Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
IR I / Pd 2
Eng 10 GT
1
Ecological Engineering: The Key to a Safer, Greener Future for our Coasts
4.3 feet. It is the height of an average six year old girl. But it is also, according to the
Maryland Sea Grant, the amount that sea levels in the Chesapeake Bay could rise over the next
eighty years, putting millions of coastal residents and environments at risk. Globally, mean sea
levels are rising at a rate of one-eighth of an inch per year (Lindsey 2017). Though these rates
vary by location, rapid change in local and global sea levels is projected to have significant
socioeconomic and environmental impact on the ten percent of the global population that
currently resides in low elevation coastal zones (McGranahan, Balk, & Anderson, 2007). Higher
sea surface temperatures, especially over the Atlantic Ocean, are believed by scientists to be
increasing the severity of tropical storms and hurricanes, and the resulting storm surges (Elsner,
Kossin, & Jagger, 2008). Moreover, as sea levels rise, those storm surges are able to to penetrate
further inland, posing a significant threat to the livelihood of coastal communities. Facing these
risks, the importance of coastal resilience, or the ability of coastlines to defend against and
quickly recover from physical disturbances, has grown considerably. In the past, efforts to
protect coasts from flooding and erosion have primarily centered on hard, or “armored” shoreline
engineering techniques, which can have a variety of negative impacts on coastal systems. As
concern about the health our coastal ecosystems increases, interest in ecological engineering is
advantages over their armored counterparts, and should be coastal planners’ engineering solution
of choice wherever possible. These solutions provide erosion protection and wave attenuation
benefits to coasts while simultaneously contributing a wide variety of habitat and ecosystem
service. These strategies require further research, but are valuable assets for coastal planners and
communities nonetheless.
Correll-Brown 2
Coastal resilience can be defined as “the ability of a system to prepare for, resist, recover
from, and adapt to achieve functional performance under stress over time” (Bridges 2015). In
coastal systems, this stress can originate from several sources, most notably from wave energy
and from the combination sea level rise and extreme weather events, which contribute to
disturbances such as severe storm surges and dangerous floods. Ideally, resilient coastlines
should have the ability to withstand and, to a certain degree, guard against, the impacts of these
disturbances, recover independently after the events, and adapt to provide more effective coastal
protection during future disturbances. In an attempt to promote resilience and protect coasts from
erosion, a variety of shoreline engineering solutions have been implemented, including hard and
is the anthropogenic modification of coastlines for a variety of purposes, including erosion and
flood protection (Deither, Toft & Shipman, 2016; Hartig et al., 2011). These techniques involve
the use of various types of walls, including seawalls, bulkheads, levees, and riprap revetments,
for the purpose of stabilizing a shoreline. Due to the significant body of research surrounding
their construction and utility, they are currently the most common form of shoreline engineering.
But, as recognition of their negative impacts on ecosystems becomes more widespread, a move
Ecological engineering, also referred to as soft shoreline engineering, works with nature
and social benefits” (Cheong et al., 2013; Hossain et al., 2014; Bridges 2015). These systems can
utilize exclusively natural materials, or combine man-made and natural structures. “Natural”
Correll-Brown 3
structures include mangroves, marshes, oyster reefs, vegetated dunes, coral reefs, and nourished
Hybrid techniques, or living shorelines, combine natural and built infrastructure for
artificial rock or oyster-shell structure known as a sill with low and high marsh grass (Cunniff et
al., 2015). The sill works to attenuate wave energy in higher-energy coastal environments, in
order to allow the marsh-grass to grow (ARCADIS et al., 2014). Because of their narrow profile
and wave-attenuating sill component, hybrid techniques are commonly implemented on high
energy shorelines, or channels lacking the space for a full restored salt marsh, and are especially
Coastal wetlands are vital ecosystems. They sequester carbon, improve water quality, and
provide habitats for a wide variety of at-risk species (EPA, 2010). But, each year, hectares of
coastal wetlands are lost as a result of sea level rise and ensuing coastal squeeze (marsh loss that
occurs when marshes at risk of inundation due to sea level rise have nowhere to go due to
coastal ecosystem services is essential, shoreline armoring does the opposite, replacing and
fragmenting coastal habitat, thereby destroying valuable coastal ecosystems. Unlike hard-
engineered coastal infrastructure, soft shoreline engineering solutions have been shown to
provide numerous ecological advantages to coastal systems, restoring valuable habitat and
coastlines negatively impact productive shoreline habitats. Specific types of armored shorelines,
like bulkheads and seawalls, have been shown to cause vertical erosion of intertidal shoreline
Correll-Brown 4
habitats (Douglass & Pickel, 1999). In addition to eroding intertidal habitats, shoreline armoring
which leads to a loss of genetic diversity, as well as decreased population stability (Hartig,
Zarull, & Cook, 2011). The loss and fragmentation of habitats commonly utilized by aquatic
organisms can result in a decrease in the variety and abundance of flora and fauna on armored
shorelines. In a 2012 study, Morley, Toft, and Hanson compared the species abundance and
density at several armored and unarmored shoreline sites on the Puget Sound. They found that
epibenthic invertebrate (sponge and crustacean) densities were “tenfold greater” on unarmored
shorelines, while biodiversity was “double that of armored locations.” The decline of habitat
quality and biodiversity at armored shoreline sites has adverse effects on the quality and stability
of coastal ecosystems and fisheries. Therefore, it is important to consider other coastal protection
options, like natural and hybrid solutions, that more effectively provide coastal habitat and
biodiversity and resulting ecosystem health. Unlike armored solutions, which have detrimental
impact on coastal habitat quality and biodiversity, soft-engineered shoreline solutions have been
shown to increase habitat complexity and enhance valuable shoreline habitats. Most ecological
engineering solutions rely on the creation or restoration of naturally-occuring coastal habitat, like
marshes and mangroves. These restorations increase vegetation cover and density, creating
habitat for a variety coastal species and leading to increases in species density and diversity as
compared to armored solutions (Gittman, et al, 2016). In a 2003 study, Bilkovic and Mitchell
found that marsh-sills provided a “demonstrative benefit” over riprap revetments when it came to
the presence of a variety of intertidal infauna (benthic organisms that bury themselves in
Correll-Brown 5
sediment). The diverse ecosystems promoted through the implementation of natural and hybrid
coastal infrastructure are not just better the organisms that live there. These ecosystems are more
Ecosystem services are the benefits for humans that arise from the maintenance of
healthy ecosystems (“Ecosystems and Human Well-Being,” 5). They include provisioning
services, such as fisheries, which healthy marshes and oyster reefs help improve. Marshes, and
the seagrass beds found in hybrid solutions, serve as nursery habitats for numerous species of
fish, while oyster reefs, another major component of many hybrid solutions and breakwaters,
generate catch. According to one report, “5.6 km of [created] oyster reef” in the gulf of Mexico,
can generate “more than 6900 pounds of additional catch per year” (Sutton-Grier et al., 2015).
Healthy fisheries have substantial benefits for coastal economies and consumers. But, the
services provided by these ecosystems extend beyond economic ones, like fisheries, to include
regulating services such as water filtration and carbon sequestration. Marshes, and other varieties
of coastal wetlands, serve as natural carbon sinks, removing carbon from the atmosphere and
sequestering it in underlying sediment at a far higher rate than terrestrial ecosystems (McLeod et
al., 2011). This carbon sequestration helps reduce harmful greenhouse gases in the atmosphere,
resulting in a healthier planet. Additionally oysters, whether they are part of reefs or sills, have
been shown to improve water quality by removing pollutants and organic matter from water
(Cheong et al., 2003). The Nature Conservancy estimates that these oyster reefs remove up to
1888 kg of nitrogen from nearshore waters, annually (Sutton-Grier et al., 2015). This filtration of
organic matter and nitrogen results in improved water quality, healthier aquatic ecosystems, and
improved fisheries and recreation on coasts, benefits that armored shorelines are unable to
supply.
Correll-Brown 6
Unlike shoreline armoring, which can cause habitat loss and fragmentation in already
threatened coastal ecosystems, soft shoreline engineering increases habitat complexity and
species diversity, providing numerous ecosystem services like carbon sequestration and water
filtration, and are therefore superior to armored solutions on the ecological front. But, ecosystem
services are not usually the first, or the most important factor that coastal planners consider when
modifying shorelines. Planners must also look at the ability of engineering solutions to prevent
erosion, attenuate waves, and function effectively for long periods of time in high wave energy
environments.
Most shoreline protection structures, natural or built, are installed for the purpose of
erosion protection and shoreline stabilization. While armored shorelines can be effective in
achieving this goal, they can also displace sediment and destroy coastal habitat, whereas natural
and hybrid shorelines can achieve the goal of erosion protection and shoreline stabilization
without the harmful impacts of sediment displacement and habitat destruction that accompany
built solutions. Additionally, ecologically engineered solutions have the advantage being able to
recover independently from disturbances and grow stronger and more effective with time, where
armored solutions may degrade. So, ecological engineering solutions are just as effective as
armored shorelines at attenuating waves and protecting shorelines, but without the negative
ecological impacts, making them a superior choice for many shoreline stabilizations.
shoreline erosion by minimizing the impacts of erosive waves. Marsh grasses dampen and
disperse waves, and, over time, develop a root mat that further protects sediment from erosion,
while sills dissipate wave energy to reduce erosive force (Hershner & Manson, 2014). An
analysis in Gedan et al. (2010) found coastal vegetation to be a “critical component” in wave
Correll-Brown 7
attenuation, even when transverse distances were small or vegetation was waterlogged.
Ecological engineering solutions’ characteristics mean they are able to protect coastal lands and
properties from loss and damage by erosion, without the potential damaging ecological impacts
created by armored shorelines, making them a valuable choice for coastal protection.
Beyond the benefits of erosion protection, expansive coastal wetland environments have
the ability to attenuate waves during larger-scale weather events. The leaves and stems of marsh
vegetation can directly attenuate waves by slowing water velocity, reducing turbulence, and
increasing sediment deposition, while their roots and decaying matter build up and stabilize
sediment, indirectly dampening waves (Gedan et al., 2010). Estimates in Southeast Louisiana
found that expansive coastal wetlands “demonstrably” reduced storm surge during extreme
weather events (Sutton-Grier et al., 2015). But, coastal communities often lack the space or
conditions which are necessary for restoration or creation of a full-blown coastal wetland, so
marsh-sills (aka living shorelines) are utilized instead. Because marsh-sills are generally narrow,
low-profile, and located at or near the mean high water mark, they do not provide the same storm
surge protection that a wider, established salt marsh would during an extreme weather event, but
this does not mean they fail to provide coastal protection. Gittman et al. (2014) concluded that,
during Hurricane Isabel in North Carolina, marshes both with and without sills continued to
provide wave attenuation and flood protection during extreme weather events, and sills
recovered more quickly after the events than hard-engineered structures. This ability to help
protect communities from flooding and damage during extreme weather events, especially as the
events become more severe, is essential for coastal structures, as is the ability of the solutions to
The key to coastal resilience is the ability of engineering structures to recover from and
adapt in response to extreme weather events, and it is here that natural and hybrid solutions set
themselves apart from their armored counterparts. In addition to their essential erosion mitigation
and wave attenuation abilities, natural and hybrid coastal infrastructure are able to recover from
extreme weather events. They are, to a greater extent than armored solutions, self sustaining and
self repairing, and can “bend” with disturbances rather than breaking, as has been demonstrated
by their performance during and after extreme weather events. When Hurricane Irma’s storm
surge struck Maryland in 2003, “All the grasses that [the Maryland DNR had] planted fell back
and… formed a blanket over the shoreline and… those roots actually held on to the sediment
beneath [them]” (Subramanian, Personal Communication). And, when Hurricane Irene hit the
central Outer Banks region, one survey established that its surge damaged 76% of bulkheads
observed, while having no impact on marsh elevations with or without sills present (Gittman et
al., 2014). Since ecological engineering structures are able to bend with disturbances and stay
resilient during extreme weather events, they provide quality coastal protection without requiring
costly repairs and updates to design, and continue to protect coasts even under extreme
conditions, making them valuable assets for coastal protection that should be widely
implemented by coastal planners. But, these solution are not just resilient to storm surge.
While “built” coastal infrastructure degrades over time under the stresses of high-energy
coastlines and sea level rise and must be repaired or modified, many natural and hybrid
solutions have the potential to adapt, growing stronger and better-established over time. In
contrast sea levels increase, armored structures remain immobile, providing less and less
protection over time. Though sea level rise poses a threat to natural shoreline solutions, in some
Correll-Brown 9
conditions, marshes and oyster reefs can keep pace with sea level rise through accumulation of
Like armored solutions, ecologically engineered solutions provide vital erosion protection
and wave attenuation benefits to shorelines. But, natural solutions simultaneously promote
coastal resilience by quickly recovering from and adapting to extreme weather events and
growing stronger and better established over time, while armored solutions have no such ability
to adapt. Ecologically engineered shorelines’ ability to adapt to coastal disturbances makes them
a superior choice to armored shorelines in areas in which either one could be implemented.
Despite all their theoretical advantages, ecologically engineered solutions are not as
widely implemented as they could be, as the solutions, especially hybrid infrastructure, are still a
relatively new tool, and have not been in use for an amount of time equal to their armored
counterparts (Hershner & Mason, 2014). Further research on system performance over time,
degrees of protection provided by different solutions during extreme weather events, and cost-
benefit analysis of the solutions has the potential to improve solutions and increase
Due to the dangerous, low-visibility conditions encountered during extreme storms, there
is a lack of data on the wave attenuation and flood protection performance of natural coastal
defenses during major extreme weather events. More data on the ability of these defenses to
combat storm surge and prevent erosion during hurricanes and tropical storms is vital, as is
research on how, and to what extent, systems can recover from the impacts of extreme weather
Since ecological engineering methods, especially living shorelines, have not been in use
for the same amount of time as hard engineering techniques, questions also remain about their
functional performance over longer periods of time, especially with regards to hybrid
infrastructure. Studies on the evolution of natural coastal infrastructure over time, both as a
would research regarding the impacts of sea level rise on hybrid infrastructure, and how
the infrastructure adapts to these changes (Gittman et al., 2016; Bilkovic et al., 2013; Cunniff
et al., 2015). This research would help us learn how well this infrastructure would perform its
functions well into the future, and make plans, improvements, and effective implementations,
accordingly.
Finally, because of their above-average durability, and the ecosystem services they
provide, natural and hybrid shoreline engineering solutions have the potential to be highly cost
effective. To some extent, cost-benefit analysis of these structures has been performed. (Cunniff,
Personal Communication) But, more studies on the value of these structures, in terms of both
property protection during storms and ecosystem services, which can be difficult to quantify,
and coastal planners when implementing coastal solutions, and this information would aid
informed decision making, and possibly promote the choice of natural infrastructure.
during storms, their development over time, and their financial benefits over other shoreline
engineering solutions, researchers can speed the adoption and implementation of these beneficial
Changing global climates necessitate resilient coastal engineering solutions that will
protect shorelines, homeowners, and property. Where armored shorelines replace and erode
intertidal habitat and wear down over time, ecologically engineered solutions are the very
shorelines, ecologically engineered solutions have been shown to perform well in extreme
weather events, sustaining no long term damage and protecting the shoreline from erosive force
where other coastal protection structures failed. Plus, in the right conditions, these structures are
self maintaining and repairing, meaning they will continue to protect against erosion, and, in
some cases, coastal storm surge, for years to come, with little maintenance or additional cost
required. And, while these solutions are protecting coasts and residents, they are also protecting
coastal ecosystems, and the environment, something that armored solutions fail to do.
Ecologically engineered solutions can serve as habitats for aquatic species, remove carbon from
the atmosphere, and denitrify water, thereby enhancing fisheries. These environmental impacts
help humans as well as aquatic organisms. In short, these solutions are both resilient and good
for the earth. Therefore, it is vital that communities implement them for coastal protection
wherever possible, and more research be done on the capabilities and most effective
implementation of these structures, so they can be more widely used to the greatest benefit.
Correll-Brown 12