Barrier Islands have long been reported to provide disaster risk reduction from storm surge. Modelling shows that barrier islands contribute to storm surge attenuation, but do not remove it completely. Benefits include annual hurricane and storm damage risk reduction to the mainland, annual recreation benefits, and annual fishery losses avoided. By replacing sand back into the littoral zone, there is a long-term contribution to the sediment budget of the islands and an opportunity for island chains to replace lost sands from one place to provide growth in others. Sands are either barged in from other locations, or dredged from nearby sources, then pumped into degraded area in stages, which allows for some natural settling to occur.

For Wallasea Island, the public was largely content with creating new habitat in place of low-productivity agricultural land, but objected to the loss of farmland and potential impacts on recreation sailing, oyster fisheries and estuary processes. Another issue was the sense that past generations had worked hard to reclaim these areas from the sea and that this should not be reversed. However, according to the Environment Agency’s flood risk maps, the project estimated that hundreds of years of such reclamations had resulted in thousands of hectares along the Essex coastline that should be inundated. Extensive public engagement and consultation processes were thus carried out during the planning and inception phases of this project to gain understanding and support. Public engagement took place in the form of consultation events, talks to interest groups, site visits for key stakeholders, new updates for involved stakeholders, the establishment of a Local Liaison Group and the appointment of a public engagement manager in April 2010.

Given the history of the Ruhr region, the Heerener Mühlbach was a canalised water body used as an open wastewater system. Conducting a mixture of waste and storm water in a straight concrete bed, the water body got classified as heavily modified according to the EU Water Framework Directive and required that a number of problems be resolved. Discharges of wastewater in the stream derogated the ecosystem tremendously and the concrete bed of the water body and the specific management of the banks harmed biodiversity. Another problem was the dangerous shape of the canal which prohibited the recreational use of the water body. And finally, bad smell regularly disturbed the neighbourhood. As a first essential step towards ecologic enhancement, a sewer pipe was placed underground along the river. The concrete bed was then removed (apart from few exceptions, e.g. under bridges), which led the river to flow on a new sole that was higher and wider than before and meander where possible. The hard banks were converted into nature-like banks. The initial plantation is complemented by wild and natural vegetation: green plants have the chance to flourish along the blue water body.

CONANP has supported a new women’s cooperative (“las orchidias”) aimed at providing additional and innovative, non-capital intensive, eco-touristic services, and thus delivering additional sources of income to climate-change threatened lobster fishing families. Examples include: bicycle and kayak tours, and environmental interpretation routes. CONANP has provided support in the form of : a) Training for multiple actors b) Financing, c) Certification of activities and services d) Organizing women’s peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and mentoring The additional co-benefits of this approach have been to increase the confidence and self-esteem of local housewives, and to raise their position in the eyes of their families, as well as to provide a new potential organized group as a platform for future activities.

Vulnerability assessments are key for identifying drivers of climate change induced vulnerability. Following IPCC’s AR4 terminology, vulnerability assessments explore exposure to climate change, drivers for sensitivity and current adaptation capacity. By assessing the causes of vulnerability, decision makers are able to identify potential adaptation measures that may contribute to reduce this vulnerability.

 

Given the limited availability of sound quantitative data on climate change impacts, the focus was placed on a participatory process and the use of qualitative data. Basically, the vulnerability assessment was performed in two workshops (one for the entire municipality, another one for an especially vulnerable district) and focused on previously identified key systems of interest.

 

The combination of Metaplan and other participatory methods during the workshops helped to engage stakeholders and to mobilize their knowledge. As one of the key outcomes, an impact model that visualizes drivers of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity, served to identify (ecosystem-based) adaptation measures to be considered in the Duque de Caxias city master plan.

Prior to the restoration, Mayesbrook Park was unloved and underused. For the project to be a success, it was thus important to reconnect the neighbouring communities with the park and its planned refurbishment. Extensive public consultation helped the partners address local concerns about the park and served to ensure significant social benefits, such as an increased number of visitors in the park, as well as a greater feeling of safety. As the park was home to criminal activities and antisocial behavior prior to reformation, the use of an on-site ranger has helped to reduce this threat and provide greater comfort to visitors and the surrounding communities. In addition, Natural England also worked with the schools to see how the park could be most relevant to their needs and based new natural play facilities and trail markers in the on designs by these children. The improvement in landscape, social and aesthetic value helped shape new recreation facilities and enabled better access for park users.

While the core purpose of the project was to address flooding related to an over-utilized combined sewage system, the neighbourhood of Augustenborg was also in a state of socioeconomic decline prior to the urban regeneration project. Thus, the generation of socio-economic benefits became central to the project’s goals, such as improving the livability and aesthetics of the neighborhood, alongside biodiversity objectives. Furthermore, the project is part of a larger regeneration initiative within the neighbourhood of Augustenborg, which is also nested within ambitious sustainability plans for the City of Malmö. More specifically, the ‘Eco-city Augustenborg’ initiative aimed to transform Augustenborg into a socially, ecologically, and economically sustainable settlement. Ultimately, the work has represented a significant transformation of the neighborhood, and has become emblematic of a more pervasive shift towards sustainability. It has also resulted in the development of several businesses in the area of water innovation. Media coverage and public relations value are viewed as being additional benefs to the city and its residents.

A partnership between the Malmö housing company, Malmö water and city planners was a critical ingredient in the implementation of this project. Technical expertise was required from each of these partners to ensure appropriate design, and funding of the project was also collaboratively provided. Further components of this successful partnership included stakeholder engagement, the presence of sophisticated technical expertise, and a high level policy directive in support of experimentation. Understanding of the local ecosystems was not critical, but project designers had to possess a very detailed understanding of the frequency and severity of local floods.

Within the Wallasea Project, land-raising and landscape engineering was innovatively approached by creating a novel public private partnership. Materials from the Crossrail tunneling project were transported to a low-lying coastal area at high risk of flooding, in order to raise the land. The project thus established a precedent for using largely waste material generated by a major infrastructure project to meet biodiversity conservation and climate change adaptation aims elsewhere. Financing stemmed from both the private company Crossrail as well as from the Environment Agency, with all parties profiting due to the economic as well as environmental benefits set off by recycling the leftover materials. With Crossrail on board as a delivery partner, the project represents a partnership between Europe's largest civil engineering project and Europe's largest intertidal habitat creation project.

As this solution serves various goals and meets several objectives, it was possible to secure sufficient funding from diverse parties, domains and funding bodies to cover the entire implementation of the project. In the case of the creation of Lake Phoenix, this included funding for water management from the water board; funding for ecology from the ecological funding program by the federal state; funding for urban development from etc. The water board, for instance, provided the amount of money that was already budgeted for the construction of a flood retention basin. This basin was not needed anymore, as the lake solution already provided the required flood retention function. Some additional potential funding sources were not even used in the end, because it would have slowed down the marketing of the real estate and would have tied the project to certain restrictions, which were not desired by the decision-makers.