When it comes to sea-level rise (SLR), there are two reasons we should start thinking bigger, sooner. The first is practical. Planning farther ahead and raising streets and structures 3 feet one time is generally less disruptive and less expensive than raising them 1 foot three times. Applying that thinking to roads, utilities, and infrastructure, it’s far more efficient to make the changes once, rather than to keep making smaller modifications.
The second reason to plan for much higher SLR sooner is that it sends a stronger signal to the wider community, as well as to ourselves, about what lies ahead. If we just keep raising buildings, roads, and infrastructure inches (centimeters) at a time, we continue the illusory perception or culture of denial.
Such “incrementalism” misses the opportunity for large-scale design change. It’s like the difference between continually modifying a building versus demolition and designing from the ground up. If we are ever going to be ready for a sea level that is 7 feet higher, we have to recognize the reality of a new baseline and think on a different scale altogether.
Decades ago, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People was a best-selling book by Stephen Covey. Habit number two was, to begin with, the end in mind. His analysis showed that high achievers often start with the eventual goal, which might be considered “point C.” With that identified, the intermediate steps, “points A and B,” become much clearer and easier to achieve. In other words, having a very clear vision of the desired far-sighted situation makes it much easier to define and adhere to the steps to get there.
Whether one is designing a building or a transportation system, there is a huge advantage to having the master plan done first, before designing, engineering, and constructing individual elements. Master plans for constructing anything large require detailed analyses that include a wide range of criteria, including bedrock, soil porosity, drainage, power availability, water, wastewater, parking, traffic flow, economics, marketing, and regional demographics. That is all developed and engineered on an iterative basis, ultimately with a model, visualization, or rendering to get stakeholder buy-in.
A cohesive and comprehensive approach is usually the best way to get the job done well. The owner of a house, a restaurant, or commercial office building that floods regularly might push for the most immediate solution to that property’s flooding problem, eager to avoid inconvenience, disruption to their access, or negative impact on the aesthetics of their property. Those owners are likely unenthusiastic about a more dramatic overhaul. If the entire street needs to be elevated to install a new drainage system, it will likely gain support only if there is a comprehensive vision of how it will lead to improved values in the future.
Galveston, Texas, is a good historic example of bold planning to get ahead of a problem. In 1900, a hurricane swept over Galveston Island, killing more than six thousand people. Realizing it could well happen again, the city built a now-famous seawall 17 feet tall, changed the building code, and elevated a large sector of buildings by the same 17 feet. That made the community far less vulnerable, giving them a century of security and prosperity. It would not have been possible for individual property owners to tackle that; it required bold vision, a long-term plan, and leadership to make it happen.
Compare those bold, visionary changes to the modest solutions now being planned, discussed, and implemented. Typically, the focus is to raise a road, seawall, or parking lot as little as possible. I am not trying to minimize or ignore the obvious difficulties to do good planning and adaptation. But we would all benefit from thinking about SLR comprehensively and making plans to outmatch its power for destruction.
Adapted from Moving to Higher Ground by John Englander (2021)
This piece was prepared online by Panuruji Kenta, Publisher, SEVENSEAS Media