Heal the Bay Blog

June 14, 2016 — From melting glaciers to the rise in extreme weather events, global warming is already affecting our planet in a variety of ways. But according to a new study, not all U.S. cities are prepared to deal with its adverse impacts. Sabrina McCormick, professor at MPH@GW, the online Master of Public Health program offered through the Milken Institute School of Public Health at the George Washington University, and her colleague Kathleen Carlson surveyed 65 local decision makers in six major U.S. municipalities to find out which ones are leading the way in climate change adaptation—and why.

What is climate change adaptation?

Climate change adaptation describes the ability of natural or human systems to adjust to the changing climate in order to lessen its harmful effects. This is not to be confused with mitigation, which refers to implementing strategies to remove or reduce the amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) released into the atmosphere. Although distinctly different, adaptation and mitigation are complementary of one another. When done in synergy, these activities can lead to cost-effective implementation of climate policies.

What did the study find?

McCormick discovered that Portland, Boston, and Los Angeles were best prepared for the realities of climate change—while Raleigh, Tucson, and Tampa trailed behind. The following social factors appeared to impact a city’s level of preparedness:

• Swing factors, which include events within or characteristics of a city that can lead it toward or away from action. One example is political culture. McCormick found conservative regions to be less likely to support climate change adaptation measures. Extreme weather is another example. In a city like Tampa, events such as hurricanes are viewed as part of everyday life rather than a threat that must be addressed.
• Inhibitors, which refer to climate change mindsets that may slow (but not necessarily stop) change. Many decision makers cited a lack of clear, trustworthy scientific information on the consequences of climate change as their reason for inaction.
• Resource catalysts, which provide a strong rationale and therefore motivation for adaptation planning. They may include academic and public interest resources that offer a scientific or moral justification for change.

Not surprisingly, the study pointed to public engagement as a driving force for change. And nowhere is this more evident than in Los Angeles. Here are just a few examples of how L.A. nonprofits and residents are banding together to combat the climate crisis:

• Heal the Bay collaborates with researchers and agencies to assess the impact of climate change on Southern California coastal environments and help local communities adapt to the new normal.
• The Sierra Club Angeles Chapter engages its members and the public in a multitude of campaigns centered on air quality improvement, coastline preservation, and building sustainable communities.
• Climate Cents actively mobilizes public support for L.A.-based environmental initiatives such as kelp forest restoration, urban farming, and tree planting.
• Los Angeles Walks is a volunteer-run advocacy group focused on making L.A. more pedestrian-friendly and reducing GHG emissions through the development of safe walking environments.

As a heavily populated city that generated a total of 99.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2010 alone (about 21.7 percent of California’s GHG emissions), L.A. has a unique responsibility to confront the global warming issue head on. And its residents are doing just that. McCormick hopes the results of her study will inspire more American cities to take action. After all, adaptation measures are not something that can wait. “It’s not tomorrow,” she says. “It’s today.”

Julie Potyraj is the community manager for MHA@GW and MPH@GW, both offered by the Milken Institute School of Public Health at the George Washington University. For several years, she served as a community development specialist in Zambia coordinating youth empowerment programs and reproductive health education. She is currently an MPH@GW student focusing on global health and health communications.

Dana Murray, Heal the Bay’s senior coastal policy manager, reports on a promising new statewide policy to minimize the impacts of sea-level rise on coastal communities.

An incoming swell may excite a surfer, a rainstorm may offer an Angeleno drought relief, and extreme tides offer a tide-pooler opportunities for sea shore exploration. But pair those same events with rising sea levels due to climate change, and the outcome is destructive and dangerous. Beach sand disappears, coastal bluffs erode and fall into the sea, and homes and businesses are flooded.

These aren’t images from some doomsday movie, this is real life and happening now in some places along California’s coast. Higher sea levels, high tides and storm surges that force waves well past their usual reach pose very real threats. And when these forces coincide, significant inundation can lay siege to coastal communities, freshwater supplies, wastewater treatment plants, power plants, and other infrastructure… not to mention public health and the environment.

So, what should we do? How can we prepare for coastal disasters?

California’s Coastal Commission has developed one way to prepare California – by adopting the state’s first Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance. After years of development and refinements, the Coastal Commission recently voted unanimously to adopt California’s Sea Level Rise Policy. Intended to serve as a scientific and planning resource for a variety of audiences, the policy provides an overview of the best available science on sea-level rise for California and recommended methods for addressing it in coastal planning and regulatory actions.

Highlighted in Chapter 7 “Adaptation Strategies”, the policy lays out ways that we can prepare coastal communities by helping them take steps now to avoid detrimental impacts from sea-level rise. These include adaptation options such as wetland, dune, and beach restoration, as these habitats will help buffer communities from sea-level rise and storm surges while enhancing coastal resources.

Maximizing natural shoreline values and processes, while avoiding armoring our shoreline with a slew of sea walls, are goals outlined. Beach armoring, especially in the form of sea walls and rocky revetments, is known to increase wave reflection and result in the narrowing of beaches. Instead, communities can protect and restore critical habitats, such as wetlands and dunes, and plan out a buffer zone so that wetlands and dunes can migrate inland while providing inland infrastructure with natural shoreline protection.

The policy also includes options that change the way we look at building along our changing shorelines. We should prioritize overall sustainability and life of infrastructure, and identify places where development can retreat inland. As the sea seeps inland, sand is eroded from beaches and bluffs, and landowners and communities are faced with the decision whether to spend large amounts of money to build sea walls against a crashing sea, or step back from the shoreline. That can mean moving trails, buildings, or parking lots inland. Surfers Point in Ventura, for example, is beginning to retreat from the ocean.

Heal the Bay commends the Coastal Commission’s leadership on climate change adaptation. This policy gives clear guidance to local governments for measures they can take to protect against and prepare for sea-level rise.  It is imperative that coastal communities advance environmentally sound adaptation solutions to be resilient in the face of climate change. We hope this policy will lead to more environmentally sound, nature-based adaptation strategies.

The environmental, economic, and social impacts of sea-level rise in California underscore the importance of addressing and planning. To demonstrate the impacts of sea level rise, the policy highlights results from the Heberger et al. (2009) study that found that the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are vulnerable to significant flooding from sea-level rise. Given that these two ports handle about 50% of the containers shipped into the United States, the rise could disturb the efficiency of goods movement, resulting in serious economic implications for California and the U.S.

At the Coastal Commission hearing, some cities came out against the policy, hesitant to see the state adopt a policy that might not align with their cities’ current shoreline visions. But, thanks to the strong leadership and scientific understanding of commissioners that take the protection and stewardship of our coastal resources seriously, the policy was passed unanimously. Demonstrating national attention to California’s climate preparedness, a representative from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) testified at the hearing that the policy will also form the base from which other states will begin to plan for climate change along their shorelines.

Heal the Bay recognizes that preparing for climate change will require time, money, and planning. But  it’s an investment in the long term health of our coastal communities that we can’t afford to let slip away into the sea.