Retreat?

So now it's time to say goodbye! After having spent the last couple of months, while writing this blog, looking at what we are dealing with in terms of sea level rise, and the some of the ways we are trying to cope with the problem. I've really been struck by the extent of the problem that we are faced with. While it will effect some coastlines alot more than others, this is definitely a global problem.


I've looked at a range of possibilities from man made to natural that can help protect our coastlines, but the over-riding impression that I get is that long run these cannot help us. I've started to wonder whether it is ever really possible to mitigate for sea level rise in the long term or whether we are just putting off the inevitable For some areas I think that in the long run (and I don't even mean that far into the future) retreat is the only option. Future projections include considerable sea level rise, and I for one am not sure I would feel comfortable living behind a sea wall or dyke and below sea level.


Already some communities are facing up to the possibilities of relocating. Many island nations in the Pacific have already been forced to abandon some of the lower lying islands, and communities in Alaska are considering moving inland after increased storms and coastal erosion (Kelman, 2008). Of these Tuvalu is perhaps the most at risk, but they are also the only ones with a plan - when Tuvalu is finally submerged the Tuvaluans can have a home in New Zealand. This is not the case for all the island nations, others such as Vanuatu, and the Cook Islands have no such safety net in place. This brings up the really interesting question - whose responsibility is it to re home these communities? And then there are also all the communities that won't be washed away but rising sea level could destroy their way of live, and their livelihood. These will be the majority - how can we look after these people too? Relocating comes with problems too - one village in Alaska voted to move inland after higher sea levels and storms were threatening to destroy their houses. But having announced their intentions they were no longer able to secure funding for important infrastructure such as hospitals and schools (GRIST). It's really important that these people don't become refugees in another country, and that it is possible to find a new home where they can keep their sense of community rather than being spread about and swallowed up by another country.

I've also been thinking - to what extent is this a problem of our own making? We have released unprecedented volumes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere causing warming, and ice melting and thermal expansion. But we have also situated many of our largest population centres next to the coast making them unnecessarily vulnerable to any small changes in sea level whether it be from natural variability, or from anthropogenic causes. Never before in human history have our numbers been so many, our populations been so static, and it been so difficult for us to relocate to higher ground.

Credits: Nick Lyon

 

So what would Canute do? This is the thing about King Canute, he never actually thought he could hold back the sea. He only sat on the beach and told the sea to stay back as a way of proving to his courtiers that he was not all powerful, and could not control nature. Perhaps this lesson from a thousand years ago is worth remembering as we move forward. We cannot control nature, and perhaps it might be better to use our resources to look after ourselves rather than holding back the sea.