Coastal Zone Management Questions and Answers

Answer: C

Correct answer: 1 and 2 only

Statements 1 and 2 describe the problem and the remedy. Statement 3 is the assumption that has defeated more realignment schemes than any engineering difficulty: a proposal may be technically sound, economically justified and environmentally beneficial and still fail, because those bearing the loss have not been compensated or consulted. Justification is necessary and is not sufficient.

Answer: D

It is easier to state than to apply where the cause is diffuse or historical. Attribution is the practical difficulty in nearly every coastal case. Diffuse causes defeat any attribution. The principle is easier to state than to apply.

Answer: A

Correct answer: Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

Both are true and the reason gives the difficulty. The principle requires a polluter to be identified and the harm attributed, and coastal erosion rarely permits either: the sediment deficit may result from a dam built inland fifty years ago, from dredging, from defences twenty kilometres updrift, or from nothing human at all. Where no one caused the harm, no one can be made to pay for it.

Answer: B

Correct answer: responsibilities divided among several bodies and levels

Coastal responsibility is characteristically fragmented: local authorities, environment or water agencies, port and harbour authorities, conservation bodies, national ministries and private landowners each hold part of it, with boundaries that seldom coincide with the sediment cells. That fragmentation is the very problem integrated coastal zone management was invented to address.

Answer: C

The first two are correct and describe the usual arrangement. The third is rarely the case, and the fragmentation is exactly what integrated management addresses itself to. Fragmentation is the condition being remedied.

Answer: D

Correct answer: prevent new development within a zone at risk of erosion

A setback line is a planning instrument: within it, new development is refused or severely restricted, so that the value at risk does not grow in a zone the coast is expected to reach. It is the cheapest coastal measure of all, because it prevents risk being created rather than defending against it afterwards, and it needs no construction and no maintenance.

Answer: A

Correct answer: Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

Both are true and the reason gives the economics. A house not built in the erosion zone will never need a defence, never be flooded and never require compensation, so the whole of that future cost is avoided at the price of a planning decision. Every defence, by contrast, must be built, maintained and eventually replaced. The difficulty is political rather than economic, since the cost falls on landowners now and the saving accrues to the public later.

Answer: B

Correct answer: the projected erosion over a defined planning horizon

The line is set by taking the erosion rate, projecting it over a stated period - commonly a hundred years - and adding an allowance for uncertainty and for the effect of sea level rise on that rate. It is therefore a statement about the future rather than the past, which is why the largest storm on record and the tide level are not the basis, though both inform the analysis.

Answer: C

The obligation to retreat travels with the land rather than with the owner. It transfers the long term risk without requiring purchase at the outset. The obligation travels with the land itself. Purchase at the outset is avoided entirely.

Answer: D

Correct answer: 1 and 2 only

Statements 1 and 2 describe the instrument: development may proceed now, but the owner accepts that the property must be given up when the shoreline reaches a defined point, and the public purse avoids buying it out today. Statement 3 is the opposite of the arrangement - a rolling easement provides for eventual retreat and expressly does not confer a permanent right to defend.