Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ doi:10.5194/nhess-17-449-2017 Author(s) 2017. CC Attribution 3.0 License.
Isavela N. Monioudi1, Adonis F. Velegrakis1, Antonis E. Chatzipavlis1, Anastasios Rigos1,2, Theophanis Karambas3, Michalis I. Vousdoukas4,1, Thomas Hasiotis1, Nikoletta Koukourouvli5, Pascal Peduzzi6, Eva Manoutsoglou1, Seram E. Poulos7, and Michael B. Collins8
1Department of Marine Sciences, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100 Mytilene, Greece
2Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University of the Aegean, University Hill, Mytilene 81100, Greece
3School of Civil Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, University Campus, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece
4European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Directorate for Space, Security and Migration Disaster Risk Management Unit, Via E. Fermi 2749, 21027 Ispra (VA), Italy
5Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100 Mytilene, Greece
6UNEP/DEWA/GRID-Geneva, International Environment House, 11 Chemin des Anmones, 1219 Chtelaine, Switzerland
7Faculty of Geology and Geoenvironment, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Panepistimioupoli Zografou, 15784 Athens, Greece
8Plentziako Itsas Estazioa, University of the Basque Country, Areatza z/g, 48620 Plentzia-Bizkaia, Spain Correspondence to: Michalis I. Vousdoukas ([email protected])
Received: 17 October 2016 Discussion started: 7 November 2016
Revised: 17 January 2017 Accepted: 4 February 2017 Published: 21 March 2017
Abstract. The present contribution constitutes the rst comprehensive attempt to (a) record the spatial characteristics of the beaches of the Aegean archipelago (Greece), a critical resource for both the local and national economy, and(b) provide a rapid assessment of the impacts of the long-term and episodic sea level rise (SLR) under different scenarios. Spatial information and other attributes (e.g., presence of coastal protection works and backshore development) of the beaches of the 58 largest islands of the archipelago were obtained on the basis of remote-sensed images available on the web. Ranges of SLR-induced beach retreats under different morphological, sedimentological and hydrodynamic forcing, and SLR scenarios were estimated using suitable ensembles of cross-shore (1-D) morphodynamic models. These ranges, combined with empirically derived estimations of wave runup induced ooding, were then compared with the recorded maximum beach widths to provide ranges of retreat/erosion and ooding at the archipelago scale. The spatial information shows that the Aegean pocket beaches may be particularly
vulnerable to mean sea level rise (MSLR) and episodic SLRs due to (i) their narrow widths (about 59 % of the beaches have maximum widths < 20 m), (ii) their limited terrestrial sediment supply, (iii) the substantial coastal development and (iv) the limited existing coastal protection. Modeling results indeed project severe impacts under mean and episodic SLRs, which by 2100 could be devastating. For example, under MSLR of 0.5 m representative concentration pathway (RCP) 4.5 of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) a storm-induced sea level rise of 0.6 m is projected to result in a complete erosion of between 31 and 88 % of all beaches (2987 % of beaches are currently fronting coastal infrastructure and assets), at least temporarily. Our results suggest a very considerable risk which will require signicant effort, nancial resources and policies/regulation in order to protect/maintain the critical economic resource of the Aegean archipelago.
Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.
Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise: the case of the Aegean archipelago (Eastern Mediterranean)
450 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
1 Introduction
Beaches are critical components of the coastal zone; not only are they signicant habitats in their own right (e.g., Defeo and McLachlan, 2013), but they also provide protection from marine ooding to other transitional ecosystems and the coastal assets, infrastructure and activities they front (e.g., Neumann et al., 2015). At the same time, tourism has been increasingly associated with beach recreational activities according to the dominant Sun, Sea and Sand - 3S tourism model (Phillips and Jones, 2006). Consequently, beaches have become very important economic resources (Ghermandi and Nunes, 2013) forming one of the pillars of tourism, an economic sector that contributes an estimated 5 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and about 67 % of global employment (directly and indirectly) (Hall et al., 2013).
Beaches are also very dynamic environments, controlled by complex forcing-response processes that operate at various spatiotemporal scales (Short and Jackson, 2013). They are generally under erosion (Eurosion, 2004; IPCC SREX, 2012; IPCC, 2013), which can be differentiated into (a) long-term erosion, i.e., irreversible retreat of the shoreline, due to mean sea level rise (MSLR) and/or negative coastal sedimentary budgets that force either beach landward migration or drowning (Nicholls and Cazenave, 2010), and (b) short-term erosion caused by storm surges and waves which, may or may not, result in permanent shoreline retreats but can be nevertheless devastating (e.g., Smith and Katz, 2012; UNECE, 2013). The accelerating MSLR coupled with episodic storm events will aggravate the already signicant beach erosion with severe impacts on coastal activities, infrastructure and assets (e.g., Jimnez et al., 2012), and the beach carrying capacity for recreation/tourism (Valdemoro and Jimnez, 2006; McArthur, 2015).
Beach erosion appears to be particularly alarming in islands. Island beaches are increasingly vulnerable to erosion due to their (generally) limited dimensions and diminishing sediment supply (e.g., Velegrakis et al., 2008; Peduzzi et al., 2013). At the same time, island beaches are amongst the most signicant 3S tourism destinations. For example, 3S tourism accounts for more than 23 % of the Gross Domestic Product in many Caribbean Small Island Developing States and in some cases, e.g., Antigua and Barbuda, for more than 75 % (ECLAC, 2011). Mediterranean islands are also major tourism destinations; in Greece, most of the hotel capacity and foreign tourist arrivals and earnings are associated with the Greek islands (SETE, 2016).
Under a variable and changing climate, projections on the future evolution of beach morphology are not easy due to uncertainties regarding both forcing and beach response (e.g., Short and Jackson, 2013). Nevertheless, beach erosion is amongst the rst issues to consider when planning for the sustainable development of the coastal zone, particularly in areas where beaches function as natural armor to valuable
coastal infrastructure and assets and/or as signicant environments of leisure (e.g., Paula et al., 2013). Therefore, assessments of the beach morphological evolution at different spatiotemporal scales are required based on advanced numerical, analytical and/or empirical models constructed and applied by experienced operators and set up/validated using appropriate eld data and backed by expert analysis (e.g., Roelvink et al., 2009; Bosom and Jimnez, 2010; Ding et al., 2013). However, such efforts are usually hampered by the (a) scarcity of relevant information in many coastal areas and (b) dearth in the necessary human and nancial resources (e.g., Parker et al., 2013); this is particularly true when assessments of beach erosion are carried out over larger spatial scales. Nevertheless, it is necessary to assess future beach retreat/erosion and ood risk at large spatial scales in order to identify hot spots and plan for effective adaptation policies and efcient allocation of resources.
Against this background, the objective of the present study is to assess the erosion and temporary inundation/ood risks of the beaches of the Aegean archipelago islands (Greece) under different scenarios of sea level rise (SLR). Towards this objective, spatial characteristics such as the area, length, maximum width, orientation, sediments and the presence of coastal works and backshore development of the Aegean beaches were recorded. This information was then used in conjunction with projections from ensembles of cross-shore morphodynamic models to obtain estimates of the ranges of potential beach retreat/erosion and ooding under different MSLRs and storm conditions.
2 Aegean archipelago beaches: signicance, environmental setting and sea level rise
2.1 Signicance of the Aegean archipelago beaches
The Aegean archipelago (Fig. 1) consists of several thousand islands and rock islets with a combined area of 17 550 km2 and a total coastline length of about 5880 km (Eurosion, 2004). Few of these islands and islets are populated; less than 70 islands have more than 100 permanent inhabitants and 45 have more than 1000 (http://www.statistics.gr/en/interactive-map
Web End =http://www.statistics.gr/en/ http://www.statistics.gr/en/interactive-map
Web End =interactive-map http://www.statistics.gr/en/interactive-map
Web End = ). Yet Aegean islands form very signicant tourist destinations. About 50 % of all Greek hotel beds (and > 60 % of all 5 star hotel beds) are located in the Aegean archipelago, with 43 % of the foreign arrivals to Greece in 2015 (7.4 out of a total of 17.1 million) arriving at its 11 international airports (SETE, 2016).
In recent years, tourism has become a most significant economic activity in Greece. In 2013, foreign earnings of the Greek tourist industry were about EUR 15.5 billion (http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/el/Statistics/externalsector/balance/travelling.aspx
Web End =http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/el/ http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/el/Statistics/externalsector/balance/travelling.aspx
Web End =Statistics/externalsector/balance/travelling.aspx ). As recent studies suggest that for each EUR 1 generated by tourism in Greece an additional EUR 1.21.65 is created by related
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 451
economic activity (a multiplier of, at least, 2.2; see IOBE, 2012), it follows that direct and indirect earnings from tourism may account for up to about 20 % of the countrys GDP (and 30 % of the private sector employment). Tourism is even more important for the island (local) economies. For example, in 2012 tourism accounted for about 48 % of the GDP of Crete and 60 % of the GDP of the Cyclades and Dodecanese island complexes (SETE, 2016).
In the Aegean archipelago, 3S tourism is the dominant model. A most critical component of 3S tourism is the availability of beaches that are environmentally and aesthetically sound and retain adequate carrying capacity (e.g., McArthur, 2015; Cisneros et al., 2016). Therefore, the assessment/management of beach erosion which could constitute a major risk for the sustainable development of the Aegean islands beaches should be prioritized; a decade-old approximation had suggested that about 25 % of the total coastline of the Aegean islands was already under erosion (Eurosion, 2004).
2.2 Environmental setting
The Aegean archipelago is located in the Aegean Sea, a peripheral sea of the Eastern Mediterranean that covers an area of some 160 103 km2, drains high relief basins with
a total area of 200 103 km2 and is connected to Black
Sea through the Dardanelles straits and to Eastern Mediterranean through the Cretan Arc straits. The Aegean Sea has a high relief due to complex regional tectonics and comprises different geomorphological units (Poulos, 2009), including an extensive shelf (N. Aegean shelf), a tectonic trough (N.Aegean Trough), a central platform (Cyclades plateau) with a large concentration of islands and deep basins (Fig. 1). The Aegean Sea shows complex hydrographic patterns and circulation (e.g., Theocharis et al., 1993) which are mainly controlled by the cold and low salinity water inputs from the Black Sea through the Dardanelles strait and the warm and saline water inputs from the Levantine Sea through the eastern Cretan Arc straits (Skliris et al., 2011). Under certain conditions (the Eastern Mediterranean transient), the Aegean basins can be important locations of deep water formation in the Eastern Mediterranean (e.g., Zervakis et al., 2000; Androulidakis et al., 2012).
The complex physiography of the Aegean archipelago controls its wind and wave climate, which is generally relatively mild due to the short fetches and durations. Northerly winds (44 % frequency of occurrence, Androulidakis et al., 2015) and waves (Soukissian et al., 2007, 2008) appear to prevail. Although waves are generally more energetic in winter, there are also energetic events in summer, forced by NNE winds (the etesians). Highly energetic wave events of relatively short duration may also occur, particularly along island straits. Soukissian et al. (2008) suggested (i) the area to the NNE of the Cyclades platform (particularly the MykonosIkaria strait) and (ii) the western and eastern Cre-
tan Arc straits (Fig. 1) as the most energetic areas of the Aegean archipelago; for example, maximum wave heights of about 11 m (Tp of 13.3 s and direction of 345 N) have been reported for the MykonosIkaria strait (22 January 2004).An Analysis of ERA-Interim wave information (19792013) from different representative areas of the Aegean archipelago carried out as part of the present study shows (a) mean signicant wave heights (Hs) of about 1 m in all areas, apart from an area to the northeast of eastern Cretan Arc straits (mean Hs of about 0.8 m); (b) mean maximum wave heights of about 2.4 m; and (c) signicant interannual variability.
Recent studies on the future wave climate of the Aegean archipelago project small changes in signicant wave heights for the 21st century. For the period 20012049, signicant wave heights in the N. Aegean are projected to slightly increase for the SW waves relative to the 19502000 reference period; whereas for the end of the century (20502099), wave occurrence and heights are projected to show high spatiotemporal variability (e.g., Prinos, 2014; Tsoukala et al., 2016).
2.3 Mean and extreme sea levels
Mediterranean MSLR rates were 1.11.3 mm yr1 for most of the 20th century. Since the late 1990s, however, much higher rates (2.43.8 mm yr1) have been recorded, an increase attributed mainly to additional water mass inputs rather than to steric contributions; these changes have been also related to North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) modulations (Tsimplis et al., 2013). For the Aegean archipelago in particular, satellite altimetry suggests recent MSLR rates of4.34.6 mm yr1 (Mamoutos et al., 2014), with some periods characterized by even higher rates (e.g., Tsimplis et al., 2009). In terms of future projections, recent studies project decreases in the MSLR rates in the 21st century, although this might be an underestimation due to the uncertainties regarding the mass exchanges particularly between the Black and Aegean Seas (Mamoutos et al., 2014). Hinkel et al. (2014), using an approach accounting for changes in ice mass and ocean circulation, projected the following MSLRs for the region of the Aegean archipelago (33.540 N, 18.528.5 E).
In 2050, MSL was projected to be 0.130.15 and 0.1416 m higher than that of the 19852005 reference period for a medium land ice scenario and RCPs of 4.5 and 8.5, respectively; in 2100, under the same scenarios, MSL was projected to be 0.460.48 and 0.660.72 m higher than that of the 19852005 reference period, respectively.
In addition to MSLR, changes in the intensity, frequency and/or patterns of extreme storm surges and waves can, at least temporarily, induce beach erosion and ooding, particularly when combined with increasing mean sea levels (MSLs)(e.g., Xu and Huang, 2013). Extreme sea levels (ESLs) in the Mediterranean have a seasonal footprint with extreme positives occurring mostly in winter and under cer-
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
452 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Figure 1. The Aegean archipelago.
tain North Atlantic Oscillation modulations (Tsimplis and Shaw, 2010).
Future ESLs are projected to show high spatial variability, being sensitive to the evolution of the thermohaline circulation and the Black Sea buoyant inputs (e.g., Mamoutos et al., 2014). Generally, extreme levels due to storm surges and waves are projected to decrease in terms of magnitude over the Mediterranean basin towards the end of the 21st century (e.g., Conte and Lionello, 2013), although model choice and resolution and the quality/resolution of the coastal observations available for model validation may have inuenced these projections (e.g., Calafat et al., 2014). For example, a recent study has suggested substantial changes in the return periods of ESLs for the E. Mediterranean for the end of the 21st century, with the current 1000-year event projected to occur every ve years (Vousdoukas et al., 2017). Regarding the storm surges in the Aegean archipelago, these are relatively small (heights of up to about 0.5 m, Krestenitis et al., 2011) and projected to show (generally) small height increases until 2050 as well as changes in their temporal distribution (e.g., Marcos et al., 2011; Androulidakis et al., 2015; Vousdoukas et al., 2016a).
3 Materials and Methods
3.1 Geospatial characteristics of the Aegean archipelago beaches
The geospatial characteristics of Aegean archipelago (dry) beaches have been recorded on the basis of the imagery and other related optical information available in the Google Earth Pro application. In this study, dry beaches were dened as the low-lying coastal sedimentary bodies bounded on their landward side by either natural boundaries (vegetated dunes and/or cliffs) or permanent articial structures (e.g., coastal embankments, sea walls, roads, and buildings) and on their seaward side by the shoreline, i.e., the median line of the foaming swash zone shown on the imagery. Regarding the lateral extent of individual beaches, these were delimited by natural barriers such as rock promontories. Tiny beaches (areas less than about 20 m2) were ignored and not included in the data set. Digitization of the remote-sensed imagery was carried out by few (four) analysts who consistently followed the above beach delimitation rules. To assess inconsistencies, 400 beaches from different islands (about 12 % of the recorded beaches) were processed by all four analysts and the standard deviation of the extracted shoreline positions was estimated at less than 0.3 m; this was considered acceptable for the scope of the study.
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
(Leontyev, 1996), XBeach (Roelvink et al., 2010) and the Boussinesq model, whose hydrodynamic component involves high-order Boussinesq equations (Karambas and Koutitas, 2002). The Bruun model is a widely-used (e.g., Hinkel et al., 2010; Ranasinghe et al., 2013) analytical morphodynamic model that estimates long-term coastal retreat (S) under a SLR ( ) on the basis of the equilibrium prole concept; its results are controlled by the height of the beach face and the cross-shore distance between the beach closure depth and the shoreline. The Edelman model estimates beach erosion/retreat using the initial height of the beach face, the water depth at wave breaking and the surf zone width, whereas the Dean model estimates retreats on the basis of the wave height, the water depth at wave breaking and the surf zone width. It should be noted that due to lack of accurate bathymetry data, the necessary input values of the analytical models, i.e., the distance of the shoreline from the closure depth and the width of the surf zone, were estimated on the basis of the beach slope.
The SBEACH model (Larson and Kraus, 1989) is a numerical morphodynamic model consisting of three modules: a hydrodynamic, a sediment transport and a morphological evolution module. It can describe wave transformation in shoaling waters, with the coastal sediment transport controlled by the coastal wave energy uxes; the sediment continuity equation in a nite-difference scheme and a stair-step beach prole discretization is used in its morphological module. The numerical model based on Leontyev (1996) uses the energetic approach, with the cross-shore wave energy balance controlled by wave propagation angle and dissipation; sediment transport rates are estimated separately for the surf and swash zones. The XBeach model (Roelvink et al., 2010) is an open-source, widely used numerical model of the nearshore processes intended to estimate the effects of time-varying storm conditions; it contains a time-dependent wave action balance solver and allows for variations in the wave action over time and over the directional space. Finally, the Boussinesq model used computes nonlinear wave transformation in the surf and swash zone based on a wave propagation module involving high-order Boussinesq equations (Karambas and Koutitas, 2002); its sediment transport module can estimate sheet ow as well as bed and suspended load over uneven sea beds (e.g., Karambas, 2006). Detailed descriptions of the models used can be found elsewhere (e.g., Vousdoukas et al., 2009a; Monioudi et al., 2016).
In the present contribution, all models were used in a stationary mode. Validation of model results was provided through comparisons with the results of physical experiments that took place in the large wave ume (GWK) in Hanover, Germany (Sect. 4.2.1). The models were used in an ensemble mode in order to assess the range of long- and short-term beach retreats/erosion for different beach slopes, sediment grain sizes and wave conditions, and under different scenarios of MSL changes and/or storm sea levels. Two model ensembles were created: a long-term ensemble consisting
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 453
However, it should be noted that the primary information used, i.e., satellite imagery snapshots, cannot provide synoptic information at the Aegean archipelago scale, as the available images have been collected in different periods and under variable hydrodynamic conditions. Regarding the beach width estimations, although astronomical tidal effects are small due to the microtidal regime of the Aegean archipelago (tidal ranges in most areas less than about 0.15 m) and the generally increased beach slopes, there are still uncertainties as the estimations were based on snapshots of the shoreline positions which are very dynamic coastal features controlled, amongst others, by the spatiotemporal variability of the nearshore waves and currents (e.g., Velegrakis et al., 2016). Satellite imagery, as well as other one-off land-based, airborne or lidar surveys, provides only snapshots of beach widths which may not represent mean conditions; nevertheless, this cannot be avoided when working at large spatial scales (e.g., Allenbach et al., 2015; Vousdoukas et al., 2016a).
Beaches were digitized as polygons and exported to ArcGIS for further analysis. There has been no georectication, as the aim of the exercise has not been to provide denitive locations and elevations of beach features, but to extract/record (horizontal) geospatial characteristics. To this end, a custom made AML (ARC Macro Language, proprietary language for ArcInfo applications in Esri software) script was used to estimate beach areas, lengths, maximum widths and orientations (Allenbach et al., 2015).
In addition to beach dimensions, other relevant information was recorded and codied, including the presence of (a) natural features, such as river mouths, back-barrier lagoons and cliffs, and beachrock outcrops; and (b) articial features such as coastal protection schemes and back-shore infrastructure/assets. Classication of the beach sediments of the Aegean island beaches in terms of sediment texture classes (e.g., sand or gravel) was also carried out on the basis of all available information from the scientic literature/reports (e.g., Monioudi et al., 2016) as well as web-based photographic material.
3.2 Beach retreat predictions due to sea level rise
Sea level rise represents a most signicant hazard for beaches, forcing their retreat/erosion; a sea level rise will result in a shoreline retreat S due to erosion of the beach face, the sediments of which are transported/deposited offshore, with the extent/rates of the cross-shore retreat controlled (amongst others) by bed slope, the texture and supply of beach sediments, and the hydrodynamic conditions (e.g., Dean, 2002).
In the present study, seven cross-shore (1-D) morpho-dynamic models were used to project beach response to SLR: the Bruun (Bruun, 1988), Edelman (Edelman, 1972) and Dean (Dean, 1991) analytical models and the numerical models SBEACH (Larson and Kraus, 1989), Leontyev
454 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
of the Bruun, Dean and Edelman analytical models; and a short-term ensemble comprising the numerical SBEACH, Leontyev, XBeach and Boussinesq models. The former is used to assess beach retreat/erosion under MSLR and the latter to assess retreat due to temporary SLR (i.e., due to storm surges and waves). The adopted approach was based on the proposition that as models have differential sensitivity to the controlling environmental factors, ensemble applications may provide tighter prediction ranges than the individual models (Sect. 4.2.1).
Experiments were carried out using various plausible energetic wave conditions in the Aegean archipelago (Sect. 2.2),i.e., waves with offshore heights (Hs) of 1, 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 m and periods (T ) of 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 s. Likewise, in order to address the sediment texture variability over the archipelago beaches, experiments were carried out for seven different median (d50) grain sizes (d50 of 0.2, 0.33, 0.50, 0.80, 1, 2 and 5 mm); note that the results of the analytical models are not controlled by beach sediment size. Five (5) different linear prole slopes (bed slopes of 1/10, 1/15, 1/20, 1/25 and 1/30) and 11 SLR scenarios (0.05, 0.15, 0.22, 0.30, 0.40,0.50, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.50 and 2 m) were examined. Experiments were carried out for all combinations (about 5500 experiments), and the means (best ts) of the lowest and highest projections by all models of the two ensembles were estimated. With regard to combined SLRs, i.e., coastal ESLs due to storm surges and wave set-ups superimposed on the MSLRs (e.g., Vousdoukas et al., 2016b), the long-term and short-term ensembles were used consecutively.
Recent MSLR projections for the area that take into account contributions of ice mass were used (Hinkel et al., 2014): (i) 0.15 m, average of the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios in 2040; and (ii) 0.5 and 0.7 m under RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 (2100). With regard to short-term SLR, recent trends for extreme sea levels in the Aegean archipelago (up to 0.50.6 m high) (Tsimplis and Shaw, 2010) are used; ESLs in the region are projected to only slightly increase in the future according to recent projections regarding their storm surge component (Androulidakis et al., 2015; Vousdoukas et al., 2016a).
The above approach is designed to project beach retreat/erosion, but not temporary inundation/ooding due to wave run-up. Although the wave run-up is dealt within the numerical models of the ensemble, its effects are manifested in the results only if it induces sediment transport that forces morphological changes (e.g., Leontyev, 1996). However, wave run-up induced temporary ooding that does not result in beach retreats might also be a signicant beach management issue (e.g., Jimnez et al., 2012; Hoeke et al., 2013).Therefore, estimations of wave run-up excursion/inundation were also undertaken on the basis of run-up heights; these were estimated for all tested conditions, using the expressions of Stockdon et al. (2006) which have been validated for the beaches of the Aegean archipelago (Vousdoukas et al., 2009b):
R2% = (1)
1.1 0.35 (Ho/Lo)1/2 + [bracketleftbig]H
oLo 0.563 2 + 0.004
[parenrightbig][bracketrightbig]1/2
!,
2
for all data,and
R2% = 0.043(Ho/Lo)1/2R2% = 0.043(Ho/Lo)1/2,for dissipative beaches (<0.3), (2)
where R2%, the 2 % exceedance of the peak run-up height, Ho and Lo are the deep water wave height and length, the beach slope and the Iribarren number ( = /(Ho/Lo)1/2).
Wave run-up excursions were then calculated from the wave run-up heights (R2%) for all tested bed slopes and wave conditions and added to the beach erosion/retreat projections of the seven 1-D cross-shore morphodynamic models to project nal ooding excursions (S(i)). The best ts of the lower and upper limits of the nal projections of ooding by all models were then estimated.
4 Results
4.1 Characteristics of the beaches of the Aegean archipelago
A total of 3234 beaches were recorded along the coasts of the 58 larger islands of the Aegean archipelago. These beaches were found to be pocket beaches, having a total area of about 21.35 km2; this indicates that the total carrying capacity of the Aegean archipelago beaches (i.e., the number of visitors that can be simultaneously hosted) is about2.135 million according to the Rajan et al. (2013) criterion (10 m2 for each beach user). A rough estimation on the basis of the average number of tourist days spent in the Aegean islands suggests that, with the exception of the busiest months (July and August) during which about 7 million tourist days per month are recorded (SETE, 2016) and many beaches operate close to their full carrying capacity, the archipelago beaches in their present condition still have (as a total) potential for development as environments of leisure.
Most of the Aegean beaches are narrow, with about 59 % of them having recorded maximum widths of less than 20 m (Fig. 2). Regarding beach sediment type, three different classes were recorded: (i) sandy beaches (36.4 %),(ii) gravel/pebbled beaches (44.4 %), and (iii) cobble/rocky beaches (about 2 %). For the remainder of the beaches, no sediment type could be assigned on the basis of the available information (Fig. 2).
Beach orientation was examined by (i) taking into consideration the eight main compass directions and (ii) considering the eight main compass directions for each of the eight island complexes of the Aegean Sea N. Aegean, Dodecanese, Cyclades, Crete, SW Aegean, Argo-Saronic, Euboea (Evia), and Sporades, Fig. 1. In the rst case, occurrence
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 455
Figure 2. Statistics of the Aegean archipelago beaches. (a) Pie diagrams of major characteristics; (b) relationship between the beach maximum width and the presence of river mouths; and (c) box plots showing relationships between beach widths and sediment types.
of beaches with S, SE and SW orientations appears more prevalent (16.1, 13.9 and 12.5 % respectively) than that of beaches facing towards the other ve compass directions; this was found to be statistically signicant (Table 1). Prevailing beach orientations were also found to differ over the different island complexes. For example, the prevailing (statistically signicant) beach orientations were found to be towards the SE (18 %) in the Dodecanese islands and towards the S (22 %) in Crete. There is also signicant correlation between beach orientation and recorded maximum width. Statistical tests (Table 1) showed that W and SW facing beaches are associated with greater maximum widths (24.5 and 24.0 m, respectively).
The above results indicate some hydrodynamic control in the development and maintenance of the Aegean beaches: there are more and wider beaches along the island coasts that are (at least) partially protected from the prevailing northerly wind/waves (Soukissian et al., 2007, 2008). However, the correlation is weak (Table 1) due to other important factors controlling island beach development/maintenance, such as the antecedent topography and geological history, the terrestrial sediment supply and the human development at each individual beach.
In terms of the terrestrial sediment supply, few beaches (about 18 %) were found to be associated with intermittent (very rarely permanent) ow river mouths; most of those were found in the large islands of the North Aegean (314 out of a total of 728 beaches). Riverine supply appears to be
a signicant control for both beach width and sediment type; beaches with river mouths are more likely to be wider and built on ner sediments (sands) (Fig. 2 and Table 1).
Another interesting nding is that perched beaches (Gallop et al., 2012) form a signicant fraction of the Aegean archipelago beaches; beachrock outcrops (e.g., Vousdoukas et al., 2009a) were recorded on the beach face of 23 % of all beaches. In terms of orientation, although there appears that beaches with beachrocks are more prevalent at the southern coasts of islands (192 out of 744 total occurrences), statistical testing did not show any signicant trends (Table 1). Since there could be a signicant number of beaches which may contain buried beachrocks (i.e., not outcropping at the time of the analyzed imagery), it seems that beachrocks are quite widespread along the Aegean island beaches.
Coastal protection schemes have been recorded at about 15 % of the Aegean island beaches (Fig. 2a). In comparison, many beaches are associated with coastal development:80.8 % of all beaches front public and private assets such as coastal roads, housing and tourist infrastructure. The density of these assets is variable, ranging from a coastal road and a few houses found in remote island beaches to the plethora of valuable public and private assets found behind the urban beaches of, e.g., Heraklion (Crete) and Rhodes. Generally, about 32.7 % of the Aegean beaches front coastal infrastructure and assets with moderate to high density. The considerable coastal development, coupled with the narrow widths of
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
456 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Table 1. Statistical analysis of the characteristics of the Aegean archipelago beaches.
Comparison Null Hypothesis (H0) Statistical test results Observations
Beach orientation and occurrence
H0: the data are uniformly distributed around the compass rose
Rayleighs test: H0 rejected (p < 0.001). Beach orientation not uniformly distributed over the compass rose.
Prevailing beach orientation towards the south (S) (occurrence16.1 %)
Beach orientation and maximum width
H0: the eight compass orientations have equal mean values regarding maximum width(1 = 2 = ...8)
KruskalWallis (Analysis of variance by ranks): H0 rejected (p < 0.001).
Mean beach maximum widths differ with orientation.
W and SW facing beaches have greater maximum widths (mean maximum widths of 24.5 and 24 m)
H0: M = 0, no correla
tion in the data population
Mardias correlation coefcient (Zar, 2010): H0 rejected (p < 0.01).
Signicant correlation between orientation and maximum width.
~2 tests for (i) four and (ii) main compass orientations:H0 rejected (p < 0.001). Small association power, Cramers (i) V = 0.13 and
(ii) V = 0.17.
No signicant trend
Beach orientation and beachrock occurrence
H0: the two variables are independent
Sediment type and presence of river mouth
H0: beach sediment type independent of the river mouth presence
~2 test: H0 rejected (p < 0.05). Signi-cant correlation, but small power of association (Cramers V = 0.064).
Sand-sized beach sediments are more associated with river mouths
Beach maximum width and presence of river mouth
H0: the sets are independent (mean values1 = 2)
Students t test (two-tailed test): H0 rejected (p < 0.001).
Beaches with large maximum widths are associated with river mouths (Fig. 2b)
Beach sediment type and maximum width
H0: mean values of the three categories are equal1 = 2 = 3
ANOVA, after splitting the data set into the three sediment types:H0 rejected (p < 0.001).
Beaches with coarse sediments are associated with smaller maximum widths (Fig. 2c)
the Aegean island beaches increase exposure under a variable and changing climate.
4.2 Predictions of erosion/retreat and ooding for the Aegean island beaches
4.2.1 Model sensitivity and validation
Model sensitivity tests undertaken within the present study have shown that beach retreats are controlled by beach typology. All models show higher retreats with decreasing Iribarren numbers i.e., for beaches with milder beach slopes ( ) and/or offshore waves of increased steepness (Ho/Lo) with the exception of the Bruun model whose results are independent of for linear proles. The most sensitive models to beach slope are the Edelman and SBEACH models, and the least sensitive is the XBeach model; with regard to the offshore wave climate, XBeach appears to be the most sensitive, while Leontyev and Boussinesq appear to be the least sensitive models. The effect of sediment texture is not always clear, although a weak negative correlation between beach retreat and the median sediment size (d50) might be discerned in the numerical models; analytical model results are inde-
pendent of the beach sediment texture. Generally, models showed differential sensitivity to initial conditions and forcing, which justies their collective use in ensembles.
Model results have been compared with those by physical experiments conducted at the large wave ume in early 2013 (details in Vousdoukas et al. 2014). In these experiments, the initial slope of the beach was set to about 1/15, tested waves had an offshore height (H) of 1 m and a period (T ) of 5 s, and the seabed consisted of well-sorted sand of median grain size (d50) equal to 0.3 mm. Three SLR scenarios were tested (rises of 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6 m), with the initial proles of these experiments controlled by the nal prole (wave forcing only) of the rst experiment (i.e., the test without level rise). Simulation times were set to 3000 s.
In Fig. 3, proles by the numerical models Leontyev, SBEACH, XBeach and Boussinesq under the baseline level as well as three increased sea levels (+0.2, +0.4 and +0.6 m)
are compared against those that resulted from the physical experiments. It appears that there are some discrepancies, particularly with regard to the dynamics of the offshore bar and trough. The Leontyev and XBeach models seem to considerably smooth these features, whereas the SBEACH and Boussinesq results tend to better represent the results of the
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
the lowest projections from the four numerical models) is given by S = 0.1 2 + 9.7 + 0.4 and the high mean by
S = 0.7 2+28.5 +4.8 (Fig. 5a), where S is the beach retreat
and is the SLR. Also, the low projection mean of the long-term ensemble is given by S = 0.1 2+10 +0.3 and the high
projection mean by S = 1.6 2+29.8 +2.3 (Fig. 5b). Ranges
in beach temporary inundation/ooding due to wave runup combined with ( ) episodic (short-term) SLRs (Fig. 5c) were estimated as S(i) = 0.1 2 + 9.7 + 4 (minimum) and
S(i) = 0.7 2 + 31.2 + 27.2 (maximum) and with long-
term SLRs (Fig. 5d) as S(i) = 0.4 2 + 10.1 + 3.7 (mini
mum) and S(i) = 0.4 2 + 30 + 28.1 (maximum).
Ranges of decreases in dry beach widths were projected through the comparison between the ranges of beach retreat/erosion (S) and the recorded maximum widths of the 3234 pocket beaches. Ranges in beach temporary inundation/ooding were estimated by the comparison between the ranges of combined beach retreat and wave run-up excursions (S(i)) and the beach maximum widths. In Table 4, estimations are presented for nine SLR scenarios: (i) 0.15, 0.5 and 0.7 m MSLRs according to recent projections for the area (Hinkel et al., 2014) using the long-term ensemble; (ii) short-term SLRs due to storm surges and waves of 0.2, 0.4 and0.6 m using the short-term ensemble; and (iii) combined MSLRs and short-term SLRs of 0.55, 1.1 and 1.3 m using the long- and short-term ensembles consecutively.
According to the projections of the long-term ensemble, MSLRs of 0.15, 0.5 and 0.7 m will result to beach retreats/erosion of about 1.86.8, 5.317.6 and 7.324 m, respectively, whereas short-term ensemble estimates show that storm-induced levels of +0.2, +0.4, +0.6 m could result in
ranges of beach retreat/erosion of about 2.310.6, 4.316.3,5.319.3 and 6.222.2 m, respectively (Table 4). For the considered SLR scenarios, there will be signicant impacts on the Aegean archipelago beaches as shown by the percentages of beaches that are projected to be eroded/shifted landward to a distance equal to between 50 and 100 % of their maximum width (Table 4).
Even under an MSLR of 0.15 m (RCPs 4.5 and 8.5 in 2040), there could be substantial impacts on the basis of the mean minimum and maximum projections of the long-term ensemble (Table 4). Temporary inundation (S(i)) could overwhelm between 4.9 and 81 % of the beaches, ooding (occasionally) 4.680 % of the beaches fronting currently existing coastal infrastructure/assets. Under an MSLR of 0.5 m (RCP 4.5, 2100), projected impacts will be severe. From 5 to 54 % of all Aegean beaches will be completely eroded in the absence of appropriate coastal defences, whereas between about 18 and 90 % of all beaches are projected to be occasionally overwhelmed by ooding. For 2100, under the high emission scenario (RCP 8.5, MSLR of 0.7 m), impacts could be catastrophic (Table 4 and Fig. 6): 12.468 and 28 93 % of Aegean island beaches will be completely eroded and occasionally overwhelmed by ooding, respectively. Associated infrastructure/assets are also projected to be greatly
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 457
physical experiments; the best performance was that of the Boussinesq model (Fig. 3). Nonetheless, there appears to be a good agreement between the beach retreats estimated by the models and those recorded during the physical experiments (Fig. 3 and Table 2). The Leontyev, SBEACH and Boussinesq models appear to slightly underestimate beach retreats, and XBeach appears to overestimate them. The Bruun and Edelman models appear to overestimate beach retreats under higher SLRs, whereas the Dean model appear to overestimate them under all SLRs tested.
When the models are used in an ensemble mode, the comparison between the retreats projected by the numerical models (short-term retreat) and those recorded in the physical experiments improves (Table 2). Conversely, analytical models tend to overestimate beach retreats by up to 20 %. Interestingly, when the results of all (7) analytical and numerical models are combined in a unied ensemble, then retreat overestimations decrease to less than 10 % for the tested SLRs.
The above results refer to natural proles. In order to relate the validation to the linear proles used here, further tests were undertaken. In these tests, the models were run using an equivalent linear prole having a slope of 1/15 to compare with the results of the physical experiments. The equivalent prole was estimated using the best linear t to the natural proles used in the physical experiment (between water depths of 3.5 and elevations of 1.5 m).
The results of this exercise are shown in Table 3. Generally, the comparison showed that, at least for the conditions tested, the results of the models set with the equivalent linear prole were reasonably close to those of the physical experiments, with the comparison worsening with increasing water levels. When the numerical models are used as an (short-term) ensemble, beach retreat forced by waves is only overestimated; under SLR, however, ensemble projections improve (overestimations of up to 19 %, Table 3). Regarding the analytical models, the long-term ensemble gave improved projections, with differences between models and experiments ranging from about 3 to 11 %.
4.2.2 Beach erosion and inundation/ooding projections
Modeling results show that sea level rise will cause shoreline retreats as well as signicant morphological changes (Fig. 4).Numerical models showed differential prole changes in both breaker and surf zones, supporting their use in an ensemble mode.
Models displayed differential behavior for almost all tested conditions, showing, as expected, signicant ranges of results (Fig. 5) due to the varying initial conditions and forcing used, i.e., different bed slopes, sediment sizes, wave conditions and SLRs. The means (best ts) of the lowest and highest projections of all models were calculated. It was found that the low mean of the beach retreat projections by the short-term ensemble (i.e., the best t of
458 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Figure 3. Proles by numerical models plotted against results from physical experiments at the large wave ume (GWK, Hanover): (a) initial/present water level; (b) water level rise of 0.2 m; (c) water level rise of 0.4 m; and (d) water level rise of 0.6 m. Both numerical and physical experiments were set up for the same initial (nonlinear) prole. Simulation times for the numerical experiments set to 3000 s to match those of the physical experiment.
Table 2. Comparison of results from models and physical experiments. Negative values represent erosion. Key: SLR, sea level rise; Exper, physical experiment; Leo, Leontyev model; SB, SBEACH model; Xb, XBeach model; Bous, Boussinesq model; ST Ens, Short-term ensemble; Br, Bruun model; Edel, Edelman model; Dean, Dean model; and LT Ens, Long-term ensemble.
SLR (m) Shoreline retreat/erosion or advance/accretion (m)
Exper Leo SB Xb Bous ST Ens Br Edel Dean LT Ens
0 0.35 0.01 0.02 2.32 0.06 0.59
0.2 3.57 3.2 3.04 5.63 3.0 3.72 3.01 3.09 6.7 4.27
0.4 6.23 5.94 5.83 8.35 5.6 6.43 6.13 6.43 8.82 7.13
0.6 8.66 8.22 8.02 10.27 7.9 8.60 9.25 9.97 11.5 10.24
impacted, with 1266 and 2692 % of all beaches fronting currently existing assets projected to be lost to beach erosion and occasionally overwhelmed by ooding, respectively.
According to the mean low projections of the short-term ensemble, storm coastal sea levels of +0.2 and +0.4 m will
result in moderate (temporary) beach retreats (0.12.3 % of all beaches will retreat more than their maximum width) and temporary ooding (512.7 % of the beaches will be occasionally completely ooded). On the basis of the mean high projections (forced by the high wave conditions expected in storms, see also Tsoukala et al., 2016), beach retreats and ooding will be substantial with severe reductions in dry beach widths and potential damage to assets located at the
back of the beach. About 27 and 51 % of all Aegean beaches will retreat by more than their maximum width and 82 and 87 % will be completely overwhelmed by temporary ooding under short-term SLRs of 0.2 and 0.4 m, respectively (Table 4).
In the case of a 0.4 m short-term SLR, up to 50 and 86 % of all beaches fronting assets will be affected by beach retreat/erosion and temporary ooding, respectively (Fig. 6), whereas impacts will be more severe under higher coastal sea levels (+0.6 m, Table 4). The picture does not change much,
even when projections are adjusted for the maximum overestimation observed in the results of the numerical models (by 19 %) when linear proles were used (Sect. 4.2.1); for exam-
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 459
Table 3. Comparison of results by models and physical experiments. Models used an equivalent linear prole slope of 1/15 to represent the natural prole of the physical experiment (see text). Negative values represent beach retreat/erosion. Key: SLR, sea level rise; Exper, physical experiment; Leo, Leontyev model; SB, SBEACH model; Xb, XBeach model; Bous, Boussinesq model; ST Ens, Short-term ensemble; Br, Bruun model; Edel, Edelman model; Dean, Dean model; and LT Ens, Long-term ensemble.
SLR (m) Shoreline retreat/erosion or advance/accretion (m)
Exper Leo SB Xb Bous ST Ens Br Edel Dean LT Ens
0 0.35 0.34 0.02 3.23 0.0 0.9
0.2 3.57 3.58 3.2 7.00 3.03 4.20 3 3.07 4.05 3.37
0.4 6.23 6.67 6.25 10.47 5.9 7.32 6 6.3 7.05 6.45
0.6 8.66 9.73 9.25 13.35 8.8 10.28 9 9.69 10.05 9.58
Figure 4. Examples of morphodynamic changes in the prole of the upper part of the beach (see inset) and mean retreats of the two ensembles for an SLR of 0.4 m. (a) Offshore (at 20 m water depth) wave height (H) of 1 m, period (T ) of 5 s and median (d50) sediment grain size of0.8 mm, linear beach prole with a 1/10 slope; (b) Offshore (at 20 m water depth) wave height (H) of 2 m, period T of 6 s and median (d50) sediment grain size of 0.33 mm, linear prole with 1/30 slope. Origin of x axis is at 20 m water depth.
ple, for a 0.4 m level rise, up to 37 and 84 % of all beaches fronting assets will be fully eroded and ooded, respectively.
The worst impacts are projected from the combined mean and short-term SLRs. In 2040, in the case that storm-induced sea levels of +0.4 m are combined with a projected MSLR
of 0.15 m (combined SLR of 0.55 m), 868 % of beaches are projected to be (at least temporarily) eroded and 2191 % of beaches ooded. In 2100, superimposition of storm levels on the projected MSLRs will have devastating effects. A combined sea level rise of 1.1 m (e.g., a storm-induced extreme level of +0.6 m superimposed on an MSLR of 0.5 m, RCP
4.5) will have very severe impacts; indeed (Figs. 6 and 7) 3188 % of all beaches will be completely (at least temporarily) eroded (2987 % of all beaches fronting assets) under the low and high mean projections of the ensemble, respectively, with 4896 % of all beaches occasionally overwhelmed by ooding (Table 4).
A combined SLR of 1.3 m (RCP 8.5, an MSLR of 0.7 m combined with a storm-induced coastal sea level of +0.6 m)
represents a doomsday scenario for the beaches of the
Aegean archipelago. Based on the low projections of the combined ensembles, about 75 % of the beaches will be shifted landward (and/or drowned) to a distance equal to
50 % of their maximum dry width, whereas about 39 % of all beaches will be (at least temporarily) completely eroded; about 37 % of beaches fronting existing assets will be fully eroded and 54 % fully ooded.
According to the high ensemble estimates, it is projected that almost 91 % of all beaches will be completely eroded, at least at the time of the storm event (90 % of all beaches fronting assets); about 97 % of all beaches will also be ooded temporarily (Table 4).
When projections are adjusted for overestimations ob-served in the validation exercise due to the use of linear proles (Sect. 4.2.1), projected impacts are still devastating: 35 89 % of all beaches will be (at least temporarily) completely eroded and 4886 % ooded whereas, according to the high estimates, 88 and 96 % of all beaches fronting assets will be completely eroded and ooded, respectively.
It should be noted that projected impacts do not account for vertical land motions (Poulos et al., 2009). Moreover, since other signicant erosion factors such as the diminishing coastal sediment supply are not considered, the above projections may actually underestimate future beach retreat/erosion and ooding at the Aegean archipelago beaches.
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
460 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Figure 5. (a, b) Projections of beach retreat/erosion and (c, d) temporary inundation/ooding due to (a, c) short-term and (b, d) long-term SLR. Projections are for different beach slopes, sediment sizes and wave conditions. The means of the highest and lowest projections of all models in the ensembles are shown as yellow stippled lines.
Table 4. Minimum and maximum mean estimates of beach retreat (S) and inundation/ooding (S(i)) by the long-term, short-term and combined ensembles and the empirical model of Stockdon et al. (2006). Ranges of cross-shore retreat/erosion (R) and temporary inundation/ooding (F ) for the beaches of the Aegean archipelago are projected by comparing the highest and lowest mean S and S(i) with the maximum width of the 3234 Aegean archipelago beaches under different SLRs. Numbers (N) and percentages of beaches where backshore infrastructure/assets are projected to be affected by beach retreat/erosion and ooding are also shown.
R F R F R F
SLR (m) S S(i) Equal to 50 % of Equal to max. Beaches with assets affected
(m) (m) max. width (%) width (%) N % N %
Long-term
0.2 Min 2.3 5.9 2.4 30.9 0.1 5.0 2 0.1 122 4.7 Max 10.6 33.4 64.3 96.6 27.5 82.1 684 26.2 2113 80.9
0.4 Min 4.3 7.9 17.4 47.9 2.3 12.7 49 1.9 315 12.1 Max 16.3 39.6 81.1 97.8 51.3 87.2 1293 49.5 2249 86.1
0.6 Min 6.2 9.8 34.7 59.1 7.9 21.5 195 7.5 537 20.6 Max 22.2 45.7 90.2 98.8 66.5 90.7 1695 64.9 2343 89.7
0.55 Min 6 9.6 34.7 59.0 7.9 21.4 195 7.5 535 20.5 Max 23.2 46.4 91.0 98.8 68.0 91.0 1730 66.2 2354 90.1
1.1 Min 11.6 15.2 68.0 78.8 30.8 47.8 763 29.2 1204 46.1 Max 40.3 63.6 97.9 99.7 88.0 96.2 2270 86.9 2506 95.9
1.3 Min 13.5 17.2 74.6 82.8 39.1 54.1 977 37.4 1364 52.2 Max 46.2 69.7 98.8 99.7 91.0 96.8 2354 90.1 2526 96.7
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
0.15 Min 1.8 5.2 0.6 27.4 0.0 4.9 0 0.0 119 4.6 Max 6.8 32.6 39.1 96.4 8.2 81.1 203 7.8 2086 79.8
0.5 Min 5.3 8.8 27.5 54.2 5.0 17.6 120 4.6 437 16.7 Max 17.6 43.2 84.4 98.3 54.2 89.7 1368 52.4 2320 88.8
0.7 Min 7.3 10.9 43.2 64.3 12.4 27.6 306 11.7 688 26.3 Max 24 49.3 91.5 99.1 68.0 92.6 1732 66.3 2400 91.8
Short-term
MSLR + Short-term
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 461
Figure 6. Minimum and maximum retreat and ooding of Aegean archipelago beaches for different SLR scenarios on the basis of the low and high means, respectively, of the ensemble projections. (a) Minimum and (b) maximum retreat and ooding under an MSLR of0.7 m. (c) Minimum and (d) maximum retreat and ooding under a storm-induced level of +0.4 m. (e) Minimum and (f) maximum retreat
and ooding under a combined long- and short-term SLR of 1.1 m (see text). Initial and nal (after SLR) maximum beach widths are shown. Final widths < 0 show beaches lost or shifted landward or ooded by their entire maximum width. Black bars show currently existing infrastructure/assets fronted by beaches.
5 Discussion and conclusions
The analysis of the rst systematic record of the geospatial characteristics of the beaches of the Aegean archipelago has provided interesting ndings. Aegean island beaches are narrow pocket beaches (59 % were recorded having maximum recorded widths < 20 m) characterized by limited terrestrial sediment supply and fronting a moderate (as a total) load of backshore development; about 81 % of the Aegean beaches currently front coastal infrastructure/assets with 33 % fronting moderate to high coastal development. At the same time, only 15 % of beaches are associated with some form of existing coastal protection. Moreover, at least 23 % of the Aegean beaches exhibit outcropping beachrocks
at their beach faces. In addition to aesthetic considerations and the safety risks that slippery beachrock surfaces might pose to beach users (Vousdoukas et al., 2009c), beach face beachrocks can also induce ecological changes and promote beach sediment removal (e.g., Vousdoukas et al., 2009b, 2012), decreasing the carrying capacity of the archipelago beaches and constraining their potential as environments of leisure (Kontogianni et al., 2014).
Development and maintenance of the Aegean beaches may be (at least partially) controlled by hydrodynamics, as more and wider beaches occur along the southern and western coasts of the islands that are relatively protected from the prevailing NNE waves. Maximum beach widths were found to correlate with sediment type and terrestrial sediment sup-
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
462 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Figure 7. Projections of minimum beach retreat under a combined SLR of 1.1 m (see text) showing Aegean beaches projected to retreat by distances equal to different percentages of their initial maximum widths. In the inset, projections for the beaches of Naxos (Cyclades) are shown in larger scale for detail.
ply; sandy beaches are wider, as are those associated with river outlets. With regard to the carrying capacity of the archipelago beaches, these appear to have potential (as a total) for further development as environments of leisure; nevertheless, better spatial distribution and a lengthening of the period of beach tourism should be considered.
Aegean island beaches appear particularly vulnerable to SLR. Our modeling results project severe erosion and ooding under SLR from as early as 2040, particularly under the combined effects of the projected MSLR and storm-induced sea levels (Table 4). By 2100, beach erosion from combined MSLR and storm events is projected to be very substantial, with potentially devastating impacts on both coastal infrastructure and tourism. For example, under an MSLR of 0.5 m (RCP 4.5), a short-term coastal sea level rise due to storm surges and waves of 0.6 m is projected to result in complete erosion of between 31 (minimum) and 88 % (maximum) of all beaches (2987 % of beaches currently fronting coastal infrastructure and assets), at least temporarily. In addition, between 46 and 96 % of the coastal infrastructure and assets behind the Aegean island beaches are projected to be temporarily ooded during such an event. Regarding the Aegean island tourism, this will be negatively affected by the pro-
jected large decreases in dry beach width, a critical control of the beach recreational use, value and resilience (e.g., Yang et al., 2012). Under increasing beach erosion/retreat and ooding, the long-term recreational value of the Aegean archipelago beaches as well as the value of associated assets may fall considerably (e.g., Gopalakrishnan et al., 2011). As a recent study projects substantial changes in the return periods of ESLs in the E. Mediterranean for the end of the 21st century (Vousdoukas et al., 2017); the projected impacts on both beaches and coastal infrastructure/assets are worrying.
Against this background, it appears that plans to respond effectively to the projected beach erosion risk should be urgently drawn up with different adaptation options analyzed. Options based on the ecosystem approach should be considered rst in order to protect both beaches and back-shore ecosystems and infrastructure/assets (e.g., Peduzzi et al., 2013), although hard works might, in some cases, be deemed necessary. However, the signicance of beaches as critical economic resources and the low effectiveness of hard coastal works (e.g., breakwaters) to protect beaches from MSLR indicate that beach nourishment schemes will also be required, at least for the most economically important beaches. As marine aggregates constitute the most suitable, but often scarce (Peduzzi, 2014), material for beach nourishment, particular care should be taken to ensure sustainability of marine aggregate deposits (Velegrakis et al., 2010). The signicance of such deposits should be certainly considered in future marine spatial plans as a matter of priority (see also EU Directive 2014/89/EU).
A primary tool to manage the assets and economic activities at risk is the introduction of effective policies and regulation. An underpinning principle of coastal management under SLR should be the introduction of effective precautionary controls on future coastal development, e.g., through regulation that allocates buffer zones (setback zones) behind retreating coastlines. It is our opinion that, on the basis of these results, there is an urgent need to adopt and implement relevant regulation for the Aegean archipelago.
A way forward could be the ratication by Greece of the 2009 ICZM Protocol to the Barcelona Convention, which prescribes setback zones (Art. 8.2a) and has already been ratied by the EU (Council Decision 2010/631/EU). However, there are also challenges, e.g., those related to the setback zone demarcation and risk allocation, (e.g., Sano et al., 2010;Gibbs et al., 2013) that can only be alleviated by publicly transparent criteria and decisions (e.g., Abbott, 2013). Assessments of beach retreat/erosion and ooding are required at various scales that are science-based and, at the same time, accessible by coastal planners, managers, stakeholders and the wider public for the planning and smooth implementation of setback zones as well as the prioritization in the allocation of resources for adaptation.
The approach adopted in the present study to assess impacts of the SLR presents certain advantages. Existing methodologies/tools for rapid assessment of coastal/beach
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 463
erosion due to MSLR and extreme events at large scales (e.g., Hinkel et al., 2010; Ramieri et al., 2011; Khouakhi et al., 2013) have limitations stemming from, amongst others, (a) their requirements for coastal digital elevation models (DEMs) of high resolution/accuracy and (b) the limited general consideration for major controls (e.g., hydrodynamics). At the same time, advanced modeling approaches (e.g., Vousdoukas et al., 2016b) in addition to detailed environmental information commonly require experienced operators and high computation costs that may make them impractical to coastal planners/managers (e.g., McLeod et al., 2010).
The present approach, which compares ranges of SLR-induced beach retreat and ooding under different initial conditions and hydrodynamic forcing with beach maximum widths, is not limited by the resolution/accuracy of available coastal DEMs or the availability of detailed environmental information (e.g., Jimnez et al., 2012) and can be easily incorporated in other beach vulnerability tools (e.g., Alexandrakis et al., 2015) and used in areas with limited human resources. Nevertheless, there are also constraints.Projections are based on the assumption that beaches comprise inexhaustible sediment reservoirs with no lateral sediment losses; cross-shore modeling obviously cannot resolve such issues. In addition, the approach is not designed to account for other erosion-controlling factors, such as geological controls, coastal sedimentary budgets, and extreme event duration and sequencing (e.g., Gallop et al., 2012; Corbella and Stretch, 2012); the presence of articial beach protection schemes and/or protecting nearshore ecosystems (e.g., Peduzzi et al., 2013); and the effects of coastal use (e.g., Bi et al., 2013). However, the aim of the exercise has not been to replace detailed modeling studies for individual beaches, but to provide ranges of beach erosion and ooding at a large (archipelago) scale.
Data availability. All the datasets (inputs/outputs) created by our research team and used for the research can be found on the following link which is publicly accessible: http://erabeach.aegean.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monioudi-et-al.-2017-Data.zip
Web End =http://erabeach.aegean.gr/ http://erabeach.aegean.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monioudi-et-al.-2017-Data.zip
Web End =wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Monioudi-et-al.-2017-Data.zip .
Competing interests. The authors declare that they have no conict of interest.
Acknowledgements. This research has been co-nanced by the European Union (European Social Fund-ESF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program Education and Lifelong Learning of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) Research Funding Program: THALES (Project ISLA). The senior authors (INM, AFV and AEC) also acknowledge the support from the ERA-Beach Project during the writing-up of the research; the program is 85 % co-funded by the EEA Grants, 20092014, and 15 % by the Public Investments Programme (PIP) of the Hellenic Republic. M. I. Vousdoukas acknowledges funding from the
European Union Seventh Framework Programme FP7/20072013 under grant agreement no. 603864 (HELIX: High-End cLimate Impacts and eXtremes; http://www.helixclimate.eu
Web End =www.helixclimate.eu ) as well as by the JRC institutional project CoastAlRisk.
Edited by: O. KatzReviewed by: two anonymous referees
References
Abbott, T.: Shifting shorelines and political winds The complexities of implementing the simple idea of shoreline setbacks for ocean front developments in Maui, Hawaii, Ocean Coast. Manage., 73, 1321, 2013.
Alexandrakis, G., Manasakis, C., and Kampanis, N. A.: Valuating the effects of beach erosion to tourism revenue. A management perspective, Ocean Coast. Manage., 111, 111, 2015.
Allenbach, K., Garonna, I., Herold, C., Monioudi, I., Giuliani, G.,
Lehmann, and Velegrakis, A. F.: Black Sea beach vulnerability to sea level rise, Environ. Sci. Policy, 46, 95109, 2015. Androulidakis, Y. S., Kourafalou, V. H., Krestenitis, Y. N., and Zervakis, V.: Variability of deep water mass characteristics in the North Aegean Sea: The role of lateral inputs and atmospheric conditions, Deep-Sea Res. I, 67, 5572, 2012.
Androulidakis, Y. S., Kombiadou, K. D., Makris, C. V., Baltikas,V. N., and Krestenitis, Y. N.: Storm surges in the Mediterranean Sea: Variability and trends under future climatic conditions, Dynam. Atmos. Oceans, 71, 5682, 2015.
Bi, X., Lu, Q., and Pan, X.: Coastal use accelerated the regional sea-level rise, Ocean Coast. Manage., 82, 16, 2013.
Bosom, E. and Jimnez, J. A.: Storm-induced coastal hazard assessment at regional scale: application to Catalonia (NW Mediterranean), Adv. Geosci., 26, 8387, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-26-83-2010
Web End =10.5194/adgeo-26-83- http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-26-83-2010
Web End =2010 , 2010.
Bruun, P.: The Bruun Rule of erosion by sea level rise: A discussion on large-scale two- and three-dimensional usages, J. Coastal Res., 4, 622648, 1988.
Calafat, F. M., Chambers, D. P., and Tsimplis, M. N.: On the ability of global sea level reconstructions to determine trends and variability, J. Geophys. Res., 119, 78407853, 2014.
Cisneros, H. M. A., Revollo-Sarmiento, N. V., Delrieux, C. A.,
Piccolo, M. C., and Perillo, G. M. E.: Beach carrying capacity assessment through image processing tools for coastal management, Ocean Coast. Manage., 130, 138147, 2016.
Conte, D. and Lionello, P.: Characteristics of large positive and negative surges in the Mediterranean sea and their attenuation in future climate scenarios, Global Planet. Change, 111, 159173, 2013.
Corbella, S. and Stretch, D. D.: Predicting coastal erosion trends using non-stationary statistics and process-based models, Coast. Eng., 70, 4049, 2012.
Dean, R. G.: Equilibrium beach proles: characteristics and applications, J. Coastal Res., 7, 5384, 1991.
Dean, R. G.: Beach nourishment: Theory and practice, in: Advanced
Series on Ocean Eng., World Scientic Publishing Company, Singapore, 18, 399 pp., 2002.
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
464 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Defeo, O. and McLachlan, A.: Global patterns in sandy beach macrofauna: Species richness, abundance, biomass and body size, Geomorphology, 199, 106114, 2013.
Ding, Y., Kuiry, S. N., Elgohry, M., Jia, Y., Altinakar, M. S., and Yeh, K.-C.: Impact assessment of sea-level rise and hazardous storms on coasts and estuaries using integrated processes model, Ocean Eng., 71, 7495, 2013.
ECLAC: An assessment of the economic impact of climate change on the transportation sector in Barbados, UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean ECLAC, Technical Report LC/CAR/L309, 44 pp., 2011.
Edelman, T.: Dune erosion during storm conditions, in: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Coast. Eng., ASCE, 13051312, 1972.
Eurosion: Living with coastal erosion in Europe: Sediment and Space for Sustainability, Part II, DG Environment, EC, available at: http://www.eurosion.org/reports-online/part2.pdf
Web End =http://www.eurosion.org/reports-online/part2.pdf (last access: March 2017), 29 May 2004.
Gallop, S. L., Bosserelle, C., Eliot, I., and Pattiaratchi, C. B.: The inuence of limestone reefs on storm erosion and recovery of a perched beach, Cont. Shelf Res., 47, 1627, 2012.
Ghermandi, A. and Nunes, P. A. L. D.: A global map of coastal recreation values: Results from a spatially explicit meta-analysis, Ecol. Econ., 86, 115, 2013.
Gibbs, M. T., Thbaud, O., and Lorenz, D.: A risk model to describe the behaviours of actors in the houses falling into the sea problem, Ocean Coast. Manage., 80, 7379, 2013.Gopalakrishnan, S., Smith, M. D., Slott, J. M., and Brad Murray,A.: The value of disappearing beaches: A hedonic pricing model with endogenous beach width, J. Environ. Econ. Manag., 61, 297310, 2011.
Hall, C. M., Scott, D., and Gssling, S.: The Primacy of Climate Change for Sustainable International Tourism, Sustain. Dev., 21, 112121, 2013.
Hinkel, J., Nicholls, R. J., Vafeidis, A. T., Tol, R. S. J., and Avagianou, T.: Assessing risk of and adaptation to sea-level rise in the European Union: An application of DIVA, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 15, 703719, 2010.Hinkel, J., Lincke, D., Vafeidis, A. T., Perrette, M., Nicholls, R. G.,
Tol, R. S., Marzeion, B., Fettweis, X., Ionescu, C., and Lever-mann, A.: Coastal ood damages and adaptation costs under 21st century sea-level rise, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 32923297, 2014.
Hoeke, R. K., McInnes, K. L., Kruger, J. C., McNaught, R. J., Hunter, J. R., and Smithers, S. G.: Widespread inundation of Pacic islands triggered by distant-source wind-waves, Global Planet. Change, 108, 128138, 2013.
IOBE: The impact of tourism on Greek Economy, Foundation for Economic & Industrial Research, 43 pp., available at: http://iobe.gr/docs/research/RES_05_E_01092012REP_GR.pdf
Web End =http: http://iobe.gr/docs/research/RES_05_E_01092012REP_GR.pdf
Web End =//iobe.gr/docs/research/RES_05_E_01092012REP_GR.pdf (last access: March 2017), 2012 (in Greek).
IPCC: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker,T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung,J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, USA, 2013.IPCC SREX: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, A Special Report of
Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC, edited by: Field, C. B., Barros, V., Stocker,T. F., Qin, D., Dokken, D. J., Ebi, K. L., Mastrandrea, M. D., Mach, K. J., Plattner, G.-K., Allen, S. K., Tignor, M., and Midgley, P. M., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, USA, 582 pp., 2012.
Jimnez, J. A., Bosom, E., Valdemoro, H. I., and Guilln, J.: Storm-induced damages along the Catalan coast (NW Mediterranean) during the period 19582008, Geomorphology, 143144, 2433, 2012.
Karambas, T.: Prediction of sediment transport in the swash zone by using a nonlinear wave model, Cont. Shelf Res., 26, 599609, 2006.
Karambas, T. V. and Koutitas, C.: Surf and swash zone morphology evolution induced by nonlinear waves, J. Waterw. Port C.-ASCE, 128, 102113, 2002.
Khouakhi, A., Snoussi, M., Niazi, S., and Raji, O.: Vulnerability assessment of Al Hoceima bay (Moroccan Mediterranean coast): a coastal management tool to reduce potential impacts of sea-level rise and storm surges, J. Coastal Res., SI 65, 968973, 2013. Kontogianni, A. D., Damigos, D., Tourkolias, C., Vousdoukas, M.I., Velegrakis, A. F., Zanou, B., and Skourtos, M.: The social cost of coastal erosion: eliciting beach users willingness to pay for protecting European beaches from beachrock processes, Ocean Coast. Manage., 98, 167175, 2014.
Krestenitis, Y. N., Androulidakis, Y. S., Kontos, Y. N., and Georgakopoulos, G.: Coastal inundation in the north-eastern Mediterranean coastal zone due to storm surge events, Journal of Coastal Conservation, 15, 353368, 2011.
Larson, M. and Kraus, N. C.: SBEACH: numerical model for simulating storm-induced beach change; report 1: empirical foundation and model development, Technical Report US Army Coast. Eng. Research Center, Technical Report CERC-89-9, 115 pp., 1989.
Leontyev, I. O.: Numerical modelling of beach erosion during storm event, Coast. Eng., 29, 187200, 1996.
Mamoutos, G., Tragou, E., and Kakagiannis, G.: Mean sea level changes in the Greek Seas, in 6th Panhellenic Conference in Management and Improvement of Coastal Zones, Athens, Greece, November 2014, 335344, 2014.
Marcos, M., Jord, G., Gomis, D., and Prez, B.: Changes in storm surges in Southern Europe from a regional model under climate change scenarios, Global Planet. Change, 77, 116128, 2011. McArthur, S.: Why Carrying Capacity Should be a Last Resort,
2015, in: Challenges in Tourism Research, edited by: Singh, T.V., Channel View Publications, 288302, 2015.
McLeod, E., Poulter, B., Hinkel, J., Reyes, E., and Salm, R.: Sea-level rise impact models and environmental conservation: A review of models and their applications, Ocean Coast. Manage., 53, 507517, 2010.
Monioudi, I. N., Karditsa, A., Chatzipavlis, A., Alexandrakis, G., Andreadis, O. P., Velegrakis, A. F, Poulos, S. E., Ghionis, G., Petrakis, S., Sifnioti, D., Hasiotis, T., Lipakis, M., Kampanis, N., Karambas, T., and Marinos, E.: Assessment of the vulnerability of the eastern Cretan beaches (Greece) to sea level rise, Reg. Environ. Change, 16, 19511962, 2016.
Neumann, B., Vafeidis, A. T., Zimmerman, J., and Nicholls, R. J.: Future Coastal Population Growth and Exposure to Sea-Level
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise 465
Rise and Coastal Flooding A Global Assessment, PLoS ONE, 10, e0118571, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118571
Web End =10.1371/journal.pone.0118571 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118571
Web End = , 2015.Nicholls, R. J. and Cazenave, A.: Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones, Science, 328, 15171520, 2010.
Parker, A., Saad Saleem, M., and Lawson, M.: Sea-level trend analysis for coastal management, Ocean Coast. Manage., 73, 6381, 2013.
Paula, D. P., Dias, J. M. A., Ferreira, O., and Morais, J. O.: High-rise development of the sea-front at Fortaleza (Brazil): Perspectives on its valuation and consequences, Ocean Coast. Manage., 77, 1423, 2013.
Peduzzi, P.: Sand, rarer than one thinks, Article reproduced from United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Global Environmental Alert Service (GEAS), Environmental Development, 11, 208218, 2014.
Peduzzi, P., Velegrakis, A. F., Estrella, M., and Chatenoux, B.: Integrating the role of ecosytems in disaster risk and vulnerability assessments: Lessons from the Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Methodology Development Project (RiVAMP) in Negril Jamaica, in: The role of Ecosystems in Disaster Risk Reduction, edited by: Renaud, F. G., United Nations University Press, ISBN-13: 978-9280812213, 109139, 2013.
Phillips, M. R. and Jones, A. L.: Erosion and tourism infrastructure in the coastal zone: Problems, consequences and management, Tourism Manage., 27, 517524, 2006.
Poulos, S. E.: Origin and distribution of the terrigenous component of the unconsolidated surface sediment of the Aegean oor: A synthesis, Cont. Shelf Res., 29, 20452060, 2009.
Poulos, S. E., Ghionis G., and Maroukian, H.: Sea-level rise trends in the AtticoCycladic region (Aegean Sea) during the last 5000 years, Geomorphology, 107, 1017, 2009.
Prinos, P.: Climate change effects on the Greek seas and coastal areas the research project THALIS-CCSEAWAVS, in: 6th Pan-hellenic Conference on Coastal Zones Management and Improvement, Athens, 2427 November 2014, 315324, 2014.Rajan, B., Varghese, V. M., and Pradeepkumar, A. P.: Beach Carrying Capacity Analysis for Sustainable Tourism Development in the South West Coast of India, Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, 1, 6773, 2013.
Ramieri, E., Hartley, A., Barbanti, A., Duarte Santos, F., Laihonen, P., Marinova, N., and Santini, M.: Methods for assessing coastal vulnerability to climate change, ETC CCA Background Paper, Copenhagen (DK) 89 June 2011, European Topic Centre on Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation European Environment Agency, 76 pp., available at: http://www.oannes.org.pe/
Web End =http://www. http://www.oannes.org.pe/
Web End =oannes.org.pe/ (last access: March 2017), 2011.
Ranasinghe, R., Duong, T. M., Uhlenbrook, S., Roelvink, D., and Stive, M.: Climate-change impact assessment for inlet-interrupted coastlines, Nature Climate Change, 3, 8387, 2013.Roelvink, D., Reniers, A., Van Dongeren, A., Van Thiel de Vries,J., McCall, R., and Lescinski, J.: Modeling storm impacts on beaches, dunes and barrier islands, Coast. Eng., 56, 11331152, 2009.
Roelvink, D., Reniers, A., van Dongeren, A., van Thiel de Vries,J., Lescinski, J., and McCall, R.: Xbeach Model Description and Manual, Unesco-IHE Institute for Water Education, Deltares and Delft University of Technology, 106 pp., 2010.
Sano, M., Marchard, M., and Medina, R.: Coastal setbacks for the Mediterranean: a challenge for ICZM, Journal of Coastal Conservation, 14, 3339, 2010.
SETE: Association of the Greek Touristic Businesses, http://sete.gr/el/statistika-vivliothiki/statistika/
Web End =http://sete. http://sete.gr/el/statistika-vivliothiki/statistika/
Web End =gr/el/statistika-vivliothiki/statistika/ (last access: March 2017), 2016.
Short, A. D. and Jackson, D. W. T.: Beach Morphodynamics, in: Treatise on Geomorphology, edited by: Shroder, J. and Sherman,D. J., 10, 106129, 2013.
Skliris, N., Soanos, S. S., Gkanasos, A., Axaopoulos, P., Mantziafou, A., and Vervatis, V.: Long-term sea surface temperature variability in the Aegean Sea, Advances in Oceanography and Limnology, 2, 125139, 2011.
Smith, A. B. and Katz, R. W.: U.S. Billion-dollar Weather and Climate Disasters: Data Sources, Trends, Accuracy and Biases, Nat. Hazards, 67, 387410, 2012.
Soukissian, T., Hatzinaki, M., Korres, G., Papadopoulos, A., Kallos,G., and Anadranistakis, E.: Wind and wave atlas of the Hellenic seas, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research Publications, HCMR, 2007.
Soukissian, T., Prospathopoulos, A., Hatzinaki, M., and Kabouridou, M.: Assessment of the wind and wave climate of the Hellenic Seas using 10-Year hindcast results, The Open Ocean Eng., 1, 112, 2008.
Stockdon, H. F., Holman, R. A., Howd, P. A., and Sallenger, J.A. H.: Empirical parameterization of setup, swash, and runup, Coast. Eng., 53, 573588, 2006.
Theocharis, A., Georgopoulos, D., Lascaratos, A., and Nittis, K.:
Water masses and circulation in the central region of the Eastern Mediterranean: Eastern Ionian, South Aegean and North West Levantine, 19861987, Deep-Sea Res. II, 40, 11211142, 1993. Tsimplis, M., Marcos, M., Colin, J., Somot, S., Pascual, A., and
Shaw, A. G. P.: Sea level variability in the Mediterranean Sea during the 1990 on the basis of two 2D and one 3D model, J. Marine Syst., 78, 109123, 2009.
Tsimplis, M. N. and Shaw, A. G. P.: Seasonal sea level extremes in the Mediterranean Sea and at the Atlantic European coasts, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 14571475, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1457-2010
Web End =10.5194/nhess-10- http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-10-1457-2010
Web End =1457-2010 , 2010.
Tsimplis, M. N., Calafat, F. M., Marcos, M., Jorda, G., Gomis, D., Fenoglio-Marc, L., Struglia, M. V., Josey, S. A., and Chambers,D. P.: The effect of the NAO on sea level and on mass changes in the Mediterranean Sea, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118, 944952, 2013.
Tsoukala, V. K., Chondros, M., Kapelonis, Z. G., Martzikos, N., Lykou, A., Belibassakis, K., and Makropoulos, C.: An integrated wave modelling framework for extreme and rare events for climate change in coastal areas the case of Rethymno, Crete, Oceanologia, 58, 7189, 2016.
UNECE: Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation for International Transport Networks, Expert Group Report, ITC UN Economic Commission for Europe ECE/TRANS/238, 223 pp., available at: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp5/publications/climate_change_2014.pdf
Web End =http://www.unece.org/leadmin/DAM/trans/main/ http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp5/publications/climate_change_2014.pdf
Web End =wp5/publications/climate_change_2014.pdf (last access: March 2017), 2013.
Valdemoro, H. I. and Jimnez, J. A.: The inuence of shoreline dynamics on the use and exploitation of Mediterranean tourist beaches, Coast. Manage., 34, 405423, 2006.
www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/ Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017
466 I. N. Monioudi et al.: Assessment of island beach erosion due to sea level rise
Velegrakis, A. F, Vousdoukas, M. I., Andreadis, O., Pasakalidou,E., Adamakis, G., and Meligonitis, R.: Impacts of dams on their downstream beaches: A case study from Eresos coastal basin, Island of Lesvos, Greece, Mar. Georesour. Geotec., 26, 350371, 2008.
Velegrakis, A. F., Ballay, A., Poulos, S., Radzeviius, R., Bellec, V., and Manso, F.: European marine aggregates resources: Origins, usage, and mining techniques, J. Coastal Res., SI 51, 114, 2010.Velegrakis, A. F., Trygonis, V., Chatzipavlis, A. E., Karambas, T.,
Vousdoukas, M. I., Ghionis, G., Monioudi, I. N., Hasiotis, T., Andreadis, O., and Psarros, F.: Shoreline variability of an urban beach fronted by a beachrock reef from video imagery, Nat. Hazards, 83, 201222, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2415-9
Web End =10.1007/s11069-016-2415-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2415-9
Web End = , 2016.Vousdoukas, M. I., Velegrakis, A. F., and Karambas, T. V.: Morphology and sedimentology of a microtidal beach with beachrocks: Vatera, Lesbos, NE Mediterranean, Cont. Shelf Res., 29, 1937 1947, 2009a.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Velegrakis, A. F., Dimou, K., Zervakis, V., and Conley, D. C.: Wave run-up observations in microtidal, sediment-starved beaches of the Eastern Mediterranean, J. Marine Syst., 78, 537547, 2009b.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Velegrakis, A. F, Kontogianni, A., and Makrykosta, N. E.: Implications of the cementation of beach sediments (beachrock formation) for the recreational use of the beach, Tourism Manage., 30, 544552, 2009c.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Velegrakis, A. F., Paul, M., Dimitriadis, C., Makrykosta, E., and Koutsoubas, D.: Field observations and modeling of wave attenuation over colonized beachrocks, Cont.Shelf Res., 48, 100109, 2012.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Kirupakaramoorthy, T., Oumeraci, H., de la Torre, M., Wbbold, F., Wagner, B., and Schimmels, S.: The role of combined laser scanning and video techniques in monitoring wave-by-wave swash zone processes, Coast. Eng., 83, 150165, 2014.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Voukouvalas, E., Annunziato, A., Giardino, A., and Feyen, L.: Projections of extreme storm surge levels along Europe, Clim. Dynam., 47, 31713190, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3019-5
Web End =10.1007/s00382- http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3019-5
Web End =016-3019-5 , 2016a.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Voukouvalas, E., Mentaschi, L., Dottori, F., Giardino, A., Bouziotas, D., Bianchi, A., Salamon, P., and Feyen, L.: Developments in large-scale coastal ood hazard mapping, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 18411853, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1841-2016
Web End =10.5194/nhess-16- http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-1841-2016
Web End =1841-2016 , 2016b.
Vousdoukas, M. I., Mentaschi, L., Voukouvalas, E., Verlaan, M., and Feyen, L.: Extreme sea levels on the rise along Europes coasts, Earths Future, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000505
Web End =10.1002/2016EF000505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000505
Web End = , 2017.
Xu, S. and Huang, W.: Effects of sea level rise on frequency analysis of 1 % annual maximum water levels in the coast of Florida, Ocean Eng., 71, 96102, 2013.
Yang, B., Madden, M., Kim, J., and Jordan, T. R.: Geospatial analysis of barrier island beach availability to tourists, Tourism Manage., 33, 840854, 2012.
Zar, J. H.: Biostatistical analysis, 5th ed., Prentice Hall PTR,658 pp., ISBN-13: 978-0321656865, 2010.
Zervakis, V., Georgopoulos, D., and Drakopoulos, P.: The role of the North Aegean in triggering the recent Eastern Mediterranean climatic changes, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 2610326116, 2000.
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 449466, 2017 www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/17/449/2017/
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Copyright Copernicus GmbH 2017
Abstract
The present contribution constitutes the first comprehensive attempt to (a) record the spatial characteristics of the beaches of the Aegean archipelago (Greece), a critical resource for both the local and national economy, and (b) provide a rapid assessment of the impacts of the long-term and episodic sea level rise (SLR) under different scenarios. Spatial information and other attributes (e.g., presence of coastal protection works and backshore development) of the beaches of the 58 largest islands of the archipelago were obtained on the basis of remote-sensed images available on the web. Ranges of SLR-induced beach retreats under different morphological, sedimentological and hydrodynamic forcing, and SLR scenarios were estimated using suitable ensembles of cross-shore (1-D) morphodynamic models. These ranges, combined with empirically derived estimations of wave run-up induced flooding, were then compared with the recorded maximum beach widths to provide ranges of retreat/erosion and flooding at the archipelago scale. The spatial information shows that the Aegean <q>pocket</q> beaches may be particularly vulnerable to mean sea level rise (MSLR) and episodic SLRs due to (i) their narrow widths (about 59% of the beaches have maximum widths <20m), (ii) their limited terrestrial sediment supply, (iii) the substantial coastal development and (iv) the limited existing coastal protection. Modeling results indeed project severe impacts under mean and episodic SLRs, which by 2100 could be devastating. For example, under MSLR of 0.5m - representative concentration pathway (RCP) 4.5 of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) - a storm-induced sea level rise of 0.6m is projected to result in a complete erosion of between 31 and 88% of all beaches (29-87% of beaches are currently fronting coastal infrastructure and assets), at least temporarily. Our results suggest a very considerable risk which will require significant effort, financial resources and policies/regulation in order to protect/maintain the critical economic resource of the Aegean archipelago.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer