metadata: authors: 0: author: Islam,Md. Saiful
1: author: Huq,Mainul
2: author: Khan,Zahirul Huque
3: author: Hasib,Md. Raqubul
4: author: Dasgupta,Susmita
count: Bangladesh
docna: 0: docna: Mangroves as protection from storm surges in Bangladesh
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: Hydrology,Inequality,Climate and Meteorology,Natural Disasters
teratopic: Social Development,Conflict and Development,Urban Development
abstracts: cdata!: Mangrove forests can reduce the
            vulnerability of adjacent coastal lands from storm surges by
            slowing the flow of water. Although the potential utility of
            mangroves in disaster risk reduction is increasingly
            recognized by coastal managers, efficient use of this
            ecosystem-based protection is often hindered by the scarcity
            of location-specific information on the protective capacity
            of mangroves. This paper evaluates that capacity in seven
            coastal locations of Bangladesh, where surge heights can
            range from 1.5 to 9 meters. Estimates confirm varying levels
            of protection from different species, width, and density of
            mangrove forests. The findings highlight that mangroves must
            be used along with built infrastructure such as embankments.
            However, mangroves in the foreshore of embankments will
            contribute to savings in maintenance costs by protecting the
            built infrastructure from breaching and other damages.
geo_reg_key: 517198,517191,517212
repnme: repnme: Mangroves as protection from storm surges
            in Bangladesh
display_title: Mangroves as protection from storm
            surges in Bangladesh
listing_relative_url: /research/2017/11/28206989/mangroves-protection-storm-surges-bangladesh
topicv3: Water m1326522 137,Poverty m1326687 695,Tsunami m1503625 3160,Cyclone m1503642 3178,Erosion m1503662 3202
publishtoextweb_dt: 2017-11-21T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: Social Development,Conflict and Development,Urban Development
no_of_pages: 33
author_keys: 0: author_key: 1009680
1: author_key: 95595
2: author_key: 95558
model_extractions: WPS8251 Policy Research Working Paper 8251

# Mangroves as Protection from Storm Surges in Bangladesh

_Susmita Dasgupta Md. Saiful Islam Mainul Huq Zahirul Huque Khan Md. Raqubul Hasib_ Development Research Group Environment and Energy Team November 2017
Policy Research Working Paper 8251

# **Abstract**

Mangrove forests can reduce the vulnerability of adjacent coastal lands from storm surges by slowing the flow of water. Although the potential utility of mangroves in disaster risk reduction is increasingly recognized by coastal managers, efficient use of this ecosystem-based protection is often hindered by the scarcity of location-specific information on the protective capacity of mangroves. This paper evaluates that capacity in seven coastal locations of Bangladesh, where surge heights can range from 1.5 to 9 meters. Estimates confirm varying levels of protection from different species, width, and density of mangrove forests. The findings highlight that mangroves must be used along with built infrastructure such as embankments. However, mangroves in the foreshore of embankments will contribute to savings in maintenance costs by protecting the built infrastructure from breaching and other damages.

This paper is a product of the Environment and Energy Team, Development Research Group. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org. The authors may be contacted at sdasgupta@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
# **Mangroves as Protection from Storm Surges in Bangladesh**

Susmita Dasgupta* Lead Environmental Economist, Development Research Group, World Bank, United States Md. Saiful Islam Specialist, Coast, Port and Estuary Management Division, Institute of Water Modeling, Bangladesh Mainul Huq Consultant, World Bank, Bangladesh Zahirul Huque Khan Director, Coast, Port and Estuary Management Division, Institute of Water Modeling, Bangladesh Md. Raqubul Hasib Specialist, Coast, Port and Estuary Management Division, Institute of Water Modeling, Bangladesh October, 2017

## **This research was conducted under the South Asia Water Initiative - Sundarbans Landscape**

* Corresponding Author: Susmita Dasgupta. Email: sdasgupta@worldbank.org; Tele phone: 1-202-473-2679; Fax: 1-202-522-2714

## **JEL Classification:** Q54; Q57

We are thankful to Polly Means for her help with the graphics. We would also like to extend our special thanks to Md. Istiak Sobhan for his guidance on selection of mangrove species and Sharifuzzaman Choudhury for his help with the literature review. We are also grateful to Sunando Bandyopadhyay, Brian Blankespoor, Abedalrazq F. Khalil and Glenn Marie Lange for their useful comments and suggestions.

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.
# **1. Introduction**

In recent years, considerable attention has been given to the protective role of mangroves<sup>1</sup> and other coastal forests either alone or alongside built infrastructure against coastal hazards.<sup>2</sup> The evidence that mangroves may shelter coastal communities and assets from coastal erosion, wind and swell waves, cyclones, etc. is well known in tropical coastal ecology and the potential utility of mangroves as a tool in disaster risk reduction is increasingly recognized by coastal managers (Chapman, 1976; UNEP-WCMC, 2006; Doney et al. 2012; McIvor et al 2012a; McIvor et al. 2012b; Waite et al. 2014). Numerous modeling and mathematical studies have shown that mangrove forests can attenuate the height of waves as well as water flow velocity (Brinkman et al., 1997, Mazda et al. 1997, 2006; Massel et al., 1999; Quartel et al., 2007, Barbier et al. 2008, Gedan et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2012; McIvor et al. 2013; Liu et al. 2013; Pinsky et al. 2013). These studies also indicate that the extent of protection from mangroves strongly depends on a number of characteristics of the forest: density, diameter of trunks and roots, floor shape, bathymetry, as well as spectral characteristics of the waves, and the tidal stage at which waves enter the forest. In order to maximize the potential of mangrove forests to act as bioshields to protect 1 Mangroves are salt-tolerant evergreen forests found along sheltered coastlines, shallow-water lagoons, estuaries, rivers or deltas in 124 tropical and subtropical countries and areas (Tomlinson 1986; Ellison and Stoddart 1991). A “mangrove” has been defined as a “tree, shrub, palm or ground fern, generally exceeding more than half a meter in height, and which normally grows above mean sea level in the intertidal zones or marine coastal environments, or estuarine margins” (Duke 1992). The term ‘mangrove’ describes both the ecosystem and the plant families that have developed specialized adaptations to live in this tidal environment. The mangrove ecosystem represents an interface between terrestrial and marine communities, which receive a daily input of water from the ocean (tides) and freshwater, sediments, nutrients and silt deposits from upland rivers. Mangroves may grow as trees or shrubs according to the climate, salinity of water, topography and edaphic features of the area in which they exist.

2 Mangroves as a natural infrastructure has received increased attention in the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

2
people and other assets from coastal hazards, additional location-specific research is necessary to design and manage these coastal forests. This paper is a step forward in that direction.

This paper evaluates the effect of different species of mangroves, density of trees and width of mangrove forests on cyclone-induced surge height and water flow velocity in coastal Bangladesh.<sup>3</sup> First, location-specific analysis was undertaken to short-list suitable mangrove species for three coastal segments prone to cyclones. Second, the hydrodynamic model for the Bay of Bengal, based on the MIKE21FM modeling system, was run multiple times to simulate the devastating cyclone Sidr that made landfall in Bangladesh in 2007 at the Barisal coast. Third, estimates of surge height and water flow velocity were recorded for different widths of mangroves under different density of planting using specific information on local topography, bathymetry, and root and trunk systems of mangrove species. The analysis is based on estimation of resistance of water flow from mangroves based on field measurements of root and trunk systems.

Bangladesh provides an exemplary backdrop for investigation of coastal protection from mangroves during cyclones, as Bangladesh is the world’s most vulnerable country to tropical cyclones (UNDP 2004). Bangladesh was hit by 48 severe cyclonic storms and 49 cyclonic storms between 1877 and 2016, 20 of which recorded hurricane wind speeds during the more recent period of 1966-2016.<sup>4</sup> On average, a severe cyclone strikes the country every three years (GoB 2009) and records indicate that the greatest damage during cyclones resulted from the inundation caused by cyclone-induced storm surges.<sup>5</sup> Though time-series records of storm-surge 3 Some researchers who are skeptical about the ability of mangroves to protect against tsunamis have noted that mangroves might be more capable of protecting against tropical storm surges (Kerr and Baird 2007; Chatenoux and Peduzzi, 2007).

4 Tropical storms are classified as severe cyclonic storms with hurricane wind speed (wind speed over 118 km per hour), severe cyclonic (89–117 km per hour), cyclonic (62–88 km per hour), deep depression (52– 61 km per hour), and depression (40–51 km per hour) based on the observed maximum sustained surface wind speed measured at a height of 10 m averaged over 3 minutes, (IWM 2009).

5 For details on major cyclones that crossed Bangladesh from 1960 to 2009, see Dasgupta et al., _Vulnerability of Bangladesh to Cyclones in a Changing Climate: Potential Damages and Adaptation Cost_ , Appendices 2 and 3. World Bank, Washington, DC (2010).

3
<!-- Start of picture text --> RRRASi<br>© | 4pataHa on OF ce no HESa LP ne mS $e Rihoeke!<br>oe vila = yi B: eae/<br>fy 3/\ 8 ok a Vy ex<br>; . se é EY<br>‘ | Jf ans ;<br>| > # wg pow y, Vi Vf Cox's BAZAR<br>Lea = if As if ee |<br>ve ) Ly eo |<br>iF i Af 11 yr |<br>we 2<br>3 LH CYL S/, i<br>i & ‘ & oe Fs y. J 3/8 Our<br>g 345000 380000WF [4 AAS MA P/M =)<br>8 : LF) Or 450000 on # ion 555000 590000 Bee00<br><!-- End of picture text -->
In the early 1960s and 1970s, and in recent years, 139 polders, of which 49 were sea facing, were constructed in Bangladesh to protect low-lying coastal areas against tidal flood and salinity intrusion, and to some extent from storm surges during cyclones. In recent years, potential impacts of sea-level rise have become a major concern for the Government of Bangladesh in light of climate change. The government in collaboration with the World Bank has initiated a Coastal Embankment Improvement project for enhancing the height of 17 selected polders in the southwest coastal region where polder heights were low and cyclone strikes were relatively infrequent in the past but where it has increased in recent years. This study was undertaken to develop a basis for the necessary engineering judgement in designing this forest cover for various segments of the foreshore of polders, with the expectation that mangroves will attenuate surge, wave and water velocity during cyclones, and complement the height of embankments as part of the coastal protection infrastructure.

The findings emphasize that the presence of mangroves does attenuate surge heights and water flow velocity, but the level of attenuation is location specific, depending on the mangrove species, width of the mangrove strip as well as on the density of mangroves. Estimates further indicate, although likely surge height reduction is from 4 cm to 16.5 cm from a 50m to 2km wide mangrove strip, the water flow velocity is likely to reduce by 29% to 92% from 50m or 100m wide mangrove forests of _Sonneratia apetala_ and _Avicennia officinalis_ . At the outset, it should be noted that we have not estimated the extent of attenuation of wind waves from mangroves during cyclones in this paper; modeling of wind waves should be addressed in future research. Estimates of resistance to water flow from different species of mangroves at different densities of planting are major contributions of this paper to the literature on disaster risk management.

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: section 2 presents the study area; section 3 describes the methodology including selection of suitable mangrove species and hydraulic modeling and simulation; section 4 presents the estimates of attenuation of storm surge and water velocity with a brief discussion; and section 5 presents the conclusions of this study.

5
# **2. Study Area**

Upon consultation with experts from Bangladesh, three areas were selected for analysis: (i) the foreshore of polder 35/1 (ii) land area adjacent to Polder 40/2, and (iii) a location at the southern foreshore of the Polder 40/1 in the Sundarbans and the Central coast of Bangladesh.<sup>8</sup> These study areas were selected considering their vulnerability to storm surge and tidal characteristics, such as mud flat accretion/erosion and availability of adequate mangrove afforestation area in the foreshore of the coastal polders. The study areas are in Bagerhat and Borguna districts where the incidence of poverty is high and natural disasters, especially recurrent cyclones in recent years, have been cited as a major reason behind the poverty.<sup>9</sup> As cyclones can make landfall anywhere and it is not possible to predict a future cyclone track with certainty, our analysis covered severe cyclone SIDR (2007) and seven sites selected in the three aforementioned study areas. Table 1 presents a few key characteristics of the study areas and Figure 2 displays the study sites.

> 8 Sundarbans coast and central coast of Bangladesh were struck by 10 severe cyclones and cyclones during 1960-2016. Records indicate an increase in the frequency of severe cyclones striking the region over time. Cyclone Sidr in 2007, cyclone Rashmi in 2008 and cyclone Aila in 2009 are examples of recent devastating cyclones.

> 9 The poverty maps developed by the Bangladesh Bureau of statistics, World Food Program and the World Bank estimates total poverty population with food expenditures are at or below the food poverty line established by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics for Bagerhat and Barguna districts are 619,480 and 168,098 respectively in 2011. These numbers include extremely poor households who do not meet the basic needs of food expenditure World Bank (2014a, b).

6
<!-- Start of picture text --> 450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 520000 530000<br>8 €: : Ns Sane X ¥ 4 ee y Legend 3<br>Ske . LAA KathaliaBetag: _ study Site 3<br>arches pak, Re wr Sy 4 y = Selected Districts<br>i poe:siege teecteat Souicatentenbesbcheahy Sire dae Ne, y J « UpazilaHQ<br>a8 {ort es WP e eSS ae eaeoe Khontakata, /f 4 MN BS | .. DistrictUnion_HQ HQ ba3<br>+ RS Bee ees yf q R Coastal Upazila F®<br>Ses = SascanS can ff Bamna Coastal District =<br>ee” Core So | = Coastal Polder<br>are ea «=a /G Sette ae 7 i } « River System<br>St raeeee a miteSes ‘iteoe Sate,SSN Wian MineSSS Sameis |PS Kenta Tat i ile é we) xAmtali +<br>oh. OS Me Nf gai... Pathaigh 4 “ee SV |s<br>+ | Study Site-2 q ie SO ae q _) Study Area-3 C . NO +<br>450000 460000 470000 480000 490000 500000 510000 520000 530000<br><!-- End of picture text -->
# **3. Hydrodynamic model set up, selection of mangrove species and estimation of resistance to water flow**

To understand the protective role of mangroves, a hydrodynamic model was set up and updated with location-specific data to represent the coastal as well as estuarine features of the study areas. Cyclonic wind field and pressure field information generated from historic cyclone data were added to the hydrodynamic model for developing the Storm Surge Model **_._** Upon consultation with the local experts and after conducting focus group discussions with local inhabitants, various species of mangroves were short-listed for each study area considering their economic value and survivability in the study sites in the location-specific tidal characteristics and water salinity. Manning’s Numbers (M)<sup>10</sup> were computed for short-listed mangrove species taking into account the physical characteristics of the mangrove trees. These Manning’s Numbers served as estimates of resistance to the flow of water from the mangrove trees while passing through the forest. Further details on the process are described below.

# _<u>Setup of the hydrodynamic water flow model and development of the cyclone model</u>_

The hydrodynamic model for Bay of Bengal was upgraded with conversion of structured computational grid (MIKE 21Classic) to a flexible mesh system (MIKE 21FM) to enhance the resolution of the grids around islands, along coastline and other areas of interest.<sup>11</sup> See Figure 3 for the updated Bay of Bengal model. The area covered by the model starts from Baruria on the Padma River down to 16<sup>0</sup> north latitudes in the Bay of Bengal. Three open boundaries were defined in the model, two in the north defined by the daily discharge time series of river water: one in the Padma River at Baruria, and another one in the Upper Meghna River at Bhairab; and

> 10 Inverse of Manning’s roughness coefficient, n.

> 11 For example, quadrangular/rectangular mashes were generated in the straight stretch of a channel and triangular mashes were generated where reaches were meandering. Both quadrangular and triangular mashes were generated to assess the effect of inter tidal area.

8
<!-- Start of picture text -->
[m]<br>Baruria _—-Bheiseb Bazar<br>600000 ~<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 500000 re ya a<br>400000 __-f\, }SI sO<br>, = — Bathymetry [m]<br>300000 }) HM Above 20<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 200000 ; f a ieme 10-(o- 20610<br>E . {|} 6- 0<br>100000; =}& D>( =MM 10-15--20- -10-155<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> of y Bay of Bengal ’ Mm -50- -25<br>-100000 <4" j —MM -1000--500--200- -200-500-50<br>: HB -2000 - -1000<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> “ p HE -3000 - -2500<br>HE Below -3000<br>-300000 | Undefined Valu¢<br>-200000 0 200000 400000 600000 800000<br>[m]<br><!-- End of picture text -->
Islands and shorelines were delineated using recent Google Images. The bathymetry of the hydrodynamic model was updated using secondary data from different sources, including the surveyed river bathymetry data from the IWM, Ocean bathymetry data (C-Map from the IWM). Setback distances of the polders in the study regions were measured; and the shorelines of different segments of the study area were developed based on the foreshore areas.

To generate the storm surge model, cyclonic wind and pressure field were added to the hydrodynamic model as inputs of meteorological parameters. Historic cyclone data on (i) radius of maximum wind, (ii) maximum wind speed, (iii) cyclone track forward speed and direction, (iv) central pressure and (v) natural pressure from the Bangladesh Meteorological Department were used to estimate the cyclonic wind field and pressure. Holland Single Vortex theory was applied to generate the cyclonic wind field (Holland 1980). The generated cyclonic wind and pressure fields for the cyclone track were then used in the hydrodynamic model to simulate the cyclonic storm surges.

Figure 4 describes the setup of the mathematical model and describes how storm surge heights were estimated for this analysis.

**Figure 4: Mathematical Model Setup**

<!-- Start of picture text --> MATHMATICAL MODEL SETUP<br>STORM SURGE<br>WAVE MODEL<br>MODEL<br>Model grid<br>Hydrodynamic<br>Boundary condition Cyclone model<br>model<br>Bed resistance<br>Hydrodynamic<br>model<br>+<br>Cyclonic wind field<br><!-- End of picture text --> 10
# _<u>Selection of mangrove species</u>_

High-resolution maps of the distribution of mangrove species from the Department of Forests, Government of Bangladesh have identified 20 mangrove species in coastal Bangladesh.<sup>13</sup> However, tidal characteristics and salinity tolerance ranges of these mangrove species are widely different. Since survival of mangroves is critical for coastal protection, selection of mangrove species took into account the tidal characteristics as well as salinity tolerance of various mangrove species (Dasgupta, Sobhan and Wheeler 2017) and water salinity<sup>14</sup> in the study sites. Upon consultation with ecologists, seven mangrove species: _Avicennia officinalis, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, Ceriops decandra, Exoecaria agallocha, Heritiera fomes, Sonneratia apetala and Xylocarpus granatum_ - which are likely to survive in the current water salinity - were short-listed. It was noted that _Avicennia officinalis_ and _Sonneratia apetala_ are likely to colonize only mudflats in newly-emergent areas where sedimentation is still ongoing, and _Ceriops decandra, Exoecaria agallocha, Heritiera fomes_ are likely choices for the intertidal surfaces higher than newlyemergent areas. Subsequently, field visits were made to identify mangrove species common in the study areas. Finally, local inhabitants evaluated their familiarity with the various mangrove species, the direct use value of the mangrove species and their interest in preserving the species on a 1 to 5 scale. The final choice of location-specific mangrove species is provided below: Study area 1: _Sonneratia apetala, Avicennia officinalis_ Study area 2: _Sonneratia apetala, Avicennia officinalis_ Study area 3: _Sonneratia apetala, Avicennia officinalis, Heritiera fomes, Exoecaria agallocha, Ceriops decandra_

> 13 These include: _Acanthus ilicifolius, Acrostichum auereum, Aegialitis rotundifolia, Aegiceras corniculatum, Avicennia alba, Avicennia marina, Avicennia officinalis, Bruguiera gymnorhiza,  Bruguiera sexangula,, Ceriops decandra, Ceriops tagal, Exoecaria agallocha, Exoecaria indica, Heritiera fomes, Kandelia candel, Rhizophora apiculate, Rhizophora mucronata, Sonneratia apetala, Sonneratia caseolari and Xylocarpus granatum_ .

> 14 See the River Salinity Information System at

<u>http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/index.cfm?page=websalinity_dynamics&ThisRegion=Asia& ThisCcode=BGD Accessed April 2017</u> .

11
# _<u>Estimation of resistance to water flow from field measurements</u>_

Understanding the resistance of water flow over surfaces is critical for simulation of cyclone-induced surges as well as for estimation of water flow velocity. Friction between the fluid and a surface is generally represented by Manning’s Number (M). Manning’s Numbers for the Bay of Bengal Model domain for different depths of water are presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Manning Number distribution in the Bay of Bengal Model domain

|Areas with depths|Manning’s number, M (m<sup>1/3</sup>/s)|
|---|---|
|Less than -20 m|32|
|-20 to -15 m|60|
|-15 to -10 m|65|
|-10 to -5 m|90|
|-5 to 0.46 m|100|

Source: IWM, 2013 As expected, Table 2 indicates resistance to water flow increases with reduction in water depth.

Scientific literature to date emphasizes that mangroves can substantially reduce the vulnerability of adjacent coastal lands from storm surges, as the flow of water through the mangrove forest is obstructed by the matrix of roots/trunks and leaves of the mangrove trees. In order to estimate the resistance of water flow from various mangrove species, field visits were made to measure the diameter of the trunks, diameter of the roots and height of the roots from the ground level for each mangrove species short-listed for this analysis<sup>15</sup> (see Table 3). During field visits, the distance between mature plants was measured and local experts were consulted on feasible density of planting and spacing between trees.

> 15 The impact of leaves has not been considered in this analysis.

12
Field measurement of the trunk system of _Sonneratia apetala_ by the study team Field measurement of roots of _Avicennia officinalis_ by the study team

**Table 3: Field data on characteristics of mangrove species**

|Mangrove species|Trunk<br>diameter (m)|Root<br>diameter (m)|Root height from existing<br>ground level (m)|
|---|---|---|---|
|_Sonneratia apetala_|0.51|0.15|1.04|
|_Avicennia officinalis_|0.32|0.05|0.23|
|_Heritiera fomes_|0.5|0.05|0.28|
|_Excoecaria agallocha_|0.3|0.08|0.33|
|_Ceriops decandra_|0.3|0.05|0.3|

The Manning’s Numbers of different mangrove species for different water levels were then estimated first for their root systems (see Table 4, Column 3) and then combining with that of the trunk systems for alternative spacing between trees (see Table 4, Columns 4-6).

13
# **Table 4: Bed resistance (Manning Roughness) for root and trunk system of selected mangrove species**

|Water|||Manning’s|Number,M<br>||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Depth (m)||Root System||Root+Trunk Syste<br>|m<br>|
||||5m Spacing|7.5m Spacing|10m Spacing|
|10|_Sonneratia_|18.24|6.27|8.78|10.78|
|5|_apetala_|16.4|8.91|11.42|12.98|
|2.5||13.9|10.7|12.15|12.81|
||||4m Spacing|6m Spacing|8m Spacing|
|10|_Aii_|26.1|6.53|9.44|11.99|
|5|_vcenna_<br>_officinalis_|25.3|9.86|13.56|16.34|
|2.5||23.8|13.83|17.4|19.49|
||||5m Spacing|7m Spacing|10m Spacing|
|10|_Heritiera_|25.10|6.52|9.39|11.89|
|5|_fomes_|24.11|9.79|13.37|16.01|
|2.5||22.50|13.56|16.87|18.76|
|10|_Ei_|24.24|7.97|11.22|13.85|
|5|_xcoecara_<br>_llh_|23.14|11.59|15.17|17.51|
|2.5|_agaoca_|21.41|15.08|17.78|19.12|
|10|_Ci_|24.70|8.22|11.55|14.25|
|5|_erops_<br>_decandra_|23.70|11.94|15.61|18.00|
|2.5||22.00|15.55|18.32|19.70|

Table 4 documents changes in Manning’s coefficients with changes in density of planting of different mangrove species for different water depths. As expected, the estimates confirm that resistance to water flowing through mangroves varies with mangrove species, density of trees, as well as depth of water. Once again, our estimates of the Manning’s coefficients confirm that resistance to water flow by mangroves decreases with increase in the depth of water. Among the mangrove species short-listed for this analysis, irrespective of water depth, _Sonneratia apetala_ causes maximum hindrance, followed by relatively similar resistance from _Avicennia officinalis_ and _Heritiera fomes._ Estimates further indicate that resistance from _Excoecaria agallocha_ exceeds that of _Ceriops decandra_ for all water depths considered in our analysis. As expected, resistance to water flow increases with increase in density of planting. However, density of planting or the minimum spacing between trees depends on the trunk/branch structures of the 14
mangrove species. Field observations considering minimum distance between mature trees conclude that planting of _Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing, _Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and _Heritiera fomes, Excoecaria agallocha, Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing in the study regions are feasible and will yield the best resistance to water flow through the mangroves.

# **4. Simulations of Cyclones and Findings**

Mangrove creates resistance and reduces the surge height and flow velocity of water by providing drag force against the incoming tidal energy. The passage of surge was modeled numerically with the upgraded Bay of Bengal model for estimation of the surge height and water flow velocity in our analysis. To start, cyclone Sidr<sup>16</sup> with a maximum wind speed of 248 kph, maximum wind radius of 64km, central pressure of 928 hPa, normal pressure of 1009 hPa was simulated <u>without mangroves with only the already existing polders to capture the current</u> condition. For investigation of the impacts of mangroves on surge height and water flow velocity, potential mangrove afforestation areas were then defined and overlaid along the river/ seafacing shoreline of the study areas. The model was calibrated at Hiron Point where there is an automated water level gauge maintained by Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Authority. Figure 5 presents the calibration plot. Cyclone Sidr was then simulated again with the mangrove <u>forest. For each location, the storm surge model for cyclone Sidr was carried out for a range of</u> width and density of afforestation of different short-listed mangrove species, recording the resulting surge height, and water flow velocity. <u>Finally, the optimum set of afforestation</u> parameters: species, width and density based on the simulation results were reported.

> 16 During Sidr (2007), radius of maximum wind 64km, maximum wind speed 248 kph, central pressure 928 hPa, normal pressure 1009 hPa were recorded.

15
<!-- Start of picture text -->
[m]<br>550000<br>540000 \ A<br>530000 \ x : -<br>520000 dg } ; S = ;<br>510000 { Ss i<br>\<br>500000 : (as \ § on a,<br>490000 ¢ . 4 Ce 9) ‘on SS$5 .<br>LS 4 vy<br>480000 S > “io af “~ YC |<br>© 470000 P .¢« SY5 " ;<br>#20000 " : 9} » p | /<br>Lad<br>450000 BGS / } | ‘ $)<br>440000 ?, KZ j (Ve<br>< -<br>430000420000 ¢\Hiro y$ } hd ey, 1D)<br>410000 ¢ y °0)<br>400000 ?.<br>390000 [> Bay of Bengal<br>400000 420000 + 440000 «= 460000» 480000 += 500000» 520000 540000 560000 = 580000» 600000<br>Northing (m) [m]<br>Scale 1:984900<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> Measured Water Level at Hiron Point [m] ————<br>Simulated Water Level atHiron Point(m] « #<br>Simulated Water Level at Hiron Point during Cyclone SIDR (2007)<br>2.6<br>24<br>2.2<br>2.0 iv<br>1.8 ;<br>8 1.6<br>£ 1.4<br>=z 12<br>8 1.0<br>5 08<br>kj<br>= 06<br>0.4<br>0.2 1<br>0.0<br>-0.20.4 }'<br>00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00<br>2007-11-13 41-14 11-15 Time 11-16 11-17<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 475000 478000 481000 484000 487000 490000<br>S8 i5<br>Polder 35/1<br>, Average Setback<br>Distance 50 to70m<br>a3.g Length of 8-<br>Afforestation 20 km |<br>Legend<br>8 ® Surge Level Extraction Locations 8<br>Fy Afforestation Width re i8<br>mm 50m- Sonneratia apetala &<br>50m- Avicennia officinalis (ae<br>g<br>ao<br>A Fa 3<br>$ fea)<br>o<br>re<br>Hl & 2<br>3 so: 3<br>Ww ; N E a<br>a Ss oe<br>— a Km Bogi link ——— i<br>475000 478000 481000 484000 487000aa490000<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text --> 490000 491500 493000 494500 496000 497500 499000<br>3 DistanceAverage Setback100-150m<br>H - AfforestationLength of11 km rE<br>H Polder 40/2 FYs<br>8) ‘ \3<br>3 3<br>Legend<br>® Surge Level Extraction Locations<br>8 Afforestation width 8<br>3] mm 50m-Sonneratia apetala ig<br>50m-Avicennia officinalis<br>8 le<br>1 3 3<br>2 //<br>|<br>bo = |<br>s Zz ogo s<br>5a 8<br>|<br>N<br>| : 4<br>3 QO: ig<br>3 s i<br>km SB<br>490000 491500 493000 494500 496000 497500Wate: Envronment& Cirvate499000|<br><!-- End of picture text -->
<!-- Start of picture text --> 490000 492000 494000 496000 498000 500000<br>Map Showing different Mangrove Species with differen afforestation width at Study Area-3<br>g3 —L _ Cyclone SIDR Track % g3<br>2 bE,<br>% Sy.<br>g % -3 g<br>a o CE<br>% ) 5<br>co N Q o<br>s 4<br>6<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 87A7<br>Legend<br>3 oO Surge Level Analysis Location $<br>7T v<br>—— Cyclone SIDR Track<br>Different Mangrove Afforestation Width<br>3| Mil 50m-Sonneratia apetala 3<br>§ 50m-Avicennia officinalis §<br>MH 100m-Heritiera fomes<br>| 500m-Excoecaria agallocha<br>8| Mill 500m- Ceriops decandra OWL e<br>* 1000m- Samnea saman Bay of Bengal Sw S |*<br>490000 492000 494000 496000 498000 500000<br><!-- End of picture text -->
|||**Site 1**||**Site 2**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|||Attenuation of||Attenuation of|
|Scenario|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|<br>surge height from<br>the baseline(cm)|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|<br>surge height from<br>the baseline(cm)|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 5m spacing<br>followed by 50m_Avicennia officinalis_at<br>6m spacing|4.002|5.151|4.159|5.219|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 7.5m<br>spacing followed by 50m_Avicennia_<br>_officinalis_at 4m spacing|4.002|5.140|4.160|5.177|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 7.5m<br>spacing followed by 50m_Avicennia_<br>_officinalis_at 6m spacing|4.003|5.100|4.160|5.150|

Table 5A: Attenuation of surge heights from afforestation of mangrove species in Study Area 2

|||<br>**Site 3**||<br>**Site 4**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|||Attti f||Attti f|
|Scenarios|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|enuaon o<br>surge height from<br>the baseline(cm)|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|enuaon o<br>surge height from<br>the baseline(cm)|
|Baseline: without mangroves|**4.223**||**4.238**||
|Only 50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 5m<br>spacing|4.176|4.677|4.188|4.981|
|Only 50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 7.5m<br>spacing|4.177|4.603|4.189|4.889|
|Only 50m_with Avicennia officinalis_at<br>4m spacing|4.177|4.619|4.189|4.912|
|Only 50m_with Avicennia officinalis_at<br>6m spacing|4.177|4.589|4.191|4.739|

19
|||**Site 3**||**Site 4**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|Scenarios|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|Attenuation of<br>surge height from<br>the baseline (cm)|Surge Level<br>(m PWD)|Attenuation of<br>surge height from<br>the baseline (cm)|
|50m_Sonneratia apeta_at 5m spacing<br>followed by 50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>at 4m spacing|4.168|5.484|4.181|5.696|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing<br>followed by 50m_Avicennia officinalis_at<br>6m spacing|4.169|5.359|4.182|5.652|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 7.5m<br>spacing followed by 50m_Avicennia_<br>_officinalis_at 4m spacing|4.170|5.330|4.182|5.624|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_at 7.5m<br>spacing followed by 50m_Avicennia_<br>_officinalis_at 6m spacing|4.170|5.320|4.182|5.584|

Table 5C: Attenuation of surge heights from afforestation of mangrove species at 5m spacing in <u>Study Area 3</u>

|||**Site 5**<br>Attti||**Site 6**<br>Attti||**Site 7**<br>Attti|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Scenario|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|enuaon<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|enuaon<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|enuaon<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|
|Baseline: without mangroves|**4.440**||**4.527**||**4.646**||
|Only50m_Sonneratia apetala_|4.384|5.588|4.471|5.620|4.583|6.347|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>_+_50m_Avicennia officinalis_|4.367|7.282|4.454|7.308|4.574|7.214|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>+100m_Heritierafomes_|4.358|8.203|4.440|8.776|4.564|8.260|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>+100m_Excoecaria agallocha_|4.358|8.188|4.440|8.759|4.564|8.250|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>+100m_Ceriops decandra_|4.359|8.127|4.440|8.746|4.565|8.146|

20
|||**Site 5**||**Site 6**||**Site 7**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Scenario|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|Attenuation<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|Attenuation<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|Surge<br>Level<br>(m<br>PWD)|Attenuation<br>of surge<br>height from<br>the baseline<br>(cm)|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>+500m_Ceriops decandra_|4.339|10.130|4.398|12.948|4.541|10.527|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia officinalis_<br>+1000m_Ceriops decandra_|4.325|11.483|4.377|15.000|4.546|10.056|
|50m_Sonneratia apetala_<br>+50m_Avicennia_ _officinalis_<br>+2000m_Ceriops decandra_|4.297|14.329|4.350|17.752|4.481|16.476|

# <u>Reductions in water flow velocity from afforestation of mangrove species</u>

Study Area 1: Site 1 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.624 m/s Study Area 1: Site 2 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.593m/s Study Area 2: Site 3 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.687m/s Study Area 2: Site 4 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.651m/s <!-- Start of picture text --> Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4<br>85% 84% 85% 84% 50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 7.5m spacing followed by<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 6m spacing<br>86% 86% 87% 87% 50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 7.5m spacing followed by<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 4m spacing<br>85% 87% 85% 89% 50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 5m spacing followed by<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 6m spacing<br>90% 91% 89% 92% 50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 5m spacing followed by<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 4m spacing<br>29% 42% 29% 32%<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 6m spacing<br>32% 44% 30% 42%<br>50 m width of Avicennia officinalis at 4m spacing<br>31% 42% 29% 38%<br>50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 7.5m spacing<br>34% 46% 33% 46%<br>50 m width of Sonneratia apetala at 5m spacing<br><!-- End of picture text --> 21
Study Area 3: <u>Site 5 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.618m/s Site 6 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.987m/s Site 7 Water flow velocity of Sidr (2007): 0.709m/s</u>

|**Site 5**|**Site 6**|**Site 7**||
|---|---|---|---|
|**67%**|**68%**|**78%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**2000 m width of****_Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing**|
|**65%**|**66%**|**69%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**1000 m width of****_Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing**|
|**63%**|**63%**|**60%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**500 m width of****_Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing**|
|**61%**|**60%**|**56%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**100 m width of****_Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing**|
|**61%**|**60%**|**56%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**100 m width of****_Excoecaria agallocha_ at 5m spacing**|
|**62%**|**61%**|**57%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and**<br>**100 m width of****_Heritiera fomes_ at 5m spacing**|
|**57%**|**59%**|**54%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 7.5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 6m spacing**|
|**57%**|**59%**|**54%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 7.5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing**|
|**57%**|**59%**|**54%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 6m spacing**|
|**59%**|**59%**|**56%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by**<br>**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing**|
|**53%**|**55%**|**51%**|**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_at 6 m spacing**|
|**55%**|**58%**|**53%**|**50 m width of****_Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing**|
|**53%**|**55%**|**51%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 7.5 m spacing**|
|**57%**|**59%**|**54%**|**50 m width of****_Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing**|

Our estimates confirm the protective role of mangroves during cyclones and highlight that the extent of attenuation of surge height and surge flow velocity from mangroves is locationspecific and depends on mangrove species, width of mangrove area as well as the density of planting. Among the three study areas considered in our analysis, attenuation of surge height is relatively higher in study area 3, which is sea-facing and shallower compared to the other study areas on river banks.<sup>17</sup> Among the seven sites considered in our analysis, the reduction of surge

> 17 The variation in bed level of study area 1, study area 2 and study area 3 are from -6mPWD to -10mPWD,

> -10mPWD to -12mPWD and 0mPWD to -3mPWD respectively (Reference: Figure A1 in the appendix).

22
height is 4cm to 16.5cm, with a median reduction of 5.5cm. The least reduction (4cm) in surge height was recorded from a 50m wide belt of _Sonneratia apetala_ at 7.5m spacing or from a 50m wide belt of _Avicennia officinalis_ at 6m spacing in Site 1. The most reduction (16.5cm) was from a 50m wide belt of _Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by a 50m wide belt of _Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing and 2000m wide belt of _Ceriops decandra_ at 5m spacing in Site 7. The reduction in surge flow velocity is in the range of 29 percent (from a 50m wide belt of _Avicennia officinalis_ at 6m spacing in Site 1) to 92 percent (from 50m width of _Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing followed by 50m width of _Avicennia officinalis_ at 4m spacing in Site 4). The median reduction in water flow velocity is 59 percent recorded from a 50m width of _Sonneratia apetala_ at 5m spacing in site 6.

Our estimates of surge height attenuation from mangroves are in centimeters. Therefore, for densely populated cyclone-prone Bangladesh, where surge heights typically range from 1.5m to 9m mangroves alone will not be sufficient to protect assets and activities at risk, but must be <u>used along with built infrastructure, such as embankments. However, since mangroves attenuate</u> surge height, embankments with mangroves in foreshore areas can be lower in height as compared to the ones without mangroves. This may result in a significant savings in construction cost of embankments due to potential cost savings in land reclamation and earthwork. Design parameters of embankments with foreshore areas consequently should also take into consideration potential mangrove protection. In the long run, mangroves also help in reducing land erosion and in the accretion of the foreshore area by trapping sediment.

As mentioned earlier, our estimates reveal significant reduction of water flow velocity from mangroves. Reduction in water flow velocity is likely to protect the embankments from “toe erosion,” breaching and other damages. Thus, the presence of healthy mangroves in the foreshore area is also likely to contribute to savings in the maintenance cost of embankments. One should also keep in mind that in addition to coastal protection services as highlighted in this paper, mangroves provide many benefits that include the provision of food, timber, wood fuel, medicine, habitat and nurseries for fish and other wildlife. Mangroves also trap nutrients and contaminants to maintain water quality and store a much higher amount of carbon per 23
equivalent area than terrestrial forests (Herr et al. 2012, Murray et al., 2011). It is important to consider all the multiple benefits of mangroves for an appropriate benefit evaluation of mangrove afforestation programs.

Bangladesh has a long-standing mangrove afforestation program. The country initiated its mangrove afforestation programs in 1966. By 2013, approximately 60km of sea-facing polders had mangrove forests in their foreshore area. Although various mangrove species, such as _Avicennia officinalis_ , _Bruguiera sexangula_ , _Ceriops decandra, Exoecaria agallocha_ and _Sonneratia apetala_ were planted, a review by Siddiqi and Khan in 2004 pointed out that _Sonneratia apetala_ accounted for 94.4% and _Avicennia officinalis_ accounted for 4.8% of successful mangrove plantings and _Sonneratia apetala_ performed particularly well all along the coastline of Bangladesh,<sup>18</sup> This historical evidence is promising as among the five mangrove species considered in our analysis, _Sonneratia apetala_ showed maximum potential for attenuation of storm surge and water velocity. A full grown _Sonneratia apetala_ plant can grow up to 20m and is also effective in blocking erosion and in quickening the accretion of land.

However, experience suggests that areas afforested only with _Sonneratia apetala_ are susceptible to pest attacks<sup>19</sup> and a combination of diverse mangrove species would reduce the risk of pest contamination. Since _Sonneratia apetala_ colonize only on mud-flats in newly emergent areas where sedimentation is still ongoing, the only other candidate mangrove species for companion planting are _Avicennia officinalis_ and _Bruguiera gymnorhiza_ . It should also be noted that the survival rates of both _Sonneratia apetala_ and _Avicennia officinalis_ are less than 50% after five years and replacement planting should be planned after three years. With vertical accretion, the land will be unsuitable for replanting of _Sonneratia apetala_ after three years and during replacement planting _Ceriops decandra, Exoecaria agallocha_ and _Heritiera fomes_ are suitable species for a permanent forest cover.

> 18 Success of _Avicennia officinalis_ is mostly limited to the Eastern coastal zone of Bangladesh (Islam, 2015).

> 19 For example, _Zeuzera conferta_ stem and Streblote siva are common in coastal Bangladesh.

24
# **5. Conclusion**

Scientific literature to date emphasizes that mangroves can substantially reduce the vulnerability of adjacent coastal lands from storm surges as the flow of water through the mangrove forest is obstructed by the matrix of roots/trunks and leaves of the mangrove trees. As a result, the protective role of mangroves and other coastal forests and trees against cyclonic storm surges has received considerable attention in disaster management in recent years. Even though experts and scientists agree that coastal forest belts, if well designed and managed, have the potential to act as bioshields for the protection of people and other assets against storm surges, most of the studies conclude that additional location-specific information is needed to define the specific details and limits of this protective function (FAO, 2007; Das and Vincent, 2009; Arkema et al. 2013).

This paper evaluates the effects of different species of mangroves, different widths of mangrove forests and densities of planting on the cyclone-induced surge height and water flow velocity for seven sites in cyclone-prone coastal region of Bangladesh. For each study site, suitable mangrove species were short-listed upon consultation with ecologists considering the survival potential of the tree species in the local environment, and taking into account the familiarity and interest of the local inhabitants in preserving the species. During field visits, roots, trunk systems and optimal spacing between trees were recorded. For understanding the resistance of water flow from mangroves, Manning’s coefficients were then estimated from field measurements of the root and trunk systems of mangrove species.

A hydrodynamic model for the Bay of Bengal based on the MIKE21FM modeling system was set up, calibrated and run multiple times to simulate the surge of cyclone Sidr that made landfall in Bangladesh in 2007 with a maximum wind speed of 248 kph, maximum wind radius of 64km, central pressure of 928 hPa and normal pressure of 1009 hPa. Estimates of surge height and water flow velocity were <u>first</u> recorded without mangroves and <u>then with different widths of</u> mangrove forests under different densities of planting using specific information on local topography, bathymetry and Manning coefficients estimated from the root and trunk systems of relevant mangrove species.

25
Our findings confirm the protective role of mangroves during cyclones, and highlight that the extent of attenuation of surge height and water flow velocity from mangroves is location-specific. Among the species considered in our analysis, _Sonneratia apetala_ causes maximum friction and hindrance to water flow. Estimates indicate that likely surge height reduction is from 4cm to 16.5cm from a 50m to 2km wide mangrove strip. Therefore, for densely populated cyclone-prone Bangladesh, where surge heights typically range from 1.5m to 9m mangroves alone will not be <u>sufficient to protect assets and activities at risk, but must be used along with built infrastructure,</u> such as embankments. Despite modest attenuation of surge heights, our estimates also indicate significant reduction of water flow velocity from mangroves. The expected reduction in water flow velocity is 29% to 91% from a 50m or 100m wide mangrove forest of _Sonneratia apetala_ and _Avicennia officinalis_ . Reduction in water flow velocity is likely to contribute to savings in the maintenance cost of embankments by protecting the embankments from “toe erosion,” breaching and other damages. Consequently, design parameters of embankments with foreshore areas<sup>20</sup> should take into account potential mangrove protection.

It should be noted that economic assessment of the location-specific benefits of mangrove protection from flooding during cyclones, potential cost savings in rehabilitation of the embankments and in the cost of operation and maintenance of embankments, as well as the costs of afforestation could not be computed at this stage due to resource constraints and should be addressed in future analysis. We also have not estimated the extent of attenuation of wind waves from mangroves during cyclones in this paper; modeling of wind waves should also be a subject of future analysis.

> 20 Many embankments do not have adequate foreshore areas, especially in active deltas where land erosion is taking place.

26