provide a buffer against waves. The tall trees were to be supplemented by low shrubs to provide soil stabilization. Feasibility of the fully functional forest as planned was hampered by the importance of the coastal highway and connector roadway with major streets leading almost to the bay’s edge. The forest, as proposed, would have provided no protection for the coastal highway. Re-aligning the roadway to create the necessary depth for the forest would have reduced the size of the park. Re-alignment would also have necessitated extensive additional land acquisition. Finally, implementation of the tsunami forest would have created a visual buffer to the sea. The complexity of implementation, plus lack of public support reduced commitment to implementation. A thin band of coco palms was planted — rather than dense forest.

Outcome: Not implemented.

Case study # 2: Hilo Long Term Recovery Planning, Keaukaha Shoreline Plan

Mitigation concept

In 1979, Hilo adopted the Keaukaha Shoreline Plan for the portion of the Hilo shoreline that adjoined the commercial core. The Keaukaha coast experienced damage in the 1946 and 1960 tsunamis; the community hospital was destroyed in 1961 by a winter storm (presumably it had been damaged, but survived the tsunami). The coast is regularly impacted by winter storms and coastal flooding. The county’s major tourist area was located at one edge of the coast; the remainder accommodates the port as well as residential uses and beach parks.

Project status and evaluation considerations

Area-wide concept:

Figure 5.4 Keaukaha Shoreline Planning Area indicating a forested belt along the Keaukaha Coast; the dimensions of the forest are not specified (Hawaii County, 1978)

Subarea concept:

Activities and land uses on Keaukaha coast were grouped into eight overlapping, but identifiable, character areas that were used as the basis for the integrated park and trail system, interspersed with residential uses — interrupted by the port. Division of the coast into subareas was one planning tool used to identify and address specific needs or conflicts between uses.

Figure 5.5 The Keukaha subarea concept with the lagoon saved by roadway realignment to provide additional depth for planting and safety from disruption caused by storms or tsunami (Hawaii County, 1978)

Project site:

Figure 5.6 Left: Coastal land form (Urban Regional Research 1982); right, project area site plan — set-backs with protective buffers (Hawaii County, 1978)

Outcome: All components of the Keaukaha plan implemented. The county acquired the parklands, which are maintained as part of the overall county park budget.

Case study # 3: Sri Lanka — reducing river bank erosion

Mitigation concept

Plate 5.8 Mangrove forest used for bank stabilization: Hikkaduwa Sri Lanka

Project B: Weligama (Mirissa) roadway stabilization:

Continuous bank erosion threatens to undermine the roadway. To reduce the threat of access disruption, a retaining wall was constructed to protect the road from erosion caused by the migrating channel. Because of the location of the erosion other solutions, such as vegetation planting, were not feasible. The benefit of this solution was the immediate protection; a “soft” solution would necessitate re-aligning the roadway.

Plate 5.9 Retaining wall to stabilize a roadway: Weligama (Mirissa), Sri Lanka

Case study # 4: Coastal erosion mitigation

Mitigation concept

To provide protection against coastal erosion, thereby reducing threats to the critical roadway. The project consists of a raised embankment and revetment with planting on the shore side of the embankment.

Project description and evaluation considerations

Project A: Coastal hardening — Sri Lanka

Critical segments of Sri Lanka’s coastal roadway are at or below sea level. Restoration and maintenance of safe access was the prime consideration; a “hard solution” was selected as an economic imperative. Some trees have been planted between the embankment and the road; however, there is insufficient area for a deep tsunami forest. Seasonal fluctuation in beach sand has been reported; during periods of low sand there is reduced access to the water by fisherfolk and others and it becomes impossible for fisherfolk to pull their boats onto land.

Plate 5.10 Left: Bank revetment, Sri Lanka. Right: Tree planting on the inland side of the revetment

Project B: Hybrid protection, Hawaii

Required set-backs from the high water, together with retaining walls and low dune planting, permit buffering from winter storms while encouraging continued beach nourishment. The project continues the use of private property with government enforcement of standards and regulations.

Plate 5.11 Vegetation protection — low retaining walls and set-backs
for residential development

Case study #5: Multiple uses with forest buffers

Mitigation concept

Forest buffers are combined with other uses to: (a) provide protection against tsunamis and coastal storms; and (b) accommodate private property-based uses.

Project A: Forest buffer and wetland agriculture (rice paddies) –— Sanriku coast, Japan

This is a combination of tsunami forests with wetland and other land use that facilitate water detention to absorb storm water runoff and tsunami inundation. This scheme also deters people from moving into the hazard zone.

Plate 5.12 Combination of protective planting with agriculture to provide detention for storm water and coastal flooding water (Japan)

Projects B & C: Residential projects rearward and tsunami forest

Dense tsunami forests have been planted to protect homes from tsunamis and from the more frequent storm waves. In the case of Hawaii, the forests have been planted along the shoreline in the area mandated by state law as set-back buffers from the coast.

Plate 5.13 Left: Sanriku coast, Japan
Right: Kauai Island, Hawaii

Plate 5.14 (left) Pedestrian trail with sign stating “Please keep off the dunes” — soil stabilization project (Oregon, USA)
Plate 5.15 (right) Structure pathway for a particularly sensitive dune (Oregon, USA)

4 Phase III: Institutional issues to encourage planting of forests and trees as part of coastal management

Objectives: Forest and tree planting, as well as management programmes, must become integrated with overall institutional processes associated with coastal management.

4.1 Part I: Institutional issues relating to forests and trees in comparison with other structures

4.1.1 Institutional overview of case studies

Using forests and trees for hazard mitigation is inherently a multidisciplinary and multisectoral field that requires commitment and cooperation among multiple agencies and donors. The first step towards integrating forests and other planting programmes into coastal management is to assess if current institutional practices positively or negatively influence vegetation management.

Case study # 1: Hilo Bayfront reconstruction plan after the 1960 tsunami

Implementing responsibility

There was no oversight body responsible for coordinating all components of the project on a long-term basis. Multiple components of the project were not developed by local planners. The planning process did not consider the feasibility of the recommendations.

• Breakwater: US Army Corps of Engineers — unpopular with locals
• Redevelopment project: County, with federal funds and oversight
• Park: County
• Tsunami forest: County

Case study # 2: Hilo–Keaukaha shoreline plan

Implementing responsibility

A single oversight body was responsible for all components of the project on a long-term basis. It was also responsible for coordinating with multiple departments and stakeholders including private parties (hotels, residents, shop owners and others).

• Acquire open space for planting: County
• Re-align roadway: County, with federal funds
• Building setbacks: County
• Tree planting within set-backs: County requirements implemented by private owners

Case study # 3: Riverine bank erosion

Implementing responsibility

Both projects have single purpose objectives — not part of a comprehensive plan.

• Project A (Sri Lanka Mangrove Forest): National-Department of Forestry
• Project B (Riverine Bank Erosion, Sri Lanka Retaining Wall): Multiple national entities, including the Road Development Authority

Case study # 4: Coastal bank erosion

Implementing responsibility

• Project A (Sri Lanka Embankment): Multiple national entities, including the Coast Conservation Department, ports and harbours and the Road Development Authority
• Project B (Honolulu Vegetation Buffer):
• Set-back standards: Administered and enforced by local government
• Planting by local government

Case study # 5: Multiple uses with forest buffers

Implementing responsibility for all projects (in Japan and the United States)

• Forest planting: Local and national government
• Residential development: Private owners in accordance with local laws

Case study # 6: Dune restoration and access, Oregon

Dune preservation and restoration goals part of the state land-use law; individual dune restoration projects administered locally.

Implementing responsibility

• Dune preservation goals: State of Oregon
• Dune preservation programme: Local community with funds from the state

4.1.2 Themes of successful implementation

The case studies indicate that inclusion of forests and trees as part of an integrated strategy most often occurred under the following conditions:

1. Multiple proponents: Part of an overall plan with commitment from multiple stakeholders. Successful efforts have reflected intersectoral “buy in” and have been multidisciplinary in their objectives. For example, the Keaukaha Shoreline Plan and forest/rice paddies in Japan demonstrate multiple proponents in preserving and enhancing vegetation.
2. Land availability: Land must be available for a forest project to be feasible. Where land acquisition is problematic or where immediate shore protection is necessary, hard solutions tend to be preferred. In communities where coastal set-backs are enforced, such lands have been used, for example in Hawaii and Japan.
3. Management programme: A coordinating body must exist to oversee multisectoral projects from their inception through implementation and long-term management. Environmental management must be grounded on coordinated policy implementation and institutional consistency.

4.2 Part II: Create a management programme for enforcement and oversight

Coastal areas are traditionally among the most intensively used portions of a community with many competing objectives and stakeholders for limited resources. Coastal management therefore requires a consistent framework for decision-making. Prerequisites to coordinated implementation of vegetation management programmes include the following actions.

4.2.1 Create and empower an oversight body to oversee the management programme

Implementation of objectives that promote planting of trees and forests highlights the need to integrate ecosystem management with other development or economic objectives. Such integration requires a mechanism to coordinate planning and decision-making. An oversight body is essential to orderly coastal management. This body would integrate and coordinate forest management with coastal management and disaster management. This body with also have the mandate and authority to coordinate policies between different jurisdictional authorities (including local/national/or different ministries with differing priorities, e.g. forestry and transportation).

4.2.2 Institute regulatory consistency

Enforcement of standards on both public and private property development — including prohibitions on building in designated areas, is essential to the long-term implementation of vegetation management programmes.

Predictable regulatory oversight is based on three factors:

1. A designated coastal management zone: Administrative zones are defined within which mitigation strategies are applied that are sufficiently large to encompass both the direct hazard and the area influenced by the potential hazard.

Tier 1 (coastal zone): Define the land area directly impacted by each hazard such as coastal flooding, riverine flooding, landslides, cyclone or tsunami during the hazard analysis. Where applicable, subzones should also be defined, for example, the floodway and the floodplain — the floodway is an ideal location for planting.

Tier 2 (coastal influence zone): Define the area that includes features that are vulnerable to damage and which potentially can reduce wave and wind impact, thereby reducing susceptibility to collateral damage. The area includes offshore and nearshore environments in which ecological influences such as trees and forests are or could be located.

2. Standards and rules for allowable and preferred uses in the coastal management zone: Articulated goals must guide future development to desired locations, and building construction must comply with standards. (Note: Many of the “successful” case study examples in this paper have used mandated set-back areas to plant forest buffers.)
3. Adopt and enforce regulations: Enforcement of laws such as set-back regulations and construction laws, as well as prohibition of practices such as coral or sand mining, will significantly contribute to reduced exposure to hazards. It is essential that commitment to regulations be enforced; for example, no construction of any kind (including by the informal sector) or building in designated areas.

4.2.3 Facilitate integrated planning processes through data sharing

A fundamental aspect of coordinated coastal management is the ability to correlate baseline data collected by many stakeholders, including national ministries, local agencies and NGOs. Review of planning processes in many countries throughout Asia indicates that data sets are not readily available to departments and agencies that have not collected them. This lack of data sharing is a serious impediment to integrative management.

4.2.4 Public education on the importance of coastal management

Sustained coastal management, including implementation of planting forests, requires local commitment. It is crucial that all sectors (public and private) accept that the implementation of planting programmes is long term. Before forests reach maturity, extensive land management may be required to prevent the use of young trees for fuelwood or other purposes.

5 Economic social and environmental costs and benefits

Objectives: Institutionalize coastal hazard management policies to maximize economic, social and environment benefits while reducing costs. This evaluation process will also develop a framework within which to explicitly demonstrate the long-term benefits of forests and trees as vehicles to achieve damage reduction.

5.1 Phase 1 for cost benefit: Review hazard, vulnerability and risk assessment findings

Field study presentation: Mangrove planting for coastline protection — to plant or not to plant?

Tan Kim Hooi, Centre for Coastal & Marine Environment, Maritime Institute of Malaysia and Ong Jin Eong, Universiti Sains Malaysia (retired)

The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami was generated by a massive 9.3 Richter scale earthquake. The destruction wreaked by this tsunami was colossal in terms of loss of human life and coastal property. A number of anecdotal reports indicated that mangrove forest played a role in saving lives and property; destruction and degradation of mangroves were blamed for exacerbating the damage incurred. As a result, governments and NGOs are embarking on plans to plant mangrove belts along coastlines to provide protection from future tsunamis. This paper provides basic information on the natural distribution and regeneration of mangroves, examines the need for mangrove planting along coastlines in tsunami-affected areas based on field observations, repositions policy priorities for mangrove protection and rehabilitation, and offers options for coastal protection where mangrove planting is not possible.