Perceived effectiveness drives shoreline decision-making for Florida's waterfront property owners

被引:0
作者
Barry, Savanna C. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Reynolds, Laura K. [2 ,4 ]
Braswell, Anna E. [2 ,3 ]
Gittman, Rachel K. [5 ,6 ]
Scyphers, Steven B. [7 ,8 ]
Smyth, Ashley R. [2 ,4 ,9 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Inst Food & Agr Sci, Nat Coast Biol Stn, 552 1st St,POB 878, Cedar Key, FL 32625 USA
[2] Florida Sea Grant Coll Program, Gainesville, FL USA
[3] Univ Florida, Inst Food & Agr Sci, Sch Forest Fisheries & Geomatics Sci, Gainesville, FL 32625 USA
[4] Univ Florida, Inst Food & Agr Sci, Soil Water & Ecosyst Sci Dept, Gainesville, FL 32625 USA
[5] East Carolina Univ, Dept Biol, Greenville, NC USA
[6] East Carolina Univ, Coastal Studies Inst, Greenville, NC USA
[7] Univ S Alabama, Stokes Sch Marine & Environm Sci, Mobile, AL USA
[8] Univ S Alabama, Dept Sociol Anthropol & Social Work, Mobile, AL USA
[9] Univ Florida, Inst Food & Agr Sci, Trop Res & Educ Ctr, Homestead, FL USA
关键词
Living shorelines; Human dimensions; Sustainability; Coastal management; Shoreline armoring; SEA-LEVEL RISE; ESTUARINE SHORELINES; LIVING SHORELINES; HURRICANE DAMAGE; CLIMATE-CHANGE; COASTAL; MANAGEMENT; PERCEPTIONS; CONSERVATION; BULKHEADS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107353
中图分类号
P7 [海洋学];
学科分类号
0707 ;
摘要
Urbanization of shorelines has altered the structure, function, and dynamics of coastal ecosystems. Consequently, these areas are less resilient to sea-level rise and coastal flooding. To protect vulnerable property, coastal residents often harden their shorelines using traditional approaches like seawalls and bulkheads. Nature-based solutions, such as living shorelines, are an alternative method to prevent erosion while providing additional benefits but are less common than hardened shorelines. Because decisions regarding private shoreline management often fall on the homeowner, there is a need to understand perceptions of shoreline management options. We conducted an address-based survey of waterfront property owners in Florida to explore their satisfaction with their current shoreline and driving factors behind how they manage and protect their shoreline. Perceived effectiveness was the most important factor driving shoreline management decisions. Most respondents were satisfied with their shoreline regardless of shoreline type (mean f SD = 7.5 f 2.3 of 10), but satisfaction was significantly higher among homeowners with natural shorelines (8.22 f 2.13) than those with armored shorelines (7.38 f 2.19). Owners of living and natural shorelines reported spending less time and money on their shorelines and recognized the environmental benefits by assigning significantly higher environmental ratings to their shorelines (4.20 f 0.75 and 4.29 f 0.20 of 5, respectively) in comparison to homeowners with armored shorelines (3.22 f 0.79). However, respondents perceived natural and living shorelines to be significantly less effective at shoreline protection (mean protection score of 3.46 f 1.10 and 3.49 f 0.66 of 5, respectively) compared to armored shorelines (mean protection score = 4.0 f 0.75). Analyses revealed a strong influence of neighboring shoreline type, though only 21.5% of waterfront property owners in our survey self- identified this as a major driver of their decisions. Moreover, there appears to be a general lack of understanding about how shoreline management decisions affect adjacent properties, with only 34.7% of respondents believing that a neighboring shoreline influenced their own. Owners of armored and hybrid shorelines exhibited a general belief that their shoreline benefitted neighboring properties (ratings of 3.59 f 0.91 and 3.45 f 0.86 of 5, respectively) while owners of natural shorelines rated their shoreline's influence as most neutral (2.67 f 0.65). Further research into the effectiveness of different living shoreline designs compared to hardened shorelines to prevent erosion and storm damage may lead to greater adoption of living shorelines. Strategic communications focusing on aspects most misunderstood or most valued by homeowners, such as effectiveness, longevity, and cost, could increase the salience of living shorelines as an advantageous shoreline management approach.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 88 条
  • [1] Goals, beneficiaries, and indicators of waterfront revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern and coastal communities
    Angradi, Ted R.
    Williams, Kathleen C.
    Hoffman, Joel C.
    Bolgrien, David W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GREAT LAKES RESEARCH, 2019, 45 (05) : 851 - 863
  • [2] Atkinson Beth, 2023, CRAN
  • [3] The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services
    Barbier, Edward B.
    Hacker, Sally D.
    Kennedy, Chris
    Koch, Evamaria W.
    Stier, Adrian C.
    Silliman, Brian R.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS, 2011, 81 (02) : 169 - 193
  • [4] Barry S., 2019, A homeowners guide to the living shoreline permit exemption Part 1: Florida department of environmental protection
  • [5] Hold the line: Modeling private coastal adaptation through shoreline armoring decisions
    Beasley, W. Jason
    Dundas, Steven J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2021, 105
  • [6] VALIDATING RESEARCH RESULTS WHEN CRONBACHS-ALPHA IS BELOW .70 - A METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURE
    BERNARDI, RA
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1994, 54 (03) : 766 - 775
  • [7] Effects of coastal development on nearshore estuarine nekton communities
    Bilkovic, D. M.
    Roggero, M. M.
    [J]. MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES, 2008, 358 : 27 - 39
  • [8] The Role of Living Shorelines as Estuarine Habitat Conservation Strategies
    Bilkovic, Donna Marie
    Mitchell, Molly
    Mason, Pam
    Duhring, Karen
    [J]. COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2016, 44 (03) : 161 - 174
  • [9] Multi-hazard climate risk projections for the United States
    Binita, K. C.
    Shepherd, J. M.
    King, Anthony W.
    Johnson Gaither, Cassandra
    [J]. NATURAL HAZARDS, 2021, 105 (02) : 1963 - 1976
  • [10] Impacts of seawalls on saltmarsh plant communities in the Great Bay Estuary, New Hampshire USA
    Bozek C.M.
    Burdick D.M.
    [J]. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 2005, 13 (5) : 553 - 568