Maldevelopment
The IPCC defines action or inaction as maladaptation if it “may lead to increased risk of adverse climate-related outcomes, increased vulnerability to climate change, or diminished welfare, now or in the future” (WGII AR535, Glossary, page 1769). In coastal environments, maladaptation aims at reducing adverse effects to the coastal community now, but has negative implications on future response options under different climate change scenarios36. For example, the wide-spread anthropogenic coastal fortification in the Maldives has lead to irreversible changes to the natural coastal system, so that the only remaining future response to rising sea levels and extreme events is further armoring of the reef islands’ coasts22. These “anthropogenic tipping points”22 are mainly governed by negative socio-political dynamics, which have grown historically in the Maldivian context within the last decades26,37. Despite the success of recent decentralization efforts38, national development policies aim at improving the socio-economic situation by fostering regional development centers (see the National Population Consolidation Program). These regional development centers are equipped with public and infrastructure facilities, and thus are considered safer and are higher populated26,37. However, these development efforts by the national government also encourage top-down implemented infrastructure projects33. In a top-down approach to implement infrastructure projects, decisions on these projects are generally made on a national-level, prescribing the implementation of these projects to the local level. Under this current policy pathway, anthropogenic disturbances in the natural dynamics will remain to govern coastal changes on the Maldives considerably in the future – besides climate change related pressures26. While recent studies found deficient coastal adaptation policies and policy compliance in the Maldives39,40, the results of this study illustrate the impact of such deficits in practice and reveal the framing of recurrent and ongoing maladaptation, which is structurally embedded within the socio-political system. In contrast to maladaptation, this “maldevelopment” is not an inadequate adaptation action leading to climate change related risks, but the socio-political driver behind repetitive maladaptation. Besides the maladaptive impact on the natural system, maldevelopment emphasizes the socio-political aspects of recurrent maladaptive actions: on the one hand, the societal factors, being the local population’s perception of and their attachment to place, their interest in economic development, and environmental protection. On the other hand, the political aspect of responsible authorities, aiming to balance the need for socio-economic development with environmental protection and issues of sustainability by means of decisions and policies. In this sense, maldevelopment is characterized by decisions or policies which are in constant, repeatedly or deliberate favor of maladaptive actions and trade-offs towards future climate change related risk – as epitomized by current coastal adaptation efforts on the reef island Fuvahmulah.
Study site
Fuvahmulah is an island in the south of the Maldives, located approximately 30 km south of the equator (latitude: − 0.30°, longitude: 73.43°, see Fig. 1). Unlike most other inhabited islands of the Maldives, Fuvahmulah is not part of a ring-shaped atoll and lacks the distinct protection features of oceanward islands8. Fuvahmulah consists of only one main island and its fringing reef. The main island has a size of about 4.4 km by 1.0 km and a coastline of ~11 km length. The island is surrounded by ridges, which are located landward behind the beaches and predominantly vegetated by a fringing palm forest. The island’s ridges reach a height of up to about 4 m above mean sea level. Together with the reef, this natural barrier mostly protects the island from storm surges, swell waves and helps mitigating overwash. Behind these natural coastal protection systems, Fuvahmulah’s inland is at mean sea level and hosts two freshwater lakes.
a Shows the island, the seaport, and airport location, as well as the beaches Geiymiskih and Thoondu. Contour lines show the fringing reef depth. b Location of Fuvahmulah and data nodes of the hindcast and reanalysis model, from which the wave climate was derived. c Location of Fuvahmulah within the Maldives and the Indian Ocean. Maps were generated with the Python module cartopy, using open-access © OpenStreetMap contributors data (open-access Geofabrik download server data and Stamen map tiles), as well as data from the field measurements (Fuvahmulah’s coastline and reef bathymetry).
Among islands of the Maldives, the landmark of Fuvahmulah is its sandy beach Thoondu, a coastal spit situated at the north of the island. As wave direction changes with the seasons, Thoondu responds to these natural dynamics5: it seasonally adjusts its landform shape, alters its sediment volume and regularly meanders from the northern part of the headland in wet season towards the north-east of the island as well as to the northwestern Geiymiskih beach in the dry season. The constant change of Thoondu is well known by locals and contributes to its uniqueness. As consequence, in 2020, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designated Fuvahmulah as a Biosphere reserve.
The closest neighboring island is Hulhumeedhoo (part of Addu Atoll) located about 40 km southwest of Fuvahmulah. The 8510 inhabitants41 of Fuvahmulah are exceptionally isolated – even when considering all 26 atolls in the Maldives, stretching over about 870 km length (north to south) and about 130 km width (west to east). The isolated location and with the reef and vegetated coastal ridges serving as the only natural coastal protection, Fuvahmulah is particularly susceptible to environmental forcing. Fuvahmulah’s location close to the equator makes it less likely to experience cyclones10,42 but the island is considered to be highly exposed to monsoon winds43 and associated wind-waves, as well as to distant-source swells5,8,10,26.
The isolated position makes Fuvahmulah dependent on transportation infrastructure, providing a safe connectivity, an access to the outside world. The transport infrastructure on the island endows the local economy and supply – especially through the shipping of goods. However, until 2002, Fuvahmulah was only accessible by small fishing boats (“dhonis”), which had to navigate through the breaking waves over the reef plateau. The “dhonis” acted as feeders, transporting people, goods, and cargo from Fuvahmulah to larger ships that were waiting offshore. In this procedure, numerous boats capsized and people died. For decades, the people of Fuvahmulah have been requesting the construction of a safe port. The new seaport was constructed on the southeast of the island opening in 2002. The seaport was followed by the construction of an airport for domestic flights in the southwest of the island that opened in 2011.
Measured coastline erosion on the east side
Ever since the port has been built, people on the island observe and report severe erosion on the east-side of Fuvahmulah44. The Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), derived from aerial imagery, prove this observation and quantify the observed erosion rates and its spatial extent along the east coast. Between 2017 and 2019, the cross-sections along the east side show distinct differences in morphologic changes (Fig. 2): while the northern area close to Thoondu (Fig. 2a) shows a slight increase in beach volume, the other transects depict ongoing erosion (Fig. 2b–d). The increase in sediment volume in the north at Thoondu beach is due to the typical dynamic behavior of the northern beaches in response to varying seasonal wave conditions: during dry season, Thoondu beach moves to the northeastern coast5. The cross-section at the end of Thoondu beach (Fig. 2a) shows the calcareous bulk material forming the beach face. When moving further south, the coast of the central east side has a steeper profile than the northern beaches and consists of gravel to cobblestone material (Fig. 2b) or larger boulders. The two southernmost transects near the seaport have steep edges, where the mainland meets the reef flat (Fig. 2c, d). These transects are located about 700 m (Fig. 2c) and 190 m (Fig. 2d) in the north-west of the seaport’s entrance. At these locations, the subsurface insular bedrock becomes visible. The erosion process is already noticeable from field observations and has also been widely recognized and reported by locals.
Cross-sections of four locations, showing typical coastal profiles along the east side of Fuvahmulah. The profiles originate from the Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of the dry season of 2017 and 2019. The DEMs were produced by Agisoft Photoscan with an Structure from Motion-MultiView Stereo (SfM-MVS) approach. a marks the beginning of the beach Thoondu, showing a slight increase of the sandy beach face. b shows a transect from the central area of the east coast, suffering slight erosion of about 0.26 m to 0.28 m at the toe of the beach. Erosion like this can occasionally be measured in other areas of the central east side but it is not constantly detectable along this section of the coast. c and d show profiles of the southeastern coast adjacent to the seaport. The steep edge is the transition of the main island into the reef flat. Here, the coast suffers from constant, structural erosion of about ~0.3 m with maximum values of ~1.33 m between 2017 and 2019 (see Fig. 3). The map in e shows the locations of the profiles on Fuvahmulah’s east coast. The map is based on data from field measurements and adapted publicly available © OpenStreetMap contributors data, accessed through the open-access Geofabrik download server.
Along the southern stretches of the east coast, there are further signs of erosion, such as uprooted trees. For example, adjacent to the most southern cross-section was a palm tree that later fell onto the reef (see Fig. 3). Large parts of Fuvahmulah’s coastal ridge have a coastal forest (“heylhi”), reinforcing the sandy beach profile with its roots. On the east side, waves and currents carve out the sediment under the roots and dislocate broken bedrock material. These observations show that erosion on the east side of Fuvahmulah starts above the reef flat at the bottom of the beach profile. These observations also help to put erosion into context: while the northern transect shows slight sediment accretion, the central part shows shoreline retreat with maximum values of 0.26 m to 0.28 m between 2017 and 2019 (Fig. 2d). However, shoreline retreat was only occasionally measurable and not present over the entire central coastline – in contrast to the southeastern coast, adjacent to the port. This area experiences substantial ongoing erosion along its entire coastline in the order of 0.3 m between 2017 and 2019 with maximum values ~1.33 m (see Fig. 3). The field data quantifies erosion on the southeast of Fuvahmulah in the order of decimeters over two years. Erosion rates on the east coast decline towards the north. In the north-east of Fuvahmulah, the highly dynamic morphology of Thoondu stabilizes the coast.
The Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the dry season 2019 on the southeastern coast of Fuvahmulah, adjacent to the seaport. The figure shows erosion (red) and accumulation (blue) when compared to the DEM of the dry season 2017. The yellow dotted line is the most southern transect of this study with cross-sectional differences of ~1.33 m (see Fig. 2d). Maps contain data from field measurements, mini maps also use adapted publicly available © OpenStreetMap contributors data, accessed through the open-access Geofabrik download server.
Wave climate of the southern Maldives
Both, erosion adjacent to the harbor and sediment dynamics on Thoondu beach, are effects of sediment transport dynamics on the reef. Here, the main driver behind sediment transport are wave-induced currents5,7. Therefore, the local wave climate and possible changes of the wave climate are of particular importance when assessing shoreline changes. As measured wave data for the Maldives is scarce, global wave hindcasts or reanalysis models are the only sources containing long-term wave data of directional sea states for the islands of the Maldives. Information on wave data is provided by several meteorological services, such as the National Centers for Environmental Protection (NCEP) of the American American National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) or the Collaboration for Australian Weather and Climate Research (CAWCR) (see Fig. 4a). Annual time series from the considered services agree very well among each other, with mean annual correlation coefficients of R ≥ 0.89 (Fig. 4c). To validate the hindcast and reanalysis data, this study uses harmonized and inter-calibrated Satellite Radar Altimetry (SRA) measurements from the Altimeter Data System (ADS) of the Helmholtz Centre Potsdam (GFZ)45 and compares these to the three data sets considered for this study (Fig. 4a). The SRA measurements are available between 1993-04-25 and 2018-06-15. Wave heights from ECMWF’s fifth generation atmospheric reanalysis of the global climate (ERA5) data set are closest to the measured SRA wave height in the region of Fuvahmulah. Even though the locations of the CAWCR output nodes differ from the other data sets, analyzing the spatial variation of the CAWCR time series shows a very high correlation of adjacent data nodes (R ≥ 0.977 ± 0.007, see Fig. 4d). The spatial similarity following from this high correlation of wave parameters allows the data sets to be compared among each other – despite the spatial distance. Likewise, this shows the wave climate on Fuvahmulah is typical for atolls in the south of the Maldives – as well as the associated exposure and impacts. All further analyses of this study make use of the CAWCR data, because the output node is closest to Fuvahmulah and CAWCR provides significant wave heights under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5, and RCP 8 for the twenty-first century46. These future projections allow this study to scrutinize future states of wave climate on the island as well as their impacts and triggered effects.
a Typical time series of the significant wave height Hs for each data set over one year (here 2009). The data sets are provided through the climate data repositories of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), the Collaboration for Australian Weather and Climate Research (CAWCR) and the National Center for Environmental Protection (NCEP) of the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). White dots are Satellite Radar Altimetry (SRA) measurements of Hs, recorded in the vicinity of the data output node. b shows the deviation between data sets and the SRA measurements c is a cross-correlation matrix for Hs from each considered data repository between 1980 and 2019-05 (sample size n = 345,504 for ECMWF’s and CAWCR’s hourly data; sample size n = 115,168 for NCEP’s 3-h data). d is a spatial cross-correlation matrix for data nodes of the CAWCR data set adjacent to the output node considered in this study. The data nodes are in the center of each cell. Values in the matrix are mean μR and standard deviation ± σR of the correlation coefficient R. The red dot marks the location of Fuvahmulah within the matrix.
The wave climate in the area around Fuvahmulah reflects the dry and wet season both by changed wave heights and wave direction. Median wave heights range between 0.98 m in March, as well as 1.71 m in July with a maximum wave height Hs,max of 3.32 m on June 22nd, 1987 (for more statistical data of Fig. 5a, f, for example on boxplot mean and IQR values, see Supplementary Information File). This study defines the period between November to February as dry season and the period between April and September as wet season (Fig. 5a). April and October are considered transition months.
a Annual significant wave height distribution for hindcast data between 1980 to 2019 (sample size n = 350,640). b shows the discrete marginal distribution between peak wave direction θp and significant wave height Hs for the dry season, while d contains results for the wet season. Here, the colorbar shows the occurrence probability of each 0.5∘ wave direction and 0.05 m wave height cell. The gray areas visualize the significant peak direction range θp,r for each subset, containing the directions which, when combined, have the highest 33% occurrence probability. c and e show wave roses for the dry and wet season. f are significant wave heights for 2010–2019 (here labeled as “Historical”; sample size n = 204,467; undefined “NaN”, or “Not a Number”, values remain unconsidered) and Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 and 8.5 (sample size n = 230,203; undefined “NaN” values remain unconsidered). Boxplots in a and f are done with the corresponding boxplot-function in Python’s module matplotlib. Here, the orange line of the boxplot is the median, the box limits are the upper and lower quartiles while whiskers mark the range of the non-outlier data and extend the box limits by 1.5 ⋅ IQR.
The waves are smaller in the dry season than in the wet season and are dominantly approaching the island from SSW (202.5°, see Fig. 5b–e). There are also other southern and south western portions between November to February, but in terms of occurrence they play a minor role. Significant wave heights Hs are mostly smaller than 1.7 m in the dry season (see Fig. 5c). In the wet season, waves approach the island dominantly from southeast and south-southwest (135° and 202.5°). In the rainy season, significant wave heights increase when compared to the dry season and range between Hs = 1 m − 2 m. Considering the future wave climate in the region, by using the projections of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), the data does not significantly differ under the respective RCPs, when compairing wave parameters between the reference time frame 1986–2005 and the last two decades of the twenty-first century (Fig. 5f; reference time frame according to the fifth assessment report of the IPCC47). These results are in line with findings of another study using CAWCR wave projection data on a global scale48.
Considering the results of the statistical wave climate analysis, this study concentrates on scrutinizing waves which propagate from SE and SSW into the computational domain of the numerical models in the following. These wave directions represent the two dominant shares of the wave rose for Fuvahmulah in both seasons. Considering today’s and future significant wave heights Hs, the numerical models use the 99th percentile from the reanalysis data set (Hs,model = 2.3 m ≈ Hs,99% = 2.27 m) as boundary conditions. All conditions are therefore modeled for storm conditions.
Natural morphodynamics on the reef and anthropogenic interventions
Results from the wave climate analysis serve as boundary conditions for the regional wave models5. The numerical wave models also utilize the DEM data and set the observed and measured morphodynamics into broader context by considering the wave climate’s hydrodynamic forcing. With that, the wave models test the assumption of the harbor infrastructure being the root cause of erosion on the southeast coast, adjacent to seaport. While Delft3D (D3D) calculates the general sediment movement on the Fuvahmulah reef platform for different wave directions, the depth-integrated (2DH) Boussinesq-type wave model gives more detailed information on the role of the port as anthropogenic interference in the natural sediment transport system of the reef (a preceding study gives further insights into the more general dynamic pattern of seasonal and annual sediment transport on the fringing reef of Fuvahmulah5).
D3D confirms that the interplay of sediment supply13 and wave-induced currents provides sediment for the island (Fig. 6). It further indicates where to expect sediment deposits under the given hydrodynamic forcing. As waves approach from θp = 202°, sediment moves towards the island and settles on the west side (Fig. 6a). A smaller sediment depot also forms on the east and southeast of the island under the given premises. Waves from θp = 135° will take sediment from the offshore reef and transport it towards the island (Fig. 6b). The computations for waves from θp = 135° disclose that the sediment stream splits at the southeastern tip of the island, approximately at today’s harbor location. The wave-induced currents distribute the sediment along the east coast of the island as well as on the southwest side. A small portion of sediment also moves around the northern tip of the island onto the lee side.
Sediment relocation calculated with Delft3D (D3D) for constant waves of one month with significant wave height Hs = 2.3 m, peak period Tp = 17 s approaching from a θp = 202∘ and b θp = 135∘. The offshore depth is truncated to 100 m. The idealized reef has a depth of 5 m to 17.5 m. Gray contour lines mark the water depth on the reef between 5 m to 15 m in 5 m increments. The erodible sediment layer is 1 m throughout the domain. Sediment accumulation is blue, while erosion is red. The maximum erodible depth is equal to the erodible sediment layer thickness. Map data is idealized, based on measurements.
In general, the D3D computations reveal that wave-induced currents take sediment from the southern reef and transport it towards the south and east coast (without seaport structures being present). D3D also indicates the particular importance of the island’s southeast part for sediment transport along the entire east coast: waves from θp = 202° pick up sediment at the southern reef, transport it towards the east and the southeast coast of Fuvahmulah where it finally accumulates. Then, over seasonal cycles, waves from θp = 135° can take away the accumulated sediment and distribute it along the east side.
The 2DH model highlights the difference in wave driven current patterns leading to sediment transport around the port area. The models also facilitate scrutinizing the changes in sediment transport with and without the harbor infrastructure being present. These computations confirm the processes outlined with the D3D computations and further highlight two factors, contributing to the erosion along the east coast of the island:
The first factor is the available sediment. In both cases – with and without the port structures (breakwater and headland) – waves from θp = 202.5° create a current in front of the port (Fig. 7a, b), transporting sediment over the reef. At the same time, in the area of today’s harbor entrance, the current decelerates and thus allows for the sediment to accumulate in this area. However, with the breakwater present, the structure interrupts the sediment transport and sediment cannot enter this area. In addition, the breakwater reaches up to the reef’s edge. As a consequence, it deflects the current and thus redirects the sediment off the reef into deeper waters.
Wave-induced currents (overline{uv}) from the depth-integrated (2DH) model for the seaport area in the southeast of Fuvahmulah, where the colorbar shows the magnitude of the current between 0.0 ms−1 (white) to 3.0 ms−1 (blue), while arrows depict the current direction. a shows velocity fields from waves with a peak direction of θp = 202∘ for Fuvahmulah without the harbor, while b includes seaport infrastructure. Similarly, c shows wave-induced currents before the port construction, while d presents today’s situation with the harbor present for waves approaching from θp = 135∘. Green dashed contours show the water depths of the reef platform for 5 m, 10 m, and 50 m. Maps are based on measurements and adapted publicly available © OpenStreetMap contributors data, accessed through the open-access Geofabrik download server.
The second factor is the transport capacity of the east coast’s current: without breakwater, waves from θp = 135° induce a northward current to the area of today’s port entrance (see Fig. 7). This is also the area, where sediment was able to settle from the θp = 202.5° component. Instead, with the harbor present, the breakwater obstructs the emerging current in this area and deflects the velocity momentum off-shore. Yet, a wave-induced longshore current is still present along the east coast independently of the port: when waves from θp = 135° approach the reef and break, they induce radiation stresses and subsequently create this longshore current. With missing sediment from the reef, the currents will likely take sediment from the coast, leading to erosion.
Governmental and societal framing of coastal development
On Fuvahmulah 93.8% of residents are citizens of the Maldives and as on most other inhabited islands, tourism plays a minor role41. Fuvahmulah’s island dwellers are mainly employed in education and commercial services41. Thus, together with the insights of the field campaigns, Fuvahmulah can be considered a local’s island. In the household survey, the local community perceives erosion as the most pressing issue (closed question, 27% of 345 mentions, see Fig. 8 and Supplementary Information File). At the same time, both the interviews with government officials as well as the recently issued Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) on coastal protection on Fuvahmulah reveal that administrations on the national and local level acknowledge erosion as a high priority issue on the island. However, while there is consensus on the need for action among all interviewed actor groups, attribution of the erosion’s root cause varied between the national government representatives and the affected community. On the one hand, the Maldives’ dominant adaptation challenge is sea level rise and the associated impacts. In fact, the Maldives national government actively promotes this narrative of being highly vulnerable to climate change induced sea level rise49 – even in the case of Fuvahmulah. On the other hand, Fuvahmulah’s population is skeptical about the national government’s narrative. The household survey contained an open question (without pre-formulated responses) asking the participants to name visible changes of the natural environment on the island. Here, about 36% of all responses mentioned erosion and of these, 20% also attributed the erosion processes on Fuvahmulah specifically to the harbor construction (see Fig. 8 and Supplementary Information File). These diametrically opposed perceptions on root causes behind coastal adaptation originate from the historical context of national politics and local society.
Selected questions and answer frequency from the population survey. See Supplementary Information File for the question type (open or closed question) as well as associated codes and coding rules.
First experiences with coastal infrastructure in the Maldives dates back to the 1970s, when the first modern coastal protection constructions were built on the islands34. However, coastal protection management was not professionalized before 1987 and 1988 when strong coastal floods caused massive damage to the Maldives’ capital Male’ and on several other islands in the middle of the country (interview with representatives of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MEE) in 2017). At the same time, establishing coastal protection in the Maldives was accompanied with a rapid increase in population, especially in the Maldives capital Male’. In accordance with the Maldives Decentralization Act in 2010, the national government shifted its focus onto regional development centers, equipped with the necessary infrastructure26 and limiting the migration to the capital50. However, the interviewees still highlight today’s accumulation of resources – economic and professional expertize – in Male’. Decisions are made at the highest level and have an impact down to the local scale. When regarding the implementation of coastal development projects in the Maldives, the planning, implementation and decision-making process are centrally executed and ministerially anchored in the national government without significant involvement of local capacities on the islands. According to actors involved in coastal governance, in general, such top-down processes in decision and implementation are applied for coastal infrastructure projects, for example seaports as well as coastal protection structures. Regional and local government institutions, such as the city council on Fuvahmulah, lack influencing power in the decision-making process. According to the interviewees, the role of local government institutions is limited to informing national-level actors about coastal problems on their island. The lack of power is also expressed by missing financial resources for coastal projects at a council-level (interview with a representative of a state environmental agency in 2017). In addition, infrastructure projects usually require external financial and knowledge resources, provided by international organizations. However, international organizations are legally bound to use the national government as an entry point and cannot initiate projects below the central national-level. Altogether, this stands in contrast to the republic’s decentralization efforts and the corresponding strengthening of local communities.
Moreover, since 2012, the EIA Regulation of the Maldives requires to assess the (adverse) impact of infrastructure projects on the environment. However, quality and compliance to EIA policies – also for example in the tourism sector39 – are traditionally weak40 and have extensively promulgated technical fortification of many inhabited islands in the Maldives20,22,26.
In contrast to the national politic perspective on coastal infrastructure, the traditions and knowledge of Fuvahmulah’s inhabitants on their environment as well as experience with coastal hazards led to a different perception on coastal adaptation. More than half of the local respondents feel safe on their island with regard to sea level rise (52% of the respondents, see Fig. 8). The interviews have shown this sense of safety evolves from the awareness that the lower-lying center of Fuvahmulah is protected from seaborne extreme events by the island’s fringing coastal ridges. Locals even believe Fuvahmulah to be comparatively safer than other islands in the Maldives. Some also mention the protective functions of the reef: one respondent answers an open question, asking which elements of the island’s natural environment are perceived as important: “most important is the reef. What I’m saying is that we are protected by the reef. It’s not like the [other islands in the Maldives] that are protected by more islands in the atoll” (Survey 1 participant: 080). Others have argued about the protective function of the “heylhi”, which is the natural green belt of vegetation around the entire coastline of Fuvahmulah, stabilizing the shore and protecting local inhabitants from seaborne hazards (see Supplementary Information File). In addition, building houses was traditionally only allowed in the center of the islands behind the green belt, consisting of local trees and shrubs. However, in 1993, a 86 m long seawall was built on the central east-side as the first protection measure on the island, followed by noticeable erosion44. Today, the seawall is detached from the coast, substantiating this study’s earlier findings and a general propensity of adverse impacts of human-made interventions in the coastal environment. While there hasn’t been a documented response to the seawall’s impact at the time, today’s erosion adjacent to Fuvahmulah’s seaport is more severe and has a higher impact on the society. For example interviewees of the second survey discussed the effects of erosion as well as the impact on their personal lives, for example: “[…] I am very worried about the soil erosion. I think around 20 feet has gone. So, it is a huge risk for our people in our community. So, I am very much worried about it.” (Survey 2 participant: 039). Fuvahmulah has gained more attention by the national government in the last two decades, manifested through numerous development projects in that time, thus erosion – being a high priority issue on the island – is a matter dealt with on the highest governmental level nowadays.
Coastal adaptation in practice
In 2014, government actors of the MEE agreed on taking action against erosion adjacent to Fuvahmulah’s seaport. They signed a grant arrangement for an internationally sponsored infrastructure development fund and initiated the project “Coastal Protection at Gn. Fuvahmulah, Maldives”. This project includes “the development, implementation and maintenance of sustainable coastal protection to prevent erosion and flooding on […] Fuvahmulah. The main objective of this project is to decrease erosion and flooding through a possible […] combination of hard and soft coastal engineering interventions […] to protect the island of Fuvahmulah against flooding due to ongoing coastal erosion and rising sea levels”50. An international consultant supported the MEE together with a local sub-contractor in the site investigation, the feasibility study, the technical design50 and the draft of the legally mandatory Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)51.
The technical design report finds human interventions and changes in natural processes disturb the natural balance of the sediment supply along the coastline50. According to the report, these human interventions are more specifically the harbor construction, sand-mining and earlier reef blasting for beach access, while natural processes disturbing the natural balance are “changes in the natural climate”50, but also “may”50 be a possible deterioration of the coral reef. The report also mentions a lacking local sediment source for the coast and predicts the fringing ridge of Fuvahmulah to breach in the next decades, causing “tremendous flood damage to the island”50. Because of this, the report concludes, coastal protection is required and the design should “immediately stop the ongoing erosion”50. A preceding feasibility study was cited in the report, identifying two possible solutions against the ongoing erosion and rendering them reasonable while considering their environmental and social impacts – an offshore breakwater and an onshore revetment. The technical report concludes the revetment to be the most viable option, after presenting preliminary designs and a cost-benefit analysis of both alternatives. The final revetment is about to cover approximately the southern 2.6 km of the 4.0 km long east side and is designed with a lifetime of 50 years, withstanding hazardous seaborne events with a return period of 100 years.
The ESIA51 builds on the technical design report and further underlines the project’s significance in the context of future climate change risks, as well as for the national and local economy. The report also finds the project would enhance the “sense of security and safety” of Fuvahmulah’s island dwellers51. The ESIA initially gives five approaches to coastal adaptation, but finds ecological methods would contain a high uncertainty and that they would be ineffective. Also, the report further dismisses soft measures (also known as sediment-based measures) as unsuitable because a proper (local) sediment source is supposedly missing. The impact assessment report finally presents the same coastal protection alternatives that have been suggested in the technical design report50. However, in addition to the technical design report, the ESIA also contains stakeholder consultations on the project. Resulting from these consultations, the chapter “project risk mitigation” in the ESIA finds “acceptability of the Project by all stakeholders is an important factor for smooth implementation of any project”51. The first local stakeholders consultation took place in July 2016 on Fuvahmulah and addressed the off-shore and on-shore protection alternatives. The discussions revealed locals prefered the off-shore alternative, but the ESIA objects as “the risk of affecting [Thoondu] beach was not well understood [by the local stakeholders] at that time”. Therefore, the ESIA mentions another consultation with the local government and community in October 2016 “to explain to the stakeholders the preferred alternative that emerged following the feasibility study and proposed in the EIA report” – with the revetment being the “preferred” and to be implemented alternative. In summary, both reports dismiss feasible soft solutions due to false assumptions (missing sediment source, however the reef naturally provides marine aggregates5,9) and undermine the participatory process by promoting the less popular alternative in the end.
In principle, public participation is a key component of EIAs39 and when taken into the decision-making process, public participation also leads to more sustainable implementation of development projects. However, the population survey of this study from March 2017 reveals an unutilized potential to improve the participatory process based on two questions: First, when asking how far politicians work together with the community (open question), 49% of the survey’s respondents found insufficient cooperation of politicians with the community in development projects – while 19% answer to be sporadically involved and 17% report to be regularly involved (see Fig. 8 and Supplementary Information File). Second, a large majority of 83% endorses more involvement in the decision-making process regarding the development of the island, while only 15% of the interviewees do not wish for more participation in this matter. These results disclose an ongoing dissatisfaction of Fuvahmulah’s people and the lacking consideration of their interests, opinions, and knowledge – despite or because of insufficient earlier attempts to include their perspective in the ESIA.
