Stabilizing the Edge: Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic Shorescapes Facing Sea-Level Rise

Adapting to sea-level rise will require measures that improve federal, state, and local governance mechanisms, management practices, and property owner behavior affecting the coastal zone. This Article arises out of an interdisciplinary research project funded by the National Science Foundation entitled Sustainability in Chesapeake Shorescapes: Climate Change, Management Decisions, and Ecological Functions, led by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science at William & Mary. As legal experts involved with the project, we have analyzed ocean-facing and estuarine protection laws from Florida to Delaware. To the authors’ knowledge, no such comprehensive overview or comparison of these shorescape protection, setback, and stabilization laws exists, and necessary adaptation will require a comprehensive understanding of these frameworks. Our analysis revealed important distinctions between how we manage ocean-facing and estuarine-facing shorelines as well as a wide variety of values and interests driving them. The Article found, for example, that the majority of ocean-facing shore protection laws in the study area have established jurisdictional lines designed based on erosion rates, but a trend towards “freezing” the most oceanward jurisdictional baselines is occurring, suggesting that rising sea-levels and increased flooding may create pressure to “hold the line” when more dynamic and adaptive responses are needed. Meanwhile, the estuarine protection laws analyzed define jurisdictional lines that measure pre-determined buffer widths from natural features. More dynamic boundary determinations for these areas using erosion rates and sea-level rise projections will be required, however, as some estuarine areas are more at risk from sea-level rise than ocean-facing areas. The Article also found that armored shorelines (e.g., seawalls and bulkheads) are almost always held to a lesser standard throughout our study area than nature-based living shorelines, even though living shoreline projects are more adaptive. In the same vein, while shoreline armoring is often cited as a management concern, the importance of uniformity is woven also throughout shore protection law and policy in the study area, with “gap-filling” and “shoreline alignment” policies furthering shoreline hardening. Finally, incorporating information into the regulatory framework is an important way to improve coastal decision-making, advance cooperative federalism, and further a more holistic, “shorescape” approach to shoreline management. Integrating the jurisdictional boundaries described in this Article with science-based modeling efforts – efforts that incorporate factors such as shoreline characteristics, shoreline change, sea-level rise projections, marsh migration projections, population projections, and demographics – would greatly further understanding of how existing regulatory frameworks may need to adapt to protect habitat, property, and human life. The Article discusses how such an approach is possible, and how the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) is a promising vehicle to build upon in order to implement a shorescape approach. A shorescape approach informed by spatial analysis and modeling also would advance more dynamic cooperative federalism, as it would allow for improved communication among different levels of jurisdictions, interjurisdictional coordination, and future scenarios planning to inform a more robust discussion of trade-offs and examination of competing goals. Ultimately, the Article fills an important research gap in the existing climate change and coastal management literature, as it sets the stage for incorporating interdisciplinary findings from coastal science and social science research with legal and policy mechanisms to inform coastal zone management.