# Social perceptions of coastal hazards in the Anlo Beach Community in the Western Region of Ghana

Olusegun A. Dada, Donatus Bapentire Angnuureng, Rafaël Almar, Selorm Dzantor, Pierre Morand

► To cite this version:

Olusegun A. Dada, Donatus Bapentire Angnuureng, Rafaël Almar, Selorm Dzantor, Pierre Morand. Social perceptions of coastal hazards in the Anlo Beach Community in the Western Region of Ghana. Journal of Coastal Conservation: planning and management, 2022, 26 (article 63), pp.1-25. 10.1007/s11852-022-00909-9. hal-03888870v2

HAL Id: hal-03888870

https://hal.science/hal-03888870v2

Submitted on 20 Feb 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
1 Dada, O. A., Angnuureng, D. B., Almar, R., Dzantor, S., & Morand, P. (2022). Social perceptions of coastal

2 hazards in the Anlo Beach Community in the Western Region of Ghana. *Journal of Coastal Conservation*,

3 26(6), 63

4

5

# Social perceptions of coastal hazards in the Anlo Beach Community in the Western Region of Ghana

6

7

Olusegun A. Dada¹,², Donatus B. Angnuureng³, Rafael Almar¹,

8

Selorm Dzantor³ and Pierre Morand⁴

9

¹Université de Toulouse, LEGOS (IRD/CNES/CNRS/UPS), Toulouse, France; ²Dept of Marine Science & Tech., Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria; ³ACECoR, Centre for Coastal Management, SBS, University of Cape Coast, Ghana; ⁴UMI SOURCE (IRD - UVSQ/PARIS SACLAY), Guyancourt, France

10

11

12

13

## Abstract

Due to climate change, coastal areas are becoming increasingly susceptible to more frequent and severe environmental catastrophes that endanger the health, safety, and way of life of coastal dwellers. Understanding the social perceptions of risk and hazard-related concerns can help in the development of adaptive capacity and associated management strategy preferences. This study employed structured questionnaires to obtain basic information on how the households of the Anlo Beach fishing community in the Western region of Ghana perceived and responded to coastal hazards. The respondents ranked coastal erosion and salinization first and second, ahead of seawater flooding and other hazards in terms of important risks in the study area. Responses illustrated high levels of knowledge and awareness about coastal hazards but low levels of trust in government and commitments in terms of taking personal mitigation measures. To varying degrees, respondent characteristics such as length of residency and occupancy status are positively and significantly associated with coastal hazard perception whereas the level of education was negative. Generally, the findings illustrated the need for better education and awareness campaigns about self-mitigation actions such as discontinuing beach sand utilization and exploiting mangroves as firewood and embracing the restoration of mangrove ecosystems. More importantly, the government should reconsider her earlier shelved plan of relocating the entire community to a safer location.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31 **Keywords:** Social perception; coastal hazards; coastal erosion; salinization; Anlo Beach; Ghana

32 coast
33 **Introduction**

34 Globally, coastal areas are becoming more vulnerable to the impacts of increased extreme weather
35 events, storm surges, and sea-level rise due to climate change (Barnard et al., 2019; Cazenave and
36 Le Cozannet, 2014; Mölter et al., 2016; Neumann et al., 2015) that pose threats to health, safety,
37 and livelihoods of the coastal dwellers (Elrick-Barr et al., 2015; Nicholls et al., 2011; Burkett and
38 Davidson, 2012). Aside from pressure resulting from the growing coastal population, most coastal
39 areas are increasingly affected by climate change-induced coastal erosion and/or flooding (Barnard
40 et al., 2019) resulting from sea-level rise (Cazenave and Le Cozannet, 2014) and possible changes
41 in wind/wave conditions and storm regimes (Ruz et al., 2020; Mölter et al., 2016). Climate change
42 will therefore increase the vulnerability of the coastal areas to hazards.

43 Understanding public perceptions and the relative priorities given to coastal risk can help
44 in the development of adaptive capacity and associated adaptation strategies (Button, 2013; Carlton
45 and Jacobson, 2013), as perceptions tend to shape individual behaviour (Slovic, 1987; Lindell and
46 Hwang, 2008) and management strategy preferences (Slovic, 1987; Steg and Sievers, 2000;
47 Peacock et al., 2005; Button, 2013). Also, Social perception of risks can constrain and influence
48 political, social, and economic activities (Leiserowitz, 2006). The household has been identified as
49 a valuable unit of analysis for perceptions of risk because it is a unit of action that exists between
50 individuals and society, where personal values, societal norms, and institutional demands converge
51 (Elrick-Barr et al., 2015; Collins, 2015).

52 This paper assesses the risk perceptions and preferred strategies for facing future coastal
53 hazards at the household scale of the Anlo coastal community of the Western region of Ghana. The
54 study area was chosen because it is characterized by the problem of coastal erosion and marine
55 flooding that may likely increase in the future due to rising sea levels and a higher frequency of
56 extreme events associated with climate change (IPCC, 2012; 2021). We begin the paper by
57 outlining the methods adopted to evaluate household risk perceptions in Anlo coastal community.
58 Finally, results are discussed, highlighting variation in risk perceptions within and between the
59 communities, before outlining key considerations for policy and research.
60
61
62

60

61

62
63 **Study site**

The Anlo Beach community (Figure 1) was purposefully selected as the study site because coastal
flooding and shoreline erosion are increasingly impacting people, property, and ecosystems in this
section of the Ghana coast (CRC, 2013; Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et al., 2017). Thus, it is believed
that people in this area will recognize their vulnerability and have higher perceptions of risk (Brody
et al., 2008).

The Anlo Beach coastal community, comprising 740 households (population ca. 4500), is located
in the Shama District, Western Region of Ghana (Fig. 1). It is bordered to the north by mangroves
and wetlands associated with the Pra River Delta that extends from the north-eastern to the western
side of the community and on the south by the open Atlantic Ocean. The community, built on a
dune and sandwiched between the wetlands and the ocean, is highly vulnerable to floods and
erosion (Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et al., 2017). Although the Pra River and its associated
mangroves and wetland areas are highly important for livelihoods, pollution of the river by illegal
gold mining and indiscriminate cutting of mangroves is increasing (Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et
al., 2017). The dominant livelihoods in the Anlo Beach community are fishing, petty trading, fish
selling, and processing. Other popular occupations included: tailoring, hairdressing, catering, and
fabric dyeing.

80

81 **The intensity of the use of natural resources in Anlo Beach**

Anlo Beach has a vast array of livelihood assets and potentials and a few services. Natural capital
includes the sea and fisheries resources, beaches, sand, River Pra Estuary, wetlands including
swamps and salt marshes, mangrove swamp, mangrove forests, dry land, and farmlands. The
surrounding area possesses ecological features that are interesting to eco-tourism. The Pra River
estuary provides suitable roosting and nesting grounds for birds and marine turtles. Mangroves of
the genera Avicennia, Rhizophora, and Laguncularia are found along the entire perimeter of the
Pra River and its estuary and extend over three kilometres on both sides of the estuary (Okyere,
2015; Coastal Resources Center / Friends of the Nation, 2010). These mangroves are highly
exploited as the main source of firewood for cooking and smoking fish and for construction
purposes in the community thereby resulting in the degradation of the mangrove forest and
reduction in the size of this critical habitat for fish breeding activities. Degraded mangrove areas

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92
are used as refuse disposal sites. In addition, sand is wined from the beach for construction purposes in the study community. This activity tends to increase coastal erosion and flooding (Kutir et al., 2022). Further north of the community has located the farmlands. Fishers in this community are actively involved in artisanal marine fishing as well as estuary fishing. Fishing and fish mongering are the major livelihood activities running from mid-July to late April while subsistence farming becomes the predominant occupation after April, lasting for about three months in the off-fishing season after which the community switches back to fishing in mid-July or early August for the main fishing season. Not all fishermen practice farming during the off-fishing months, and only a few members of the community are small-scale farmers who only fish for subsistence. Cassava and maize are the major crops produced although a few farmers cultivate cash crops such as oil palm and coconut (Okyere, 2015; Coastal Resources Center / Friends of the Nation, 2010).

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. a) Map Anlo Beach coastal fishing community. Inset: map of Ghana (sources: Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et al., 2017).</figcaption></figure>
108

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2. The environmental situation in the Anlo Beach community: a) erosion; b) loss of mangroves due to erosion; and c) impact of salinization.</figcaption></figure>

109

110

111

112

113

## 2 Materials and Methods

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

A household survey was conducted in the Anlo Beach community in the Western Region of Ghana to obtain information on household risk perceptions. The survey, in which 156 respondents participated, was conducted as part of the West Africa Coastal Area - mapping Vulnerability, Adaptability and Resilience in changing climate (WACA-VAR) project, between July and August 2021 by a team of researchers from the Centre for Coastal Management-African Centre of Excellence in Coastal Resilience (CCM-ACECoR), University of Cape Coast, Ghana, and the Institut de Recherche pour de Developpement (IRD), Toulouse, France. The interviews were conducted face-to-face with a systematic selection of every 5th household to ensure that the results that will be obtained from our survey will approximate what would have been obtained if the entire population had been surveyed.
The survey, with 156 questions, consists of several parts, out of which three are common to all respondents. First, an identification of the survey site with its GPS coordinates and locality (section A). Then section B is based on the characteristics of the respondents, focusing on the respondents' place of residence, age, sex, professional activity, level of academic education, and attachment to the place. Section C is composed of two questions, dealing with the risks linked to the hazards and potentially dangerous phenomena observed and identifying the two phenomena that most affected the respondents. The respondents were allowed to rank the hazards that largely impact their lives, whether salinization, coastal erosion, coastal flooding, plastic pollution, or oil pollution.

Section D corresponds to a series of detailed questions based on the most impacted hazard noticed in section C. Questions were broadly structured around the manifestation of the hazard observed by the respondent, its evolution in recent years, the impact of the hazard on the individual, and possible measures that are taken or could be put in place in the management of these potential or actual hazards (Louarn, 2020; Morand, 2021). Kobo connect software, installed on mobile phones, was used to conduct the interview. In most cases, responses provided to the questionnaire were used directly as binary or multi-modal variables.

## 2.1 Descriptive statistics analysis

A descriptive statistics analysis was performed to describe the personal characteristics of the respondents, thus providing the structure of the sample.

## 2.2 Construction of composite indices for Linear Regression analysis

To consolidate and make more synthetic information in the evaluation of global perceptions, we created composite indices from binary/multi-modal answers to basic inquiries. To do it, we employed different subsets of questionnaire answers for this construction, which were sometimes binary choice answers and sometimes responses on ordered qualitative scales. Each composite index was calculated by adding values of 1 or 0 applied to the response categories obtained, thereby creating two synthetic indices: indices of (i) perceived impact and (ii) adaptive measures. The two indices were presented in the form of quantitative scores which will play, in turn, the role of the dependent variable for the analyses carried out using the linear model. Each of the two synthetic indices was then analyzed using a linear model. For the two indices, seven variables were used. No
variable taken into account in the construction of a composite index is reused as an explanatory factor for the same index, which prevents any risk of circularity in the interpretation of the results.

The coefficients of the model were estimated using the Linear Regression analysis in the SPSS software. Only significant effects up to the 10% (p<0.1) threshold were retained and discussed.

The value of the coefficient was used to identify the direction of the effect (positive or negative) on the evolution of the index.

## 3. Results

### 3.1 Descriptive analysis

#### 3.1.1 Basic characteristics of the respondents

Ninety-nine percent of the survey respondents lived at the study site. About 53% of them were permanent homeowners while 46.5% were non-permanent owners. Only 10% of the respondents had lived less than 10 years in the study site, indicating the majority (90%) of them had lived in the area for more than 10 years. Of the survey respondents, 61% were females while 39% were males. Out of the entire respondents, 57.1% were between the ages of 18 and 50 years. About 11.5% of the respondents had a higher tertiary education while 26.3% never went to school (Table 1).

<table><caption>Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the respondents</caption><thead><tr><th>Variable</th><th>Response</th><th>Percentage</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Gender</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>95</td><td>60.9</td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>61</td><td>39.1</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Age</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17-25</td><td>17</td><td>10.9</td></tr><tr><td>26-50</td><td>75</td><td>48.1</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;50</td><td>64</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Education</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Illiterate</td><td>41</td><td>26.3</td></tr><tr><td>Primary</td><td>59</td><td>37.8</td></tr><tr><td>Secondary</td><td>38</td><td>24.4</td></tr><tr><td>Tertiary</td><td>18</td><td>11.5</td></tr></tbody></table>
### Length of residence

<table><tr><td>Permanent</td><td>83</td><td>53.2</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;10 years</td><td>57</td><td>36.5</td></tr><tr><td>5-10 years</td><td>7</td><td>4.5</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5 years</td><td>9</td><td>5.8</td></tr></table>

### Occupancy status

<table><tr><td>Permanent owners</td><td>83</td><td>53.5</td></tr><tr><td>Non-permanent owners</td><td>72</td><td>46.5</td></tr></table>

### 3.1.2. Intensity in the usage of natural resources

As shown in Table 2, freshwater, mangrove wood, and beach sand were identified by the respondents to be of high use in the study area. About 75.7% of the respondents indicated high usage of freshwater while 9.6 and 14.7% of the respondents, respectively, indicated low and moderate utilization of freshwater. About 58.8% of the respondents indicated high use of mangrove wood for domestic and professional activities, while 32.7 and 8.5% indicated low and moderate usage. While beach sand was highly used by 62.8% of the respondents, river sand had low utilization (by 76.7% of the respondents).

<table><caption>Table 2. Usage of coastal natural resources in Anlo Beach based on the respondents' perception</caption><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><strong>Freshwater usage</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>15</td><td>9.6</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>23</td><td>14.7</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>118</td><td>75.7</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"><strong>Mangrove wood usage</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>50</td><td>32.7</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>13</td><td>8.5</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>90</td><td>58.8</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"><strong>River sand usage</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>115</td><td>76.7</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>8</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>27</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"><strong>Beach sand usage</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Low</td><td>43</td><td>27.6</td></tr><tr><td>Moderate</td><td>15</td><td>9.6</td></tr><tr><td>High</td><td>98</td><td>62.8</td></tr></tbody></table>
3.1.3 Perceived coastal hazards assessment

To explore the level of perception of coastal hazards in the study area, first, the respondents were asked to select three hazards they perceived to have the greatest impacts on their lives and properties (Fig. 2).

As shown in Figure 2, coastal erosion (46.8 %) was on top of the list of the first major ranking coastal hazards perceived by the respondents in the study area, followed by salinization (30.1 %) and seawater flooding (23.1 %). Salinization (50.6 %) overwhelmingly topped the list under the second major ranking of coastal hazards perceived by the respondents, followed by coastal erosion (23.7 %) and seawater flooding (21.2 %). Plastic and wastewater pollution were not cited under the first major ranking of coastal hazards perceived by the respondents in the study area but only slightly mentioned under the second major ranking of coastal hazards perceived by the respondents (Fig. 2) whereas oil pollution and sewage pollution were never mentioned at all. Thus, coastal erosion and salinization being the first 2 major coastal hazards perceived by the respondents in the study area were considered in the present study.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. Major ranking of coastal hazards as perceived by the respondents</figcaption></figure>

200

201

202
3.1.4. **Knowledge, causes, potential impacts, and approaches to reducing coastal hazards risks**

This section explores respondents’ perceptions of the causes and potential impacts and their
approach to mitigating the major coastal hazard risks.

Perceived knowledge and awareness about coastal erosion

The majority of the respondents (88.5%) stated that there has been strong coastal erosion in the last 10 years while only a few (1.9%) believed that it was little (Fig. 3a). About 94.2% of respondents believed that the shoreline had moved landward more than it was 10 years ago, and 2.6% argued that it was constant (Fig. 3b). While most respondents (70%) pointed out that the erosion was highest near the Pra Estuary inlet, others (30%) believed that it was everywhere along the coast.

A. Erosion trend in the last 10 years

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3 a) Erosion trends in the last 10 years; b) Shoreline positions in the last 10 years as perceived by the respondents</figcaption></figure>

B. Shoreline position in the last 10 years

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

Seasonality and major causes of erosion

As shown in Fig. 4a, the respondents considered coastal erosion (or a landward advance of the sea) to be higher between May and September and least between October and April. However, about 58% of respondents maintained that the beach never returned to where it was previously, indicating a high level of vulnerability in the area. When asked about the major causes of the erosion phenomenon in the study area, the majority of the respondents (68.7%) linked it to the combined effects of natural factors (Fig. 4b) such as wave actions, sea-level rise, tidal waves, river flooding, and seasonal cycles. While about 12.7% of the respondents linked erosion in the study area to human activities (Fig. 4b) like beach sand mining, harbour construction at Sekondi and Takoradi, nearby sea defense at Aboadze, the opening of the Pra River estuary inlet, and building houses near
the coast; 18.6% of them believed it was both natural and human-induced (Fig. 4b). The majority of respondents (75%) believed that erosion became aggravated during some events or years. For example, the combined effects of river and sea flooding events during the 2005/2006, 2014/2015, and 2017/2018 periods were considered to have aggravated coastal erosion in the study area, indicating a high level of awareness about the vulnerability of the area.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4.** a) Monthly/ Seasonal coastal erosion trends; b) Causes of coastal erosion as perceived by the respondents.</figcaption></figure>

*Perceived impacts, efforts at mitigating coastal erosion, and suggested solutions*

As presented in Table 3a, 91.7 and 92% of the respondents, respectively, stated that coastal erosion had a high to extremely high impact on their domestic activities and general living conditions whereas 8.3 and 8% of the respondents said it had a moderate to low impact. Most of the respondents (84%) stated that they suffered physical or property damages as a result of coastal erosion (Table 3b). However, they displayed low preparedness levels for mitigation measures. When asked whether they were taken any measures to combat erosion, the majority (83.3%) of the respondents said they were not making any efforts (Table 3c). Owing to various impacts of coastal
erosion, about 68.4% of them had been forced to relocate to other parts of Anlo Beach while ~76.7% are still contemplating moving in the future (Table 3b).

When asked what could be done to slow down to reduce coastal erosion hazards in their community, about 78.8% opted for the construction of sea defense along the coast as it was done in Cape Coast, a nearby city, while 10.9% suggested relocation of the community to a safer place by the government (Table 3d).

<table><caption>Table 3a. Impacts of coastal erosion on domestic activities, professional activities, and conditions of living</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Variable</th><th colspan="2">Low</th><th colspan="2">Moderate</th><th colspan="2">High</th><th colspan="2">Very High</th><th colspan="2">Extremely High</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>i. Impact on domestic activities</td><td>14</td><td>3.2</td><td>7</td><td>4.5</td><td>5</td><td>9</td><td>23</td><td>14.7</td><td>106</td><td>68</td></tr><tr><td>ii. Impact on professional activities</td><td>23</td><td>14.7</td><td>10</td><td>6.4</td><td>11</td><td>7.1</td><td>46</td><td>29.5</td><td>66</td><td>41.7</td></tr><tr><td>iii. Impact on condition of living</td><td>11</td><td>7.1</td><td>1</td><td>0.65</td><td>7</td><td>4.5</td><td>26</td><td>16.7</td><td>109</td><td>70.8</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 3b. The severity of coastal erosion on the respondents and responses</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="2">Yes</th><th colspan="2">No</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>i. Have you suffered any physical or property damage</td><td>131</td><td>84</td><td>25</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>ii. Have you moved to a different location because of coastal erosion?</td><td>106</td><td>68.4</td><td>49</td><td>31.6</td></tr><tr><td>iii. Do you think you will have to move again?</td><td>115</td><td>76.7</td><td>35</td><td>23.3</td></tr><tr><td>iv. Any built coastal defense e.g., dikes, breakwaters, groins in your community?</td><td>1</td><td>0.6</td><td>154</td><td>99.4</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 3c. Efforts at combating coastal erosion</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="2">None</th><th colspan="2">Personally</th><th colspan="2">Collectively</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Any effort at combating coastal erosion in your community?</td><td>129</td><td>83.8</td><td>1</td><td>0.6</td><td>24</td><td>15.6</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>Table 3d. Suggested ways of combating coastal erosion</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="2">No idea</th><th colspan="2">Sea defense</th><th colspan="2">Relocation</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>What could be done to mitigate coastal erosion in your community?</td><td>17</td><td>10.9</td><td>123</td><td>78.8</td><td>16</td><td>10.3</td></tr></tbody></table>
Perceived knowledge and awareness about salinization and its major causes

The perception of the respondents about salinization hazards was very high. About 89.1% of the respondents stated that the situation is well-known to everyone in the community. The majority, 99.4 and 76.3% respectively, of the respondents, reported the presence of salt in the drinking water from the well and river, in the study area. About 95.5% of the respondents stated that there was an occurrence of high salinity in the well water during the dry season between November and March of each year (Fig. 5a). This is consistent with nationally observed weather conditions; the wettest months in Ghana are May-July and September-October, with the driest period occurring from December to February and a brief period in August. The majority of the respondents, about 95.5 and 69.9%, described the salt in the well and river as higher than in the past 10 years. The overall response to the questions was an indication of good knowledge of their local environment.

When asked about the causes of salinization in the study area, 94.8% of respondents (Fig. 5b) believed that it was a natural phenomenon due to drought (91%), seawater flooding (41.7%), high tide (25%) (Fig. 5c). On the other hand, 1.3% of the respondents believed that it was caused by humans while 1.9% said it was both human and natural (Fig. 5b). Others also believed that the nearness of the community to the Ocean was a major factor.
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. a) Monthly/ Seasonal coastal salinization trends; b) General causes of salinization; and c) Natural causes of salinization as perceived by the respondents.</figcaption></figure>

Perceived impacts of salinization and mitigation efforts

Ninety-four percent (94%) of the respondents stated salinization has impacted their domestic activities, 66% of the respondents stated that it has affected their professional activities, while the general living conditions of 91% of the respondents have been impacted (Table 4a). When asked if the community had put any measure in place to prevent salt contamination, 85.9% indicated there was no measure on the ground (Table 4b). When asked what could be done to reduce salinization in their community, 5.1%, 3.2%, and 41.7% of the respondents suggested relocation, water treatment, and provision of pipe-borne water, respectively, while 50% of the respondents had no idea of what to do (Table 4c).

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289
290

291

<table><caption>Table 4a. Impacts of salinization on domestic and professional activities and general condition of living</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Variable</th><th colspan="2">Low</th><th colspan="2">Moderate</th><th colspan="2">High</th><th colspan="2">Very High</th><th colspan="2">Extremely High</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Domestic activities</td><td>2</td><td>1.28</td><td>1</td><td>0.64</td><td>5</td><td>3.21</td><td>19</td><td>12.18</td><td>129</td><td>82.69</td></tr><tr><td>Professional activities</td><td>27</td><td>17.31</td><td>12</td><td>7.69</td><td>13</td><td>8.33</td><td>45</td><td>28.85</td><td>59</td><td>37.82</td></tr><tr><td>Condition of living</td><td>4</td><td>2.56</td><td>3</td><td>1.92</td><td>6</td><td>3.85</td><td>29</td><td>18.59</td><td>114</td><td>73.08</td></tr></tbody></table>

292

293

<table><caption>Table 4b. The effort to mitigate salinization in your community</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="2">None</th><th colspan="2">Personal</th><th colspan="2">Collective</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Any effort at mitigating salinization in your community?</td><td>134</td><td>85.9</td><td>3</td><td>1.9</td><td>19</td><td>12.2</td></tr></tbody></table>

294

295

<table><caption>Table 4c. How to mitigate salinization in your community</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="2">No idea</th><th colspan="2">Pipe-borne water</th><th colspan="2">Water treatment</th><th colspan="2">Relocation</th></tr><tr><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th><th>Freq.</th><th>%</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>What could be done to mitigate salinization in your community?</td><td>78</td><td>50</td><td>65</td><td>41.7</td><td>5</td><td>3.2</td><td>8</td><td>5.1</td></tr></tbody></table>

296

297

298

## 3.2 Factors acting on perception: Linear model analysis (LMA)

### Perception of impact and adaptive measures regarding erosion hazard

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310
Perception of impact and adaptive measures regarding salinization hazard

As shown in Table 5b, a high level in the perception of the impact of salinization (appraised through a composite index) was negatively related to occupancy status (p < 0.05) and positively related to education level (p < 0.1; Table 5b). Also, the propensity of respondents taking adaptive measures (appraised through a composite index) to salinization was negatively related to occupancy status (p < 0.01) and positively related to education level (p < 0.01; Table 5b). In other words, non-owners of land in the study area are more likely to perceive the impact of the salinization than the landowners. Given the same impact, the higher the education level of the respondents the more likely they perceive the salinization impact. In the same vein, non-owners of land are more likely to take adaptive measures, and also, the higher the education level of the respondents the more likely they take adaptive measures.

<table><caption>Table 5a. Linear model analysis of social factors affecting the perception of coastal erosion impact and the propensity to engage in adaptation measures vs erosion</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="3"></th><th colspan="4">Coastal Erosion hazard</th></tr><tr><th colspan="2">Indice of perceived impact</th><th colspan="2">Indice of adaptive measures</th></tr><tr><th>coefficient</th><th>p-value</th><th>coefficient</th><th>p-value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age</td><td>-0.094</td><td>0.258</td><td>-0.375</td><td><strong>0.005</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Gender (F vs M)</td><td>-0.067</td><td>0.482</td><td>-0.061</td><td>0.277</td></tr><tr><td>Level of education</td><td>-0.234</td><td><strong>0.011</strong></td><td>-0.105</td><td>0.189</td></tr><tr><td>Length of residency</td><td>0.170</td><td><strong>0.039</strong></td><td>0.154</td><td>0.175</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy status (owner vs non-owner)</td><td>0.124</td><td>0.148</td><td>-0.007</td><td>0.889</td></tr><tr><td>Occupation (Farming)</td><td>-0.024</td><td>0.782</td><td>0.017</td><td>0.822</td></tr><tr><td>Occupation (Fishing)</td><td>0.177</td><td><strong>0.041</strong></td><td>0.033</td><td>0.521</td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: Bolded values are significant at p < 0.05
<table><caption>Table 5b. Linear model analysis of social factors affecting the perception of salinization impact and the propensity to engage in adaptation measures vs salinization</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="3"></th><th colspan="4">Salinization hazard</th></tr><tr><th colspan="2">Indice of perceived impact</th><th colspan="2">Indice of adaptive measures</th></tr><tr><th>coefficient</th><th>p-value</th><th>coefficient</th><th>p-value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age</td><td>0.132</td><td>0.112</td><td>-0.018</td><td>0.600</td></tr><tr><td>Gender (F vs M)</td><td>0.019</td><td>0.578</td><td>0.015</td><td>0.302</td></tr><tr><td>Level of education</td><td>0.089</td><td><strong>0.073</strong></td><td>0.085</td><td><strong>&lt;0.0001</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Length of residency</td><td>0.055</td><td>0.437</td><td>-0.045</td><td>0.113</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy status (owner vs non-owner)</td><td>-0.066</td><td><strong>0.031</strong></td><td>-0.038</td><td><strong>0.002</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Occupation (Farming)</td><td>-0.047</td><td>0.312</td><td>0.019</td><td>0.301</td></tr><tr><td>Occupation (Fishing)</td><td>-0.014</td><td>0.667</td><td>0.013</td><td>0.327</td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: Bolded values are significant at p < 0.05

The results of the present study show that the respondents are more concerned about coastal erosion than all other coastal hazard types in the Anlo community of the Western region of Ghana. This is in concordance with geomorphological studies that found that this section of the Ghana coast is eroding (e.g., Addo, 2009; Boateng, 2012; Boye et al., 2018). For instance, Boateng (2012) observed an erosion rate of 2.7± 0.4 m per year between Sekondi port jetty and Pra estuary in the long term. Boye et al. (2018) noted that in both the short and long term, the western part of the study area is eroding at a faster rate than the eastern section. Findings from the study carried out by Friends of the Nation (2015) in the study area revealed that about 146 houses close to the shore of the Atlantic Ocean are highly exposed to coastal erosion. Several houses stand threatened once the highly exposed ones are eroded. Another report showed that more than 1,000 houses have been destroyed by the sea in the last 30 years (Graphic Online, 2017). According to the same report, more than 198 houses were washed away, and more than 800 residents were displaced during the 2017 tidal wave that hit the area (Graphic Online, 2017). It is important to note that the Anlo Beach community is built on a dune between the wetlands and the Atlantic Ocean, and it is highly vulnerable to floods and erosion (Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et al., 2017).

Although seawater flooding is a well-recognized problem in the study area (Mutimukuru-Maravanyika et al., 2017), it was the third hazard identified by the respondents. Studies have shown that laypeople can make a subjective assessment based on sentiments and psychometric factors
(Slovic, 1987; Slovic et al., 1984) and/or social values (Wildavsky and Dake, 1990; Dake, 1991) rather than on data. This may be because seawater flooding was perceived by some respondents as one of the natural causes of salinization in the study area (Fig. 5), and as it emerged, about 26% of the respondents saw it as a major cause of salinization (Fig. 5).

Looking at it from a different perspective, it could also be due to the systematic failure of the government (Liddle et al., 2015) to provide piped water services, thereby prompting the inhabitants to rely on water from wells and boreholes (Grönwall, 2016). About 49% of Ghanaian coastal dwellers rely heavily on groundwater from shallow aquifer systems for domestic and professional purposes (Ghana Statistical Service, 2012; Kortatsi, 1994). Salinization of surface wells and groundwater has been reported as a major problem in many coastal areas of Ghana (e.g., Lutterodt et al., 2021; Helstrup et al., 2007; Bannerman, 1994; Gill, 1969). A study indicates that the salinization of wells in these areas is a result of saltwater intrusion (Helstrup et al., 2007). This has caused the abandonment of several water wells in the Anlo community (Fig. 2). This may have caused salinization to be seen as more impactful than seawater flooding. Therefore, there is a need for control measures to check the further degradation of freshwater through the landward movement of seawater into these coastal areas.

Such a measure could be increased public awareness of the need to lower water abstraction rates and usage of other water resources that can contribute to an increase in freshwater volume, which slows the infiltration of saltwater. This is the simplest, most direct, and most economical solution to problems with saltwater intrusion and groundwater balance in aquifers. However, a supplemental source of water will be required to substitute for the mandated reduction in the groundwater pumping plan (Hussain et al., 2019; Abd-Elhamid et al., 2018; Bruington, 1972). As suggested by the majority of respondents, this additional water source can be the community being provided with pipe-borne water by the government (Table 4c). It is notable that, while the respondents' perception of increasing coastal hazards was high, their propensity to take adaptive measures was very low for both hazards (Table 3). More than 80% of the respondents were not making any effort to mitigate either coastal erosion or salinization because they viewed them as natural (Tables 3c and 4b). This is not surprising because previous studies also found no connection between people's risk perception and their intentions to take mitigation measures (Diakakis et al., 2018; Baron and Petersen, 2015; Wachinger et al., 2013; Bubeck et al., 2012; Siegrist and Gutscher, 2006; Kreibich et al., 2005; Takao et al., 2004). According to Brilly and Polic (2005), proper
actions and countermeasures do not always follow perceived threats. Based on this, Diakakis et al. (2018) is of opinion that future public sensitization should focus more on the importance of self-protection measures, rather than emphasizing only the risks.

Concerning the variables or factors that influenced the perception of the respondents, our findings show that respondents' perceptions of increasing coastal erosion hazards were negatively associated with their level of education and occupancy status, whereas some type of occupation (fishing) was positively associated with coastal erosion hazard perception. The two factors that were always statistically significant among all the relevant socio-demographic characteristics were level of education and occupancy status (owner versus non-owner) (Table 5 a, b). These findings are consistent with previous studies, which suggest that demographic, attitudinal, and social contextual characteristics have a significant impact on perceptions of ecological risks (Bord et al., 1998; Kempton, 1993; Peters and Slovic, 1996).

For instance, O'Connor et al. (1999) and Savage (1993) found that people with higher levels of education and household income have lower levels of ecological risk perception. House ownership (occupancy status) is also found to be associated with perceived risks. For example, Burningham et al. (2008) and Grothmann and Reusswig (2006) argued that owning a property could result in higher levels of perceived risk than renting a residence. A study has also shown that permanent residence (length of residency) in a risky place may increase risk perception (Kellens et al., 2011; Burningham et al., 2008; Lindell and Hwang, 2008).

Regarding taking adaptive measures to combat coastal hazards, age was negatively associated with the perception of coastal erosion risks, which is similar to that of Kellens et al. (2013) but at variance with earlier studies that found older respondents to display a higher perception than younger people. (e.g., Lindell and Whiteney, 2000; Grothmann and Reusswig, 2006; Knocke and Kolivras, 2007; Miceli et al., 2008; Burningham et al., 2008; Bonem et al., 2015). Taking adaptive measures to salinization was positively influenced by the level of education and associated with occupancy status. Higher education levels may increase respondents' promptness to take adaptive measures (Kellens et al., 2011). The varying outcome may be due to methods of measuring risk perception and different subjects (Kellens et al., 2011). For instance, while Burningham et al. (2008) measured risk awareness, Grothmann and Reusswig (2006) focused on the perceived ability to take protective actions against flood risks. Previous studies may not be
421 directly related to coastal erosion and salinization hazards, they shed light on the effects of socio-
422 demographics on perceptions of coastal hazards.

423 From our findings, there is a belief that the government is solely responsible for the
424 implementation of protective measures, whereas self-effort by individuals is far less important.
425 Further, they saw structural coastal protection measures as the key management strategies instead
426 of taking personal measures. A larger emphasis was placed by residents upon measures to reduce
427 coastal hazards, rather than concentrating on reducing community activities (such as the
428 construction of new buildings) in hazard-prone areas. Similarly, Wisner et al. (2004) found that
429 disadvantaged people (economically or politically) are bound to stop trusting their means of self-
430 protection and lose self-confidence. This behaviour is intensified by a lack of government attention.
431 Consequently, the people were blaming the government instead of increasing their resilience
432 capacity at the local level.

433 We believe that the people also have a role to play. For instance, our findings (see Table 2;
434 Fig. 2) revealed that mangrove woods are heavily exploited (58.8%) in the study area, and beach
435 sand (62.8%) is heavily utilized compared to river sand (18%). However, mangroves are known to
436 be a natural protector of coastlines and builders of beaches (Besset et al., 2019; Gracia et al., 2018;
437 Spalding et al., 2014). While the aerial roots of mangroves encourage sediment deposition and
438 prevent erosion, the roots, trunks, and canopy dampen the force of oncoming waves and storm
439 surges and thus reduce seawater flooding. So, there is a need for attitudinal change: to discontinue
440 beach sand utilization and exploitation of mangroves as firewood for cooking and smoking fish in
441 the community and embrace the restoration of mangrove ecosystems.

442
443 **5. Conclusions**
444
This research examines the societal perceptions of coastal risks in the Anlo Beach Fishing
445 Community in Ghana's Western Region. We identified and explained numerous critical factors
446 determining household risk perception using descriptive statistics and multivariate regression
447 models. Our findings not only reveal how individuals view coastal risks, but also provide crucial
448 information to policymakers interested in reducing the negative effects of coastal hazards on local
449 populations. Although this research gives insight into the factors that influence people's perceptions
450 of coastal risks in the study area, it should only be used as a starting point for further research.
451 More real actions are required, such as actual legislative responses to coastal dangers. Further,
findings from this study call for interventions from the appropriate authorities. These interventions should take the form of educating people about the necessity of self-protection measures like ceasing to use of beach sand exploitation of mangroves for fuel, as well as embracing mangrove ecosystem restoration; and awareness about the need to lower water abstraction rates and usage of other water resources such as the provision of pipe borne water to the community to an increase in freshwater volume and slows the infiltration of saltwater.

458

## 459 Acknowledgments

This study was carried out as part of the West Africa Coastal Area - mapping Vulnerability, Adaptability, and Resilience in a changing climate (WACA-VAR) project, sponsored by the OCEAN Department of the Institut de Recherche pour de Developpement (IRD) and supported by the JEAI COASTS-UNDER-CONTROL between IRD and ACECoR. The first author is grateful to the leadership of the IRD OCEAN Department for supporting his Postdoctoral fellowship. He is equally thankful to the staff of the Centre for Coastal Management-African Centre of Excellence in Coastal Resilience (CCM-ACECoR), the University of Cape Coast, Ghana, especially the Director, Professor Denis Aheto; and Associate Director, Dr. Precious Mattah. The authors thank the Editor and anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions.

469

470

## 471 References

472 Abd-Elhamid, H.F., Abd-Elaty, I., Negm, A.M., 2018. Control of Saltwater Intrusion in Coastal Aquifers. In: Negm, A. (eds) Groundwater in the Nile Delta. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol 73. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2017_138

475 Addo, K.A, 2009. Detection of coastal erosion hotspots in Accra, Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa (Volume 11, 4.

477 Bannerman, R.R., 1994. Appraisal of the limestone aquifer of the Keta Basin, Ghana. In: Soveri J. and Suokko T. (Eds.), Future Groundwater Resources at Risk. Publ. 222. International Association for Hydrological Sciences, Wallingford, pp. 315-321.

480 Barnard, P.L., Erikson, L. H., Foxgrover, A.C., Finzi Hart, J.A., Limber, P., O'Neill, A. C., van Ormondt, M., Vitousek, S., Wood, N., Hayden, M.K. and Jones, J.M., 2019. Dynamic flood modeling essential to assess the coastal impacts of climate change. *Scientific Reports*, 9: 4309.

484 Baron, N. and Petersen, L.K., 2015. Climate change or variable weather: rethinking Danish homeowners' perceptions of floods and climate, Reg. Environ. Change 15, 1145-1155.

486 Besset, M., Gratiot, N., Anthony, E. J., Bouchette, F., Goichot, M. and Marchesiello, P., 2019. Mangroves and shoreline erosion in the Mekong River delta, Viet Nam. *Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science*, 226, 106263.

489 Boateng, I., 2012. An application of GIS and coastal geomorphology for large scale assessment
490 of coastal erosion and management: a case study of Ghana. Journal of Coastal
491 Conservation, 16:383-397.

492 **Bord, R. J., Fisher, A., and O'Connor, R. E., 1998.** Public perceptions of global warming: United
493 States and international perspectives. Climate Research, 11, 75-84.

494 **Bonem, E.M., Ellsworth, P.C., and Gonzalez, R., 2015.** Age differences in risk: perceptions,
495 intentions and domains, J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 28, 317-330.

496
497 **Boye, C. B.** Appeaning Addo, K., Wiafe, G. and Dzigbodi-Adjimah, K., 2018. Spatio-
498
temporal analyses of shoreline change in the Western Region of Ghana. Journal of Coastal
499
Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-018-0607-z

500 Bradford, R. A., O'Sullivan, J. J., van der Craats, I. M., Krywkow, J., Rotko, P., Aaltonen, J., Bonaiuto, M., De Dominicis, S., Waylen, K., and Schelfaut, K., 2012. Risk perception – issues for flood management in Europe, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 2299–2309.

503 Brilly, M., and Polic M., 2005. Public perception of flood risks, flood forecasting and mitigation, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 5, 345–355.

505 Brody, S.D., Zahran, S., Vedlitz, A. and Grover, H., 2008. Examining the relationship between
506 physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United States.
507 Environment and Behavior 40(1), 72-95.

508 Bruington, A. E., 1972. Saltwater intrusion into aquifers 1. JAWRA Journal of the American
509 Water Resources Association, 8(1), 150-160.

510 Bubeck, P., Botzen, W. J. W., Kreibich, H., and Aerts, J. C. J. H., 2013. Detailed insights into
511 the influence of flood-coping appraisals on mitigation behaviour. Global Environ. Chang.,
512 23, 1327-1338.

513 Bubeck, P., Botzen, W.J., and Aerts, J.C., 2012. A review of risk perceptions and other factors
514 that influence flood mitigation behaviour, Risk Anal. 32, 1481–1495.

515 Burkett, V.R. and Davidson, M.A., 2012. Coastal impacts, adaptation and vulnerability: a
technical input to the 2012 national climate assessment. cooperative report to the 2013.
National Climate Assessment 150, 1-89.

518 **Burningham, K., Fielding, J., and Thrush, D., 2008.** "It'll never happen to me": Understanding
519 public awareness of local flood risk. Disasters 32(2):216-238.

520 **Button, C., 2013.** Coastal vulnerability and climate change in Australia: public risk perceptions
521 and adaptation to climate change in non-metropolitan coastal communities. PhD Thesis,
522 School of Social Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Australia, 361 pp.

523 **Carlton, S.J and Jacobson, S.K., 2013.** Climate change and coastal environmental risk
524 perceptions in Florida. Journal of Environmental Management, 130, 32-39.

525 Cazenave, A. and Le Cozannet, G., 2014. Sea level rise and its coastal impacts. *Earth's Future*,
526 2, 15-34.

527 Coastal Resources Center (CRC, 2013). Coastal Hazards and Flooding Risk in Ghana's
528 Western Region. Issue Brief 7 in series “Hèn Mpoano: Our Coast, Our Future”.
529 Narragansett, RI: Coastal Resources Center, Graduate School of Oceanography, University
530 of Rhode Island. USAID Integrated Coastal and Fisheries Governance Program for the
531 Western Region of Ghana. Narragansett, RI: Coastal Resources Center, Graduate School
532 of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island. 15 pp.

533 **Collins, R., 2015.** Keeping it in the family? Re-focusing household sustainability. *Geoforum* 60,
534 22–32.

535 **Coastal Resources Center / Friends of the Nation, 2010.** Report on characterization of coastal
536 communities and shoreline environments in the Western Region of Ghana. Integrated
537 Coastal and Fisheries Governance Initiative for the Western Region of Ghana. Coastal
538 Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, 425pp.

539 **Dake, K., 1991.** Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary
540 worldviews and cultural biases, J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 22, 61–82.

541 **Diakakis, M., Priskos, G. and Skordoulis, M., 2018.** Public perception of flood risk in flash
542 flood prone areas of Eastern Mediterranean: The case of Attica Region in Greece,
543 International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 28, 404-413.

544 **Elrick-Barr, C.E., Smith, T.F., Thomsen, D.C. and Preston, B.L., 2015.** Perceptions of Risk
545 among Households in Two Australian Coastal Communities. Geographical Research 53
546 (2), pp. 145-159

547 **Friends of the Nation (2015).** Shama Disaster Management Committee Meeting and Field Work
548 to Plan Anlo Beach Resettlement, The USAID/Ghana Sustainable Fisheries Management
549 Project (SFMP). Narragansett, RI: Coastal Resources Center, Graduate School of
550 Oceanography, University of Rhode Island and Friends of the Nation, Adiembra - Parks
551 and Gardens. GH2014_ACT085_FON 26 pp.

552 **Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), 2012.** Summary report of final results for 2010 population and
553 housing census. Ghana Statistical Service. Accra, Ghana.

554 **Gill H. E., 1969.** A groundwater reconnaissance of the Republic of Ghana, with a description of
555 geohydrologic provinces. US Geological Survey Water-supply Paper 1757-K Washington,
556 DC, 37pp.

557 **Gracia, A., Rangel-Buitrago, N., Oakley, J. A., and Williams, A. T., 2018.** Use of ecosystems
558 in coastal erosion management. *Ocean & coastal management*, 156, 277-289.

559 **Graphic Online, 2017.** Anlo Beach to be wiped out in a year. Retrieved 24th of February 2022
560 from https://www graphic com gh/news/general-news/anlo-beach-to-be-wiped-out-in-a-
561 year.html

562 **Grönwall, J., 2016.** Self-supply and accountability: to govern or not to govern groundwater for
563 the (peri-) urban poor in Accra, Ghana. Environ. Earth Sci. 75, p.1163

564 **Grothmann, T.and Reusswig F., 2006.** People at risk of flooding: Why some residents take
565 precautionary action while others do not. Natural Hazards 38(1–2):101–120.

566 **Helstrup T., Jorgensen N. O. and Banoeng-Yakubo, B., 2007.** Investigation of hydrochemical
567 characteristics of groundwater from the Cretaceous–Eocene limestone in southern and
568 southern Togo using hierarchical cluster analysis. Hydrogeology 15, p. 977–989.

569 **Hussain, M.S., Abd-Elhamid, H.F., Javadi, A.A. and Sherif, M.M., 2019.** Management of
570 Seawater Intrusion in Coastal Aquifers: A Review. Water 11(12):2467.

571 **IPCC, 2012.** Summary for policymakers. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken
572 DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen, SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM,
573 editors. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change
574 adaptation. A special report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on
575 Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 19 p.

576 **IPCC, 2021: Climate Change 2021.** The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group
577 I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
578 Change[Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N.
579 Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R.
580 Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)].
581 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, In
582 press, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.

583 **Kellens, W., Zaalberg, R., Neutens, T., Vanneuville, W. and De Maeyer, P., 2011.** An Analysis
584 of the Public Perception of Flood Risk on the Belgian Coast. Risk Analysis 31 (7), 1055-
585 1068.

586 **Kellens, W., Terpstra, T. and De Maeyer, P., 2013.** Perception and communication of flood
587 risks: A systematic review of empirical research. Risk Anal. 33, 24–49.

588 **Kempton, W., 1993.** Will public environmental concern lead to action on global warming?
589 Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 18, 117-145.

590 **Knocke, E.T. and Kolivras, K.N., 2007.** Flash flood awareness in southwest Virginia, Risk
591 Anal. 27, 155–169.

592 **Kortatsi B. K., 1994.** Groundwater utilization in Ghana. Future Groundwater Resources at Risk
593 (Proceedings of the Helsinki Conference). IAHS Publ. no. 222.

594 **Kreibich, H., Thieken, A.H., Petrow, T., Müller, M. and Merz, B., 2005.** Flood loss
595 reduction of private households due to building precautionary measures - lessons learned
596 from the Elbe flood in August 2002, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 5, 117–126.

597 **Kutir, C., Agblorti, S.K.M., and Benjamin B. Campion, B.B., 2022.** Migration and Estuarine
598 Land use/land cover (LULC) change along Ghana’s coast. Regional Studies in Marine
599 Science 54, 102488.

600 **Leiserowitz, A., 2006.** Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: the role of affect,
601 imagery, and values. Climatic Change, 77, 45-72.

602 **Lindell, M.K. and Hwang, S.N., 2008.** Households’ perceived personal risk and responses in a
603 multi-hazard environment. Risk Analysis 28(2), 539–556.

604 **Liddle, E.S., Mager, S.M., and Nel. E.L., 2015.** The suitability of shallow hand-dug wells for
605 safe water provision in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from Ndola Zambia. Appl. Geography.
606 57, pp.80-90.

607 **Louarn, A., 2020.** Vulnerability of coastal socio-ecosystems in West Africa: design of a survey
608 to analyse the role(s) of communities in erosion, submersion, salinisation and pollution
609 processes, 2020. M2 internship thesis.

610 **Lutterodt, G., Miyittah, M.K., Addy, B., Ansa, E.D.O. and Takase, M., 2021.** Groundwater
611 pollution assessment in a coastal aquifer in Cape Coast, Ghana. Heliyon 7(4), e06751.
612 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06751.

613 **Miceli, R., Sotgiu, I. and Settanni, M., 2008.** Disaster preparedness and perception of flood risk:
614 a study in an alpine valley in Italy, J. Environ. Psychol. 28 (2), 164–173.

615 **Mölter, T., Schindler, D., Albrecht, A. and Kohnle, U., 2016.** Review on the projections of
616 future storminess over the North Atlantic European region. Atmosphere, 7(4),
617 doi.org/10.3390/atmos7040060.

618 Morand, J-A, 2021. Statistical and geomatic analysis of perceptions of environmental change by
619 coastal communities in Senegal. M1 internship thesis. University of Savoie Mont-Blanc,
620 53p.

621 Mutimukuru-Maravanyika, T., Mills, D.J., Asare, C., Asiedu, G.A., 2017. Enhancing
622 women's participation in decision-making in artisanal fisheries in the Anlo Beach fishing
623 community, Ghana, Water resources and rural development 10, pp. 58-75.

624 Neumann, B., Vafeidis, A.T., Zimmermann, J. and Nicholls, R.J., 2015. Future coastal
625 population growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding - A global
626 assessment. PLOS ONE 10(3): e0118571.

627 Nicholls, R.J., Marinova, N., Lowe, J.A., Brown, S., Vellinga, P., de Gusmao, D., Hinkel, J.
628 and Tol, R.S., 2011. Sea-level rise and its possible impacts given a 'beyond 4°C world' in the
629 twenty-first century. Philos Trans A Math Phys Engineering and Science 369, 161–181.

630 O'Connor, R. E., Bord, R. J., and Fisher, A., 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental
631 beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis, 19, 461-471.

632 Okyere, I., 2015. Assessment of aquatic ecosystems, the fishery and socio-economics of a coastal
633 area in the Shama District, Ghana (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cape Coast).

634 Peacock, W.G., Brody, S.D. and Highfield, W., 2005. Hurricane risk perceptions among
635 Florida's single family homeowners. Landscape Urban Plan. 73, 120-135.

636 Peters, E., and Slovic, P., 1996. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions
637 in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
638 26(16), 1427-1453.

639 Ruz, M.-H., Rufin-Soler, C., Héquette, A., Révillon, R., Hellequin, A.-P., Deboudt, P.,
640 Herbert, V., Cohen, O., Lebreton, F., Le Goff, L., Schmitt, F.G., Marin, D., 2020. Climate
641 change and risk perceptions in two French coastal communities. In: Malvárez, G. and
642 Navas, F. (eds.), Proceedings from the International Coastal Symposium (ICS) 2020
643 (Seville, Spain). Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 95, pp. 875-879.

644 Savage, I. (1993). Demographic influences on risk perceptions. Risk Analysis, 13(4), 313-420.

645 Siegrist, M. and Gutscher, H., 2006. Flooding risks: a comparison of lay people's perceptions
646 and expert's assessments in Switzerland, Risk Anal. 26, 971–979.

647 Slovic, P., 1987. Perception of risk, Sci. New Ser. 236 (1987) 280–285.

648 Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichtenstein, S., 1984. Behavioral decision theory perspectives on
649 risk and safety, Acta Psychol. 56, 183–203.

650 Spalding, M., Mcivor, A., Tonneijck, F., Tol, S., and Eijk, P. V., 2014. Mangroves for coastal
651 defence. Guidelines for coastal managers & policymakers. Published by Wetlands
652 International and The Nature Conservancy. 42 p

653 Steg, L. and Sievers, I., 2000. Cultural theory and individual perceptions of environmental risks.
654 *Environment and Behavior* 32, 250–269.

655 Takao, K., Motoyoshi, K, T., Sato, T. and Fukuzono, T., 2004. Factors determining residents'
656 preparedness for floods in modern megalopolises: the case of the Tokai flood disaster in
657 Japan, J. Risk Res. 7 (2004) 775–787.

658 Wildavsky, A. and Dake, K., 1990. Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why? J.
659 Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 119, 41–60.

660 **Wachinger, G.**, **Renn, O.**, **Begg, C.** and **Kuhlicke, C.**, 2013. The risk perception paradox – implications for governance and communication of natural hazards, Risk Anal. 33, 1049–1065.

661
662
663 **Wisner, B.**, **Blaikie, P.**, **Cannon, T.**, and **Davis, I.**, 2004. At-risk. Natural hazards, people's vulnerability and disasters, Routledge, London, 471 pp.

665

666

667

668