COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT INTHE MEDITERRANEAN:

AN OVERVIEW

by

Prof. Dr. Erdal Özhan

PAP-4/CE/02/PP.1Priority Actions ProgrammeRegional Activity CentreAnkara/Split, May 2002

COASTAL EROSION MANAGEMENT IN THE MEDITERRANEAN:AN OVERVIEW

Prof.Dr. Erdal ÖzhanChairman of MEDCOAST, Professor of Coastal Engineering and Management

Middle East Technical University, 06531 Ankara, Turkey

1. Introduction

Coastal erosion is one of the most important socio-economical problems that challenge the capabilities of states and local authorities. Whether it is due to natural or anthropogenic reasons, coastal erosion causes significant economical losses, social problems, and ecological damages. The problem of erosion may extend its influence hundreds of kilometres alongshore in the case of large deltaic areas, and may have transboundary implications. In the case of pocket beaches on the other hand, it could be a very local phenomenon affecting only the residents of a nearby town and/or the tourism industry.

The Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP), an action-oriented co-operative effort among the riparian countries and the European Union, has the general objective of creating a healthier Mediterranean environment, resting on the principles of sustainable development. MAP is a part of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and was its first Regional Seas Programme, set-up in 1975. The Priority Actions Programme (PAP), implemented by the Regional Activity Centre in Split, Croatia is a part of MAP, and deals with implementation of priority actions, the most important being the Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM). PAP wishes to contribute to rational management of the coastal erosion in the Mediterranean. An Expert Meeting was organised by PAP/RAC in Split during 10-11 January 2002, with the aim of discussing the coastal erosion issues in the Mediterranean, and the concrete actions that could be taken to combat it. This paper was prepared for the purpose of setting the stage for discussions in the Expert Meeting.

2. The problem of coastal erosion

Coastal erosion is defined as the long term loss of the shore material (volume) relative to fixed reference line (baseline) and initial reference volume seaward of this line above some, arbitrary vertical datum (Basco, 1999). Coastal erosion is always accompanied with the shoreward recession of the shoreline and the loss of land area.

Coastal erosion is usually judged as “critical “ when it presents a serious problem wherever the rate of erosion, considered in conjunction with economic, industrial,

1

recreational, agricultural, navigational, demographic, ecological and other relevant factors, indicates that action to remedy (stop or slow down) erosion may be “justified”

In the Mediterranean, coastal erosion has been a longstanding, large-scale issue around the deltaic areas, such as the deltas of the Nile and Po Rivers, and the smaller deltas like those of the Albanian rivers. It has also been a major issue at smaller scales, especially in the municipal or tourist resort beaches along the relatively more densely developed northern coast, following the flux of people from inland areas to the coast and the boom of the tourism industry. More than 40 % of beaches in France, Italy and Spain was found to be confronting erosion in the EU project CORINE completed in 1990. Two graphs showing the findings of this study for four EU countries of the Mediterranean are given in Appendix A. These graphs were reconstructed from the figures given in Blue Plan (1996). One of the graphs provides the lengths of various coast types, and the second gives the lengths of beaches that are eroding, accreting or in equilibrium. According to the Atlas of the Italian Beaches (Fierro and Ivaldi, 2001), 27 % of the Italian beaches which constitute 61 % of the total Italian coastline are retreating, 70 % in equilibrium, and only 3 % prograding. (The information provided in Fig. 2 in Appendix A somewhat differs from these percentages).

Damages of coastal erosion may depict itself in the followings (van der Weide et al, 2001)

a. Life of people: This is a serious issue for people living in low-lying lands (below the sea level) adjacent to seas and oceans such as the Netherlands. It is generally not a problem in the Mediterranean.

b. Property and associated economical values: Loss of extremely valuable land (recreational and tourist beaches) and damages to urban infrastructure are important for the Mediterranean countries.

c. Ecological values: Good examples to this type of damage are turtle nesting beaches like the Kazanli Beach (Turkey) and several beaches in the Zakynthos Island (Greece) that have been loosing critical turtle nesting grounds due to anthropogenic erosion.

d. Cultural values: There exist numerous examples to this type of damage all along the Mediterranean coast in areas where people have settled since ancient times, such as the Phoenician ruins in Tyre, Lebanon (Özhan, 1993).

3. Causes of coastal erosion

Factors that cause changes (erosion / accretion) in the seabed topography and the time scales of these changes are summarised in Table 1. Some of these factors (waves, alongshore currents, rip currents, undertow, overwash) usually combine together to reshape the sea bottom during a storm, causing an aerial pattern of erosion and accretion and resulting an overall gain or loss for the volume of beach sand. On the other hand, variations in the wave conditions (large, short period, small steepness) have seasonal (cyclic) effects. The type of change due to these factors does not necessarily indicate the long-term nature of the change, but they contribute to it. The factors that are associated

2

Table 1. Factors that cause changes in the sea bed topography and the time scales

FACTOR EFFECT TIME SCALE COMMENTS

Sediment supply (source and sinks) Accretion/erosion Decades to millennia

Natural supply from inland or shoreface and inner shelf sources can contribute to shoreline stability or accretion

Sea Level Rise Erosion Centuries to millennia Relative sea level risePhenomenal storm, storm surge Erosion Hours to days Very critical to erosion magnitude

Large wave height Erosion Hours to months Individual storms or seasonal effectsShort wave period Erosion Hours to months Individual storms or seasonal effectsWaves of small steepness Accretion Hours to months Summer conditions

Alongshore currentsAccretion, no change, or erosion

Hours to millennia Discontinuities (updrift//downdrift) and nodal points

Rip currents Erosion Hours to months

Narrow seaward-flowing, near-bottom currents may transport significant quantities of sediment during coastal storms.

Underflow Erosion Hours to daysSeaward-flowing, near-bottom currents may transport significant quantities of sediment during coastal storms.

Inlet presence Net erosion;high instability Years to centuries

Inlet-adjacent shorelines tend to be unstable because of fluctuations or migrations inlet position; net effect of inlets is erosional owing to sand storage in tidal shoals.

Overwash Erosional Hours to days High tides and waves cause sand transport over barrier beaches

Wind Erosional Hours to centuries Sand blown inland from beachSubsidence, compaction Erosion Years to millennia Natural or human-induced withdrawal of

subsurface fluids

Tectonic events Erosion / Accretion Instantaneous, centuries to millennia

Earthquakes; Elevation or subsidence of plates

with effects having time scales in the order of years or more (eg. changes in sediment supply, sea level rise, coastal subsidence and tectonic events) are directly responsible for the long-term behaviour of the coast.

The natural and anthropogenic causes of coastal erosion in the Mediterranean are not different from the causes elsewhere. In the followings, the natural events and the anthropogenic activities that cause coastal erosion are briefly discusses. The references that are provided indicate the part of the Mediterranean where the mentioned factor is a primary reason for erosion.

The natural causes of long term coastal erosion are the followings:

3

a. Sea level rise (Pranzini & Rossi, 1995; Khalil, 1997);b. Coastal subsidence due to tectonic events (Khalil, 1997);c. Climatic changes (changing of the storm intensities, shift of the dominant storm

directions affecting the approach angle of waves; variation of precipitation and the river regimes and discharges) (Medina & Lopez, 1997);

d. Increased vegetation cover over the river watersheds due to climatic changes (causing decreased soil erosion and sediment supplied to the coast);

e. Sediment sinks (presence of offshore canyons, movement to great depths at steep slopes, wind transport of sand to inland areas) (Golik & Rosen,1999);

f. Changing of river courses and mouths in deltas (PAP/RAC, 2000; Berriolo, Fierro & Gamboni, 2001)

Anthropogenic causes of long term coastal erosion are more or less parallel to the natural causes. These are:

a. Decreasing sediment supply by rivers to the coastal physiographic unit (cutting of the sediment transport by damming the rivers, sand and gravel mining along the river beds, decreasing the sediment transport efficiency by lowering water discharges due to increased fresh water use or due to river works such as bank and bed erosion control) (Simeoni et al., 1997; Eronat, 1999; Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999; PAP/RAC, 2000);

b. Erosion control works and afforestation in coastal and riverine watersheds (Eronat, 1999);

c. Decreasing the volume of sand in the physiographic unit (sand mining from the beach and dunes, offshore sand mining) (Özhan, 1993; Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999);

d. Alteration of the usual pattern of coastal currents and the associated sediment transport along and across the shoreline, due to man-made coastal structures and urban development too close to the shoreline (Silva et al., 1993; Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999; Fatallah & Gueddari, M., 2001, Rakha & Abul-Azm, 2001);

e. Anthropogenic changes made to river courses and mouths in deltas (PAP/RAC, 2000; Berriolo, Fierro & Gamboni, 2001);

f. Maintenance dredging of approach channels and estuarine inlets;g. Land subsidence due to anthropogenic effects (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997;

Fierro & Ivaldi, 2001).

In Cyprus for example, dam construction, sand mining, coastal structures and urban development too close to the shoreline are cited as the factors that have triggered and accelerated coastal erosion (Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999). Eronat (1999) lists dam construction, erosion control in the watershed, sand and gravel mining along the river bed, illegal sand mining from the beach, and construction of coastal structures by property owners as the main reasons for significant erosion rates that has been observed in the vicinity of the mouth of the Madra Creek, the northern Aegean coast of Turkey. Along the coast of the Emilia-Ramagna Region (Adriatic Sea, Italy), the main causes of coastal erosion are sand and gravel extraction from the river beds, building of river impoundment works, subsidence caused by ground water exploitation and the coastal

4

structures (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997). Along the Venetian coast of the Adriatic Sea, the main causes of the erosion by far are said to be the reduction of the sediment inputs from the rivers and the construction of the jetties at three inlets of the Venice Lagoon (Silva et al., 1993).

Anthropogenic causes (a), (b), (e) and (f) result in the net erosion of the physiographic unit; e.g. there appears an overall shoreline recession. Causes (c) and (d) on the other hand induce shoreline erosion at local scales. These are usually associated with accretion elsewhere. In the case of cause (c) for example, the shore around the old river mouth swiftly erodes, whereas the location of the new river mouth accretes. For (d), shoreline erosion takes place down-coast of the coastal structures (at the side of the net longshore sediment transport), but a similar rate of accretion occurs up-coast of the coastal structure.

There are several reasons that decrease the sediment load brought by rivers to the coast. The most important of these is the construction of dams and engineering works along the rivers. Dams intercept almost all the sediment brought from upstream sections. Furthermore, by modifying the water discharge (making it more uniform), the sediment transport downstream of a dam is also altered and the sediment transport efficiency is decreased.

In addition to damming of rivers, alterations of the flow regimes by diversions and engineering works, and modification of the discharge rates and patters are also responsible for the decreased sediment loads brought to the coast, and thus for coastal erosion. This is also a significant cause for the Albanian coastal erosion (Simeoni at al, 1997). Darci River was observed to have lost a great part of its discharge rate due to diversions and upstream water use. This is the main reason behind the recession of the shoreline next to the river mouth at an annual rate of 1-2 meters. This erosion will continue until the shoreline and the nearshore topography is changed to have their equilibrium shapes, which do not yield net sediment transport rates in the alongshore direction.

Another major cause for decreased sediment input to the coast and the consequent erosion, is sand and gravel quarries located along the active riverbeds. This activity is usually not allowed from the beaches, but significance of mining from riverbeds is often overlooked. For example, sand and gravel extraction from the riverbeds has been a significant economical activity in Albania (PAP/RAC, 2000), and it is still a legitimate undertaking in Turkey.

Removal of sand and gravel directly from the coast by illegal quarrying could be a significant factor triggering coastal erosion and shoreline recession. The shoreline south of the Town of Tyre in Southern Lebanon receded more than 100 meters in about 20 years due to commercial sand extraction from inshore and the beach face (Özhan, 1993).Topological changes in the seabed slope resulting from offshore sand mining for beach nourishment have also been criticised for the accelerated shore erosion when the borrow area is not sufficiently far away from the coast and not at a large enough water depth.

5

Changing of the river course and location of the mouth in a deltaic coast can be a natural phenomenon. Simeoni et al. (1997) mentions that several Albanian rivers (e.g. Ishmi, Shkumbini, Semani, and Vjose) have undergone such changes. Such alterations are accompanied with local erosion around the old mouths and accretion around the new ones as mentioned earlier.

For small pocket beaches, sand transported by wind into inland locations (which does not return back to the beach) may constitute a major sink. Also, mechanical cleaning of dead Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia ocenica) for aesthetic purposes from the surface of recreational beaches could cause significant sand losses from the system. The material removed by special-duty machines was found to contain sand up to 30 percent in some Italian beaches (Pranzini, 2002).

4. Management of coastal erosion ( Shoreline management)

4.1 Detecting coastal erosion

The locations of the historical coastal erosion and the erosion rates can be estimated by using the followings:

a. The historical aerial photographs and coastal topographic maps (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997, Golik and Rosen, 1999; Suzen & Özhan, 2000; Berriolo, Fierro & Gamboni, 2001; Bowman & Pranzini, 2001, Fatallah & Gueddari, M., 2001). These sources provide information on the past shoreline positions and the rate of shoreline recession.

b. The old bathymetric maps. Comparison of the successive bathymetric maps provides information on the regions of erosion and accretion, and their average rates) (Golik and Rosen, 1999).

c. A numerical model to calculate the sand transport rates from the historical time series of wave data, and the resulting morphological changes (Golik and Rosen, 1999; Rakha, & Abul-Azm 2001)

Golik and Rosen (1999) uses all three approaches above in their study on management of Israeli sand resources.

The present and the future trends of coastal erosion can be monitored through the following schemes:

a. Visual observations on erosion indicators (location of erosion and in some cases the rate of shoreline retreat) (PAP/RAC, 2000);

b. Shoreline position surveys (location and the rate of shoreline retreat/advance) (Micallef, 2001);

c. Topographic and bathymetric surveys (zones of erosion and accretion, and their rates) (Bowman & Pranzini, 2001; Certain, et al., 2001; Delbono et. Al. 2001);

6

d. Use of aerial digital photography and satellite images (location and the rate of shoreline retreat/advance) (Eronat, 1999; Suzen & Özhan, 2000).

Cultural features present along the coast (such as the bunkers along the Albanian coast) serve as useful landmarks for assessing erosion areas, and in some cases the erosion rates (PAP/RAC, 2000). Although the resolution of the satellite images has become finer in the recent years and one can obtain shoreline images with an accuracy of 50 cm., the use of this data in coastal erosion studies still suffers from the inaccuracies inherent in the analysis. The most important problem encountered is the detection of the exact location of the shoreline in the image, especially during the stormy periods (when the shore face is wet due to wave run up) (Golik & Rosen, 1999). Aerial digital photography provides a fast and reasonably accurate tool for monitoring the shoreline locations along lengthy stretches of the coast (Edwards et al., 1996; Curr et al., 1997; Eronat, 1999)

2 Predicting future erosion

Numerical modelling has developed to be a powerful tool for predicting past, present and future changes in the sea bed topography and shoreline position. The prediction of the historical changes by numerical models helps to understand the scale and composition of the factors that contribute to coastal erosion. Knowledge on the present and future erosion patterns and rates that would occur under different scenarios and strategies is a very important information that contribute significantly to rational coastal development plans and management practices.

A coastal morphodynamic model has four components:

a. Wave prediction and transformation;b. Wave breaking and breaker zone hydrodynamics;c. Coastal sediment transport;d. Morphological changes of the sea bed.

Among these four components, (b) and (c) are the most complicated ones. Modelling of highly irregular, turbulent water motion in the breaker zone due to wave breaking and broken waves, and associated sediment transport has been challenging subjects for many researchers for years (Özhan, 1982, 1983, 1987). Several sediment transport models of various complexity levels have been developed. The greatest difficulty in using these models arises from the inadequacy of available information on the parameters that are required by the models (especially by the comprehensive models). The simplest and perhaps the most popular model available are the so-called one-line models of shoreline evolution (Hanson, 1993; Rakha, & Abul-Azm, 2001). This box type model assumes the shape of the seabed as an inclined plane with always the same slope. The seabed is moved in either direction (towards land or the sea) depending on gradients of the longshore and cross-shore sand transport rates than enter and leave the “box”.

7

Consequently, the one-line model predicts only the position of the receding or prograding shoreline.

A more comprehensive tool is the three-dimensional numerical model that simulates the evolution of the seabed morphology (Aminti et. Al., 2001). This is a more complex model and requires significant amount of information to be fed as input.

Numerical morphodynamic models have been used for various purposes. These include the response of a beach to a proposed defence scheme (coastal structure, nourishment or both), the quantity and periodicity of beach nourishment, long-term shoreline evolution, especially around deltaic coasts (Jimenez et al., 1995), and the beach response to external events such as the sea level rise or decrease in the rate of sediment supply. Physical morphological models built in laboratories have also been used to study the impacts of a proposed defence scheme (structures or nourishment) on the beach and sea bottom topography (Özhan et al., 1987, Özhan, 1988; Özhan 1991, Corsini & Guiducci, 1993; Ruol et al., 1997).

3 Responses to coastal erosion

Shoreline management master plans were prepared for three coastal areas of Cyprus by Delft Hydraulics (the Netherlands) in 1995 (Loizidou & Iacovou, 1999). The main concepts used in preparing these plans outline more or less the present philosophy of shoreline management. These concepts are the followings:

Work with the dynamic nature of the coastal environment rather than fighting the forces of the sea;

Use “soft” engineering measures like beach nourishment where applicable; Make more environmentally friendly designs of “hard” engineering works like

breakwaters (e.g. minimize the length, lower the crest elevation, make it submerged where appropriate);

Apply the concept of “retreat” management; Apply the concept of “do-nothing” option; Introduce a detailed monitoring program to observe the coastal changes near the

structures.

There are three types of managerial options in response to coastal erosion (Van der Weide, de Veroeg & Sanyang (2001). These are:

Retreat; Accommodate for the present; Defend.

The “retreat” option indicates the acceptance on the shoreline erosion as a long-term phenomenon, and movement of development to inland locations that are sufficiently far away for not being affected from the ongoing erosion within a reasonable timeframe. This option is especially meaningful for undeveloped (rural) coasts where not many

8

people suffer critically from the ongoing erosion. “Accommodate for present option” could be the rational choice when an important infrastructure (such as a highway) can be modified with a reasonable budget so that it can be used for an additional period after the eroding shoreline more or less hits a length of the structure. This option merges with the “retreat” option in the long run. The “defend” option is the undisputed choice for an eroding urban coast. It indicates the use of one or more types of structural or non-structural measures to stabilise the length of the eroding coast facing the urban areas. The “defend” option may also benefit from improved watershed management practices.

The shoreline management options should pay due attention to the climate change and the anticipated sea level rise. In the Eastern Mediterranean, the sea level is said to have been increasing 1 cm/year on the average over the last 8-9 years (Rosen, 2002)

4 Coastal defence

The defense strategy for an eroding coast may incorporate the so-called “hard” or “soft” measures, or a combination of them.

The “hard” measure is the generic name given to those using classical coastal structures. There are several types of structures that have been used to stabilise an eroding beach. Most commonly used types are groins (Bartoletti et al., 1995), detached breakwaters (Özhan & Vefai, 1991; Hassan & Baset, 1997), revetments and sea walls. The rubble-mound detached breakwaters were widely used along the Italian coast in the past, but they are no longer popular (Bowman & Pranzini, 2001). The basic function of these structures is to provide shelter to the segment of the shoreline, which they protect. Consequently, the protection is limited to this segment. The presence of coastal defence structures is almost always accompanied with accelerated downcoast erosion. Therefore, coastal defence structures do not stop beach erosion, but transfer this problem to another location downcoast. In some applications, the accelerated downcoast erosion is compensated by beach nourishment (Rakha & Abul-Azm, 2001).

In addition to transferring erosion downcoast of the protected segment, the coastal defence with hard structures are generally found unattractive by the beach users and are known to contribute negatively to coastal water quality.

The so-called “soft” coastal defence measures are listed below:

Beach nourishment Generation of gravel beaches Low-crested (submerged) structures (breakwaters, groins) Others (dewatering of beach face to decrease erosion-dry beaches, planting

seagrass on the sea bottom)

Beach nourishment, which has been the most important soft defence measure during the last decades, indicates the process of feeding a beach periodically with material brought

9

from elsewhere, either to artificially increase the beach area for accommodating a larger number of beach users, or to compensate for the amount of sand that has been removed from the area by erosion.

In the USA, a major shift occurred in the late 1960’s from coastal defence utilising hard structures to beach nourishment. In the mid 1970’s, about 80 % of the budget spent for shore protection projects carried out by the Federal Agency (USA Army, Corps of Engineers) was for beach nourishment, and only 20 % was for coastal structures (Basco, 1999). The reason for this change was said to be both ecological and economical.

Beach nourishment became a popular practice in the Mediterranean in the early 1980’s. Many municipal and tourist beaches in France, Italy and Spain were nourished either to increase the beach area or to remedy erosion.

Periodic beach nourishment alone could be the only coastal defence measure. In many cases however, coastal structures and beach nourishment have been used together for the purpose of decreasing the amount of sand needed and/or to increase the residence time of the nourished sand (Özhan and Vefai, 1991; Liberatore et al., 1993; Silva et al., 1993; Bartoletti et al., 1995; Pacini et al., 1997; Ruol et al., 1997; Cipriani et al., 1999).

Marine and land sources of sand have been used as the fill material in beach nourishment, although the former is more common in the northern Mediterranean countries. The determination of the marine borrow area is a very critical issue. Several considerations should be made before deciding on the site. On one hand, this is an economical issue as the distance from the site of nourishment is a significant factor increasing the project cost. In the earlier applications of beach nourishment, the borrow sites at depths as shallow as 15 meters had been used. Nowadays, the practice is generally to go to the depths of 30 to 40 meters at the least (Van der Salm & Unal, 2001; Lupino and Ricardi, 2001). There are two reasons for going to further offshore to get sand. One of these is the long-term stability of the coastal sea bed topography. The second is the concern for destruction of the Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) meadows, which is a protected species. Furthermore, the sea areas that are important for fisheries need to be avoided. The limiting water depth for sand extraction by present dredgers is about 100 meters (Lupino & Ricardi, 2001).

In several Mediterranean countries, the projects involving significant amounts of sand mining from marine areas are subject to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Other important concerns for the potential marine borrow areas are the grain size distribution and the material quality. Sand that contains significant amounts of organic material or toxic substances is not suitable for beach nourishment. As a general rule, the sand used for nourishment should ideally be slightly coarser than the native material. The percentage of fine material present should be small for the considerations of both the stability of the fill and the beach water quality (as it causes turbidity). When the sand deposit that is suitable for nourishment is covered with a thick layer of finer material (silt and clay), the extraction of sand may not be economically feasible (Golik & Rosen, 1999;

10

Lupino & Ricardi, 2001), and may not be environmentally viable due to high amounts of sediment resuspension.

The cost of sand used for beach nourishment is generally high and varies in the Mediterranean countries. This cost is about 2 US$/m3 in Egypt, 5 US$/m in Israel (Rosen, 2002), and 12 US$/m in Italy (Cipriani et al., 1999). For the Italian case (Marina di Massa, the Ligurian Sea) the artificially enlarged square meter surface area of the beach costs approximately US $ 24. The annual revenues derived from the increased beach area were estimated to more or less balance the total cost of nourishment (Cipriani et al., 1999). In two other beach nourishment projects in Italy (Nettuno & Anzio, Regionale Lazio), the fill material was obtained from dredging of the approach channel of the Anzio Port. The cost of a cubic meter of sand was US$ 6.5 for Nettuno and US$ 7.4 for Anzio. The payback periods for these two projects were estimated respectively as 3 and 15 years (Van der Salm & Unal, 2001).

The use of gravel instead of sand as the fill material in a beach nourishment project is a relatively new practice in the Mediterranean. The “gravel beaches” thus created are more resilient against erosion and may not require further protection by structures even in high-energy coasts (Pacini et al., 1997).

The use of low-crested (submerged) structures in a defence scheme is becoming more and more popular in the Mediterranean. There already exist several built examples of submerged detached breakwaters and groins. These structures can be used alone or in combination with beach nourishment. In the recent years, the traditional building material of rubble mound has been replaced in some projects by innovative units such as the sand sacs (Preti, Carboni & Albertazzi, 1997; Preti, Lamberti & Martinelli, 1997)

5. Environmental impacts and social implications

Coastal defence structures such as groins and detached breakwaters generally increase the rip currents. In recreational beaches protected by coastal structure, the enhanced rip currents may be a significant safety issue, being responsible for the case of drowning. The use of porous and/or submerged detached breakwaters has less pronounced effect on the rip currents. Such structures increase the water exchange from the protected area, and thus have a positive effect on coastal water quality. Frihy (2001) reviews the impacts of various coastal projects carried out along the Egyptian Mediterranean coasts and identifies their impacts. The impacts include: changing the depositional-hydrodynamic regime by coastal structure, down-drift erosion to the neighbouring beaches, sedimentation in lagoons, estuaries and harbour channels, damaging water quality, and increasing the likelihood of property loss and damages.

Beach nourishment may also have important environmental impacts and social implications. Pollution of water column during dredging / nourishment due to suspension of fine particles can be a significant issue when the borrow and fill material has considerable amount of fines or impurities. For instance in Elba Island (Italy), beach

11

nourishment became a legal issues since the sand used for nourishment contained large amounts of iron dust, changing the colour of the beach and water. Nourishment of turtle nesting beaches is a delicate practice. Needless to say, one should avoid the nesting season (May to September in the Mediterranean) for nourishment. When the colour of the sand used for beach nourishment in a turtle beach is darker (lighter) than the native material, the biology of the turtle nesting may be affected due to increased (decreased) sand temperatures.

An interesting questionnaire study was carried out to understand the level of public acceptance of the nourished beaches in Catalonia, Spain (Villares et al., 1999). For different projects, the percent of people that were satisfied with the new nourished beach varied from 60 to 80 %. It was found that the beach users have concerns on the fill material characteristics (colour, texture), the loss of beach and underwater flora and fauna, and the landscape alteration with the new size of the nourished beach.

6. Coastal erosion in the context of integrated coastal management

Both the structural remedies against beach erosion and beach nourishment are costly interventions. Therefore, they are used in many cases only when the socio-economical gains from stabilising the shoreline are in excess of the costs involved. For example, beach nourishment has been extensively carried out in tourist beaches of the northern Mediterranean coast, since the revenues brought by tourism (which is enhanced by a larger beach space) offset the cost of beach nourishment. Structural solutions or beach nourishment are also commonly applied in municipal beaches, since erosion in such locations could cause damages to city infrastructure (roads, promenades, etc), public and private property.

A film made by BBC in 1998 addressed the issue of the responsibility of the state for combating coastal erosion in order to protect private property (a village in the Northeast coast of England). In the film, the state agencies stabilised a length of the shoreline in order to protect a state owned industry built adjacent to the shore. The authorities were not eager to extend the stabilisation works along the shore to protect the village due to enormous costs involved. The villagers argued that it was the responsibility of the state to protect their homes, since they were all legally built in the present locations, according to a land use plan approved by the state authorities. Who should pay for coastal defence and why? This is definitely an interesting question that carries important socio-economical implications.

In summary, combating coastal erosion is worthwhile whenever there exist significant socio-economical reasons. An eroding beach in the wilderness does not call the attention of anyone. Even if it does, it is difficult to convince the financing authorities, if at all possible, to allocate funds for defending such a beach.

The key issue here is the future development of the land area behind an eroding beach. It is a very important policy not to allow development (buildings, roads etc) very close to

12

the shoreline. If the land use plan does not include a sufficiently wide buffer zone where no development is allowed, it will definitely be necessary sometime in the future to invest large amounts of money for stabilising an eroding shoreline in order to protect the developments.

The undeveloped coastal areas are among the extremely valuable resources for a country. There will be pressures for development of these areas for various economic sectors (such as tourism, intense mechanised agriculture, aquaculture/mariculture, industry, transportation, and urbanisation). Consequently, the human activities over such pristine coastal areas should be very well planned and managed.

Coastal erosion does not only cause the loss of valuable land. It necessitates very expensive shore protection schemes for saving facilities that had been developed several years ago. Such situations can only be avoided firstly by knowing the future evolution of the shoreline, and secondly by following a coastal policy to accommodate the erosion-prone areas as the “no development” buffer zones in coastal land use plans. The key point here is the acceptance of the fact that several segments of the Mediterranean coast will erode as the consequence of the anthropogenic activities which have already been taken place at inland locations (building of dams, river diversions, water consumption, etc.). The erosion process will continue until new equilibrium shapes of the shoreline and the nearshore topography are formed under the reduced (or completely stopped) sediment inputs. In the legislation of the Mediterranean countries, there is usually a minimum width of the shore band where construction is restricted. This width (usually 100 meters) is not wide enough for a location that undergoes significant erosion.

The coastal strategy, which is briefly described above, has two important requirements. These are; a) knowledge on the coastal processes and the long-term shoreline evolutions; b) wise coastal planning supported by a new legislation, and more importantly, the enforcement these plans.

Going over the anthropogenic causes discusses earlier, it is clearly seen that the lack of proper coastal and river basin management triggers coastal erosion. Several of these causes are due to human activities and developments that take place far away from the coast (building of dams, flow diversions, afforestation works, sand and gravel mining from river beds). Therefore, proper management of rivers and their watersheds has direct and strong implications for coastal stability. On the other hand, the presence of significant coastal erosion should trigger coastal management efforts, not only to develop and implement a defence scheme in the short run, but to initiate a process by which the issue of coastal erosion is addressed in a wider sense, involving various stakeholders, including those who contribute to the causes of erosion, and those who suffer from it.

A very significant tool that helps to bring shoreline erosion into the process of coastal management is the Atlas of Italian Beaches (Fierro and Ivaldi, 2001). This highly valuable publication (available both as bind volume and in CD) that present 108 charts covering the whole length of the Italian coastline (approximately 8 000 km long) provides information on human activities, natural features, coastal hydrodynamics and

13

sedimentological processes, including the locations where coastal erosion prevails. The Atlas of Italian Beaches, which is the first of its kind in the Mediterranean region and the product of a tremendous scientific effort, is an easy-to-use source of information to coastal policy makers, managers and planners. Another useful management tool is the coastal GIS database that has been developed by Valpreda et al. (2001) for assessing at the national scale the vulnerability of the Italian coast against erosion.

7. Conclusions:

The main conclusions of the present review on coastal erosion in the Mediterranean and the shoreline management practices are the followings:

a. Coastal erosion is a significant coastal management issue in the Mediterranean region.

b. There has been many expensive mistakes made in past in the name of coastal protection.

c. Wise land use planning in the coastal zone that incorporates buffer areas for erosion, expected within a certain time frame is an essential strategy.

d. Numerical models for predicting shoreline and sea bottom topography changes and remote sensing (satellite imagery, digital aerial photos) for monitoring the coastal erosion have become important tools. They are often used in conjunction with shoreline management efforts.

e. The shift for using softer solutions against coastal erosion is in progress. Sand and gravel nourishment has already become a very significant coastal protection method along the northern shores.

f. There is a need for basin-wide collaboration for improving the national capabilities in the following directions:

· Numerical modelling and prediction of the long term changes in sea bottom morphology and the shoreline position,

· Effects of sea level rise on future erosion rates and other impacts, · Erosion monitoring methodology including remote sensing, · Soft methods of coastal defence, including wise uses of coastal structures, · Good practice of beach nourishment, · Ecological aspects of coastal erosion, · Socio-economic aspects of coastal erosion,

g. Working Groups could be formed for collaborative developments in several of these issues. It is recommended that an international organisation, such as the Priority Actions Programme Regional Activity Centre of MAP, initiates the formation of such

14

Working Groups and provides financial support for the costs of collaboration (not for research).

h. Two priority subjects proposed for the working groups are briefly described in Appendix B. The titles of these subjects are:

Good practice of beach nourishment and other soft coastal protection methods in the Mediterranean – Success stories and guidelines.

Methodologies and standards for monitoring shoreline changes by conventional methods and remote sensing

A timetable suggested for the work of the Working Groups in the next two years is given in Appendix B.

15

References

Aminti, P. et al.(2001),Human and wave-climate change impacts on the morphodynamics of the Tombolo di Feniglia (Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1445-1456.

Bartoletti, E., Cipriani, L.E., Dreoni, A.M., Montelatici, M. & Pranzini, E. (1995), Beach first response to stabilization works: a case study at the Cecina River mouth, Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1173-1187.

Basco, D.R. (1999), Overview of Beach Engineering in the United States of America, Final Report, Coastal Engineering Centre, Old Dominion University, Virginia, 116 p.

Berriolo, G., Fierro, G. & Gamboni, S. (2001), The evolution of the coast between Cape Farina and Cape Gamarth (Northern Tunisia), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1497-1502.

Blue Plan (1996), L’érosion cotiere en Méditerranée, A Working Report by R.E. Quellennec, Sophia Antipolis, January 1996, 43 p.

Bowman, D. & Pranzini, E. (2001), Erosion within a segmented detached breakwater (Gombo Presidential Villa Beach, Tuscany, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1479-1488.

Certain, R. et al. (2001), Bottom and shoreline evolution under wave actions at the Beach of Séte, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1371-1380.

Cipriani, L, Pellicia, F. & Pranzini, E. (1999), Beach nourishment with nearshore sediments in a highly protected coast, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1579-1590.

16

Corsini, S. & Guiducci, F. (1993), Coastal Woks improvement by moveable bed models, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 973-987.

Curr, R.H.F., Edwards., E, Koh, A., Williams, A.T. and Davies, P. (1997), Analyses of Mediterranean sand dunes using digital imaging, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 811-822.

Delbono, I. et al. (2001), Morphological evolution as indicator of coastal processes (Liguria, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1435-1443.

Edwards, E., Koh, A., Curr, R.H.F. and Williams, A.T. (1996), Aerial digital photography: a management tool for sand dunes, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the International Workshop on ICZM in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea: Immediate Needs for Research, Education-Training & Implementation, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, pp: 171-186.

Eronat, A. H. (1999), Altinova Madra Creek region coastal erosion study, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1525-1540.

Fatallah, S. & Gueddari, M. (2001), Sedimentary processes and shoreline changes along the Sousse Coast, Eastern Tunisia, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1457-1466.

Fierro, G. & Ivaldi, R. (2001), The Atlas of the Italian Beaches: a review of coastal processes, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1557-1566.

Frihy O.E. (2001), The necessity of environmental impact (EIA) in implementing coastal projects: lessons learned from the Egyptian Mediterranean Coast, Ocean & Coastal Engineering, Elsevier, v: 44, pp: 489-516.

Golik, A. and Rosen, D.S. (1999), Management of Israeli Coastal Sand Resources, I.O.L.R. Report No. H28/1999, National Institute of Oceanography, Israel

17

Oceanographic and Limnological Research Ltd, Haifa, November 1999, 70 p. + 40 figures.

Hanson, H. (1993), Beach erosion at San Vito La Capo, Sicily, Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 945-959

Liberatore, G., Gaggio, M. & Preti, M. (1993), Field experience of protected beach nourishment in Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 989-1002.

.Hassan, R.M. and Baset, S.A. (1997), Coastal erosion and protection of Ras El Bar,

Egypt, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1073-1088.

Jimenez, J.A. et al. (1995), Coastal processes along the Ebro, Po and Rhone Deltas, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 827-840.

Khalil, S.(1997), Critical problems of the Egyptian Mediterranean coastal zones, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 1, pp: 513-521.

Liberatore, G., Gaggio, M. & Preti, M. (1993), Field experience of protected beach nourishment in Italy, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 989-1002.

Loizidou X. I. & Iacovou, N.G. (1999), Anthropogenic coastal erosion and shoreline management in Cyprus, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1501-1509.

Lupino P. & Riccardi C. (2001), Utilisation of marine sand for beach nourishment in the western Mediterranean, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1347-1358.

18

Medina, J.M. & Lopez, J.S. (1997), Strong erosion scenario due to disequilibrium of solid transport rate: the case of Torrox Beach(Malaga), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1234-1239.

Micallef, A. (2001), Development of a novel approach to beach profiling in the Maltese Islands, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1359-1369.

Özhan, E.(1982), Laboratory study of breaker type effect on longshore sand transport, (B.M. Sümer & A. Müller, Eds.), Mechanics of Sediment Transport, Balkema, Amsterdam, pp: 265-74.

Özhan, E.(1983), Longshore sand transport by irregular waves, Proc. International Conf. on Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing Countries (COPEDEC), Colombo, Sri Lanka, vol. 2, pp: 1167-77.

Özhan, E.(1987), Energy flux computations for estimating longshore sand transport rate, Proc. the Second International Conf. on Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing Countries (COPEDEC II), Beijing, China, vol. 1, pp: 269-281.

Özhan, E. et al.(1987), Effects of jetty construction on navigability of the Cecina Inlet, Proc. the Second International Conf. on Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing Countries (COPEDEC II), Beijing, China, vol. 2, pp: 1447-64.

Özhan, E. (1988), Flow Regimes and Dynamic Equilibrium of Coastal Changes at Köycegiz Lake Inlet Turkey, Journal of Coastal Engineering, Elsevier, Vol.12, No: 2, pp.109-1032, 1988

Özhan E. and Vefai A.R., (1991) The Use of Physical and Mathematical Models for Designing a Small Artificial Beach Proceedings of Coastal Sediments'91, ASCE, Vol: 2, pp: 1476-1492, 1991

Özhan, E. (1993), Beach erosion and other management problems in the coastal zone of Tyre, Southern Lebanon, Unpublished report prepared for Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), UNESCO.

Pacini, M, Pranzini, E. & Sirito, G. (1997), Beach nourishment with angular gravel at Cala Gonone (Eastern Sardinia, Italy), (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1043-1058.

19

PAP/RAC (2000), Report on the Albanian coastal erosion, PAP / RAC Mission to Albania to Assess the Problem of Coastal Erosion – Consultants’ Reports, UNEP / MAP Priority Actions Program Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia, October 2000.

Pranzini, E. & Rossi, L.(1995), Physical model test in the framework of beach nourishment performance evaluation, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Second International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 95, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1145-1159.

Pranzini, E. (2002), Personal communication during Expert Meeting on Coastal Erosion, 10-11 January 2002, UNEP / MAP, PAP Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia.

Preti, M, Carboni, E. & Albertazzi, C.(1997), Shore protection planning in Emilia-Ramagna Region: a new trend is in act, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1247-1262.

Preti, M, Lamberti, A. & Martinelli, L.(1997), Analysis of sand sac submerged barrier: case of a beach in Riccione, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1059-1072.

Rakha, K.A. & Abul-Azm, A.G. (2001), Modelling of shoreline changes along the north western Egyptian coast, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1467-1478

Rosen, D.S. (2002), Personal communication during Expert Meeting on Coastal Erosion, 10-11 January 2002, UNEP / MAP, PAP Regional Activity Centre, Split, Croatia.

Ruol, P., Capabianco, M. & Tondello, M.(1997), Physical model test in the framework of beach nourishment performance evaluation, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Third International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 97, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1073-1088.

Silva, P., Galante, F., Nilo, A. & Powell, K. (1993), Coastal defence and restoration of the environment in the litorals of the Venice Lagoon, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the First International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 93, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 2, pp: 1043-1057.

20

Simeoni, U. et al (1997), The coastline of Albania: morphology, evolution and coastal management issues, In: Transformation and evolution of the Mediterranean coastline, Eds: F. Briand & A. Moldonado, CIESM Science Series no 3, Monaco.

Süzen, L. and Özhan, E. (2000), Monitoring of shoreline changes around Yesilirmak Delta by using remote sensing, International MEDCOAST Conference on the Use of Remote Sensing for Managing Coastal Areas and River Basins, Ispra, Italy, April 2000.

Valpreda, E. et al. (2001), Coastal erosion susceptibility assessment at national scale: The Italian case, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1415-1424.

Van der Salm, J. & Ünal, Ö. (2001), Towards a common Mediterranean framework for potential beach nourishment projects, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1333-1346.

Van der Weide, J., de Veroeg, H. & Sanyang, F (2001), Guidelines for coastal erosion management, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Mediterranean Coastal Environment, MEDCOAST 01, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1399-1414

Villares, M., Junyent, R. & Gatell, E. (1999), Sustainable beaches along the Spanish Mediterranean? The risks and the opportunities of regeneration, (E. Özhan, Ed.), Proc. of the MEDCOAST 99 – EMECS 99 Joint Conference: Land-Ocean Interactions – Managing Coastal Ecosystems, MEDCOAST Secretariat, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, v: 3, pp: 1609-1622.

21

APPENDIX A

The lengths of various coast types, and the lengths of beaches that are eroding, accreting or in equilibrium in four. EU countries of the Mediterranean as obtained in the EU project CORINE (UNEP MAP Blue Plan RAC, 1996).

22

23

24

APPENDIX B

Possibilities for contribution of PAP RAC

Two projects are envisaged that could be led by PAP RAC, and are of regional value to the Mediterranean community. These are:

Good practice of beach nourishment and other soft coastal protection methods in the Mediterranean – Success stories and guidelines.

There are several questions that need to be resolved in achieving successful beach nourishment practices in the Mediterranean countries. They include the characteristics of the fill material and the borrow area, the type of investigations necessary for selecting the borrow area, the practice of beach nourishment, environmental impacts and guidelines for the EIA studies, prediction of the response of beach morphology to nourishment, and economics of beach nourishment. Additionally, this project will help to enhance the efforts towards the other soft coastal protection methods in the Mediterranean.

Methodologies and standards for monitoring shoreline changes by conventional methods and remote sensing

This project may produce a manual that could describe the standards and the procedures of the field methods for monitoring shoreline changes, together with the available satellite images that could be used for shoreline monitoring, the practice of airborne digital photography, the procedures for analysis, and limitations.

Activities proposed for the next two years

Preparation of the project description documents (A short overview describing the value of the project, objectives, probable products, the role of the contributors, time schedule (June 2002)

Formation of task forces for both projects (July 2002) Take off meetings of the task forces to review the process of preparing the guidelines

in each subjects (July 2002) The first task force meetings to discuss the progress (Oct. 2002, during the

MEDCOAST Workshop Med & Black Sea Beaches, 24-27 October 2002) The second task force meetings to discuss the progress (Jan. 2003) The third task force meetings to discuss the contents and the preparation of the final

reports (the guidelines) (June 2003) Preparation of the draft final report (Oct. 2003) The fourth task force meeting to review and discuss the draft final report (Nov. 2003) The project concluding workshop with wider participation of invited experts in

addition to the task force members to present and discuss the guidelines (Final reports) (January 2004)

25