Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-nlwjb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T08:20:16.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2023

Xénia Philippenko*
Affiliation:
BRGM, 45060 Orléans, France CNRS, LGP UMR 8591, Université Paris 1, Paris, France
Gonéri Le Cozannet
Affiliation:
BRGM, 45060 Orléans, France
*
Corresponding author: Xénia Philippenko; Email: xenia.philippenko@cnrs.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The latest IPCC report estimates that approximately 1 billion people will be at risk from coastal hazards in the near term due to coastal population increase, sea-level rise and other coastal changes. This will occur in a world that is changing rapidly due to climate change, ecosystem decline, human development and the projected transformations of the economy to meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement. In this context, social sciences provide a pivotal perspective to coastal adaptation, for example, while assessing barriers and opportunities across scales, from local to global. This scoping review explores how social sciences support coastal adaptation. We show that Political Sciences, Economics, Sociology and Geography are already supporting coastal adaptation. Yet, scientific fields such as legal sciences, psychology, history and archaeology as well as anthropology and ethnography are less developed in the context of coastal adaptation to sea-level rise. New research avenues could also integrate education, media and communication research and aim at truly interdisciplinary studies linking different branches of social sciences with coastal science and climate services. This effort could help moving from a coastal adaptation often focused on coastal engineering protection to a broader vision of coastal resilient development, also addressing the challenges of mitigation, sustainable development and coastal ecosystem decline.

Information

Type
Review
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Idealised adaptation pathway leading to coastal resilient development, based on typical settings in Europe. During the 20th century, engineering protection has been the mainstream coastal risk prevention measure. This measure is becoming increasingly costly and may face adaptation limits when sea-level rise exceeds some site-specific thresholds or rates. New measures such as ecosystem-based protection or accommodation (actions to reduce vulnerability, for example, raising houses, developing early warning systems…) are being increasingly experimented locally. The feasibility of relocation is often limited today due to social and economic interest. Yet relocation may become mainstream and may be part of coastal resilient development in the future above site-specific sea levels. Figure inspired by Bednar-Friedl et al. (2022) and IPCC (2022).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Social sciences in the context of coastal adaptation. The figure shows how social sciences are positioned in the context of coastal adaptation implementation. It highlights the unequal number of studies available in the peer-reviewed literature depending on each branch of social sciences.

Figure 2

Table 1. Fields of social sciences for which numerous studies on coastal adaptation to sea-level rise can be identified (more than 70 studies)

Figure 3

Table 2. Fields of social sciences for which a more limited number of studies on coastal adaptation to sea-level rise can be identified (around 20 studies)

Figure 4

Table 3. Fields of social sciences are characterised by a very limited number of studies on coastal adaptation to sea-level rise (less than 20 studies)

Figure 5

Figure 3. Illustrative transition from a coastal adaptation focused mainly on limiting future coastal risks to a coastal resilient development considering other economic, social and ecosystemic transformations in coastal areas. Social sciences can help in expanding the scope of coastal transformations considered at different decision levels.

Supplementary material: Image

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material 1

Download Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material(Image)
Image 81 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material 2

Download Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material(Image)
Image 37 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material 3

Download Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material(Image)
Image 15.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material

Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material 4

Download Philippenko and Le Cozannet supplementary material(File)
File 602.3 KB

Author comment: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R0/PR1

Comments

Dear Dr. Spencer,

Thank you very much for your invitation for a commissioned review for the journal Coastal Futures.

Xenia Philippenko and myself are pleased to submit a manuscript entitled “Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation”. In this paper, we review how social sciences have contributed to coastal adaptation so far. We identify branches of social sciences that could provide a greater contribution in the future such as Legal Sciences and studies focused on Medias, Communication and Education. We argue that more interdisciplinary studies in social sciences applied to coastal adaptation can help the practice of coastal adaptation and could support moving from coastal adaptation practices often focused on coastal engineering solutions to broader transformations enabling coastal resilient development.

We hope that this proposal will be suitable for the journal and I remain available for any question on this proposal.

Many thanks again for your invitation.

Best regards

Xénia Philippenko and Gonéri Le Cozannet

Review: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

I do not have competing interests with the authors.

Comments

Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation

Comments to Authors

This article addresses a very important topic: the adaptation of coastal regions to climate and environmental changes. It proposes to review the role of the different branches of social sciences that can enable sustainable coastal development. It presents several significant outcomes. Nevertheless, no scientific information is available regarding the review methodology.

Propositions

1/. Include social sciences as keywords.

2/. Summary: it is not clear what the article is about, and what is its methodology for getting the results presented in the abstract. What sort of review did the authors write? For instance, “We show that some bunches….” What does it mean we show, it is not precise!!!

3/. Impact statement: very general, requires a certain amount of precision.

4/. Page 2: Keywords are not the same as on the cover page, why?

5/. The term “accommodation” would need to be defined for Figure 1, Figure 2; page 3, line 75.

6/. Page 4, line 87 “We often assume that adaptation will be implemented in an optimal way.” Who are we? For optimism, maybe some references to psychology might be helpful. (e.g. Lammel, A., Dugas, E., & Guillen Gutierrez, E. (2012). L’apport de la psychologie cognitive à l’étude de l’adaptation aux changements climatiques: la notion de vulnérabilité cognitive. Vertigo, 12(1) ; Gardezi, M., & Arbuckle, J. G. (2020). Techno-optimism and farmers’ attitudes toward climate change adaptation. Environment and Behavior, 52(1), 82-105.)

7/. Page 4, line 79 (Figure 1; Bednar-Friedl et al., 2022) the reference in Figure 1 is different from the reference on page 3.

8/. Page 4, lines 89-102: This section is quite general and contains a few “errors”. It should be delayed or provide more accurate information, for example on the role of philosophy in the genesis of the social sciences. A distinction would have to be drawn between the humanities and the social sciences.

9/. Page 4, lines 104-105 “This review is based on a search, selection, and assessment of the existing literature using Web of Sciences (Table 1).” Methodological aspects of research, selection, and assessment have to be presented. Who encoded the papers? According to what criteria? Why solely WEB of Sciences? There are very different types of reviews, and there is a need to give specific information on the research protocol. (Various reviews: scoping review, systematic review, academic literature evidence map, systematic global inventory, etc.). For a method protocol of a systematic review, see for example Andreucci, M.B., de Vries, S., Marselle, M. R., Olszewska-Guizzo, A., Keune, H., O’Brien, L.,... and Lammel, A. (2019). Types and characteristics of urban green & blue spaces having an impact on human mental health and wellbeing: Methods Protocol, Knowledge assessment and synthesis. EKLIPSE.

10/. Page 7, lines 143 to 145, what are the criteria that apply to those classifications? How many scientific articles? The types of articles? The methodology?

11/. Figure 2 is unclear and does not present the relationship between the different adaptation options and the social sciences involved in these adaptive responses. This figure must be revised.

12/. Page 9, 205-206 “The number of studies relevant to these issues, while still limited, is growing (Merrill et al., 2018; Moser et al., 2019; Woodruff et al., 2020; Bisaro et al., 2020).” This phrase is somewhat ambiguous, what does it mean limited, but growing? I think this kind of quantitative commentary doesn’t make sense if the authors don’t give specific criteria.

13/. Page 10, lines 214-227 Legal science references are not really new, they do not appear to be an emerging research area.

14/. Page 12, line 294... I suggest adding: and provides knowledge as well!!

15/. Page 13, lines 307-309 As you gave only one example I propose to put this sentence in the conclusion part. “Here again, there is a need for more interdisciplinary research bringing together the different branches of social sciences supporting coastal adaptation.”

16/. Page 14, line 371 what is “long-term vision”, how many years, decades, centuries? How to integrate the different scenarios with a “long-term vision”?

17/. Figure 3 the Coastal adaptation circle and the coastal resilient development circle should be bidirectional.

18/. Page 16, 379-390 avoid some repetitions; 388-390 “Combined with artistic contributions, which although not a social science can greatly help to raise awareness and disseminate science, social sciences can now be considered as an essential part of science to enable coastal adaptation and resilient coastal development.” The role of art, even if I think is very important, it does not fit with the reviewed social sciences, maybe it should be integrated into “perspectives”.

19/. Pages 16, 17 maybe you should add a “perspective” section.

20/. Pages 35-38 Table 1: review of social science studies applied to coastal adaptation: If you have enough space, you could integrate more references (exhaustive) references in order to strengthen the review.

Table 1: Potential for enabling adaptation or resilient coastal development or potential for accelerate coastal adaptation (as in the title)?

Review: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

n/a

Comments

This artile seeks to outline the contributions of the social sciences to the study of coastal climate adaptation. The authors provide an overview of the social sciences as it relates to a broad field of discplines and find that the discpline of economics and political science have made most of the contributions to date. The paper, however, conflates literature that is in the applied social sciences with the interperative and theory-driven social sciences scholarship. Consequently, the authors fail to review a wide array of literature, particularly in anthropology and area studies, that has made contributions to the topic of coastal climate adaptation. Also, the authors tend to attribute such broad themes as “colonialism” and “inequality” to being resolutely “social science” topics, while also citing literature on these themes that have very little to do with coastal climate adaptation. I’d encourage the authors to more clearly engage distinctions between applied and interperative/theory-driven scholarship in the social sciences on coastal climate adaptation. In addition, I would suggest that the authors add a “coda” section that offers an analysis as to why/how the existing governance frameworks of the IPCC perpetuate an overemphasis on applied scholarship; and on the other hand, blindly encourage the narrowing of social science literature around themes, such as ‘justice’ and ‘equity,’ in the the study of coastal climate adpatation.

Recommendation: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R0/PR4

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R1/PR6

Comments

Dear Editors,

Thank you for inviting us to publish our manuscript in Coastal’s Futures.

Please find enclose a revised paper and detailed responses to the comments of the reviewers.

All the comments were implemented and/or responded. We hope that these clarifications are appropriately responding to the reviewers’ concerns.

We stay at your disposal for any further information.

With best regards,

On behalf of the co-author,

Xénia Philippenko

Review: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R1/PR7

Conflict of interest statement

There are no competing interests between me and the authors.

Comments

Dear Author,

The article is now ready to be published. The article’s quality was improved by the modifications. The importance of social sciences in coastal adaptation to sea-level rise is fully demonstrated by it.

Recommendation: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R1/PR8

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Social science to accelerate coastal adaptation to sea-level rise — R1/PR9

Comments

No accompanying comment.