UBC Graduate Research

Making the Case for Coastal Buyouts in Canada Gray, Emily C Apr 30, 2017

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
310-Gray_Emily_Coastal_buyouts_Canada_2017.pdf [ 9.95MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 310-1.0362572.json
JSON-LD: 310-1.0362572-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 310-1.0362572-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 310-1.0362572-rdf.json
Turtle: 310-1.0362572-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 310-1.0362572-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 310-1.0362572-source.json
Full Text
310-1.0362572-fulltext.txt
Citation
310-1.0362572.ris

Full Text

Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 3		E X E C U T I V E 	 S UMMA R Y 			 This	report	presents	findings	from	a	research	project	investigating	the	potential	for	buyouts	as	a	strategy	to	adapt	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	processes	in	coastal	communities	of	Canada.	The	central	research	question	the	project	sought	to	address	is:		How	the	case	can	be	made	for	coastal	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	for	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	in	Canada?		To	produce	practical	and	relevant	findings	from	the	project,	this	was	complemented	with	a	secondary	purpose:	to	produce	recommendations	for	Canadian	communities	to	begin	looking	at	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy.	Literature	review	was	undertaken	to	gain	a	sense	of	broader	themes	affecting	the	existing	scape	of	hazard	management	and	climate	change	adaptation	in	Canada.	Through	this,	three	key	themes	emerged:	the	traditional	protectionist	approach	to	hazard	adaptation;	the	problem	of	ongoing	development	of	vulnerable	lands;	and,	the	potential	for	buyouts	to	foster	ecosystem	services	along	the	coast.	Case	studies	of	the	states	of	New	Jersey	and	New	York	were	completed	to	gather	a	sense	of	the	framework	for	implementing	buyouts.	These	provided	insights	into	how	buyout	programs	have	been	implemented	in	practice,	including	some	successes	and	gaps	that	can	be	used	to	inform	buyout	program	structuring	in	Canada.	Finally,	informant	interviews	offered	the	opportunity	to	draw	on	the	literature	review	and	case	study	findings	and	to	find	ways	of	applying	them	to	a	Canadian	context.	These	interviews	highlighted	barriers,	opportunities,	and	needs	for	implementing	buyouts	in	Canadian	communities,	through	discussions	informed	by	literature	review	themes	and	case	studies.				These	findings	were	synthesized	to	produce	three	key	recommendations	for	Canadian	communities	to	look	at	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	moving	into	the	future:		Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 4		1. Buyout	programs	should	be	initiated	and	implemented	by	local	governments,	but	supported	with	clear	frameworks	and	stances	on	adapting	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	from	the	provincial	and	federal	levels.	2. Education	and	meaningful	engagement	with	affected	populations	is	necessary	to	successfully	and	sustainably	implement	buyouts	in	communities.	3. Full-cycle	planning	processes	 can	maximize	 the	potential	 benefits	of	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	for	natural	hazards	and	climate	change.			Recommendations	are	discussed	in	detail	in	Section	5.0.	Based	on	these	recommendations,	this	report	found	that	discussion	of	the	potential	of	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	needs	to	be	initiated	in	Canada,	alongside	education	/	outreach	campaigns	with	coastal	communities	to	improve	populations’	understandings	of	coastal	risks	and	adaptation	opportunities.	Further	research	should	seek	to	perform	cost	benefit	analyses	of	buyouts	compared	to	other	adaptation	strategies	and	to	clarify	potential	roles	for	the	insurance	and	real	estate	industries.	Investigation	into	the	potential	for	coastal	management	planning	in	Canada	would	be	highly	complementary	to	this	project,	as	this	is	a	potential	avenue	for	planning	and	implementing	buyouts	strategies.		Finally,	it	should	be	noted	that	this	project	was	very	much	a	scoping	study,	intended	to	offer	broad	recommendations	and	initiate	a	discussion	around	the	potential	for	buyouts.	Further	research	in	this	area	would	be	highly	valuable	and	timely.				 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 5		1 . 0 	 C O N T E X T 	 A N D 	 P U R P O S E 			 Living	on	the	coast	has	long	been	appealing	to	Canadians.	Aesthetics,	recreation	opportunities,	moderate	climates,	and	economic	opportunities	are	just	some	of	the	reasons	these	dynamic	environments	are	so	densely	populated.	This	pattern	of	settlement	is	not	unique	to	Canada.	In	2010,	it	was	estimated	that	39%	of	the	population	of	the	United	States	(U.S.)	lived	along	the	coast	(Felter	and	Morris,	2016).	Worldwide,	coastal	areas	have	significantly	higher	population	densities	than	non-coastal	areas	and	have	been	demonstrated	to	be	growing	at	significantly	more	rapid	rates	(Neumann	et	al.,	2015).	These	trends	are	projected	to	continue	and	intensify	in	the	future,	bringing	more	people	and	more	infrastructure	to	the	coastlines	of	the	world	(Felter	and	Morris,	2016;	Neumann	et	al.,	2015).	While	this	means	that	populations	are	in	closer	proximity	to	picturesque	views	and	family	beach	days,	this	is	also	placing	strain	on	some	of	Earth’s	most	sensitive	and	at-risk	environments	(Felter	and	Morris,	2016).	Coastlines	are	wild,	ever-changing	landscapes	exposed	to	a	myriad	of	natural	hazards.	Coastal	flooding	can	be	variously	caused	by	tidal	events,	coastal	storms	and	hurricanes,	storm	surge,	or	some	combination	of	processes,	which	are	only	exacerbated	by	the	effects	of	climate	change	(Banholzer,	Kossin,	and	Donner,	2014).	Thus,	as	the	climate	changes	and	populations	continue	to	flock	to	the	coast,	more	people	and	infrastructure	are	placed	at-risk	from	hazard	events	and	sea	level	rise.	Recent	figures	estimate	that	at	least	40	million	people	are	currently	exposed	to	a	1	in	100-year	coastal	flood,	but,	by	the	year	2070	this	has	been	projected	to	swell	to	more	than	150	million	(Hanson	et	al.,	2011).	These	trends	hold	true	for	Canada,	meaning	that	Canadian	communities	will	increasingly	need	to	plan	for	coastal	hazards	and	the	impacts	of	sea	level	rise	(Hanson	et	al.,	2011;	Manson,	2005).	For	instance,	in	2016	it	was	estimated	that	a	coastal	flood	affecting	the	Lower	Mainland	of	British	Columbia	(B.C.),	Canada,	could	destroy	1,100	buildings	and	cost	$14.2	billion	in	damages	(Fraser	Basin	Council,	2016).	In	2100,	considering	sea	level	rise	and	increasing	settlement	along	the	coast,	the	same	event	could	destroy	3,700	buildings	and	cost	over	$19	billion	(Fraser	Basin	Council,	2016).			Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 6		Concurrent	with	increasing	populations	along	coasts,	coastal	flooding	from	storm	events	is	expected	to	increase	all	over	the	globe	due	with	the	effects	of	climate	change	(IPCC,	2013).	Magnitudes	and	frequencies	of	coastal	storms,	hurricanes,	and	their	accompanying	storm	surges	are	increasing	(Banholzer	et	al.,	2014).	Ostensibly,	as	mean	sea	levels	rise,	coastal	floods	will	reach	further	and	further	inland,	causing	increasing	destruction	of	properties	and	infrastructures	along	the	coast.	Increased	storm	intensities	will	bring	more	precipitation,	further	exacerbating	coastal	flooding.	Sea	level	rise	will	also	gradually	inundate	some	coastal	areas	under	everyday	conditions.	“Long-term	planning	under	projected	[climate	change]	scenarios	should	then	account	for	these	potential	increases	in	severe	[storms],	as	well	as	a	likely	increase	in	rainfall	rates	and	associated	coastal	and	inland	fresh-water	flooding”	(Banholzer	et	al.,	2014).	The	flooding	mechanisms	of	extreme	events	and	climate	change	are	thus	intricately	connected	and	reinforce	one	another.	Similarly,	strategies	to	adapt	to	climate	change	and	natural	hazards	can	be	amalgamated	to	integrate	and	reinforce	adaptation	to	both	present	(i.e.,	natural	hazards)	and	future	risks	(i.e.,	sea	level	rise)	(Thomalla	et	al.,	2006).	In	adapting	to	coastal	flooding	then,	communities	will	need	to	look	to	strategies	that	both	improve	their	resilience	to	present	hazard	risks	as	well	as	the	gradual	inundation	of	sea	level	rise.			The	United	Nations	Framework	Convention	on	Climate	Change	(UNFCC)	defines	adaptation	as	“adjustments	in	ecological,	social,	or	economic	systems	in	response	to	actual	or	expected	climatic	stimuli	and	their	effects	or	impacts…	to	moderate	potential	damages”	(2014).	A	well-adapted	community	can	be	said	to	be	resilient,	or	able	to	absorb	and	recover	from	hazard	events	and	climate	change	processes	(Norris	et	al.,	2008).	As	coastal	lands	are	becoming	increasingly	more	developed	while	simultaneously	facing	increasingly	severe	flood	hazards,	this	poses	a	significant	challenge	to	which	coastal	populations	will	need	to	better	adapt.	With	this	in	mind,	this	report	examines	the	potential	for	using	coastal	buyouts	to	adapt	to	coastal	hazards	in	Canada	and	present	recommendations	for	Canadian	communities	to	start	looking	at	this	strategy.	The	central	research	question	is:	how	can	the	case	be	made	for	coastal	buyouts	in	Canada?			Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 7		2 . 0 	 L I T E R A T U R E 	 R E V I EW 			 The	literature	review	helped	to	establish	the	circumstances	for	retreat,	i.e.,	the	need	for	communities	to	adapt	to	coastal	hazards	and	climate	change.	It	uncovered	broader	themes	in	disaster	resilience	and	climate	change	adaptation	and	helped	to	link	these	to	coastal	retreat.	At	the	beginning	of	this	project,	it	was	intended	that	literature	review	would	be	the	main	method	used	to	investigate	the	potential	costs	and	benefits	of	buyouts	and	develop	recommendations	for	Canadian	communities	to	undertake	them.	However,	interview	responses	from	informants	provided	richer	information	and	more	interviews	than	was	anticipated.	Accordingly,	the	literature	review	was	scaled	back	and	serves	to	uncover	broader	themes	in	disaster	resilience	and	climate	change	adaptation.		2.1	Findings			 Literature	review	uncovered	findings	that	have	been	grouped	into	the	following	three	themes.	These	themes	link	buyouts	to	broader	issues	affecting	current	disaster	resilience	/	hazard	management	/	climate	change	adaptation	planning	efforts,	as	well	as	highlight	potential	barriers	and	benefits	that	the	strategy	could	offer.			2.1.1	Current	planning	responses.	The	suite	of	options	available	for	communities	to	adapt	to	 hazards	 and	 climate	 change	 is	 typically	 categorized	 into	 four	 approaches:	 accommodate,	protect,	and	retreat	/	avoid.	Accommodation	and	protection	can	improve	resilience	by	reducing	exposure	to	a	hazard,	or	mitigating	potential	negative	effects	(Harman	et	al.,	2015;	Klein	et	al.,	2001;	McLean	et	al.,	2001).	Accommodation	is	achieved	by	adapting	vulnerable	development	in	hazard	prone	areas	through	modifications	or	preparatory	actions	(Farstad	et	al.,	2013;	Harman	et	 al.,	 2015).	 Retrofitting	 a	 building	 to	 make	 it	 more	 earthquake	 proof,	 establishing	 flood	construction	levels	to	elevate	infrastructure	in	floodplains,	or	taking	out	insurance	in	preparation	for	the	financial	impacts	of	an	event	are	all	examples	of	accommodating	actions.	Protection	is	the	most	commonly	employed	strategy	for	improving	resilience	to	coastal	hazards	and	involves	exactly	what	its	name	suggests:	physically	armouring	communities	against	the	effects	of	hazards	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 8		through	engineering	measures	such	as	dikes	or	seawalls	(Caldwell	and	Segall,	2007;	Farstad	et	al.,	2013;	Thomalla	et	al.,	2006).	Although	there	is	an	increasing	trend	toward	coupling	these	with	“softer”	protection	measures	such	as	beach	nourishment	or	living	shorelines,	overall,	protective	measures	are	increasingly	being	recognized	as	expensive	and	short-term	solutions	(Farstad	et	al.,	2013;	Hallegatte,	2009;	Harman	et	al.,	2015).				Thus,	while	valuable	tools,	accommodation	and	protection	are	adaptation	strategies	that	only	reduce	the	level	of	risk	posed	by	a	hazard,	contributing	toward	resilience	on	a	piecemeal	basis.	Conversely,	retreat	and	avoidance	strategies	can	eliminate	risk	entirely,	and	represent	an	opportunity	for	large	scale,	policy-driven	adaptation	that	can	fill	the	gaps	left	by	other	piecemeal	approaches	(Heinz	Center,	2000;	Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	Avoidance	strategies	use	land	use	planning	and	regulatory	measures	to	prevent	development	in	hazard	prone	areas	(Farstad	et	al.,	2013;	McLean	et	al.,	2001).	Land	acquisition	is	an	example	of	an	avoidance	strategy,	in	which	undeveloped	 land	 is	acquired	by	the	government	and	typically,	designated	a	“no	build”	zone.	Retreat	is	similar	in	principle,	but	is	avoidance	in	areas	where	development	already	exists.	Retreat	involves	the	planned	or	managed	relocation	of	development	out	of	hazard	prone	areas	(Farstad	et	al.,	2013;	Harman	et	al.,	2015).	In	the	toolkit	of	climate	change	and	hazard	adaptation	options,	retreat	 has	 been	 broadly	 ignored	 and	 dismissed	 as	 too	 socially-unpalatable	 or	 challenging	politically.		2.1.2	The	dominant	approach	and	planning	responses.	In	Canada,	adaptation	efforts	have	long	been	more	reactive	than	proactive	(Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Similar	to	the	rest	of	the	world,	adaptation	has	focused	on	protection	and	accommodation	strategies	to	minimize	 hazard	 effects	 on	 infrastructure,	 lives,	 and	 properties	 (Caldwell	 and	 Segall,	 2007;	Thomalia	et	al.,	2006).	This	 is	 indicative	of	 the	traditional,	dominant	approach	to	disaster	risk	reduction.	This	approach	interprets	hazards	as	extreme	events	in	the	natural	environment,	the	effects	 of	 which	 humans	 cannot	 control	 (Hewitt,	 1983).	 It	 is	 characterized	 by	 a	 one-way	relationship,	wherein	the	physical	environment	impacts	the	social	environment	(Hewitt,	1983).	Communities	 are	 helpless	 victims	 and	 can	 only	 adapt	 to	 the	 possibility	 of	 a	 hazard	 event	 by	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 9		armouring	 themselves	 (i.e.,	 protecting)	 against	 these	 accidents	 of	 the	 physical	 environment.	“Such	 a	 hazard-focused	 as	 opposed	 to	 vulnerability-focused	 view	 has	 produced	 policies	 for	reducing	 the	 risk	 of	 climate-related	 disasters	 that	 resemble	 war	 strategy…	 treating	 climate	hazards	 as	 enemies,	 because	 people	 need	 ‘protection’”	 (Gaillard	 et	 al.,	 2014).	 As	 such,	investments	 by	 decision-makers	 has	 traditionally	 focused	 on	 adapting	 to	 exogenous	 events	through	 engineering	 projects	 following	 disasters	 (Gaillard	 et	 al.,	 2014).	 Protection	 through	engineering	 is	viewed	as	the	only	option	and	has	been	the	dominant	approach	to	hazard	and	climate	change	adaptation	in	coastal	communities	worldwide	(Farstad	et	al.,	2013).	In	Canada,	the	 Sea	 Level	 Rise	 Adaptation	 Primer	 used	 as	 the	 national	 toolkit	 for	 adaptation	 planning	recognizes	that	protection	is	“typically	the	first	response	considered”	(Farstad,	2013).			As	 Gaillard	 suggests	 however,	 there	 is	 an	 alternative:	 the	 vulnerability-focused	 view.	Increasingly,	alternative	views	 in	 resilience	 thinking	are	 recognizing	 the	 role	 that	vulnerability	plays	in	disasters.	Vulnerability	is	a	product	of	the	human	sphere,	shaped	by	socioeconomic	and	political	 factors	 (Gaillard	et	al.,	 2014).	 This	 view	 recognizes	 that	 risk	 is	 created	 in	part	by	 the	characteristics	of	a	population.	A	disaster,	or	the	risk	of	disaster	 faced	by	a	community	 is	not	simply	an	unfortunate	act	of	God,	but	rather	is	produced	through	the	combination	of	hazard	and	vulnerability	(Wisner,	2004).	Retreat,	achieved	through	buyouts,	represents	an	opportunity	to	reduce	vulnerability	by	 changing	 land	use	patterns	 to	better	adapt	human	systems	 to	hazard	events.	Retreat	respects	and	works	with	the	natural	world,	not	seeking	to	fortify	against	disasters	but	instead	working	through	land	use	restrictions	to	reduce	exposure	and	allowing	for	natural	processes	to	buffer	extreme	events	and	gradual	inundation.	It	is	truly	an	adaptation	strategy,	as	it	requires	adjustments	in	ecological,	social,	and	economic	spatial	patterns,	in	response	to	actual	and	expected	risks,	to	moderate	potential	damages	(UNFCC,	2014).	Retreat	seems	to	be	a	viable	strategy	 for	 improving	 resilience	 and	 Canadian	 communities	 should	 begin	 shifting	 their	perspectives	to	look	a	more	vulnerability-focused	view	of	hazard	management,	and	to	look	at	retreat	as	an	 important	adaptation	strategy	 (T.	Golumbia,	personal	 communication,	March	9,	2017).		Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 10		2.1.3	Risky	development.	In	addition	to	this	shift	in	perspective,	buyouts	will	require	the	government	to	implement	broad,	policy-driven	efforts	to	create	the	conditions	for	efficient	adaptation	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	(Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	In	Canada,	the	prevailing	economic	and	political	conditions	do	not	help	adaptation	because	of	a	cycle	facilitating	risky	development	of	vulnerable	areas.	This	cycle	begins	with	the	lack	of	policies	to	discourage	the	development	of	vulnerable	areas,	such	as	coastlines,	and	follows	through	to	disaster	financial	assistance	bail	outs	provided	by	the	federal	government.	Without	a	change	in	these	conditions,	it	will	be	difficult	to	implement	retreat	through	buyouts.				 This	cycle	begins	with	the	problem	of	profitable	coastal	properties.	As	Tierney	states:	“government	programs	to	reduce	losses	from	floods	have	made	little	headway	in	the	face	of	development	pressures”	(2014,	p.131).	Currently,	there	are	no	incentives	in	place	for	developers	not	to	build	or	to	adapt	coastal	sites,	unless	buyers	discriminate	based	on	vulnerability	or	government	policies	force	them	not	to	(Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	In	most	Canadian	communities,	local	governments	have	only	limited	power	to	restrict	development	based	on	land	use	zoning	(Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	In	practice,	the	potential	for	high	property	tax	revenue	from	development	of	these	vulnerable	areas	on	profitable	lands	encourages	local	governments	to	allow	development	to	move	forward	(Burby	et	al.,	1999).	Developers	and	local	governments	de-emphasize	the	risks	of	developing	in	hazardous	locations,	then,	when	properties	built	on	these	vulnerable	sites	are	sold	to	members	of	the	general	public,	it	is	the	purchaser	who	assumes	the	risks	from	hazards	(Tierney,	2014).	The	developer	reaps	the	immediate	benefits	(i.e.,	profit),	while	passing	on	the	long-term	costs	(i.e.,	flooding	hazards,	sea	level	rise)	to	property	owners	(Kousky	and	Zeckhauser,	2006;	Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).			In	Canada,	this	is	exacerbated	because	coastal	flooding	is	uninsurable	–	flooding	from	“unpredictable	perils”	such	as	bursting	pipes	is	the	only	type	of	flood	hazard	coverage	widely	available	(Sandink	et	al.,	2010).	While	it	has	been	reported	that	70%	of	Canadian	homeowners	believe	their	insurance	covers	them	for	all	floods,	in	fact,	it	is	the	federal	government	who	is	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 11		responsible	for	damages	from	coastal	flooding	(Thistlethwaite	and	Feltmate,	2013).	Federal	disaster	financial	assistance	is	only	available	for	uninsurable	events,	which	creates	the	conditions	for	property	owners	to	receive	pay	outs	from	the	government	when	coastal	disasters	–	uninsurable	events	–	strike.	Most	property	owners	thus	believe	that	their	insurance	or	government	will	bail	them	out	following	a	disaster	(Burby	et	al.,	1999;	Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	As	such,	there	are	no	incentives	for	developers	not	to	develop	these	sites,	and,	no	incentives	for	people	not	to	purchase	them.	There	are	no	incentives	not	to	redevelop	in	the	exact	building	envelope	from	which	the	property	was	destroyed,	as	disaster	financial	assistance	in	Canada	allows	for	this.	Additionally,	as	developments	continue,	political	pressures	oblige	local	governments	to	continue	to	protect	and	accommodate.	To	avoid	this	problem,	“when	structures	are	built	[in	hazardous	areas]	due	to	a	variance	or	permit,	it	should	be	clear	that	the	owner	takes	on	the	financial	risk	and	that	no	public	funding	will	be	provided	for	future	relief	or	rebuilding”	(Siders,	2013,	p.52).			Large	scale	policies	to	break	this	cycle	and	dis-incentivize	the	development	of	hazardous	lands	are	thus	required	from	the	federal	government	to	encourage	the	“effective	adaptation	of	long-term	investment	patterns”	(Burby	et	al.,	1999;	Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007,	p.412).	As	it	stands,	adaptation	will	continue	to	occur	on	a	piecemeal	basis,	as	certain	local	governments	or	property	owners	who	feel	passionately	about	adaptation	actively	choose	to	discriminate	against	vulnerable	lands	based	on	the	risks	(Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	Policies	to	empower	local	governments	to	pursue	managed	retreat	through	buyouts	offers	a	means	of	adaptation	through	changed	investment	and	land	use	patterns.	Further,	setting	aside	bought-out	properties	as	public	open	spaces	could	encourage	communities	to	conserve	these	lands	and	take	on	responsibility	for	the	development	of	these	areas,	rather	than	developing	for	property	tax	revenue,	incurring	damages,	then	applying	to	the	federal	government	for	aid	and	further	protective	structures	(Burby	et	al.,	1999).	Land	use	planning	in	Canada	needs	to	be	shifted	to	encourage	investment	in	developments	that	are	adaptive	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	processes	along	the	coast	(Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).	Buyouts	offer	a	land	use	planning	mechanism	to	achieve	this,	but	will	not	be	effective	until	risky	development	is	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 12		stopped.	The	federal	government	will	need	to	step	in	with	mandatory	restrictions	or	legislation	around	hazardous	lands	to	stimulate	the	market	towards	adaptation	and	break	this	cycle	(Stern	and	Great	Britain,	2007).			2.1.4	Ecosystem	services.	There	is	much	consensus	in	literature	about	the	environmental	benefits	of	preserving	naturalized	coastline	environments	(Burby	et	al,	1999;	Caldwell	and	Segall,	2007;	Felter	and	Morris,	2016;	Lichterman,	2000).	Purchasing	lands	along	the	coast	and	setting	these	aside	as	undeveloped	open	spaces	is	an	opportunity	to	simultaneously	eliminate	hazard	risks	and	reap	environmental	gains	(Burby	et	al.,	1999;	Lichterman,	2000).	Public	open	spaces	have	been	demonstrated	to	have	many	positive	benefits	for	a	community	(i.e.,	psychological	well-being,	enhanced	property	values,	health	benefits,	habitat	preservation)	(Trust	for	Public	Land,	2016).	Naturalized	open	spaces	along	the	coast	have	the	potential	to	offer	these	benefits,	plus	additional	benefits	related	to	the	buffering	of	hazard	and	climate	change	impacts	(Felter	and	Morris,	2016;	Heinz	Center,	2000;	Lichterman,	2000).	Coastal	floodplains,	“often	have	environmental	value	that	is	incompatible	with	development”	and	can	serve	important	and	valuable	flood	storage,	stormwater	filtration,	and	sea	level	rise	impact	absorption	functions	(Burby	et	al.,	1999;	Felter	and	Morris,	2016;	NJDEP,	2015).	These	benefits	are	referred	to	as	“ecosystem	services”,	and,	although	difficult	to	quantify,	are	increasingly	being	recognized	as	important	inputs	in	cost	benefit	analyses	for	land	use	planning	(Bolund	and	Hunhammar,	1999;	Heinz	Center,	2000).	When	determining	the	true	costs	and	benefits	of	different	adaptation	options,	it	is	necessary	to	attempt	to	include	the	value	offered	from	these	inputs.	Buyouts	are	an	opportunity	to	secure	some	of	these	benefits,	a	form	of	value-added	adaptation.	This	is	consistent	with	interview	findings	and	the	Green	Acres	Program	/	Coastal	Blue	Acres	case	study,	which	corroborates	this	with	their	approach	to	ongoing	management	of	hazardous	coastal	areas	for	low-intensity	uses.				 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 13		3 . 0 	 C A S E 	 S T U D I E S 		Case	studies	of	buyout	programs	in	New	Jersey	and	New	York	States	in	the	U.S.	were	undertaken	to	illustrate	how	buyouts	can	be	implemented	in	practice	to	adapt	to	floodplain	risks	and	to	recover	from	coastal	hazards.	The	New	Jersey	Green	Acres	Program	/	Coastal	Blue	Acres	preserves	open	spaces	for	public	good	by	acquiring	land,	including	the	land	in	coastal	floodplains.	Through	the	program,	land	is	purchased	both	proactively,	to	adapt	to	coastal	hazards	and	climate	change,	as	well	as	reactively,	as	a	recovery	strategy	for	properties	affected	by	Hurricane	Sandy.	In	New	York,	the	New	York	Rising	Program	was	initiated	as	a	recovery	strategy	in	response	to	Hurricane	Sandy.	It	empowers	communities	to	create	their	own	reconstruction	plans	and	access	funding	to	purchase	properties	destroyed	by	recent	coastal	hazards.	These	programs	are	precedents	of	successful	structuring	and	administration	of	funding,	governance,	and	public	engagement	for	coastal	buyouts.	This	section	discusses	key	takeaways,	illustrated	through	examples	of	each	program	in	action	in	the	communities	of	Sayreville,	New	Jersey,	and	Mastic	Beach,	New	York.		Full	case	studies	are	included	as	Appendices	A	and	B	and	can	be	referenced	for	details	of	program	administration	and	history.			3.1	The	Green	Acres	Program	/	Coastal	Blue	Acres			Coastal	Blue	Acres	operates	under	the	umbrella	of	the	New	Jersey	Department	of	Environmental	Protection	(NJDEP)	Green	Acres	Program	in	the	state	of	New	Jersey.	Coastal	Blue	Acres	uses	state	funding	to	acquire	developed	or	undeveloped	land	in	coastal	floodplains.	Land	must	be	from	willing	sellers	who	apply	to	the	program	and	must	be	set	aside	in	perpetuity	for	conservation	or	public	recreation,	with	restrictions	on	the	construction	of	recreation	facilities	that	could	be	at-risk	from	coastal	hazards	(NJDEP,	2012).	Hazard	prone	buffer	lands	are	acquired	pre-storm	as	an	adaptive	strategy,	through	75%	grant	and	25%	loan	from	the	state	to	the	local	government	(NJDEP,	2017).	Post-storm	buyouts	are	funded	through	50%	grant	and	50%	loan.	Notably,	the	NJDEP	website	highlights	that	all	funding	made	available	for	pre-storm	adaptive	buyouts	was	committed	within	3	years	of	program	inception.	Considering	this	and	the	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 14		higher	proportion	of	grant	money	dedicated	to	pre-storm	purchases	indicate	the	popularity	and	potential	for	further	use	of	buyouts	as	a	proactive	adaptation	strategy,	beyond	reactive	recovery.	Following	Hurricane	Sandy,	a	large	quantity	of	federal	money	was	made	available	for	post-storm	buyouts	administered	through	a	special	subset	of	the	Coastal	Blue	Acres	Program,	the	Superstorm	Sandy	Blue	Acres	Buyout	Program.	As	such,	use	of	this	program	for	recovery	has	eclipsed	the	proportion	used	adaptively.			3.1.1	Sayreville,	New	Jersey.	In	Sayreville,	N.J.,	200	homeowners	made	applications	for	buyouts	following	Hurricane	Sandy,	199	of	which	were	approved	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).	The	town	was	damaged	by	three	separate	storms	in	three	consecutive	years,	culminating	in	the	devastation	of	Sandy,	after	which	homeowners	expressed	strong	desires	to	participate	in	buyout	programs.	Homes	were	purchased	for	pre-storm	fair	market	value,	disregarding	any	damages.	As	one	resident	stated,	this	“was	pretty	much	a	godsend”	(Hutchinson	in	Upton,	J.,	2014).	Considering	that	the	town	has	a	high	percentage	of	lower	income,	renter,	and	visible	minority	neighbourhoods,	buyouts	offer	a	way	out	for	some	of	the	most	vulnerable	populations,	offering	some	social	justice	benefits	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).			The	purchase	and	demolition	of	196	homes	in	Sayreville	required	an	initial	investment	of	$48.4	million	provided	by	the	federal	government	and	administered	by	Green	Acres	/	Coastal	Blue	Acres	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).	The	buyouts	are	estimated	to	cost	the	community	a	further	$6.7	million	 per	 year	 in	 lost	 property	 tax	 revenue.	 However,	moving	 forward,	 fiscal	 analysis	performed	by	Freudenberg	et	al.	indicates	that	buyouts	could	save	the	community	up	to	$186	million	in	damage	and	dislocation	costs	for	a	100-year	flood	event,	when	sea	level	rise	estimates	for	2050	are	factored	in	(2016).			3.2	The	New	York	Rising	Program			 Following	Hurricane	Sandy,	the	state	of	New	York	established	New	York	Rising,	which	encompasses	a	buyout	/	acquisition	and	community	reconstruction	planning	program.	New	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 15		York	Rising	administers	federal	and	state	funding	to	purchase	properties	damaged	by	Hurricane	Sandy,	Hurricane	Irene,	or	Tropical	Storm	Lee	(GOSR,	2016).	Some	properties	are	maintained	as	“coastal	buffer	zones	or	other	non-residential	/	commercial	uses”,	where	reconstruction	is	not	permitted,	while	redevelopment	is	permitted	on	other	properties	“in	a	resilient	manner”	as	determined	through	compliance	with	local	and	state	building	codes	(GOSR,	2015,	p.15,	p.76).	Concurrent	with	the	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program,	the	state	administers	the	Community	Reconstruction	Program,	which	helps	communities	to	integrate	recovery	actions	(such	as	buyouts)	within	their	own	long-term	resilience	plans	(GOSR,	2016).	Plans	are	created	by	Planning	Committees	composed	of	local	stakeholders	and	supported	with	technical	expertise	provided	by	the	state.	This	helps	to	identify	and	build	consensus	around	buyouts	of	areas	in	communities,	supported	by	financial	incentives	offered	by	New	York	Rising	for	the	purchase	of	contiguous	properties	or	whole	neighbourhoods	(GOSR,	2015).			3.2.1	Mastic	Beach,	New	York.	Unlike	many	communities	who	reach	a	decision	to	pursue	buyouts	together,	the	population	of	Mastic	Beach	in	Suffolk	County,	New	York,	is	divided	on	the	issue.	Suffolk	County	produced	a	N.Y.	Rising	Community	Reconstruction	Plan	in	2014,	which	listed	“provide	residential	flood	protection,	resilience	measures,	and	opportunities	for	buyouts,	acquisitions,	and	land	swaps”	as	the	first	community	goal	for	implementation	of	the	plan	(Mastic	Beach/Smith	Point	of	Shirley,	p.16).	Like	Sayreville,	the	community	is	largely	lower	to	moderate	income	relative	to	the	surrounding	area,	which	limits	the	ability	of	residents	to	pursue	expensive	accommodation	strategies,	such	as	raising	their	homes	(Mastic	Beach	/	Smith	Point	of	Shirley,	2014).	Although	it	recognizes	that	some	short-term	protective	measures	may	be	necessary	to	protect	residents	who	remain	opposed	to	being	bought	out,	the	County	emphasizes	a	desire	to	“transition	to	more	resilient	measures…	(e.g.,	relocation)	over	time”	(Mastic	Beach	/	Smith	Point	of	Shirley,	2014).	The	most	flood	prone	properties	were	prioritized	in	the	plan	and	the	County	helped	interested	residents	of	these	parcels	to	access	the	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program,	despite	opposition	from	some	municipal	officials	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).	Fiscal	analysis	by	Freudenberg	et	al.	indicates	that	a	100-year	flood	event	could	cost	Mastic	Beach	up	to	$173	million,	while	a	buyout	of	the	most	vulnerable	properties	could	save	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 16		the	municipality	approximately	$3.7	million	with	each	passing	year	in	damage	and	dislocation	costs	(2016).	The	County	intends	for	properties	to	be	returned	to	their	natural	functioning	state	as	coastal	wetlands,	potentially	offering	further	benefits	not	accounted	for	in	costing.			3.3	Key	Takeaways		There	are	a	few	aspects	of	each	program	that	contribute	to	success	and	public	support,	and	that	other	buyout	programs	would	do	well	to	incorporate.	Comparing	differences	between	the	programs	offers	the	following	takeaways	to	inform	the	design	of	buyout	programs	for	Canadian	communities.				o It	is	well	established	that	planning	processes,	especially	drastic	ones	such	as	buyouts,	must	be	community-driven	(Arnstein,	1969;	Lefevre	et	al.,	2000).	Coastal	Blue	Acres	allows	property	owners	to	apply	to	the	program	and	mandates	that	all	buyouts	must	be	from	willing	sellers	(NJDEP,	2015).	Acquired	land	must	be	set	aside	for	community	conservation	or	recreation,	ensuring	that	the	end	result	of	the	buyout	process	is	community-driven	as	well.			o The	Green	Acres	mission	“to	achieve,	in	partnership	with	others,	a	system	of	interconnected	open	spaces,	whose	protection	will	preserve	and	enhance	New	Jersey's	natural	environment	and	its	historic,	scenic,	and	recreational	resources	for	public	use	and	enjoyment”	ensures	that	land	acquired	through	Coastal	Blue	Acres	will	serve	the	community	(NJDEP,	2017).	This	establishes	motivation	for	the	community	to	participate	in	buyouts	and	offers	value-added	adaptation	by	fostering	ecosystem	services	in	acquired	lands.		New	York	Rising	mandates	that	bought-out	land	must	be	maintained	as	coastal	buffers,	recognizing	the	potential	for	ecosystem	services.	However,	acquired	land	can	be	redeveloped	in	the	future,	which	could	impact	public	trust	and	long-term	benefits	of	buyouts	(GOSR,	2015).			Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 17		o Designating	portions	of	funding	for	pre-storm	acquisitions,	such	as	by	Coastal	Blue	Acres,	is	a	good	idea	for	facilitating	the	use	of	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy,	rather	than	just	for	post-storm	recovery.	In	practice,	however,	more	funding	needs	to	be	made	available	for	pre-storm	for	this	to	have	a	significant	impact.	This	will	be	a	difficult	but	smart	shift	to	make,	following	the	huge	recovery	bills	of	Hurricane	Sandy	and	similar	storms.			o Coastal	Blue	Acres	allows	for	lot-by-lot	buyouts,	resulting	in	piecemeal	acquisitions.	In	New	York	Rising,	Planning	Committees	help	to	build	community	consensus	around	buyouts,	rather	than	the	lot-by-lot	approach	(GOSR,	2016).	Additionally,	the	program	offers	financial	incentives	for	sellers	to	relocate	together	(GOSR,	2015).	Buyouts	have	been	shown	to	be	most	effective	and	have	the	least	negative	impacts	on	communities	when	whole	neighbourhoods	relocate	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016;	Heinz	Center,	2000).	Establishing	large	tracts	of	open	space	rather	than	single	lots	can	enhance	property	values	in	the	community	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).			o Coastal	Blue	Acres	does	not	offer	resources	to	support	communities	to	plan	for	and	execute	buyouts.	As	discussed	in	the	following	section,	interviews	suggested	that	buyouts	for	adaptation	would	require	hazard	assessments	and	cost-benefit	analyses	comparing	buyouts	with	other	adaptation	strategies.	New	York	Rising	offers	technical	support,	which	helps	smaller	communities	who	often	do	not	have	the	capacity	to	undertake	these	processes	alone	(GOSR,	2016).	New	York	Rising	also	more	effectively	links	buyouts	to	larger	scale	planning	processes	through	the	accompanying	Community	Reconstruction	Plans.	 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 18		4 . 0 	 I N T E R V I EW S 		Informant	interviews	were	conducted	to	link	findings	to	the	Canadian	context	to	address	the	overall	purpose	of	this	project:	producing	relevant	recommendations	for	Canadian	communities.	Questions	were	semi	structured,	allowing	participants	to	offer	their	general	opinions	on	buyouts	a	strategy	to	adapt	to	coastal	hazards	and	climate	change	in	Canada	through	a	combination	of	open	ended	questions	and	probes	(see	Appendix	C	for	complete	script).	They	were	asked	about	barriers,	benefits,	and	needs.		Six	local	government	staff	were	interviewed,	including	parks	planners,	engineers,	and	planners	with	expertise	in	sustainability	and	/	or	conservation.	Four	professionals	with	expertise	in	climate	change	adaptation,	coastal	planning,	and	/	or	disaster	prevention	were	interviewed.	Interviews	drew	on	participants’	current	and	past	career	experience	to	solicit	views	on	the	application	of	buyouts	across	different	Canadian	communities	(see	Table	1).			Table	1.	Locations	of	interview	participants.		Region	 Number	of	Interviewees	East	coast	 2	West	coast	(outside	Metro	Vancouver)	 5	Metro	Vancouver	 2	Other	(central	Canada)	 1		 	4.1	Findings			Participants	appreciate	that	this	project	is	initiating	discussion	around	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	for	coastal	communities	in	Canada.	They	think	this	subject	is	an	“adaptation	option	that	people	should	start	talking	about”,	but	is	something	the	government	and	public	are	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 19		reluctant	to	broach	(S.	Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Interviewees	indicated	that	they	like	the	idea	of	buyouts	and	some	suggested	this	would	be	their	ideal	adaptation	strategy,	if	the	barriers	can	be	overcome.	Ultimately,	buyouts	were	identified	as	inevitable	in	the	long-run.		All	interviewees	had	heard	of	buyouts	or	coastal	retreat	as	an	adaptation	strategy,	either	from	adaptation	toolkits	(i.e.,	from	the	B.C.	Sea	Level	Rise	Adaptation	Primer)	or	from	cases	in	the	U.S.	(i.e.,	following	Hurricanes	Sandy	and	Katrina).	Some	indicated	that	they	had	heard	of	the	use	of	buyouts	in	Calgary,	Alberta,	following	the	2013	floods,	or	in	Fort	McMurray,	Alberta,	following	the	wildfires	of	summer	2016.	Some	described	uptake	of	“elements	of	retreat”	in	their	communities,	although	these	were	limited	to	small	scale	setbacks	or	acquisitions	of	properties	in	the	path	of	protective	structures	(C.	Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).	Overall,	interviewees	communicated	that	they	were	unfamiliar	with	details	and	logistics	of	the	strategy	and	how	it	could	be	applied	in	Canada,	underscoring	the	timeliness	and	potential	contributions	of	this	research.			4.1.1	Benefits.	Participants	were	asked	to	broadly	identify	what	they	viewed	as	potential	benefits	to	pursuing	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	along	Canada’s	coasts.			Environmental	benefits.	The	most	commonly	identified	benefit	to	coastal	buyouts	is	the	potential	to	restore	and	protect	sensitive	coastal	environments.	Nine	out	of	ten	participants	suggested	that	buyouts	can	offer	a	range	of	environmental	benefits	that	other	adaptation	strategies	cannot,	by	setting	aside	and	restoring	sensitive	coastal	environments	such	as	beaches,	intertidal	areas,	wetlands,	salt	marshes,	and	bluffs.	Purchasing	coastline	properties	and	prohibiting	or	removing	development	is	an	opportunity	to	foster	or	restore	ecological	functioning	so	that	these	areas	can	offer	a	variety	of	valuable	ecosystem	services.	Fisheries,	recreation	and	tourism	opportunities,	biodiversity	and	habitats,	stormwater	absorption	and	filtration,	and	hazard	buffering	were	identified	as	some	of	the	services	naturalized	coastlines	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 20		offer	(T.	Ennis,	personal	communication,	March	23,	2017;	Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	Interviewees	expressed	that	taking	a	holistic	viewpoint	that	considers	both	the	ecological	and	economic	benefits	of	buyouts	makes	a	case	for	this	over	other	adaptation	strategies	(Ennis,	personal	communication,	March	23,	2017).			Taken	one	step	further	in	the	planning	cycle,	planning	practitioners	were	excited	at	the	idea	of	setting	these	areas	aside	for	public	open	spaces	(L.	Wilson,	personal	communication,	March	7,	2017).	Several	expressed	concerns	about	ensuring	the	land	remained	undeveloped	and	how	it	would	be	managed	into	the	future.	Natural	coastlines	are	disappearing	with	the	processes	of	coastal	squeeze,	where	coastal	habitats	are	trapped	between	structures	on	the	landward	side	and	encroaching	sea	levels	on	the	other	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	Doddy,	2013).	Interviewees	flagged	the	loss	of	coastal	habitat	as	a	concern	and	expressed	desires	to	preserve	these	as	managed	open	spaces	for	public	use.	Buyouts	would	require	much	more	than	just	buying	the	land;	interviewees	suggested	that	the	land	would	need	to	be	used	to	serve	another	need	related	to	risk	and	climate	change	adaptation	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	Preserving	such	land	as	open	spaces	and	ensuring	it	can	provide	buffering	functions	as	a	naturalized	floodplain	would	achieve	this.	One	interviewee	suggested	that	the	public	in	their	community	is	acutely	aware	of	the	relationship	between	their	property	taxes	and	park	space	development,	so	establishing	a	relationship	between	buyouts	and	open	space	establishment	could	help	to	build	trust.	Preserving	these	lands	as	open	space	rather	than	park	space	would	minimize	maintenance	costs	to	the	local	government	and	avoid	the	need	to	develop	recreation	facilities	on-site	(Wilson,	personal	communication,	March	7,	2017).			Justice	implications.	Interviewees	also	suggested	that	buyout	strategies	offer	the	potential	to	avoid	differential	impacts	to	socially	vulnerable	populations,	a	demographic	group	that	is	likely	to	suffer	the	most	negative	impacts	from	disasters	and	climate	change	(Regional	Plan	Association,	2015).	Buyouts	could	better	help	homeowners	who	do	not	have	protective	structures	installed	on	their	properties,	especially	considering	that	protective	structures	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 21		installed	along	one	section	of	coast	but	not	along	neighbouring	properties	can	exacerbate	damage	(C.	Breen,	personal	communication,	March	22,	2017).	Buyouts	could	be	an	opportunity	for	lower	socioeconomic	status	populations,	who	would	lose	everything	in	a	flood	without	adequate	resources	to	recover	(Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Participants	suggested	that	local	governments	feel	a	responsibility	to	protect	their	communities	from	hazards	and	the	effects	of	climate	change,	and	that	the	public	has	an	inherent	right	to	live	in	a	hazard-free	environment	(Confidential,	personal	communication,	March	29,	2017).	Buyouts	offer	an	opportunity	for	equal	protection	of	all	populations	and	for	equal	access	to	the	natural	coastline	as	a	public	good.	To	effectively	achieve	this,	local	governments	will	need	to	be	enabled	with	broader	legislative	powers	to	override	the	power	of	affluent	properties	to	resist	buyout	schemes	and	ensure	equal	application.	Further,	local	governments	will	need	to	ensure	buyout	participants	are	helped	through	the	entire	purchase	and	resettlement	process,	to	avoid	negatively	impacting	marginalized	groups.			Efficiency.	Eight	participants	suggested	that	buyouts	represent	the	most	cost	efficient	strategy	to	adapt	to	hazards	and	climate	change	in	the	long-run.	All	six	planning	practitioners	indicated	that	buyouts	would	be	more	cost	efficient	than	traditional	engineering	approaches	in	certain	contexts,	especially	in	smaller	communities	and	on	longer	timeframes,	considering	the	huge	costs	associated	with	building	and	maintaining	protective	structures.	Several	suggested	that	structural	measures	are	inherently	flawed	because	they	are	prone	to	failure	and	require	continual	updating	to	keep	pace	with	rising	sea	levels	and	intensifying	flood	hazards	(D.	Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).			Effectiveness.	Buyouts	are	an	opportunity	to	combine	strategies	and	existing	plans	and	policies	for	more	effective	adaptation	in	Canadian	communities.	Buyouts	can	be	combined	with	other	strategies	for	more	effective	and	robust	approaches	to	hazard	and	climate	change	adaptation.	Buyouts	can	facilitate	more	effective	protection	and	accommodation	by	creating	more	space	for	structures	or	soft	shore	mitigation	measures	(A.	Danyluk,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Interviewees	also	suggested	that	buyouts	offer	the	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 22		opportunity	for	“total	elimination	of	risk”	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	As	such,	they	also	reduce	local	government	liability	(Breen,	personal	communication,	March	22,	2017).	Protection	and	accommodation	strategies,	in	contrast,	can	only	reduce	risks.		4.1.2	Barriers.	Numerous	barriers	to	pursuing	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	to	coastal	hazards	and	climate	change	were	flagged.	The	first	barrier	recognized	by	most	was	that	the	strategy	is	politically	difficult	due	to	broad	public	distaste	for	the	idea.		Public	perception.	This	was	attributed	to	emotional	attachment,	visuals	and	status	of	living	on	the	coast,	sense	of	place,	and	overall	public	attitude.	Overall,	“people	don’t	want	to	move”	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	One	interviewee	suggested	that	tradition	of	living	along	the	coast	plays	a	significant	part	in	this	in	the	Canadian	Maritimes	(Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	This	was	also	attributed	to	the	overall	distrust	and	reluctance	of	people	to	sell	their	properties	to	the	government	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).			Participants	suggested	that	this	barrier,	may,	in	part,	be	related	to	a	lack	of	public	understanding,	especially	regarding	coastal	hazards,	climate	change	effects,	and	the	level	of	risk	and	consequence	in	coastal	areas	(Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	Further,	there	is	a	general	lack	of	knowledge	about	the	benefits	of	naturalized	shorelines	and	ecosystem	services.	As	one	interviewee	stated,	“humans	are	terrible	at	making	decisions	about	the	future	and	like	to	live	in	places	that	are	vulnerable”	(Danyluk,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	For	example,	following	the	Fort	McMurray	wildfires,	the	Waterways	neighbourhood	was	the	best	potential	scenario	for	a	buyout	and	relocation	program	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	Homes	located	in	an	area	of	high	flood	risk	were	destroyed	by	the	wildfire,	there	were	low	risk	areas	in	which	to	rebuild,	and	the	cost	would	be	covered	by	insurance.	Despite	this,	people	chose	to	rebuild	in	the	same	Waterways	neighbourhood,	a	fact	the	interviewee	attributes	to	people’s	sense	of	place	and	community	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).			Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 23			Due	to	this,	there	exists	a	lack	of	political	will	to	pursue	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	option.	Participants	indicated	that	they	feel	that	local	governments	in	Canada	are	largely	unwilling	to	wade	into	this	discussion,	especially	considering	election	appeal	and	public	pushback	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).		Existing	Government	Landscape	in	Canada.	Planning	practitioners	interviewed	suggested	that	it	will	be	difficult	to	pursue	buyouts	until	higher	levels	of	government	treat	this	as	an	viable	option	within	the	adaptation	toolkit.	Funding	available	to	local	governments	is	currently	funnelled	toward	protective	strategies,	with	an	emphasis	on	building	new	and	bigger	structural	measures	(Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).	Retreat	is	the	last	option	encouraged	by	provincial	and	federal	governments	and	will	need	to	be	placed	on	an	equal	footing	with	other	strategies	in	grant	programs	before	local	uptake	occurs	(Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).			This	would	require	all	levels	of	Canadian	government	to	revisit	policies	to	create	a	clearer	and	more	well-developed	policy	stance	on	hazard	/	climate	change	adaptation	and	coastal	management	(Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Local	governments	need	to	work	within	the	ebbs	and	flows	of	Canadian	politics,	which	variously	enable	or	neglect	disaster	resilience	and	climate	change	adaptation	(Breen,	personal	communication,	March	22,	2017).			Risky	development.	The	emphasis	on	protection	encourages	continuing	development	of	lands	at-risk	of	coastal	hazards.	Interviewees	flagged	this	as	a	significant	barrier	to	pursuing	buyouts,	because	allowing	continued	development	of	at-risk	lands	while	simultaneously	proposing	buyouts	is	“like	a	revolving	door”	(Confidential,	personal	communication,	March	29,	2017).	Lack	of	local	government	power	and	will	to	restrict	development	in	these	lands	compounds	this	process,	as	while	being	held	responsible	for	floodplain	management,	local	governments	only	have	limited	power	to	restrict	development	based	primarily	on	land	use	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 24		zoning	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	Broad	restrictions	on	development	of	large	tracts	of	hazardous	lands	are	difficult	to	implement.	In	many	cases,	portions	of	potentially	hazardous	lands	are	deemed	to	be	safe	enough	or	to	be	sufficiently	satisfying	protective	standards	(e.g.,	building	codes,	flood	construction	levels)	for	development	to	be	endorsed	by	qualified	professionals	(e.g.,	engineers,	biologists,	geologists,	etc.).	In	these	cases,	municipal	governments	are	likely	to	approve	development,	impeding	large	scale	land	use	regulations	to	restrict	risky	development.			Private	interests	are	thus	able	to	develop	at-risk	lands,	then	pass	the	responsibility	and	cost	of	managing	the	hazards	onto	local	governments	to	protect	their	populations.	This	reflects	the	problems	with	existing	market	and	government	conditions	trapping	local	governments	in	a	cycle	of	risky	developments,	as	discussed	in	Section	2.1.3.	The	public	assumes	they	can	live	in	these	areas	risk-free	because	their	local	governments	will	protect	or	bail	them	out	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).		 		Existing	development.	Existing	development	obviously	poses	a	barrier	to	buyout	programs.	In	B.C.,	interviewees	flagged	the	property	values	as	a	significant	challenge,	while	on	the	east	coast,	place	attachment	and	tradition	was	identified	as	a	more	significant	factor	(D.	Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017;	Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	One	indicated	that	although	feasible	in	less	developed	areas	of	their	community,	buyouts	in	the	downtown	area	would	be	far	more	costly	than	protective	measures	because	of	the	density	of	development	and	value	of	properties	(Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).			Money.	Interviewees	are	unsure	as	to	whether	funding	would	be	a	public	or	private	responsibility	and	raised	questions	about	whether	the	real	estate	and	/	or	insurance	industries	would	play	a	role	(Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	The	case	studies	discussed	in	Appendices	A	and	B	serve	offer	possible	funding	structures	for	Canada	to	consider.		Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 25		4.1.3	Needs.	In	the	final	question,	interviewees	were	asked	what	they	anticipate	coastal	Canadian	communities	might	need	to	pursue	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy.	All	planning	practitioners	interviewed	suggested	that	buyouts	will	require	coordination	across	all	levels	of	government.	Overall	policy	direction	and	funding	from	the	provincial	or	federal	level,	commitment	/	agreement	across	jurisdictions,	and	reconciliation	with	other	policy	agendas	(i.e.,	hazard	/	climate	change	adaptation)	would	be	required	(Wilson,	personal	communication,	March	7,	2017).	It	was	made	clear	that	local	governments,	especially	those	in	smaller	communities,	may	not	have	the	capacity	to	manage	this	process	alone	(Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).	However,	interviewees	equally	emphasized	the	importance	of	implementation	occurring	through	local	governments,	who	could	use	their	land	use	planning	powers	and	local	knowledge	to	ensure	buyouts	are	pursued	in	a	manner	suited	to	their	community	(Wilson,	personal	communication,	March	7,	2017).			Policy.	Interviewees	suggested	that	legislation	to	make	some	aspects	of	the	buyout	process	mandatory	would	be	required,	to	filter	down	to	local	governments	who	could	then	implement	buyouts	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	Provincial	or	federal	legislation	to	empower	and	incentivize	local	governments	to	oppose	development	of	risky	lands	along	the	coast,	combined	with	a	stricter	approach	to	disaster	financial	assistance,	is	needed	(Danyluk,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	At	minimum,	provincial	policies	to	limit	development	along	the	coasts	are	an	option	(Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	One	interviewee	suggested	that	buyouts	would	need	high	level	directive,	funds,	and	would	need	to	be	made	mandatory	to	be	implemented	by	local	governments	(Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	Another	proposed	a	hybrid	approach	that	combines	grandfathering	in	of	existing	development	with	voluntary	buyout	options	(Ennis,	personal	communication,	March	23,	2017).		Proactive	adaptation	strategies.	Buyouts	would	need	to	be	one	component	of	a	larger	adaptation	strategy	from	the	provincial	or	federal	government	with	a	more	proactive	approach	focused	on	adaptation	to	hazards	and	climate	change	(Confidential,	personal	communication,	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 26		March	29,	2017;	Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	Currently,	Canada	takes	a	more	reactive	approach	focused	on	recovery,	consistent	with	the	dominant	view	discussed	in	Section	2.1.2.	Revised	adaptation	policies	would	need	to	treat	retreat	as	an	equally	viable	approach	alongside	protection	and	accommodation,	rather	than	a	last	resort.	It	was	suggested	that	adaptation	would	be	better	viewed	as	a	spectrum,	ranging	from	armouring	with	sea	walls	to	fully	naturalized	coastal	wetlands,	but	with	many	combinations	of	approaches	in-between	(Golumbia,	personal	communication,	March	9,	2017).			These	broader	adaptation	strategies	would	require	communities	to	first	undertake	hazard	/	climate	change	risk	assessments,	then	assess	their	options	for	addressing	these	risks,	before	buyouts	could	be	identified	as	a	suitable	strategy	in	an	official	mitigation	/	adaptation	plan	(Confidential,	personal	communication,	March	29,	2017;	Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).	For	example,	the	City	of	Surrey,	B.C.,	has	identified	and	mapped	their	coastal	flood	risks	to	the	year	2100,	and	is	currently	developing	a	Coastal	Flood	Adaptation	Strategy	to	assess	and	identify	the	best	adaptation	strategies	for	their	community	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	City	of	Surrey,	2016).				Gradual	implementation.	It	was	suggested	buyouts	would	best	be	approached	by	local	identification	and	prioritization	high	risk	areas	and	/	or	areas	with	limited	existing	development	(Breen,	personal	communication,	March	22,	2017).	This	would	give	people	time	to	adjust	to	the	process	and	would	be	a	more	palatable	approach	than	large-scale	planned	removal,	which	can	make	buyouts	seem	“huge	and	scary”	(Baron,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017;	Danyluk,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	For	example,	the	District	of	Squamish,	B.C.,	is	beginning	to	relocate	infrastructure	and	facilities	out	of	coastal	floodplains	as	they	reach	the	end	of	their	lifecycles	(Rouslton,	2017).			Ingredients.	Interviewees	also	identified	the	following	“ingredients”	that	communities	would	likely	need	to	pursue	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy:		Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 27		1. Public	education.	Interviewees	suggested	that	public	education	would	need	to	address	vulnerability	and	risk,	the	value	offered	by	naturalized	coastlines	and	ecosystem	services,	and	insurance,	among	other	concerns	(Ennis,	personal	communication,	March	23,	2017;	Page,	personal	communication,	March	31,	2017).	In-depth	public	engagement	would	be	required	to	involve	the	public	in	the	decision-making	process	for	their	communities,	to	offer	solutions	to	their	concerns	and	to	help	them	decide	how	they	want	to	invest	their	tax	dollars	in	managing	bought-out	properties	(i.e.,	as	parks,	open	spaces,	conservation	areas,	etc.)	(Wilson,	personal	communication,	March	7,	2017).		2. Financial	analysis.	Participants	advised	that	a	business	case	would	have	to	be	made	to	pursue	buyouts,	where	the	cost	of	buyouts	is	demonstrated	to	be	less	than	the	cost	of	protecting	or	accommodating	(Confidential,	personal	communication,	March	29,	2017).	This	would	require	financial	analyses	to	weigh	the	costs	and	benefits	of	buyouts	against	the	costs	and	benefits	of	other	strategies,	using	defined	criteria	(Breen,	personal	communication,	March	22,	2017).	Such	analyses	should	account	for	the	values	provided	by	ecosystem	service	potentials	(Ennis,	personal	communication,	March	23,	2017).					3. A	disaster.	Several	interviewees	indicated	that	a	disaster	will	need	to	strike	a	community	before	they	are	motivated	to	pursue	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy	(Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017;	Sandink,	personal	communication,	March	30,	2017).	Bringing	representatives	from	communities	who	have	experienced	disasters	into	other	communities	to	discuss	proactive	adaptation	with	public	and	decision-makers	was	discussed	as	a	possible,	albeit	less	effective,	alternative	(Roulston,	personal	communication,	March	21,	2017).		 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 28		5 . 0 	 R E C OMM E N D A T I O N S 			 Findings	from	the	literature	review,	case	studies,	and	interviews	were	synthesized	to	propose	the	following	recommendations.	These	are	starting	points	to	adapt	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	along	Canada’s	coasts	using	the	mechanism	of	buyouts	to	facilitate	a	strategy	of	managed	retreat.					1. Buyout	programs	should	be	initiated	and	implemented	by	local	governments,	but	supported	with	clear	frameworks	and	stances	on	adapting	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change	from	the	provincial	and	federal	levels.		To	 be	 successful,	 buyouts	 must	 be	 a	 community	 driven,	 bottom-up	 process	implemented	by	local	governments	but	framed	by	policy	and	legislation	from	higher	levels	 of	 government	 for	 hazard	 /	 climate	 change	 adaptation	 and	 development	restriction.	 Local	 governments	 should	 also	 be	 provided	 with	 resources	 for	implementation	 of	 buyout	 programs,	 such	 as	 fiscal	 analysis	 support,	 restructured	financial	 assistance	 programs,	 technical	 consulting	 and	 engineering	 support,	 and	community	 education.	 This	 is	 supported	 by	 examples	 from	 the	 case	 studies	 and	opinions	expressed	in	the	interviews.		2. Education	 and	 meaningful	 engagement	 with	 affected	 populations	 is	 necessary	 to	successfully	and	sustainably	implement	buyouts	in	communities.			Affected	populations	need	to	have	a	better	understanding	of	the	risks	of	developing	and	settling	 in	areas	vulnerable	to	natural	hazards	and	climate	change.	This	 is	true	across	hazardous	lands	in	Canada,	not	solely	in	the	case	of	coastlines.	Populations	will	need	 to	 be	 educated	 about	 adaptation	 options	 beyond	 traditional	 protective	 and	accommodative	structures	and	engaged	with	to	explore	and	select	options	that	are	right	for	their	communities.		Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 29			3. Full-cycle	 planning	 processes	 can	 maximize	 the	 potential	 benefits	 of	 buyouts	 as	 an	adaptation	strategy	for	natural	hazards	and	climate	change.			Buyouts	are	most	effective	as	an	adaptation	strategy	if	they	are	completed	as	a	full-cycle	 planning	 process.	 Such	 a	 full-cycle	 planning	 process	 would	 begin	 with	community	engagement	about	vulnerable	areas	and	would	end	with	the	designation	of	purchased	properties	as	public	open	spaces.			This	process	would	engage	populations	to	assess	what	risks	their	community	faces,	identify	and	prioritize	vulnerable	areas,	evaluate	the	costs	and	benefits	of	different	adaptation	strategies,	and	create	a	plan	for	adapting	to	risks	in	these	areas	using	a	spectrum	 of	 adaptation	 approaches.	 If	managed	 retreat	 is	 identified	 as	 a	 suitable	adaptation	 approach	 in	 this	 plan,	 the	 process	 would	 continue	 with	 buyout	participants.	 Participants	 would	 be	 guided	 through	 the	 entire	 purchasing	 and	relocation	 process,	 while	 local	 governments	 would	 undertake	 demolition	 and	restoration	(where	necessary)	of	purchased	lands.	Finally,	the	planning	process	would	include	 provisions	 for	 ongoing	management	 of	 the	 purchased	 lands,	 ensuring	 the	property	is	set	aside	in	perpetuity	as	open	space.			Such	a	planning	process	would	prevent	purchased	properties	from	being	redeveloped,	which	 would	 create	 distrust	 in	 the	 local	 government	 and	 deter	 others	 from	participating	in	a	buyout	program.	Designating	the	land	as	undeveloped	open	space	offers	buyout	participants	the	chance	to	contribute	toward	a	public	resource,	from	which	 they	 would	 still	 benefit.	 Aiding	 in	 the	 resettlement	 process	 offers	 local	governments	 the	 chance	 to	 resettle	 populations	 within	 the	 same	 jurisdictional	boundary,	mitigating	losses	in	property	tax	revenue.			 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 30		6 . 0 	 C O N C L U S I O N S 		This	report	has	demonstrated	that	there	exists	a	case	for	buyouts	to	adapt	to	hazards	and	climate	change	in	coastal	communities	in	Canada.	Indeed,	managed	retreat	through	buyouts	is	a	discussion	that	needs	to	be	initiated,	because	it	is	an	opportunity	for	more	efficient	adaptation	that	the	dominant	responses	to	these	processes.	The	strategy	has	the	potential	to	offer	new,	value-added	benefits	that	current	strategies	do	not.	To	facilitate	this,	there	are	some	options	for	actions	to	be	taken.			6.1	What	can	we	do	now?				 Public	outreach	about	hazard	and	climate	change	risks,	the	problem	of	risky	development,	and	the	potential	for	ecosystem	services	is	a	potential	first	step	toward	buyouts.	This	will	help	to	raise	awareness	of	the	need	to	shift	from	a	reactive,	traditional	approach	to	hazard	management	to	a	more	proactive,	vulnerability-focused	approach	and	could	be	a	platform	for	federal	or	provincial	government	action.	Enhanced	awareness	of	ecosystem	services	could	reframe	buyouts	as	a	mechanism	for	providing	a	public	good	in	the	form	of	coastal	open	spaces,	rather	than	a	process	of	forced	relocation.			6.2	Future	Research		 		 Future	research	into	the	fiscal	impacts	of	buyouts	compared	to	other	adaptation	options,	such	as	cost-benefit	analyses	for	test	communities	could	help	local	governments	decide	if	this	would	be	a	suitable	strategy	to	pursue.	Future	research	into	potential	roles	for	the	insurance	and	real	estate	industries	in	buyout	programs	would	help	to	clarify	confusion	expressed	by	many	interviewees	and	could	offer	some	solutions	to	the	barriers	of	funding	and	/	or	risky	development.			Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 31			 Finally,	this	project	suggests	that	research	into	the	potential	for	coastal	management	planning	in	Canada	would	be	timely	and	significant.	Planning	with	the	coast	as	the	central	unit	seems	crucial,	considering	the	convergence	of	stakeholder	interests	(e.g.,	fisheries,	recreation	and	tourism,	property	owners,	ports),	the	sensitivity	of	coastal	environments,	trends	of	increasing	populations	and	development,	and	coastal	hazards	and	climate	change	effects	in	these	spaces.	Canada	could	look	to	the	California	Coastal	Commission	in	the	U.S.,	Marine	Spatial	Planning	in	the	European	Union,	or	Shoreline	Management	Plans	in	the	United	Kingdom	for	precedents.			 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 32		A P P E N D I X 	 A : 	 T H E 	 G R E E N 	 A C R E S 	 P R O G R AM 	 / 	C O A S T A L 	 B L U E 	 A C R E S 			The	Green	Acres	Program	has	been	operating	since	1961.	Its	mission	is:	“to	achieve,	in	partnership	with	others,	a	system	of	interconnected	open	spaces,	whose	protection	will	preserve	and	 enhance	 New	 Jersey's	 natural	 environment	 and	 its	 historic,	 scenic,	 and	 recreational	resources	for	public	use	and	enjoyment”	(NJDEP,	2017).	Green	Acres	works	to	acquire	land	for	public	open	spaces	such	as	parks,	wildlife	preserves,	or	other	natural	areas	by	distributing	state	funding	for	local	governments	and	non-profit	organizations	to	undertake	land	acquisition,	park	development,	or	stewardship	projects	(NJDEP,	2017).	Funding	is	designated	through	bond	acts	approved	 by	 voters	 in	 New	 Jersey	 state.	 The	 first	 bond	 act	 committed	 $60	million1	 for	 land	acquisition	 projects	 in	 1961.	 Since	 that	 time,	 nearly	 $3.1	 billion	 has	 been	 authorized	 for	 the	program	through	ballot	voting,	indicating	the	degree	of	public	support	for	the	program	(NJDEP,	2017).	 Additionally,	 in	 2014,	 voters	 approved	 designating	 a	 portion	 of	 the	 state’s	 Corporate	Business	 Tax	 for	 Green	 Acres.	 The	 portion	 of	 funding	 variously	 allocated	 for	 acquisition,	recreation	development,	and	stewardship	shifts	every	few	years,	as	does	the	budget’s	focus	on	grants,	loans,	or	debt	servicing	for	the	program	(NJDEP,	2017).			In	1995,	the	Green	Acres,	Farmland	and	Historic	Preservation	and	Blue	Acres	Bond	Act	was	passed	by	voters.	This	expanded	Green	Acres,	authorizing	the	program	to	administer	funds	for	 land	 acquisition	 in	 floodplains,	 known	 as	 the	 Blue	 Acres	 /	 Floodplain	 Buyouts	 Program.2	Coastal	Blue	Acres,	for	the	acquisition	and	buyouts	of	land	in	coastal	floodplains,	is	a	component	of	this	(see	Figure	1).																																																											1	All	values	in	US	dollars,	unless	otherwise	indicated.	2	This	Act	also	made	small	amounts	of	funding	available	for	preservation	of	farmland	and	historic	sites,	which	is	not	administered	by	the	Green	Acres	Program.	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 33		Figure	1.	Structure	and	components	of	the	Green	Acres	Program.	Boxes	indicate	program	components,	with	blue	boxes	indicating	those	related	to	coastal	floodplains.	Dotted	lines	and	dates	indicate	the	addition	of	program	initiatives.		In	 1995,	 $15	million	 was	 designated	 for	 coastal	 floodplain	 buyouts	 through	 Coastal	 Blue	Acres,	divided	into	$6	million	for	pre-storm	efforts	and	$9	million	for	post-storm:		• Pre-storm	 funding	 is	 for	 hazard	 prone	 buffer	 lands	 that	 are	 “unimproved	 or	 largely	unimproved”	and	is	administered	as	75%	grant	and	25%	loan	to	the	local	government.		• Post-storm	 funding	 is	 for	 lands	 that	have	experienced	at	 least	50%	 reduction	 in	 value	following	a	storm	event	and	is	administered	as	50%	grant	and	50%	loan	(NJDEP,	2017).		All	 land	 acquired	 must	 be	 from	 willing	 sellers	 and	 must	 be	 made	 available	 for	 public	recreation	or	conservation	purposes,	although	the	construction	of	recreation	facilities	that	could	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 34		be	at-risk	from	coastal	hazards	is	prohibited	(NJDEP,	2012).	If	there	is	existing	development,	all	structures	are	removed	to	create	open	space.	The	state	does	not	distinguish	between	the	terms	“buyout”	and	“acquisition”,	referring	to	this	process	as	“floodplain	buyouts”	whether	the	land	is	developed	or	not.	Land	must	be	located	on	a	coastal	barrier	island	or,	within	150	feet	of	either	the	mean	high	tide	water	line	or	the	landward	limit	of	a	beach	or	dune,	to	be	considered	“coastal”	and	therefore	eligible	(NJDEP,	2012).			In	 October	 2012,	 Hurricane	 Sandy	 hit	 the	 coast	 of	 N.J.,	 causing	 12	 deaths,	 damaging	 or	destroying	346,000	homes,	and,	at	its	height,	leaving	nearly	3	million	people	in	the	state	without	power	 (CNN,	 2016).	 Widely	 recognized	 as	 the	 second-costliest	 disaster	 in	 US	 history,	 total	damage	costs	in	the	state	of	New	Jersey	reached	nearly	$30	billion	(NOAA,	2012).	Following	this,	the	state	was	allocated	approximately	$300	million	 in	 recovery	 funding	 from	the	U.S.	Federal	Emergency	Management	Agency	(FEMA)	for	the	purchase	of	affected	properties	(NJDEP,	2015).	The	 New	 Jersey	 Department	 of	 Environmental	 Protection	 subsequently	 established	 the	Superstorm	Sandy	Blue	Acres	Buyout	Program	under	Coastal	Blue	Acres	to	administer	the	buyout	process.	 This	 program’s	 purpose	 is	 to	 purchase	 homes	 or	whole	 neighbourhoods	 flooded	 by	Sandy	or	previous	storms,	demolish	any	structures,	and	retain	 the	 land	 in	perpetuity	as	open	space	for	public	recreation	or	conservation,	recognizing	that	“the	preserved	land	will	serve	as	natural	 buffers	 against	 future	 storms	 and	 floods”	 (NJDEP,	 2015,	 p.1).	 Again,	 sellers	must	 be	willing,	so	buyouts	are	administered	only	when	residents	or	local	governments	decide	they	would	like	to	participate	in	the	state	program	(Freudenberg	et	al.,	2016).					 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 35		A P P E N D I X 	 B : 	 T H E 	 N EW 	 Y O R K 	 R I S I N G 	 P R O G R AM 		In	New	York	state,	the	New	York	Rising	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program	was	established	following	Hurricane	Sandy,	Hurricane	Irene,	and	Tropical	Storm	Lee	to	provide	communities	with	assistance	in	recovery	and	rebuilding	(GOSR,	2016).	Hurricane	Sandy	alone	is	attributed	with	causing	53	deaths,	the	damage	and	destruction	of	thousands	of	homes,	and	nearly	$42	billion	in	repair,	restoration,	mitigation,	and	prevention	costs	(CNN,	2016).	Although	only	minor	flooding	was	reported	along	the	coast,	Irene	is	still	attributed	with	causing	10	deaths	and	more	than	$1.3	billion	in	damages	during	the	2011	storm	season	(Associated	Press,	2012).	In	the	same	season,	Tropical	Storm	Lee	brought	heavy	rainfall	to	the	same	regions	hit	by	Irene	only	one	week	later,	exacerbating	effects	and	causing	extensive	inland	flooding	(NOAA,	2012).			In	response	to	these	events,	New	York	State	established	its	first	large	scale	comprehensive	buyout	program.	Although	the	New	York	Department	of	Environmental	Protection	previously	worked	with	Delaware	County	to	offer	buyouts	to	property	owners	affected	by	floods	in	1996,	retreat	did	not	truly	gain	traction	as	an	adaptation	strategy	until	recovery	efforts	following	Sandy.	Unlike	the	Green	Acres	Program	/	Coastal	Blue	Acres,	the	N.Y.	Rising	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program	distinguishes	between	buyouts	and	acquisitions.	Buyouts	are	the	purchase	of	eligible	properties	within	“Enhanced	Buyout	Areas”	designated	by	the	state,	which	are	areas	inside	the	floodplain	that	have	been	substantially	damaged	(i.e.,	sustained	damages	of	at	least	50%	of	the	property’s	pre-storm	fair	market	value)	by	one	of	the	three	storms.	Although	it	is	unclear	how	fair	market	value	is	assessed,	this	is	defined	in	the	program	policies	as:	“the	hypothetical	price	that	a	willing	buyer	and	seller	will	agree	upon	when	they	are	acting	freely,	carefully,	and	with	complete	knowledge	of	the	situation.	Enhanced	buyout	areas	are	those	that	are	identified	as	the	most	susceptible	to	future	disasters,	with	the	highest	levels	of	risk	due	to	hazard	exposure	and	vulnerable	populations	(GOSR,	2015).	Areas	must	meet	all	the	following	conditions	to	be	eligible:			1. Have	a	history	of	flooding	and	/	or	damage	caused	by	extreme	weather	events.	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 36		2. Have	multiple	contiguous	parcels	in	the	floodplain	with	similar	damage	and	property	owners	who	have	expressed	interest	in	relocation.	3. Municipal	officials	of	prospective	areas	have	a	mutual	understanding	with	the	state	regarding	the	benefits	of	permanently	removing	residents	from	the	floodplain	and	converting	the	site	to	a	coastal	buffer	zone	(GOSR,	2015,	p.14-15).				 Buyout	recipients	are	offered	the	full	pre-storm	fair	market	value	for	their	properties.	Unlike	New	Jersey,	the	N.Y.	Rising	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program	offers	incentives	of	an	additional	5%	to	15%	on	top	of	purchase	price	for	neighbourhoods	or	communities	that	decide	to	relocate	together	(GOSR,	2015).	Further,	the	program	specifies	that	all	costs	associated	with	the	sale	process	(i.e.,	legal	survey,	title	preparation,	survey)	are	covered	by	the	state,	which	is	not	expressly	declared	in	the	Green	Acres	Program.			Acquisitions	are	provided	as	an	option	for	those	properties	that	do	not	meet	all	three	of	the	conditions	to	be	eligible	for	buyout.	Used	here,	“acquisition”	does	not	only	apply	to	undeveloped	tracts	of	land,	but	rather	to	private	properties	where:		1. The	dwelling	is	substantially	damaged	and	within	the	floodplain;	2. The	dwelling	is	in	the	floodway;		3. The	dwelling	is	substantially	damaged	and	the	applicant	cannot	apply	directly	to	FEMA	for	assistance;	and	/	or,	4. Case-by-case	requests	by	homeowners	based	on	hardship	(GOSR,	2015).		Purchase	costs	are	covered	by	the	State,	although	for	in	the	case	of	acquisitions,	the	homeowner	is	offered	an	amount	beginning	at	the	post-storm	fair	market	value	of	the	property.	Another	distinction	between	buyouts	and	acquisitions	under	the	N.Y.	Rising	Program	lies	in	their	treatment	of	the	properties	once	obtained	by	the	State.	Similar	to	Coastal	Blue	Acres	in	New	Jersey,	parcels	that	are	bought	out	are	maintained	in	perpetuity	as	“coastal	buffer	zones	or	other	non-residential	/	commercial	uses”,	and	reconstruction	is	not	permitted	(GOSR,	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 37		2015,	p.15).	However,	in	most	cases,	parcels	obtained	by	the	state	through	acquisition	are	redeveloped	“in	a	resilient	manner”,	as	determined	through	compliance	with	local	and	state	building	codes	(GOSR,	2015,	p.76).		Concurrent	with	the	N.Y.	Buyout	and	Acquisition	Program,	the	state	administers	the	N.Y.	Community	Reconstruction	Program.	This	program	helps	communities	to	create	their	own	recovery	plans,	with	the	end	goal	of	increasing	community	resilience	(GOSR,	2016).	Each	community	forms	a	Planning	Committee	comprised	of	local	citizens,	non-profit	organizations,	and	municipal	officials	and	is	provided	with	technical	support	from	state	planners,	consultants,	and	engineers	to	first	assess	their	local	needs	and	assets	and	then	develop	a	recovery	plan	using	various	resilience	strategies,	from	protect	to	retreat	(GOSR,	2016).	Theoretically,	should	retreat	identified	by	community	members	as	a	desired	strategy,	the	N.Y.	Community	Reconstruction	Program	could	develop	and	document	consensus	between	the	state	and	municipal	officials	to	pursue	buyouts,	a	requirement	to	be	deemed	eligible	under	the	state	buyout	program.	However,	a	major	shortcoming	of	the	state’s	buyout	framework	is	the	lack	of	clear	coordination	between	the	two	plans.	As	a	result,	retreat	remains	a	neglected	and	difficult	to	access	strategy	for	recovery,	despite	its	potential	to	contribute	to	community	resilience.					 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 38		A P P E N D I X 	 C : 	 I N T E R V I EW 	 S C R I P T 		How	can	the	case	be	made	for	coastal	buyouts	in	Canada?	This	project	will	investigate	how	buyouts	could	be	pursued	as	a	strategy	for	adapting	to	coastal	hazards	in	Canada.	It	will	produce	recommendations	for	why	buyouts	can	be	considered	an	effective	adaptation	tool	and	suggest	how	they	could	be	undertaken.			A	literature	review	and	case	studies	have	been	undertaken	to	investigate	how	coastal	buyouts	have	been	successfully	implemented	elsewhere.	Through	interviews,	I	am	seeking	general	opinions	on	coastal	buyouts,	as	well	as	your	thoughts	on	potential	needs,	benefits,	and	barriers	affecting	this	strategy	in	a	Canadian	context.			This	data	will	be	analyzed	to	determine	the	potential	costs	and	benefits	of	coastal	buyouts	for	Canadian	communities.	All	this	material	will	then	be	synthesized	to	present	recommendations	for	coastal	buyouts	in	Canada.			Question	1.			Are	you	familiar	with	buyouts	as	a	“retreat”	adaptation	strategy?			Question	2.		Considering	coastal	hazards	such	as	storms,	flooding,	storm	surge,	and	tsunami,	as	well	as	the	effects	of	climate	change	(sea	level	rise,	increased	hazard	occurrences),	what	are	your	thoughts	on	using	buyouts	in	coastal	areas	to	adapt	to	these	risks?			Question	3.		What	benefits	do	you	think	buyouts	could	offer	as	an	adaptation	strategy?	Please	elaborate.		Question	4.			What	barriers	do	you	think	buyouts	could	face	as	an	adaptation	strategy?	Please	elaborate.			Question	5.		What	do	you	anticipate	coastal	communities	in	Canada	might	need	to	pursue	buyouts	as	an	adaptation	strategy?	Please	elaborate.				 	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 39		R E F E R E N C E S 		Associated	Press.	(2012,	August	27).	Hurricane	Irene	one	year	later:	Storm	cost	$15.8	billion.	Daily	News	New	York,	pp.	n.p.	Arnstein,	S.	(1969).	A	ladder	of	citizen	participation.	Journal	of	the	American	Planning	Association,	35,	(4)	216-224.		Banholzer,	S.,	Kossin,	J.,	and	Donner,	S.	(2014).	The	impact	of	climate	change	on	natural	disasters.	In	Zommers,	Z.	and	Singh,	A.	(Ed.),	Reducing	disaster:	Early	warning	systems	for	climate	change	(pp.	21-49).	Dordrecht:	Springer	Science	+	Media.	Bolund,	P.,	&	Hunhammar,	S.	(1999).	Ecosystem	services	in	urban	areas.	Ecological	Economics,	29(2),	293-301.	Burby,	R.	J.,	Beatley,	T.,	Berke,	P.	R.,	Deyle,	R.	E.,	French,	S.	P.,	Godschalk,	D.	R.,	et	al.	(1999).	Unleashing	the	power	of	planning	to	create	disaster-resilient	communities.	Journal	of	the	American	Planning	Association,	65(3),	247-258.	Butler,	L.,	Morland,	L.,	&	Leskin,	G.	(2007).	Psychological	resilience	in	the	face	of	terrorism.	In	B.	Bongar,	L.	Brown,	J.	Beutler,	J.	Breckenridge	&	P.	and	Zimbardo	(Eds.),	Psychology	of	terrorism	(pp.	400-417).	New	York,	US:	Oxford	University	Press.	Caldwell,	M.,	&	Segall,	C.	H.	(2007).	No	day	at	the	beach:	Sea	level	rise,	ecosystem	loss,	and	public	access	along	the	california	coast.	Ecological	Law	Quarterly,	34,	533-578.	City	of	Surrey.	(2016).	Coastal	flood	adaptation	strategy	primer	(Primer.	Surrey,	CA:	City	of	Surrey.	Creswell,	J.	W.	(2016).	Designing	and	administering	an	interview	protocol.	30	essential	skills	for	the	qualitative	researcher	(pp.	126-143).	Los	Angeles,	US:	SAGE	publications.	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 40		Doddy,	J.	P.	(2013).	Coastal	squeeze	and	managed	realignment	in	Southeast	England,	does	it	tell	us	anything	about	the	future?.	Ocean	and	Coastal	Management,	79,	34-41.	Farstad,	G.,	Elford,	S.,	Grochowich,	A.,	Chantler,	A.,	Crawford,	E.,	Guerin,	G.,	et	al.	(2013).	Sea	level	rise	adaptation	primer:	A	toolkit	to	build	adaptive	capacity	on	Canada's	south	coasts.	Vancouver,	CA:	B.C.	Ministry	of	Environment.	Felter,	E.,	&	Morris,	M.	(2016).	Coastal	zone	management	(Planning	Advisory	Service	Report	No.	PAS	Report	581).	Chicago,	US:	American	Planning	Association.	Floor	statement	on	sandy	supplemental:	U.S.	House	of	Representatives,	Congress	of	the	United	States,	Floor	Remarks	(2013).	Fraser	Basin	Council.	(2016).	Lower	mainland	flood	management	study:	Phase	1	(Summary	Report.	Vancouver,	CA:	Fraser	Basin	Council.	Gaillard,	J.	C.,	Glantz,	M.,	Kelman,	I.,	Wisner,	B.,	Delica-Wilison,	Z.,	&	Keim,	M.	(2014).	Taking	the	'naturalness'	out	of	natural	disaster.	Natural	Hazards	Observer,	38(3)	Governor's	Office	of	Storm	Recovery.	(2015).	NY	rising	buyout	and	acquisition	program	policy	manual.	New	York,	US:	Governor's	Office	of	Storm	Recovery.	Governor's	Office	of	Storm	Recovery.	(2016).	NY	rising	2012-2016:	4th	annual	report.	New	York,	US:	Governor's	Office	of	Storm	Recovery.	The	H.	John	Heinz	III	Center	for	Science,	Economics,	and	the	Environment	(Heinz	Center).	(2000).	Chapter	3:	Toward	an	improved	understanding	of	the	true	costs	of	coastal	hazards	and	disasters.	The	hidden	costs	of	coastal	hazards	(pp.	45-104).	Washington,	U.S.:	Island	Press.	Heinz	Center.	(2002).	Human	links	to	coastal	disasters.	Washington,	U.S.:	H.	John	Heinz	Center	for	Science,	Economics,	and	the	Environment.				Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 41		Hanson,	S.,	Nicholls,	R.,	Ranger,	N.,	Hallegatte,	S.,	Corfee-Morlot,	J.,	Herweijer,	C.,	et	al.	(2011).	A	global	ranking	of	port	cities	with	high	exposure	to	climate	extremes.	Climate	Change,	104,	89-111.	Hallegatte,	S.	(2009).	Strategies	to	adapt	to	an	uncertain	climate	change.	Global	environmental		 change,	19,	pp.	240-247.	doi:	10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.12.003	 Hallegatte,	S.	and	Corfee-Morlot,	J.	(2011).	Understanding	climate	change	impacts,		 vulnerability,	and	adaptation	at	city	scale:	An	introduction.	Climatic	Change,	104,	1-12.		 doi:	0.1007/		Harman,	B.	P.,	Heygena,	S.,	Taylor,	B.	M.,	&	Fletcher,	C.	S.	(2015).	Global	lessons	for	adapting		 coastal	communities	to	protect	against	storm	surge	inundation.	Journal	of	Coastal		 Research,	31(4),	pp.	790-801.	Retrieved	from	http://www.jstor.org/stable/43432895		 s10584-010-9981-8			IPCC.	Summary	for	policy	makers.	In	Stocker,	T.F.,	Qin,	D.,	Plattner,	G.-K.,	Tignor,	M.,	Allen,	S.	K.,	Boschung,	J.,	...	Midgley,	P.	M.	(Ed.),	Climate	change	2013:	The	physical	science	basis.	contribution	of	working	group	I	to	the	fifth	assessment	report	of	the	intergovernmental	panel	on	climate	change.	(pp.	3-29).	Cambridge	and	New	York:	Cambridge	University	Press.	Klein,	R.	T.	J.,	Nicholls,	R.	J.,	Ragoonaden,	S.,	Capobianco,	M.,	Aston,	J.,	&	Buckley,	E.	N.	(2001).	Technological	options	for	adaptation	to	climate	change	in	coastal	zones.	Journal	of	Coastal	Research,	17(3),	531-543.	Kousky,	C.,	&	Zeckhauser,	R.	(2006).	JARing	actions	that	fuel	the	floods.	In	R.	J.	Daniels	et	al.	(Ed.),	On	risk	and	disaster:	Lessons	from	hurricane	katrina	(pp.	59-76).	University	of	Pennsylvania	Press:	Philadelphia,	US.	Lefevre,	P.,	Kolsteren,	P.,	De	Wael,	M.,	Byekwaso,	F.,	&	Beghin,	I.	(2000).	Comprehensive	participatory	planning	and	evaluation.	Antwerp,	BE:	Institute	of	Tropical	Medicine	of	Antwerp.	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 42		Lichterman,	J.	D.	(2000).	A	"community	as	resource"	strategy	for	disaster	response.	Public	Health	Reports,	115,	262-265.	Manson,	G.	K.	(2005).	On	the	coastal	populations	of	Canada	and	the	world.	Proceedings	of	the	12th	Canadian	Coastal	Conference,	Dartmouth,	CA.	Mastic	Beach	/	Smith	Point	of	Shirley	Planning	Committee.	(2014).	Mastic	beach	and	smith	point	of	shirley:	NY	rising	community	reconstruction	plan	(Community	Plan.	New	York,	US:	Governor's	Office	of	Storm	Recovery.	McLean,	R.	F.,	Tsyban,	A.,	Burkett,	V.,	Codignotto,	J.	O.,	Forbes,	D.	L.,	Mimura,	N.,	et	al.	(2001).	Coastal	zones	and	marine	ecosystems.	In	J.	J.	McCarthy,	O.	F.	Canziani,	N.	A.	Leary,	D.	J.	Dokken	&	K.	S.	White	(Eds.),	Climate	change	2001:	Impacts,	adaptation,	and	vulnerability.	New	York,	US:	Cambridge	University	Press.	National	Oceanic	and	Atmospheric	Administration.	(2012).	Hurricane	sandy.	Retrieved	April	5,	2017,	from	http://www.weather.gov/okx/HurricaneSandy#Top	Neumann,	B.,	Vafeidis,	A.	T.,	Zimmermann,	J.,	&	Nicholls,	R.	J.	(2015).	Future	coastal	population	growth	and	exposure	to	sea	level	rise	and	coastal	flooding:	A	global	assessment.	PLoS	One,	10(6),	1-34.	NJDEP.	(2012).	Green	acres	program	project	descriptions.	State	of	New	Jersey.	Retrieved	March	27,	2017	from	http://www.nj.gov/dep/greenacres/pdf/ga-descriptions.pdf	NJDEP.	(2015).	Frequently	asked	questions:	New	jersey	department	of	environmental	protection	superstorm	sandy	blue	acres	buyout	program.	State	of	New	Jersey.	Retrieved	March	27,	2017,	from	http://www.nj.gov/dep/greenacres/pdf/faqs-blueacres.pdf	NJDEP.	(2017).	Coastal	blue	acres.	State	of	New	Jersey.	Retrieved	March	27,	2017	from	http://www.nj.gov/dep/greenacres/blue.html	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 43		New	York	State.	(2017).	Governor's	office	of	storm	recovery:	Plans.	Retrieved	March	27,	2017,	from	https://stormrecovery.ny.gov/community-reconstruction-program	Norris,	F.	H.,	Stevens,	S.	P.,	Pfefferbaum,	B.,	Wyche,	K.	F.,	&	Pfefferbaum,	R.	L.	(2008).		Community	resilience	as	a	metaphor,	theory,	set	of	capacities,	and	strategy	for	disaster	readiness.	American	Journal	of	Community	Psychology,	41,	107-150.	Public	Safety	Canada.	(2017).	Disaster	financial	assistance	arrangements.	Retrieved	April	10,	2017,	from	https://www-publicsafety-gc-ca.libproxy.jibc.ca/cnt/mrgnc-mngmnt/rcvr-dsstrs/dsstr-fnncl-ssstnc-rrngmnts/index-en.aspx#a01	Regional	Plan	Association.	(2015).	Roundtable:	Where	to	reinforce,	where	to	retreat?	(Fourth	Regional	Plan	whitepaper.	New	York,	US:	Regional	Plan	Association.	Resilience	Alliance.	(n.d.).	Key	concepts.	Retrieved	April	5,	2017,	from	http://www.resalliance.org/key-concepts	Sandink,	D.,	Kovacs,	P.,	Oulahen,	G.,	&	McGillivray,	G.	(2010).	Making	flood	insurable	for	canadian	homeowners:	A	discussion	paper.	Toronto,	CA:	Institute	for	Catastrophic	Loss	Reduction	&	Swiss	Reinsurance	Company	Ltd.	Siders,	A.	(2013).	In	Gerrard	M.	B.	(Ed.),	Managed	coastal	retreat:	A	legal	handbook	on	shifting	development	away	from	vulnerable	areas.	New	York,	US:	Columbia	Center	for	Climate	Change	Law.	State	of	New	Jersey.	(2017).	NJDEP	green	acres.	Retrieved	March	27,	2017,	from	http://www.nj.gov/dep/greenacres/	Stern,	N.	H.,	&	Great	Britain.	(2007).	Chapter	18:	Understanding	the	economics	of	adaptation.	The	economics	of	climate	change:	The	stern	review		(pp.	404-415).	Cambridge,	UK:	Cambridge	University	Press.	Making	the	Case	for	Coastal	Buyouts	in	Canada			 	EMILY	GRAY	 44		Thistlethwaite,	J.,	&	Feltmate,	B.	(2013).	Assessing	the	viability	of	overland	flood	insurance:	The	canadian	residential	property	market.	Waterloo,	CA:	University	of	Waterloo.	Thomalla,	F.,	Downing,	T.,	Spanger-Siegfried,	E.,	Han,	G.,	&	and	Rockstrom,	J.	(2006).	Reducing	hazard	vulnerability:	Towards	a	common	approach	between	disaster	risk	reduction	and	climate	adaptation.	Disasters,	30(1),	39-48.	Tierney,	K.	(2014).	Chapter	6:	Communities	and	societies	at	risk.	The	Social	Roots	of	Risk:	Producing	disasters,	promoting	resilience.	Stanford,	US:	Stanford	University	Press,	pp.	125-159.	Trust	for	Public	Land.	(2016).	Economic	and	health	benefits.	Retrieved	April	10,	2017,	from	https://www.tpl.org/economic-health-benefits#sm.0001ldvnl5xk5dtkvq628xjreo9n4	UNFCC.	(2014).	Focus:	Adaptation.	Retrieved	April	13,	2017,	from	http://unfccc.int/focus/adaptation/items/6999.php	United	Nations	Office	for	Disaster	Risk	Reduction.	(2015).	Sendai	framework	for	disaster	risk	reduction	2015-2030	(Framework	Document	No.	UNISDR/GE/2015	-	ICLUX	EN5000	1st	edition).	Geneva,	SUI:	United	Nations.	Upton,	J.	(2014,	November	4).	Jersey	retreating	from	rivers,	but	not	coast,	after	sandy.	Climate	Central,	van	Aalst,	M.	(2006).	The	impacts	of	climate	change	on	the	risk	of	natural	disasters.	Disasters,	30(1),	5-18.	

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.310.1-0362572/manifest

Comment

Related Items