Soft engineering vs. a dynamic approach in coastal dune management: a case study on the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, the Netherlands

B. de Jong, J.G.S. Keijsers, M.J.P.M. Riksen, J. Krol, P.A. Slim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Dunes act as flood defences in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a “soft engineering” approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) “dynamic coastal management,” with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively.
Dunes act as flood defenses in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a "soft engineering" approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) "dynamic coastal management," with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively. For each section, we analyzed cross-shore profile data from 1980 until 2010, deriving dune foot position, crest position, crest height, and foredune volume for each year and analyzing the situation before and after the change in management. We further assessed the effect of the management regime on dune vegetation. Other factors that could influence dune development were also taken into account, such as beach width and shape, water levels, wave heights, and nourishments. Results show that implementation of dynamic coastal management did not directly affect the volume of the foredune. Growth was occasionally interrupted, coinciding with high-water events. In periods between erosive storms, dune growth rates did not show a significant difference between management types (p = 0.09 and 0.32 for sections 1 and 2, respectively). The main effect of the change was on vegetation development. Dynamic coastal management, therefore, did not reduce coastal safety.
LanguageEnglish
Pages670-684
JournalJournal of Coastal Research
Volume30
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

barrier island
dune
engineering
coastal zone management
dune formation
safety
coastal zone
sea
flooding
sand
vegetation
wave height
water level
beach

Keywords

  • flood control
  • coastal management
  • dunes
  • aeolian processes
  • geological sedimentation
  • dutch wadden islands
  • dutch coast
  • beach
  • foredunes
  • erosion
  • storms

Cite this

@article{eca8814bf4d9481989e20941f483251d,
title = "Soft engineering vs. a dynamic approach in coastal dune management: a case study on the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, the Netherlands",
abstract = "Dunes act as flood defences in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a “soft engineering” approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) “dynamic coastal management,” with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively.Dunes act as flood defenses in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a {"}soft engineering{"} approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) {"}dynamic coastal management,{"} with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively. For each section, we analyzed cross-shore profile data from 1980 until 2010, deriving dune foot position, crest position, crest height, and foredune volume for each year and analyzing the situation before and after the change in management. We further assessed the effect of the management regime on dune vegetation. Other factors that could influence dune development were also taken into account, such as beach width and shape, water levels, wave heights, and nourishments. Results show that implementation of dynamic coastal management did not directly affect the volume of the foredune. Growth was occasionally interrupted, coinciding with high-water events. In periods between erosive storms, dune growth rates did not show a significant difference between management types (p = 0.09 and 0.32 for sections 1 and 2, respectively). The main effect of the change was on vegetation development. Dynamic coastal management, therefore, did not reduce coastal safety.",
keywords = "hoogwaterbeheersing, kustbeheer, duinen, eolische processen, geologische sedimentatie, nederlandse waddeneilanden, flood control, coastal management, dunes, aeolian processes, geological sedimentation, dutch wadden islands, dutch coast, beach, foredunes, erosion, storms",
author = "{de Jong}, B. and J.G.S. Keijsers and M.J.P.M. Riksen and J. Krol and P.A. Slim",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-13-00125.1",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "670--684",
journal = "Journal of Coastal Research",
issn = "0749-0208",
publisher = "Coastal Education and Research Foundation",
number = "4",

}

Soft engineering vs. a dynamic approach in coastal dune management: a case study on the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, the Netherlands. / de Jong, B.; Keijsers, J.G.S.; Riksen, M.J.P.M.; Krol, J.; Slim, P.A.

In: Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 30, No. 4, 2014, p. 670-684.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Soft engineering vs. a dynamic approach in coastal dune management: a case study on the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, the Netherlands

AU - de Jong, B.

AU - Keijsers, J.G.S.

AU - Riksen, M.J.P.M.

AU - Krol, J.

AU - Slim, P.A.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Dunes act as flood defences in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a “soft engineering” approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) “dynamic coastal management,” with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively.Dunes act as flood defenses in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a "soft engineering" approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) "dynamic coastal management," with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively. For each section, we analyzed cross-shore profile data from 1980 until 2010, deriving dune foot position, crest position, crest height, and foredune volume for each year and analyzing the situation before and after the change in management. We further assessed the effect of the management regime on dune vegetation. Other factors that could influence dune development were also taken into account, such as beach width and shape, water levels, wave heights, and nourishments. Results show that implementation of dynamic coastal management did not directly affect the volume of the foredune. Growth was occasionally interrupted, coinciding with high-water events. In periods between erosive storms, dune growth rates did not show a significant difference between management types (p = 0.09 and 0.32 for sections 1 and 2, respectively). The main effect of the change was on vegetation development. Dynamic coastal management, therefore, did not reduce coastal safety.

AB - Dunes act as flood defences in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a “soft engineering” approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) “dynamic coastal management,” with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively.Dunes act as flood defenses in coastal zones, protecting low-lying interior lands from flooding. To ensure coastal safety, insight is needed on how dunes develop under different types of management. The current study focuses on two types of coastal dune management: (1) a "soft engineering" approach, in which sand fences are placed on the seaward side of foredunes, and (2) "dynamic coastal management," with minimal or no dune maintenance. The effects of these management styles on dune formation are examined for two adjacent coastal sections of the North Sea barrier island of Ameland, The Netherlands, where dynamic coastal management was introduced in 1995 and 1999, respectively. For each section, we analyzed cross-shore profile data from 1980 until 2010, deriving dune foot position, crest position, crest height, and foredune volume for each year and analyzing the situation before and after the change in management. We further assessed the effect of the management regime on dune vegetation. Other factors that could influence dune development were also taken into account, such as beach width and shape, water levels, wave heights, and nourishments. Results show that implementation of dynamic coastal management did not directly affect the volume of the foredune. Growth was occasionally interrupted, coinciding with high-water events. In periods between erosive storms, dune growth rates did not show a significant difference between management types (p = 0.09 and 0.32 for sections 1 and 2, respectively). The main effect of the change was on vegetation development. Dynamic coastal management, therefore, did not reduce coastal safety.

KW - hoogwaterbeheersing

KW - kustbeheer

KW - duinen

KW - eolische processen

KW - geologische sedimentatie

KW - nederlandse waddeneilanden

KW - flood control

KW - coastal management

KW - dunes

KW - aeolian processes

KW - geological sedimentation

KW - dutch wadden islands

KW - dutch coast

KW - beach

KW - foredunes

KW - erosion

KW - storms

U2 - 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-13-00125.1

DO - 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-13-00125.1

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 670

EP - 684

JO - Journal of Coastal Research

T2 - Journal of Coastal Research

JF - Journal of Coastal Research

SN - 0749-0208

IS - 4

ER -