Integrated Coastal Area Management – Experiences and lessons learnt from Germany

Bianca Schlegel – Technical Advisor, GIZ CZM Project, Soc Trang, Vietnam

02 ICAM-In Germany Bianca Schlegel

In this presentation, experiences of ICAM in Germany, and especially in Northern Germany were shown with the example from the study tour in July of delegates from Soc Trang province. Participants were introduced to different concepts and different solutions through different stations during the study tour. 

The starting and ending points was Hamburg where we can observe many aspects of urban flood management. The city itself located 110 km above the estuary from the North Sea. Hamburg has the largest harbor in Germany. After Rotterdam, Hamburg is the largest harbor in Europe. Thus, it is important for the region. City of Hamburg is located at the river Elbe which has a very dynamic estuary that is vulnerable to anthropogenic influences. Therefore an estuary management between city of Hamburg and the North Sea is greatly important. 

In Hamburg, we can basically find 3 types of flood protection. We have dykes and walls (1). We have construction on artificial elevation, so called dwelling mounds (2). In the new city, new district, where all buildings were built in front of the dyke, the areas are allowed to be flooded, so here specific solutions for infrastructure or individual site protection (3) are needed. The public flood protection is financed by the city and the state. While the private protection measures have to be paid by those who want to settle in the endangered areas. 

Some examples shown in photos:

One of the high line escape bridge which serves as the normal bridge
during daytime but still ensure escape routine during flooding.

A flood gate for residential buildings in the new harbor district which were in front of the dyke. Here there is also flood protection wall in front of a café.

The official market with residential buildings and office buildings around when flood occurred in Hamburg. This area is flooded more or less regularly (the areas allowed to be flooded are restricted). The protection wall protected one of the main traffic roads.

Another example for urban individual solution is the St. Pauli Elbe tunnel below the river Elbe which connects the city of Hamburg with the main harbor area in the other side.  This 100 years old tunnel is still actively used today.

One aspect of estuary management is creating of new retention areas. Used retention areas have become so important as the harbor is essential for the whole region. There has been a fairway deepening for big ships to come into the port and that has led to an increased in the tidal ranges and tidal pumping. Only small amount of sediment which is transported upstream (Hamburg) during flood will also be transported downstream again during low tide. This in turn increases sedimentation which is currently the biggest challenge in Hamburg.

Ecosystem functions now are endangered. And therefore, 6 years ago, the concept for sustainable sediment management and development of tidal Elbe was developed (2006) – the Tidal Elbe Concept. This concept includes engineering measures as well as creation of new retention areas, and improved sediment management. Since it is a very complex process that involves many stakeholders, it only works with participatory approach.

Another aspect outside Hamburg, in the North Sea, which we also observed during the study tour was dyke construction and drainage. We went to an outdoor museum in a small fishing village (Buesum) where we can see historical development of dyke construction in Northern Germany. More than 800 years of experiences with dyke constructions have led to improved dyke designs. Nevertheless, dykes form an artificial barrier and require technical solutions for drainage. The secure discharge is of great importance for flood protection and agriculture. In Northern Germany, a system of channels and ditches enable the coastal discharge and the tidal outlets or pumping stations discharge the surface water. But of course, the increase sedimentation and sea level rise will make it a big challenge in the future.

Another very individual solution could be observed on the Halligen. A Hallig is a small, undyked island in the North Sea, regularly flooded during stormy weather. Therefore, houses are built on small dwelling mounds (Warften). Germany invests a lot of money in protection of these Halligen because they are very unique. For example, 5 of the Halligen joint together have been recognized as UNESCO biosphere reserve for their unique landscape, surrounding ecosystem and culture.

Currently, there is a dynamic equilibrium of sedimentation and sea level rise which is about 4 – 5 mm/year. That means at the moment, the Halligen are adapting in a natural way. But future sea level rise definitely requires further adaptation measures.

Next station in the study tour was the island of Sylt, the largest of the Northern Region’s islands, where very special and very expensive solutions can be observed. The island of Sylt is connected to the mainland by the Hindenburgdamm. Nowadays, it is assumed that this construction of the dam led to morphodynamic changes and to significant losses of land at the southern spit of the island. Constant erosion has taken place. Thus, without any protection measures, the island would be endangered very hard.

Several measures have been tried and failed.

Around 1880, groins were tried, but it soon turned out that the construction led to increased erosion at other places.

Then from 1960 on, tetrapods were used for counter protection, but it soon turned out that they were simply too heavy for the soft sand.

So, since 1970, sand nourishments have been taken place. After many trials and errors, sand is now only put in locations where it is needed. it is a very expensive solution (high cost), but it is justified by the high income generated from tourism sector. Sylt is one of the most popular islands in Germany.

The participants of the study tour also had a chance to have a talk with one of the representative from the environmental ministry which is responsible for coastal protection. He gave a very nice insight about the governance of coastal protection, which is summarized below.

State and communities have their own tasks and responsibilities. There are certain tasks which are 100% responsible and financed by the state. There are shared tasks, which can be financed up to 90% by the state. There are also simple maintenance tasks, which are responsible and financed 100% by communities.

A very interesting tool for the governance of coastal protection was the so-called Advisory board integrated coastal protection, led by the Ministry of the Environment, with participation of communities, mayors, nature conservationists and many others. They meet twice per year. Here, “the state’s ears are opened to the needs of the local communities.”

Currently, a new master plan developed in Germany for integrated coastal management has integrated all aspects: (coastal) land use planning, economic activities/tourism, as well as disaster prevention and nature conservation. The later is very important because the Wadden Sea is recognized as World Heritage Site and attracts a lot of tourists. This provides a very good example for the combination of coastal protection and environmental protection. But of course, the regional and international cooperation can be areas of conflict which have to be addressed.

About international cooperation, there is a very good example for transboundary management. It is a central command for maritime emergencies responsible for planning, training and implementation of maritime emergency measures. They share responsibilities with neighboring countries in quick response zones (where they can act in case of emergency without having to address any diplomatic channels). So, the command can access equipments and staffs of the partners. It has overall coordination and operational control, even if borders are crossed until situation is cleared. The command works autonomously, not subject to any directives in case of operation and has a clear legal foundation.

Managing coastal zone is not only about coastal protection or protection of nature but also about economic uses of the coastal zone. Therefore one of the stations of the study tour was the offshore wind company.

Offshore wind energy represents a direct and economical usage of coastal zone. Germany has more than 20 years of experiences with offshore wind energy in North Sea and Baltic Sea. Consistent and strong winds provide better conditions than on land. New methods are tested constantly, and environmental impacts have to be considered (for example acoustic noise could disturb marine mammals).

In summary, the key lessons learnt from the study tour, from different fields visited in Germany with ICAM are:

• Definitely, individual solutions are needed. And it has to be a combination of large-scale solutions and individual adapted solutions, which has to consider local characteristics and requirements. There is no single solution for the whole coast.
• Sustainable ICAM basically requires consideration of future scenarios in today’s planning which means to certain extent, dealing with uncertainties. Sustainable ICAM also requires participation of many stakeholders for decisions, consideration of complex processes and interactions. It has to be interdisciplinary and cross-border consensus.

Q & A

Dr. Andrea Barcelona, GIZ Philippines: Prof. Smith has said that ICAM is mainly a social issue. In Germany, what are the specific social problems and issues have you encountered? Of course environmental problems are always environmental dilemma, because people manage natural resources as pursuing their own personal interests. Are there dilemmas such as what we’ve encountered in developing countries like Philippines and Vietnam?

Yes, of course, it is an issue in Germany as well. For example, in the case of the Halligen, the small, undyked  islands which are flooded regularly, there is a lot of money invested for protection measures. There is heavy discussion also going on in Germany, whether it is justified to invest so much money to protect the very large island where sometimes maybe just ten people living in. The Halligen is an important issue and they recognize the special unique feature in German landscape. So, yes, it is justified.

Another discussion which is going on would be an example of interest conflicting in Hamburg. Hamburg’s port is very important not only for the city itself but for the whole region. But the fairway deepening for bigger ships to come into the port heavily affects the fruit grown area just outside of Hamburg. Thus, the fruit grown area has increased problems due to salinity. So we have now strong conflicts between different stakeholders and they all have to be addressed.

Dr. Andrea Barcelona, GIZ Philippines:  There is a lot of mentions about the interface between the ocean and the estuary areas. For Germany, for management body, is there any interaction between the estuary area and the up-land inland area to deal with areas of conflicts such as salt water intrusion or something like that.  To what extent is the interaction between the estuary and the inland areas in terms of management scheme?

It is a very complex process. This can be seen quite well with the example of Hamburg. Because the advantages of the fruit growing area are heavily affected by all the anthropogenic inputs and adaptation measures which were carried out previously, the farmers there managed to organize themselves, give themselves a voice. So, although the city of Hamburg was more interested in strengthening the port, increasing economic influence, they have to hear the farmers from the fruit growing area. Then nowadays, the city of Hamburg would not dare to take decisions without asking the farmers. Of course, it is still a very difficult and a long process where you have to involve every stakeholder and consider every interest. It also depends on how strong people can organize to give themselves more voice.

Dr. Trinh Thi Long, Southern Institute of Water Resources Research, HCMC: We heard about experiences in coastal zone resource management in Germany. Then, what are the challenges that we have to face to manage the natural resources in Soc Trang province in particular and in Vietnam in general?

Germany is quite different to Vietnam but of course, we can see some similarity. One interesting example was, in Vietnam you have the mangrove which can protect the coast. In Germany, we don’t have any trees to protect our coast line. Therefore, we have created so-called salt marshes, kind of larger grass land which has the same function in reducing the incoming wave energy to protect the coast zone. The whole area has to be maintained very well. It is difficult to compare one to one situations in Germany and Vietnam. But the basic rule, basic message we can learn from Germany is that it is important to really look at the specific site and find individual solutions. As in Germany, we have very different situations along the whole coast (we could not compare the North Sea and the Baltic Sea because they are totally different). But even just along the North Sea, we have very different situations and they all require very individual solutions. We always have to consider the local needs and local requirements if we want to try to find solutions for a specific site.