About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1 [1] (July 6, 2015)

handle is hein.crs/govccvx0001 and id is 1 raw text is: FF.ri E.$~ & p\w -- , gnom go mppm qq\ , q I aS 11LIANJILiN, Updated July 6, 2015 Coastal Flood Resilience: Policy, Roles, and Funds Congress and other policymakers are faced with how to cost-effectively reduce coastal flood risk. Issues include how to coordinate action and assign responsibilities for preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery; who bears the cost of impacts and long-term adjustments; and how to finance actions to improve coastal flood resilience. States largely determine whether the approach to coastal flooding is to protect (e.g., constructed dunes, gates), accommodate (e.g., elevate structures and infrastructure), or avoid and retreat (e.g., rolling easements that allow the shore to migrate inland). A state's approach can have implications for disaster resilience (including for public infrastructure), demand for federal assistance, and patterns and rates of recovery. Federal programs and policies can provide incentives or disincentives for nonfederal investment in coastal planning and risk reduction. The past decade has been marked by increased federal emergency funding for areas hit by coastal storms and increasing federal aid as a share of hurricane damages: 6% in 1955, 50% in 2005, 69% in 2008, and more than 75% in 2012 (see National Research Council, Reducing Coastal Risk, 2014). To what extent various federal programs and funds promote resilience (i.e., ability to recover from disruptions and adapt to changing conditions) is the subject of debate. U.S. coastal development historically was dominated by urban areas with ports and defense installations, such as Miami and Tampa St. Petersburg, Florida; New York City/Newark, New York and New Jersey; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Virginia Beach, Virginia. More recently, smaller settlements have transformed into higher-density resorts and urban complexes. The resulting trend is for coastal flooding to threaten greater proportions of the nation's population, infrastructure, and investments. The flood hazard is shaped by a locale's meteorologic, hydrologic, and geologic conditions and by broader trends in sea levels and conditions. Flooding occurs with not only storms but also regular high tides that produce nuisance flooding. In 2014, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) identified nonlinear increases in coastal nuisance flooding. Flood vulnerability and consequences are shaped by land use and building code practices, and investments in nonstructural protection (e.g., natural dunes, wetlands) and structural measures (e.g., barriers/gates, engineered dunes). Considerable variation exists across states and among local jurisdictions in the adoption, use, and enforcement of these measures. Variation also exists in the effort to maintain functional and intact wetlands and coastal forests as defenses from erosion and flooding. A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report estimated the potential future economic impacts of storm surge and sea-level rise on U.S. coasts cumulatively during this century at $5 trillion (2014 dollars, discounted at 3%), if no adaptation measures are implemented; these impacts drop to $0.8 trillion if investments are made in cost-effective adaptations and protections (see EPA, Climate Change in the United States: Benefits of Global Action, 2015). Awareness of flood risk and its long-term fiscal impact historically has proven insufficient to motivate pre-disaster land use changes and investments in mitigation and protection. Most coastal flood-related federal spending since 2005 has consisted of emergency funds concentrated on storm- damaged areas, rather than competitively distributed. Support through the annual federal appropriations process typically has been for planning and technical assistance, with some cost-shared investment in mitigation and protection. For most years, annual spending for these activities has totaled less than $200 million nationally for agencies with related missions: NOAA, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), as described below. State and local spending data on coastal flood activities is not available. NakoxnaI 0,k n: a d A:'mnosp 3c che ns'rko NOAA conducts a broad variety of activities that support coastal resilience including scientific research, data collection and monitoring, and coastal and ocean management. The Office for Coastal Management and its Coastal Zone Management, Coral Reef Conservation, Digital Coast, and National Estuarine Research Reserve programs are the core of NOAA's coastal resilience efforts. The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) provides planning and technical services to assist states in protecting, restoring, and developing coastal communities and resources. Under CZMA's voluntary program, states and territories develop coastal management plans. Once these plans are federally approved, states become eligible for grants, and federal actions in the coastal zone are required to be consistent with state plans. Management of development in high-hazard areas is a key element of most state plans. CZMA grants are used to support state efforts to reduce damages caused by coastal hazards ($17 million in FY2014). In 2015, NOAA established the Regional Coastal Resilience Grants program to build community, ecosystem, and economic resilience, and it uses Digital Coast and its partnerships to provide state and local coastal managers with data, mapping services, training, and case studies. FEMA's most prominent roles in coastal resilience are through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (which is funded based on a formula derived from individual declared