managed retreat

Question 1

what is managed retreat?

Answer 1

managed retreat is an example of soft engineering. areas of the coast are deliberately allowed to erode and flood naturally. this is through the removal of a coastal defence method that was there before. usually this will be areas that are considered low value e.g. places not being used for housing or expensive farmland.

Question 2

what are the aims of managed retreat?

Answer 2

• use natural defences to absorb wave energy
• replace hard coastal defences
• protect inland areas rather than the coasts

Question 3

what are the stages of managed retreat?

Answer 3

1. build a new embankment or line of defence inland
2. break an existing coastal defence
3. grow saltmarsh plants on the land
4. finally, the vegetation absorbs wave energy and reduces erosion rates

Question 4

describe our case study, ‘medmerry’:

Answer 4

medmerry is the largest managed retreat scheme on the open coast in Europe. it provides cost-effective flood risk management to 348 properties. it costed £28 million to put in place in 2013, after a large local flood in 2008 that cost £5 million.

Question 5

what are the positive economic, social and environmental factors of medmerry?

Answer 5

environmental:
- 1 in 1000 chance of coastal flooding (best in the UK). damage from 2013 winter storms was avoided
- flooding designers took measures to protect existing species (e.g. water voles, badgers)

social:
- maintenance access track provides a cycle route and footpath. 10km footpaths, 7km bike paths, whereas there were only 2 footpaths before

economic:
- newly flooded area can become fishing area, boosting fishing industry in surrounding area.
- tourism is expected to increase. 2 new carparks, 4 viewing spots - gains a reputation with birdwatchers and nature enthusiasts

Question 6

what are the negative social, economic, and environmental factors of medmerry?

Answer 6

environmental:
- habitats of existing species (e.g. badgers) would still have been hurt, despite planning
- some believe that the environment agency shouldn’t have given up land so quickly and should have looked at other options first
- three farms selling oilseed rape and winter wheat had to be abandoned - this can be seen as wasteful, and the EU has been questioned as to why it prioritises buildings over agricultural land. is this short sighted?

social:
- surrounding areas resented the expenditure in such a sparsely populated area.

economic:
- at £28 million the scheme was very expensive - would it not be better to spend £0.2 million a year to maintain a shingle wall? (with rising sea levels, this is not a good option)