The Importance of Surfers Wave knowledge for Coastal Management

The management of coastal resources is complex with not only multiple ocean users and  stakeholders to consider  but also the complexity of the interaction between the ocean and land from the littoral zone to nearby community and conurbations. It has been extensively recognised that there is a need for both expert and local knowledges in order to create effective plans and policies for these areas (and other areas) and this is particularly the case when accommodating the complex and interrelated issues that relate to the sustainability.  

A recent research paper by Dan Reineman of Stanford University published in the journal Marine Policy outlines the importance of surfers wave knowledge for coastal management.    It also identifies wave knowledge as a unique form of knowledge on a par with other recognised forms of local knowledge. Dan describes wave knowledge as:  

…a body of understanding of the dynamic oceanographic and environmental conditions in the coastal ocean acquired through experience, which enables surfers to predict short-term and mid-term changes to those conditions and informs their surfing-related actions.

The paper is based on  two surveys of over a 1000 respondents in California. Questions in the survey included general demographics of the respondents, questions relating to respondents participation in surfing and well as more specific questions about the surf spots respondents were familiar with.  The survey also had a number of open ended questions prompting respondents to define wave knowledge.  Themes that were drawn from these responses included, situational awareness, interpretative ability, knowledge for action, experience in ocean, place specificity and value of wave knowledge.

Dan points out that there is an increasing call for surfers and their wave knowledge to be incorporated into coastal planning and this is magnified by the increasing impacts of climate change on wave resources and on the broader coastal environment.  The paper identifies the following areas of particular importance:   

 

• Shoreline stabilization to protect property or infrastructure Sea walls or other armouring that could affect sediment erosion, loading, and transport in the near shore environment as well as cause wave reflection
• Other types of coastal and shore line development on or in the nearshore environment, e.g., dune stabilization, beach nourishment, and other activities that affect beach sediment supply;
• Coastal watershed management that could affect delivery of sediment to the near shore environment, e.g., coastal lagoon mouth management, watershed hardening,etc;
• Coastal or watershed activities that could adversely impact coastal water quality;
• Offshore or onshore development of jetties, breakwaters, groins, or other structures that could influence the propagation of waves, e.g., through the reflection or refraction of waves or the transport or accumulation of sediment;
• Development of harbors, ports, or other large infrastructure that could disrupt, displace, or destroy  surf-spots entirely

The paper marks an important step forward in formally defining the importance of surfers wave knowledge for coastal management. As a stakeholder group directly engaged with the ocean environment surfing communities locally, as traditionally defined by their local surf breaks or more broadly as communities of interest connected electronically have a significant role to play in transitions towards sustainability.

 

References

Reineman, D. (2016) The utility of surfers’ wave knowledge for coastal management, Marine Policy 67:139-147

Sources and impacts of marine litter by Jane Lee/ Marlisco

How Do Public Administrations Support Sustainable Development?

BSc (Hons) Public Management and Business

United Nations Human Development Report

The report divides its main analysis into two sections – firstly identifying the key drivers of the rise of the south and secondly, raising future issues that need to be addressed to maintain this process. Both contain factors that will impact on sustainabililty. The three key factors driving the growth of the south are:

1. A proactive developmental state;
2. The tapping of global markets;
3. Determined social policy innovation.

All three of these ‘key drivers’, emphasise an interventionist and active regulatory role for the state rather than merely leaving key choices in the hands of the free market. Indeed the report explicitly notes that the best-performing southern economies ‘diverge from the unfettered liberalization espoused by the Washington Consensus’. Thus, discussing the ‘tapping of global markets’

The Report has five main conclusions for the future:

1. Rising economic strength in the south must be matched by a full commitment to human development – a commitment that is as much to do with economic necessity as the moral case for human potential.
2. Less developed countries can learn and benefit from the success of emerging economies in the south – it cites recent Chinese and Indian joint ventures and start-up manufacturing investments in Africa as an example of this.
3. New and stronger institutions are needed to promote trade and investment and accelerate experience sharing across the south.
4. Greater representation for the south can accelerate progress on major global challenges – the report cites the emergence of the G20 as an example of this process but points out that India – a nuclear power, an economic giant and soon to be the most populous country in the world still has no permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
5. The rise of the south presents new opportunities for generating a greater supply of public goods – the report cites climate change as an example of the kind of issue that the south’s new power may help to solve.

Sustainable Development Goals Surfing to Saftey or Suffer the Final Wipeout

I'm running through the thought piece in Nature on what the SDG's will look like. Must say that I’m struggling to see this new paradigm. The three pillars approach was always seen as a starting point for broader exploration and expansions. The economy, society, and earths life support System is also far from new and is in fact part of the existing paradigm.   Of course I understand the need to translate a hugely contested, ambiguous concept into a meaningful policy grounded form, but there is also a need to maintain an appreciation of this complexity.  I worry about this articulation and its transmission to the six proposed SD goals.  I will elaborate on this at a later point. For now I draw on the imagery used in the article and obviously this is going to stand out in light of my research into sustainable development and Surfing.  A sweeter synergy I could not have asked for.

 

 

 

 

 

Not only a  wave, the most terrifying of waves, the Tsunami well at least an artist’s impression,  as this wave does seem to have a shoulder and a very workable face, can’t make out if it’s a left or a right though. There is a flimsy boat about to be pounded  by said wave.  Four figures at the helm and one looking back at the stern, life rings are seen thrown asunder, not needed now, the image would suggest, as it is too late.   In the background a volcano billowing smoke, undoubtedly about to erupt and cover everything in the vicinity with red hot magma.  Is this how the authors imagine the Anthropocene?  This too is something I will explore in more detail at a later date.  For now I simply ‘note with interest’ the use of the wave and the multiple ways this iconography is employed. We must ask ourselves with SDG’s that now put the economy front and centre, well in the middle anyway. What is it selling now, a car, a T-shirt, in this instance it is an ideology, a political imperative that none can escape from. A global community bound to and responsible for (to very varying degrees) the disintegration of the global life support system.  The image leaves one wondering.  Does the life boat mange to surf the wave to the saftey of the shore (though im worried about the volcano) or does it suffer the final wipout.

Proposed Sustainable Development Goals

More thoughts on this when I have time to think !




iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OLThpZIq8IE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Goal one: Thriving lives and livelihoods.

End poverty and improve wellbeing through access to education, employment and information, better health and housing. It should include targets on clean air that build on World Health Organisation guidelines for pollutants such as black carbon.

 Goal two: Sustainable food security.

The MDG hunger target should be extended and targets added to limit nitrogen and phosphorus use in agriculture; phosphorus flow to the oceans should not exceed 10m tonnes a year; and phosphorus runoff to lakes and rivers should halve by 2030.

Goal three: Sustainable water security.

Achieve universal access to clean water and basic sanitation. This would contribute to MDG health targets, restrict global water runoff to less than 4,000 cubic kilometres a year and limit volumes withdrawn from river basins to no more than 50-80% of mean annual flow.

Goal four: Universal clean energy.

Improve affordable access to clean energy that minimises local pollutionand health impacts and mitigates global warming. This contributes to the UN commitment to sustainable energy for all, and addresses MDG targets on education, gender equity and health.

Goal five: Healthy and productive ecosystems.

Sustain biodiversity and ecosystem services through better management, valuation, measurement, conservation and restoration. Extinctions should not exceed 10 times the natural background rate. At least 70% of species in any ecosystem and 70% of forests should be retained.

 

Goal six: Governance for sustainable societies.

Transform governance and institutions at all levels to address the other five sustainable development goals. This would build on MDG partnerships and incorporate environmental and social targets into global trade, investment and finance. Subsidies on fossil fuels and policies that support unsustainable agricultural and fisheries practices should be eliminated by 2020.