Once the source of prosperity for many coastal communities, the UK’s seas are now sometimes perceived as a barrier to their economic progress. Our coastal communities are often the most disadvantaged and distant from public decision-making, with many people feeling left behind.

Somewhere, Britain lost something very important: our belief in the sea as a source of prosperity. It is our task to get it back. Turning back to the sea means getting more people excited about what our coast has to offer and growing a new generation of innovative coastal and marine businesses. The Blue New Deal is a plan to put people in control so they can shape local priorities, value their greatest asset, and revitalise the UK coast.

Fishing communities continue to lose jobs and revenue, as fishing rights accumulate in the hands of a few unaccountable companies. Many coastal areas find it hard to retain young people and recruit teachers, as they lack the appropriate physical and digital connectivity. Without the necessary support, communities and businesses are struggling to make the most of the coast’s abundant potential for cleaner energy. And without the appropriate resources, local authorities are discouraged from innovating in more sustainable ways to protect homes and businesses from climate change.

“But people on the coast are eager to take control. They want to be in the driving seat, leading a new approach to regenerating their areas.”

And already the coast is dotted with great ideas and projects – from sustainable shellfish farming projects in Wales and the south west of England, to a world-leading hub for marine renewable energy in Orkney.

Our challenge now is to build on those ideas and help them grow to become opportunities for fundamental, wide-scale change.

A Blue New Deal for coastal communities has to begin by asking how communities can be supported to make the most of their unique assets, now and for future generations.

In practice, that means asking:

How can we empower coastal communities to become centres for a renewable energy revolution?

How can we support coastal destinations in attracting visitors year round?

How can we ensure small fishing boats become and remain economically viable?

How can coastal communities tackle the impact of second-home ownership on the local housing market, or benefit from inward investment without leaving local people priced out of their communities?

And having asked the questions – speaking with and learning from hundreds of people up and down the country – we can now offer real answers that will help people on the coast take control of what affects their lives, today and in the future.

Some of what needs to happen would broadly apply anywhere, and benefit any community in the country – like developing new sources of finance for local businesses. Others are unique to the specific challenges and assets that coastal communities have – like adapting to coastal erosion or innovative marine leisure businesses.

A healthier coastal and marine environment plays a key role in delivering many of the things that coastal communities need and want.

There are four things that need to happen to revitalise the UK coast, and they must work together to deliver its potential.

    1. Local people need to be in control, leading a new approach to regeneration.
    2. Coastal communities need to work together to explore how different areas of the coastal economy – including tourism, energy, fisheries, and aquaculture – can help inspire and support each other, to turn again to the sea for jobs and economic prosperity
    3. More needs to be done to support coastal areas to plan for a changing coast. Proactive and innovative approaches are needed to help make the UK coast more resilient to climate change.
    4. Government must build the capabilities of places, people, and communities; support projects, small or large; and ensure there is the digital and transport infrastructure that communities need to thrive.

There has never been a more urgent need for communities to come together and lead the change themselves. The Brexit vote was a wake-up call: communities left behind by our economy and ignored by our politics are demanding to be heard. In the face of growing inequality, political and financial instability, and increasingly urgent threats to the natural environment we depend on, we all want to see a new economy that benefits areas of the country whose potential is not being fulfilled.

“The action plan that follows is just the beginning. Making it all happen will require working at different levels: communities, national and devolved governments, and business and investors.”

For investors, there is huge potential for supporting the new businesses and innovative projects that are needed.

For governments, the Blue New Deal offers the building blocks for a coastal industrial strategy, which could play a key role in helping to rebalance our economy and begin to close the gaps between the UK’s marginalised and well-off regions and communities.

The New Economics Foundation will continue to work with coastal communities from all regions of the UK, to help them reinvent and take control of their local economies, and to speak with a louder voice in government and parliament.

20 priorities to revitalise coastal communities

Healthier and more productive seas can be an engine for more and better jobs into the future.

Focusing on these 20 priorities, through innovation and greater investment in building expertise and capacity in our coastal communities, has the potential to support around 160,000 additional jobs and add about £7.2 billion to the coastal economy. 1

Put local people in control

  1. Communities want the power to define what economic success looks like for their areas. Community-led plans should be taken far more seriously within the wider decision-making system. The economic progress they work towards should be defined by locally felt economic benefits, rather than simply by contribution to the area’s Gross Value Added (GVA) or short-term financial returns.
  1. People need the capability and opportunities to play active roles in influencing their local place and economy. This includes offering local training in technical and financial skills to build local expertise; providing forums and events for people to meet and interact; and rekindling people’s connection with their local natural environment.
  1. People and communities want greater control over the public goods and services they rely on, such as housing, energy, land, and transport. Inward investment needs to add value to a place without pricing local people out. Innovative models of common ownership can help harness assets like land and energy for the good of the community.

Plan for coastal change

  1. Coastal areas have unique planning challenges and they need confidence to plan robustly and innovate for the future. A regional planning tier should be re-established to integrate land, coastal, and marine planning, and make it easier for different areas, authorities, and economic sectors to work together.
  1. Coastal communities need support to face the difficult decisions imposed by a rapidly changing climate and coastline, including relocation. Innovative approaches to adapt to coastal change need to be seen as an equally important measure as just defending the coast, and should be reflected as such in planning policies.
  1. Experimentation is crucial to help build the evidence needed to prioritise alternative solutions to managing our coast. Government should support coastal areas in funding innovative approaches in their locality.

Invest in a coastal transformation

  1. Government should treat the coast as a unique case in its national approach to both industrial strategy and infrastructure development. There should be a coastal industrial strategy and targeted public investment to build the capabilities of places, people, and communities on the coast.
  1. Local projects need better access to finance than the big banks are able or willing to provide. Government should encourage a more diverse network of local and regional banks to channel investment into sound local businesses.

Tourism

  1. Visitors – from home and abroad – need to be inspired by how much the UK coast has to offer and to find it easy and affordable to visit. A UK coastal tourism push is needed; transport connectivity and affordability must be a high priority.
  1. Accessible, wildlife-rich seafronts, and a healthy marine environment, are assets to tourism and vital for communities to take pride in what their local areas have to offer. Post-Brexit, the government should retain and strengthen the EU’s Bathing Water Directive to have the continent’s cleanest coastline and beaches.
  1. Strong local supply chains retain more value locally – it shouldn’t just be a few shops that benefit from visitors to a place. Communities, industry, training centres, and government need to play their part in supporting small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and businesses that create positive local economic, social, and environmental impact.

Energy

  1. The UK should lead the world in offshore and marine renewable energy. Businesses, local authorities, innovators, and communities need a clear commitment from government to long-term innovation funding and to rapidly phase out support and rhetorical backing for fossil fuels.
  1. Communities and towns should be empowered to become centres for community-led renewable energy – both community owned energy and other projects with genuine local benefit. As part of this, the right conditions and proper access to finance are essential.
  1. The UK needs an ambitious programme to insulate homes and buildings, reduce energy bills, and cut carbon emissions. Energy efficiency must be a UK national infrastructure priority.

Fisheries

  1. Fishers need healthy fish stocks– today and for years to come. National policy must follow scientific advice to set fishing limits sustainably and preserve future fishing opportunities.
  1. Smaller boats are the lifeblood of thriving ports – those that are fishing sustainably need to get a larger share of fishing opportunities. The UK currently gives only 1.5% of the national fishing quota to the smallest category of boats, even though they make up over 75% of vessels.
  1. Fisheries management and governance need to better support fishing communities. The UK needs a small-scale Producer Organisation (PO), which can give smaller boats a voice and greater control to help rebalance power in the fishing industry.

Aquaculture

  1. Aquaculture innovators need government’s support and commitment to pioneer new sustainable aquaculture businesses, including funding to support innovation focused on raising environmental standards.
  1. Businesses should come together and collaborate with local authorities to set up local or regional ‘seafood hubs’ that provide support, training and marketing opportunities to aquaculture producers and fishers, and better connect them with the local economy and communities.
  1. Clean water is essential for fish and shellfish health, and therefore crucial to the success of aquaculture businesses. As part of a wider effort to have the continent’s cleanest coastline and beaches, regulators must ensure the UK meets current EU water quality targets, and increase, or at least keep the same, targets post-Brexit.

open-sea-para

INTRODUCTION

Coastal communities can turn to the sea once again for jobs and increased wellbeing, whilst building a stronger economy for the future. Talking about the future of the UK coast, and its unique context, makes sense to people and is a timely debate.

 

A unique asset

The UK coast is home to more than 11 million people. Coastal communities are not all the same – they range from small islands and fishing villages, to port towns and major urban centres, and they have different contexts and local priorities.

But dotted across the UK’s vast coastline, they all have one thing in common: they are at the forefront of the UK’s relationship with the oceans. The coastal and marine environment is coastal communities’ unique asset, it is what makes them different, and it is an essential part of their history and their identity.

The future of the oceans is relevant to all of us, but coastal communities depend on it for jobs, economic activity, and wellbeing.

 

The UK coast today

Today, coastal areas top the list of the most deprived areas in the UK. When compared to non-coastal areas, they see higher levels of underemployment, economic inequality, and educational underachievement (Figures 1–3).

Figure 1: Index of Multiple Deprivation (UK average versus coastal average)

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/24/"></iframe>

Figure 2: Average income per head (UK average versus coastal average)
<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/25/"></iframe>
Figure 3: Percentage of population with higher education level+ (UK average versus coastal average)
<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/27/"></iframe>

Coastal communities also have an increasing elderly population and experience higher outward migration – young people are often forced to move elsewhere due to a lack of employment and wider social opportunities. For many coastal and island communities, especially but not only those that are remote, there are additional challenges in terms of infrastructure and connectivity (Case Study 1).

The 2016 State of Nature report showed how nature is faring worse in the UK than in most other countries. Yet, over the last eight years, public spending on UK biodiversity has fallen by 32%. For the coastal and marine environment, the key challenges remain the impact of our activities – a combination of pollution, over-exploitation, and climate change.

Climate change is also posing particular challenges for many coastal communities, and this will only get worse without rapid global action to cut carbon emissions.

Increasingly stormy and extreme weather will affect coastal infrastructure, such as local energy supplies, and pose challenges to isolated areas and those with older populations, who are reliant on public services, such as transport and health. More frequent flooding is likely to bring down house prices, affect tourist attractions, discourage further investment, and have a negative impact on people’s wellbeing. Rising sea levels are also forcing many communities to make difficult decisions, such as having to leave their homes and communities, as they battle with coastal erosion.

 

How did we get here?

The complexity of challenges facing the UK coast has not developed overnight, and many have been recognised for some time.

  • In 2007, a select committee report on communities and local government already highlighted many of these challenges as long-term trends. It concluded that ‘seaside towns are the least understood of Britain’s “problem” areas’, and that ‘the government does not sufficiently appreciate the needs of coastal towns.’
  • In 2002, a Coastal Socio-Economic Scoping Study for the Scottish government, highlighted that ‘there has been minimal interest to date in considering the socio-economic experiences of coastal communities’ and that ‘as part of the development of any future national coastal management framework, it is important that mechanisms are set in place for promoting, managing and monitoring coastal economic development programmes.’

In recent years, several national policies and government initiatives have been developed, thanks to the efforts of a range of groups on the coast and government agencies (Case Study 2).

More sustainable and innovative approaches are already happening, but they are still far too few to deliver the transformation that is needed. What policies still have not been able to address is that the problem for many coastal communities is that they lack the scale of power and resources needed to address their complex and many unique challenges. Now they face an increasingly uncertain economic future.

 

Co-developing an action plan

The UK public, when asked, is consistent and clear about what they want their economy to deliver: secure and well-paid jobs, increased wellbeing, effective public services that guarantee good health and education, low levels of economic inequality, and a healthy environment.

The Blue New Deal initiative, led by the New Economics Foundation and launched in summer 2015, offered a joined-up vision for the UK coast, one that could balance the social and economic needs of communities with those of our coastal and marine environment, ensuring their return to prosperity.

In recent years, coastal towns have grabbed headlines with names like ‘poverty-on-sea’ and even ‘misery-by-sea’. So, coastal communities welcomed a fresh and more positive narrative about the challenges they face.

The Foundation brought together a diverse network of people, from all regions of the UK, to explore the remaining barriers for success, develop ideas, and propose solutions, to turn a shared vision into a reality. This report is a result of this process – what we have heard and learned – a comprehensive package of what needs to happen to revitalise the UK coast.

deciding-para

1. DECIDING WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN

People on the coast want to be in the driving seat, leading a new approach to regenerating their areas. And there are new possibilities already getting started in communities all over the country.

The coast is dotted with great ideas and projects – from sustainable shellfish farming projects in Wales and the south west of England, to a world-leading hub for marine renewable energy in Orkney. Our challenge now is to build on those ideas and help them grow to become truly transformative opportunities for change.

 

Part of a bigger problem

When listening to communities on the coast, many feel disconnected from sections of the country where decisions are being made, which affect their lives. They see how our economics and politics seem to be benefiting some areas of the country more than others. And they are right.

The UK is the fifth wealthiest nation in the world. But it is also the only one of the world’s leading economies where inequality has increased this century. Britain is home to some of the richest and poorest regions in Western Europe, and the gap between their economic fortunes is widening.

Figure 4 compares GDP per person (adjusted for purchasing power) between regions in the UK – or how people in different areas are able to afford buying things like food or a house. The 100 line shows the average in the whole of Europe (EU28). More than half of UK regions (NUTS2 regions) are below the European average, whilst London far exceeds anywhere else in Europe.

Figure 4: Regional inequality in the UK compared to the EU28 average

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/38/"></iframe>

Gross domestic product (GDP) per inhabitant in purchasing power standard (PPS) in relation to the EU28 average, by NUTS2 regions, 2014 Source: Eurostat

Struggling coastal communities are not alone. They are a part of a bigger problem. They sit alongside other areas in the UK that have never truly recovered from the loss of traditional industries and jobs, over the past decades.

Since the 1970s, successive public policies have failed to inject new life into marginalised UK economies:

  • They have not been able to generate the appropriate investment in those areas to support good sustainable jobs and attract ongoing investment.
  • They have increasingly widened the gaps between people, their local assets, and resources, with ownership of public goods and services – such as energy, land, and fishing rights – going into ever fewer and unaccountable private hands.
  • They have made these communities more dependent on government ‘hand-outs’, stripping them of a sense of pride in creating their own opportunities for a better future.

Perhaps it’s little surprise that the top five areas that voted to leave the EU were all coastal. Communities left behind by our economy and ignored by our politics are demanding to be heard.

For coastal communities, taking action to support, inspire, and regenerate the UK coast was important before Brexit; now, it’s essential. Their geography, compounded by their social and economic challenges, make them some of the most vulnerable areas in the country to future economic and environmental shocks.

There has never been a more urgent time for communities to come together, to share skills and resources, and lead the change that is needed, themselves.

 

Four things that need to happen

There are four things that need to happen to revitalise coastal communities, and these must work together to deliver its potential:

  1. Put local people in control: Section 2 outlines how people and communities can take control and lead a new approach to regenerating their areas.
  1. Deliver good jobs and healthier seas: Sections 3-7 set out how coastal communities can work together to explore how different areas of the coastal economy – including fisheries, aquaculture, energy, and tourism – can help inspire and support each other, to turn again to the sea for jobs and economic prosperity.
  1. Plan for coastal change: Section 8 explores the urgent need for proactive and innovative approaches to help make the UK coast more resilient to climate change.
  1. Invest in the coastal future: Section 9 looks at the role of government, as well as public and private finance, in building the capabilities of places, people, and communities; supporting projects, small or large; and ensuring there is the digital and transport infrastructure that communities need to thrive.

Here’s how we can do it.

portpatrick-life-boat-week-photo-para

2. PUTTING LOCAL PEOPLE IN CONTROL

The success of long-lasting community regeneration will ultimately be about local people – those who live and work in a local area, including businesses, non-profit organisations, schools, local government and community groups – increasingly having the power and the ability to decide and act on what matters to them.

Coastal, and non-coastal communities alike, need to be given the powers and capabilities that they need to shape their own economic future.

 

Where are we now?

Every place is different, so we can’t define what works for each community. Different people in an area should be able to engage in shaping their local priorities and testing different approaches to regeneration and have the opportunity to play a genuine role in decisions that will ultimately shape their future.

The coast is an asset for coastal communities, but who owns it? This question became pertinent as we talked to people from around the UK coast about the potential for communities to turn again to the sea for opportunities. It is fair to say the vast majority of the UK coast, just like inland, is in private ownership – including many important seafront assets like ports, and even beaches.

For communities, this is often a barrier to developing local economic plans; for seafront managers, this creates extra challenges when trying to manage the coast or implement measures to improve public amenities.

Private land ownership is not always a bad thing, if areas are still accessible to the public, and managed in the public good (Case Study 3). But for people and communities to take control, they need to have a say and power over their shared resources, and the places where they live (Case Study 4).

Putting people in control means building their capabilities and supporting them in taking ownership of their places, their local resources, and their working lives; helping them build resilient economies that can withstand external shocks; and enabling them to deliver on shared goals.

These principles would broadly apply anywhere. But here, we talk about what needs to happen, with a focus on what that means for coastal communities.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Communities want the power to define what economic success looks like for their areas. Decisions need to be taken as close, and as accountably, as possible to those they will affect, through more inclusive democratic institutions.

  • Community-led plans should be taken far more seriously within the wider decision-making system. The economic progress they work towards should be defined by locally-felt economic benefits, rather than simply by contribution to the area’s GVA or short-term financial returns. This would enable communities to invest in what matters to them, including delivering social and environmental outcomes, such as increasing local wellbeing, a more equal distribution of economic benefits, and environmental sustainability (Box 5). Community-led plans, such as Neighbourhood Plans, must be integrated with the wider economic development plans in an area, for example, with those led by Local Enterprise Partnerships.
  • Governments should give local authorities greater powers over planning, taxation, spending, and borrowing, and require them to work closely with community-led economic and development plans.
  • Local public services should be increasingly co-produced. Coproduction is an approach that turns people from passive recipients of a service into active participants. It directly engages local people in tailoring their local services, by making use of local skills, knowledge, and experiences.
  • Local economic plans can ensure a more holistic approach to development, and make sustainable use of environmental resources, including materials, waste, physical spaces, and energy. Strategies, such as neighbourhood plans, should be built around available assets (like beaches, iconic buildings, and heritage sites), skills, and opportunities to decarbonise the economy.

2. People need the capability and opportunity to play active roles in influencing their local place and economy.

  • Communities want training in technical and financial skills to help them develop their own robust and well-informed local economic vision and strategy. Government needs to ensure that the UK’s economic policy supports the economic resilience of places; local economies should be able to generate good jobs, wellbeing, and wealth within the local area, and distribute economic benefits fairly and widely.
    • Methods, such as the Community Economic Development 2 approach, are tools that communities can use to deliver more sustainable development locally. Strong local economic plans would, for example, support a diverse network (in sector and scale) of businesses and organisations, which are well-connected by short supply chains, so that money keeps flowing into the local economy as much as possible, rather than leaving the area straight away. This strong ‘multiplier effect’ can be achieved in different ways, including through channelling public and private sector procurement more effectively, through SMEs. Local Multiplier assessments (e.g. LM3) can be used to build evidence of the wider economic benefit of local procurement.
  • Communities can create opportunities (e.g. forums, events, initiatives) for people to come together, which work to engage a wide representation of people locally, without discrimination. Government can provide increased access to information, to enable communities to self-organise and actively engage in the issues affecting their areas. It can achieve this by:
    • recognising and strengthening the role of groups and organisations on the UK coast (e.g. coastal partnerships, coastal groups, coastal community teams, community forums), which are creating opportunities for those with a stake in the marine environment to develop and deliver ideas together. Investment should also go into building local capacity (e.g. training in new skills and acquiring resources) so that local institutions can work more effectively.
    • encouraging a network of businesses and organisations (public and private sector), which enable greater democratic employee representation, with a view to increasing workers’ share of productivity gains, reducing wage inequalities, and giving people more control over their work and time, so they are able to actively participate in community life (e.g. cooperatives, mutual ownership).
  • Government, communities, and businesses can maximise the use of the coast and the marine environment as a health and education asset by supporting initiatives that rekindle people’s connection with their local natural environment, built assets, and other members of the community. Such initiatives enable people to gain increasing knowledge of their place and make the most of it together, and can help public bodies deliver public goods – such as health and education – more cost-effectively (Case study 6).

3. People and communities need greater control over the public goods and services they rely on, such as housing, energy, land, and transport. Inward investment needs to add value to a place without pricing out local people, or leading to excessive gentrification.

  • Government should work with local authorities to encourage and support communities that wish to play a leading role in managing their coastal and marine environment, for example through community-led Marine Protected Areas (Case study 7).
  • Local economic development needs to safeguard local access to housing. This can be done in different ways:
    • Public and community partnerships can build homes with affordability locked in over-time (e.g. community land trust, mutual homes ownership schemes).
    • With the appropriate powers, councils could adopt living rents for the area (basing rents on local incomes rather than local markets).
    • Local authorities should move away from selling off public land for short-term capital gain, and instead consider ways to generate long-term rental income from land assets – for example, through providing high-quality, energy-efficient social housing. Attracting institutional investment and community-led housing partnerships would allow local authorities to invest in housing in this way, despite constraints put on council borrowing.
    • Local authorities can limit the impacts of second-home ownership in the area, by working with communities to ensure the local housing market meets the local housing needs. For example, second-home ownership can be curbed through creating a neighbourhood development plan that prohibits new builds for non-residents, following St Ives’ example (Case  study 8).

jobs-seas-para

3. DELIVERING GOOD JOBS AND HEALTHIER SEAS

Economic prosperity and healthy seas can and must go hand in hand for coastal areas. Everywhere is different, and there are many economic opportunities that communities can explore.

We have started by focusing on four main areas: tourism, energy, fisheries and aquaculture. Most importantly, these different areas of the coastal economy can inspire each other, and combine to create new business models.

 

A starting point for action

A Blue New Deal for coastal communities had to start by asking how communities can support more businesses and economic activity by making the most of their unique asset, now and for future generations. A healthier coastal and marine environment plays a key role in delivering many of the things that coastal communities need and want.

We have focused on four areas of the coastal economy: tourism, energy, fisheries, and aquaculture. By working together, these areas can make each other stronger and support innovative new businesses models.

  • Innovative marine energy projects, like tidal lagoons, offer wider opportunities for coastal regeneration, including a range of tourist attractions.
  • Fishing communities can reinvent themselves as sustainable ‘seafood hubs’ – bringing together fishers, aquaculture producers, anglers, and tourism businesses – to create a new brand for the future, whilst protecting their heritage.
  • Offshore wind platforms could be designed to include improvements in offshore aquaculture, making the most of natural resources and space.
  • Fishers can work alongside environmental groups and energy businesses to turn old or unusable fishing gear into a range of products, creating new opportunities for local manufacturing businesses.

The following sub-sections provide some context for each focal area, highlight their key priorities and assess the potential economic impact of delivering different measures. Economic benefits would mainly arise from growing faster some areas, including aquaculture, marine renewables, solar power, energy efficiency, and tourism.

tourism-para

4. TOURISM

The UK’s extensive coastline and marine environment are big selling points for tourism around the UK coast, but this potential is not being realised.

 

Where are we now?

Coastal tourism 3 already supports more than 230,000 jobs in coastal communities around the UK, and contributes £3.8 billion to their income – expressed in GVA terms. There are more than 7,000 tourism businesses on the UK coast, out of which an overwhelming majority are SMEs. In some coastal towns, for example St Davis in Wales, more than 50% of local jobs are in tourism-related activities. 4

Table 1 presents the jobs and GVA supported by coastal tourism in respective countries and regions of the UK. When considering the indirect economic and employment impacts of tourism through spill-over effects on other sectors, we estimate that coastal tourism supports more than 440,000 jobs. Appendix A presents a breakdown of GVA and jobs supported by each coastal Local Authority.

Table 1: Direct and indirect coastal tourism revenue and jobs supported in the UK

table1-bnd

Source: NEF based on Business Register Employment Survey, Beatty et al.5 and Marine Scotland.6

*Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row

  • The UK coast and seas are unique assets for coastal tourism. Its diverse habitats and wildlife, as well as its heritage, support a range of activities cherished by people both at home and abroad, including coastal walks, boat trips, coasteering (exploring a rocky coastline by climbing, jumping, and swimming), surfing, diving, and nature watching (Case study 9).

  • There have been several efforts to improve people’s access to the coast. In particular, initiatives to build coastal paths covering the entire UK coastline, which allows coastal communities to make the most of their unique asset in terms of health and wellbeing, as well as supporting the local economy and attracting visitors. The South West Coast Path in England is recognised as one of the region’s principal tourism attractions and leisure facilities. The Wales Coast Path is the first in the world to encompass a country’s entire coastline. And work on the England Coast Path – to cover the entire English coastline – is expected to be completed in 2020.
  • But as important to visitors are the local people, the quality of life in a place, and a community’s particular culture, heritage, and hospitality. The current conditions of deprivation in many coastal communities, in addition to public perceptions of traditional seaside tourism resorts as ‘tacky and dated’, are negatively impacting the attraction of the UK coast as a visitor destination.
  • Furthermore, the amount of marine litter washing up on UK beaches since the end of the 1990s has almost doubled, and its impact on quality of life, recreational opportunities, and aesthetic value contributes to the negative image and adds costs to society. Swimming in the sea off the coast of Britain has only become a healthy activity in recent years, after decades of poor water quality. Since 1976, the UK has been subject to the EU’s Bathing Water Directive (BWD), which gave member states targets to meet certain water quality standards in bathing areas. Although progress has been slow, by 2015, 97% of England’s bathing waters had passed the EU Commission’s minimum standards, compared to only 27% in 1990. More still needs to be done to maintain and improve on this success.

We are currently not making the most of the distinctiveness of our coastal communities and the richness of our coastal and marine assets. When listening to tourism businesses, their No. 1 priority is to improve the quality of the tourism experience on the coast.

  • The UK coast is considered by many as a national treasure and yet visiting the coast is not a high priority. This is due to a lack of awareness of what the coast has to offer, compounded with the lack of transport infrastructure to make the coast accessible to visitors from the UK and from abroad.
  • Coastal tourism businesses face staffing challenges relating to recruitment, engagement, and retention. Labour turnover costs the sector £274 million annually. At the same time, tourism jobs are often low-wage, low-skill, seasonal, and part-time employment, which offers limited opportunities for career development.
  • Coastal communities are not only struggling to retain its young people, but young people (under-35s) also make the smallest percentage of visitors to the coastAttracting and keeping young people happy on the UK coast is a key challenge, but also a major opportunity to support coastal communities and reinvent coastal economies. A key issue is the lack of affordable housing and the impact that second-home ownership has on the housing market. The purchase of holiday homes skews the focus of the community, making it much more transient. It also makes ownership of property prohibitively expensive for many, particularly those working in low-paid, seasonal jobs.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Visitors – from home and abroad – need to be inspired by how much the UK coast has to offer and to find it easy and affordable to visit. A UK coastal tourism push is needed; and transport connectivity and affordability must be a far higher priority.

  • Government should set a headline goal to increase coastal tourism revenue at a minimum by 3.8% per year to 2025, to meet the UK-wide average growth. A more ambitious policy would aim to increase it by more than national average, or 5% per year to 2025. A key part of that should be to encourage domestic tourism.
  • Coastal areas should work together – with support from government – to develop a strong and coherent national coastal tourism brand, to champion the UK coast. 7 This shouldn’t be a top-down exercise but an inclusive, jointly owned project that engages a diversity of coastal towns and cities. Local authorities and seaside towns can also work with a diversity of local sectors to develop a collaborative identity and brand for their place or region (e.g. Ireland’s Wild Atlantic WayMorecambe Bay’s Sense of Place toolkit).
  • Government needs to ensure local transport authorities can invest in public transport infrastructure – buses, light rail, and dedicated routes for walking and cycling – to make the UK coast more accessible, and to better connect local economies. This investment should also aim to deliver multiple benefits in areas such as better health, reduced congestion, improved air quality, and carbon reductions.

2. The UK coast needs to be accessible, host wildlife-rich seafronts, and support a healthy marine environment. These are assets to tourism and vital for communities to take pride in what their local areas have to offer.

  • Post-Brexit, the government should retain and strengthen the EU’s BWD to have the continent’s cleanest coastline and beaches.
  • There is a wealth of best practice on how local authorities, community groups, and local businesses can work together to keep the coastline, including beaches, clean, healthy, and accessible. Tourism bodies and the relevant government departments should work closely with environmental groups to share best practice information with local areas. For example:
    • Plastic waste can be reduced by installing water fountains near beaches and other tourist spots.
    • Government should build on the success of the plastic bag levy by extending the same principle to other major sources of waste that end up in the sea, for example by implementing a plastic bottle deposit scheme.
    • Traditional and more innovative litter reduction schemes – including beach cleans, adequate recycling bin provision, and ideas such as ‘fishing for litter’ initiatives, can have a big impact (Case study 10).

The land, coastal, and marine planning systems – and their integration – is hugely important in enabling communities and businesses to create healthier and more resilient coastal habitats for both land and seascape (which incorporate the transition between land and sea at the coast, covering the terrestrial and the marine environment). We discuss the planning system further on Section 8.

  • Government should continue to support the creation of a well-managed ecologically coherent network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in UK seas. Newly created areas should follow scientific and expert advice on design, implementation, and management principles. Local areas can lead the creation and management of MPAs close to their coast by bringing together local tourism businesses, scientists, and marine managers to create strategies in line with the particular needs of protected areas and species (Case study 9).
  • There are significant opportunities for communities and local businesses to develop nature-tourism offers, which both financially support, and help to educate and promote, a healthier environment. These include wildlife watching; adventure tourism and even underwater travel (Case study 11). Initiatives like the Hebridean Whale and Dolphin Trust’s Sea Change project, for example, bring together conservation groups, schools, economic sectors, and community groups. Methods like Visitor Payback schemes – where visitors choose to give money (or other help) to assist the conservation or management of places they visit – can engage local businesses to support a community fund, which is then used to reinvest in the assets and resources underpinning these activities.

3. It shouldn’t just be a few shops that benefit from visitors to a place – strong local supply chains retain more value locally. The more locally sourced goods and services that supply the visitor economy the better.

  • Communities, industry, training centres, and government need to play their part in supporting SMEs and entrepreneurs on the coast. SMEs need hands-on and accessible 8 support and training across a range of areas – technology, management, marketing, social media, and resilience to risks, such as climate change. Government should work with industry and training centres to provide this.
  • Local economic strategies should encourage businesses that are actively trying to improve their area and creating positive local economic, social and environmental impact. For example:
    • Incentivising cooperative and socially driven business models (e.g. social enterprises, Community Interest Companies, cooperatives), and encouraging organisations who specifically focus on employing people in particular need of opportunity, such as NEETs (young people Not in Education, Employment, or Training), or who offer training and apprenticeships for local young people.
    • Incentivising services designed to support local attractions and activities, which facilitate visitors’ experience and engagement, and create more local jobs (e.g. canoe hire, boat -based tourism, surfboard hire, diving equipment hire, etc.).
    • Offering networking opportunities (e.g. events and forums), through the local destination management organisation, for businesses in an area to share best practices and develop new ideas and projects.
  • National and local marketing strategies could strengthen coastal paths’ connections with outdoor activities, local wildlife and unique local offers in terms of food, culture, and heritage (Case study 12). Coastal paths – including the soon-to-be completed English coastal path – are a big tourist draw, but there is a lot more to do to make the most of their potential.

 

The impacts of increasing coastal tourism revenue

Estimating the economic impacts of increasing tourism revenue and jobs is complex (Appendix B has a lengthier explanation). This is because there are risks of substantial displacement effects. For example, one coastal area may start attracting visitors who would have visited another coastal area instead, meaning some areas will develop their tourism sectors at the expense of other areas.

That is why it is so important that coastal areas collaborate and work to strengthen each other. Based on the recommendations we have proposed, we have looked at different ways through which net coastal tourism revenue and job opportunities can be enhanced without displacing other UK-based tourism.

It is worth noting that increasing benefits from tourism may take the form of avoided losses. For example, reversing ecological degradation of certain coastal areas may not increase tourism visitors or spend, but may avoid a potential reduction of both. Estimations we provide in this section should only be considered indicative.

Table 2 shows the impacts of respective scenarios. The moderate-growth scenario assumes that coastal tourism revenue growth keeps up with national average (3.8% per year) to 2025. The high-growth scenario measures the impacts of growing coastal tourism revenue by more than UK average tourism growth (5% per year) to 2025.

Table 2: The benefits of increasing coastal tourism revenue and jobs

table2-bnd

Source: NEF based on Business Register Employment Survey, Beatty et al.9, Marine Scotland10 and Deloitte11

*Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

Depending on the scenario, between 92,802 and 128,274 additional jobs could be supported by increasing tourism revenue across the UK coast. 12

energy-para

5. ENERGY

Coastal communities are uniquely placed to benefit from and champion sustainable energy.

Decentralised energy, like solar power, could help ensure local economic resilience; energy from our seas, like offshore wind and tidal power, could generate significant coastal employment; and greater energy efficiency could help reduce energy bills and fuel poverty.

 

Where are we now?

The UK coast and seas host some of the world’s best cleaner energy resources, including onshore, offshore, and marine renewables, as well as innovative technologies, like seawater heating. The UK has an incredible advantage for wind energy; both onshore and offshore wind are already success stories, but unless government renews its commitment to support renewable technologies for the long term, this potential will not fully materialise.

Taken in combination, offshore wind, tidal, and wave energy currently support approximately 22,000 jobs13, and add approximately £2.2 billion to the UK’s national income, on an annual basis. Of these jobs, around 3,500 are likely to be in coastal areas, through operations, maintenance and installation.14 The figures in Table 3 account for indirect supply chain impacts, as well as indirect jobs throughout the economy.

Table 3: MW capacity, Jobs and GVA currently supported by offshore wind, tidal and wave energy

table3-bnd

Source: NEF based on BEIS (a)15, BEIS (b)16 and UK Energy Research Centre

*Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

The UK has strong climate laws. The 2008 Climate Change Act requires the UK to cut carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. But the government is failing to meet this target, and the Paris Agreement, to which the UK is a signatory, raised the bar still further, committing the world to keeping temperature rises to well below 2 degrees Celsius.

Cutting global carbon emissions requires an unprecedented effort. The UK needs to do much more if it is to play its part, meet its targets, and secure a cleaner, more democratic, diverse, and resilient energy system for the future.

  • In practice, the government is still determined to maximise recovery of the UK’s remaining oil and gas resources, with ongoing tax cuts for the North Sea firm and similar pledges to the presumed fracking industry. At the same time, policy and funding support for renewable energy have recently been slashed, with huge impacts on investor confidence and employment in the sector.
  • In the past decade, the UK has seen an incredible surge of community renewable energy projects across the country (Case study 13), proof that there is great appetite in communities to own and manage their energy, and to invest in renewable and cleaner sources. But in October 2015, a survey of 80 community energy groups with membership totalling 11,000 people, revealed that 90% of groups feel that their developing projects are completely or partially at risk. This is a direct result of the government’s cuts to Feed-in Tariff (FIT) subsidies, which, since the scheme began in 2010, had attracted £50 million in capital investment and generated £45 million for local economies. In addition to FIT subsidies, community energy projects will no longer be able to benefit from tax incentives such as Enterprise Investment Schemes, the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme, or the Social Investment Tax Relief, making their investments much less attractive.
  • The UK has one of the poorest quality, energy-inefficient, housing stocks in western Europe, resulting in high rates of winter deaths and an estimated cost of over £1 billion to the NHS, a year.17 Around 46,700 winter deaths since 2010 have been attributed to people living in cold homes. Although the devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales have recently implemented measures to improve energy efficiency, UK government investment has declined considerably since 2013. A 2016 report by the National Audit Office (NAO) showed that, since 2013, there has been a dramatic 60% decline in the delivery of home energy efficiency. Coastal buildings are more likely to be exposed to severe wind-driven rain, and as a result material and fabric damage to buildings in coastal areas can often be higher and more costly.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. The UK should lead the world in offshore and marine renewable energy. Businesses, local authorities, innovators, and communities need a clear commitment from the UK government to long-term innovation funding and to rapidly phase out support and rhetorical backing for fossil fuels.

  • Businesses, local authorities, innovators, and communities need a clear commitment from the UK government that it will support an ambitious target for energy generation, from offshore and marine renewables, by the year 2020, and champion all renewable energy for the long term – well past 2020. An ambitious target to have 15GW of offshore and marine renewables installed by 2020, could add £3.4 billion to the economy and support an additional 34,000 jobs across the UK. This would not only give confidence to investors – large and small – but also to educational institutions, to invest in skills and training.
  • Government policy needs to be backed up by long-term innovation funding commitments (e.g. for research and development, and for test and demonstration sites, such as Wave Hub in the south west of England; Case study 14). Ongoing subsidy will also still be needed: the costs of renewable technologies are falling as deployment has increased, thanks in part to the investor confidence provided by subsidies, but the job is not yet done. Some sectors in particular, for example tidal energy, will continue to need support to encourage cost reductions and innovation. Government should ensure that, post-Brexit, the UK matches or exceeds EU funding streams that would have paid for research and innovation, including Horizon 2020 funding towards Low Carbon Technologies.
  • A new government industrial strategy should specifically include a plan for manufacturing supply chains for renewable systems.

2. Communities and towns should be empowered to become hubs for community-led renewable energy – both community-owned energy and other projects with genuine local benefit. As part of this, the right conditions and proper access to finance are essential.

  • UK government should set targets, and provide financial support (which could include development finance), for community or locally owned energy, including minimum regional targets to encourage a proactive approach by the public sector and communities as investors. Scotland has already set a target of 500MW of renewables to be in community and local ownership by 2020. Community Energy Wales has proposed a target of 100MW for Wales to be installed over the period of 2016–2020. The planning process should be amended accordingly to give a greater emphasis to community owned energy projects with genuine local benefit (Cornwall Council’s planning policy for community energy provides a good model). Government should support pilot innovation projects in decentralised energy systems, such as the ‘low carbon energy systems’ model being developed in Scotland.
  • Local authorities should explore options to set up their own energy suppliers, or partner with one of various new not-for-profit municipal energy suppliers. This can give local areas the levers to reduce energy bills for residents, engage people in the energy system, and steer local infrastructure towards local priorities (e.g. by giving power purchase agreements – PPAs – to local renewable projects).
  • Government must step up its support for local energy supply markets, including by clarifying the requirement by local generators to supply to the national grid. In the UK, the market structure has resulted in a significant ‘leakage’ of energy value out of cities, regions and ultimately the entire country. Enabling new, local business models to be tested that reverse this loss of value is an important next step, to ensure that the value created by locally-generated power is realised and shared locally in the form of lower energy prices, new jobs and skills in a local economy, improved energy security and stronger support for local renewable energy. More investment in back-up power supplies is especially important for coastal communities impacted by flooding events (Case study 15).

3. The UK needs an ambitious programme to insulate homes and buildings, to reduce energy bills, and to cut carbon emissions. Energy efficiency must be a UK national infrastructure priority.

  • Government should commit to ensuring that one million homes a year are insulated to a good standard 18 until the year 2025, with a bias towards those where residents are at greater risk of fuel poverty.
  • New-build standards for homes must be clear, and set to rise over time. Tougher regulation is needed to ensure landlords of private rented accommodation – typically the least well insulated in the UK – bring their properties up to scratch. These rules must be tailored to ensure high-quality retrofit and meaningful action on fuel poverty, given the unique characteristics of coastal properties. Seaside properties have particular characteristics and the environment places unique demands on the fabric of the buildings.
  • Insulating homes to this standard should be treated as one coherent priority national infrastructure project, with a focus on providing the funding (public and private) that is needed to deliver. The Scottish government has already established energy efficiency as a national infrastructure priority. This would empower coastal local authorities and communities to develop programmes of home insulation that work for the particular needs of their housing stock: homes in coastal areas are typically costlier to insulate, due to an excess amount of wind and rain.

 

The impacts of additional renewable energy deployment

At a national level, there is scope for considerably expanding the offshore and marine renewable sector. 19 Table 4 shows how, under an ambitious scenario, additional offshore and marine renewable deployment could add £3.4 billion to the economy and support an additional 34,000 jobs across the UK. If only a fraction of these jobs – namely part of construction and operations and maintenance jobs – will be located in coastal communities, an additional 3,500 coastal jobs could be supported.

Table 4: Benefits of deploying additional marine renewables

table4-bnd

Source: NEF based on BEIS (a)20, BEIS (b)21, UK Energy Research Centre and Fraser of Allander Institute

We also looked at the local benefits of additional renewable energy deployment for coastal Local Authorities in the UK. In addition to their marine renewable potential, coastal communities also benefit from onshore renewables, which currently play a greater role in generating income and supporting employment in coastal areas. Whereas offshore renewables are still highly concentrated in some areas of the country, onshore ones are more decentralised, and can benefit coastal communities around the country right now.

Table 5 shows how doubling the onshore renewable capacity on the coast could lead to the creation of more than 26,000 additional jobs. 22 This assumes the creation of strong local supply chains, which ensure that the majority of employment throughout the construction and operation phases is locally sourced – as proposed by this action plan. 23 Detailed estimations per coastal Local Authority are available in Appendix A.

Table 5: Benefits of deploying additional onshore renewables in coastal Local Authorities

table5-bnd

Source: NEF based on BEIS (a)24, BEIS (b)25 and UK Energy Research Centre

Note: Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row. 26

 

Economic impacts of raising energy efficiency

In England and Wales, more than 16 million households or 71% of total households have poor energy efficiency, defined as an EPC (Energy Performance Certificate) rating of D or below. At the same time, fuel poverty hits approximately 10% of all households. Increasing residential energy efficiency could substantially reduce household energy bills, reduce fuel poverty, and significantly contribute to climate change mitigation – as the residential sector is responsible for 15% of the UK’s carbon emissions.

Although poor energy efficiency of the residential sector is not a coastal-specific problem, it needs to be part of a strategy aimed at rejuvenating coastal communities.

Investing in energy efficiency yields multiple benefits to households and to the economy more widely. A 2015 study estimated that incrementally lifting all UK households to an EPC C rating could create up to 91,000 additional jobs by 2020, notably boosting manufacturing and construction employment. Table 6 presents a breakdown of employment impacts across the UK’s different regions and countries.

Table 6: Employment impacts of bringing residential energy efficiency to EPC C ratings in the UK by 2020

table6-bnd

Source: Washan et al27

Note: Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

Although such a policy would require significant, upfront, publicly supported investment, it has been estimated that the UK economy would actually benefit from £2.47 of additional GDP (national income) for each £1 invested into energy efficiency; and the state would raise £1.27 of tax revenue for each £1 spent.

 

The benefits for coastal communities

We replicated this analysis for coastal Local Authorities only, in order to assess the coastal-specific benefits of increasing residential energy efficiency. A breakdown of EPC ratings by Local Authority was only available for England and Wales. As such, this analysis excludes Scotland and Northern Ireland.

At the moment, 8.4 million homes located in English and Welsh coastal Local Authorities have an EPC rating of D or below. Following the methodology adopted by previous estimations, an ambitious policy would at minimum consist of raising these homes to an EPC rating of C. Such a policy would entail addressing coastal-specific challenges: indeed, dwellings located in coastal areas have distinct weather conditions and this may render efficiency measures, such as insulation or draught proofing, more expensive.

The policy would entail two dimensions:

  • The installation costs of improving EPC ratings for low-income households would be covered by the State of local and regional public authorities.
  • For able-to-pay households, the government would provide a loan subsidy: households would be granted a loan on a 0% interest rate for installation measures and the costs of energy assessments.

On average, the net bill savings of raising homes with an EPC rating of D or below to an EPC rating of C have been estimated to be £245 per household for low-income homes and £216 per household for able-to-pay homes (in £ 2015). These benefits are net of costs, in the following sense: for low-income homes, they account for rebound effects, i.e., the fact that low-income homes may increase their consumption following a reduction of energy bills; for able-to-pay homes, they account for loan repayments.

We find that improving the energy efficiency of residential dwellings in coastal Local Authorities of England and Wales would result in net annual household savings of 1.75 billion in total (Table 7).

Table 7: Total household energy bills savings in coastal Local Authorities, broken down by region

table7-bnd

Source: Source: NEF based on NEED28 and Washan et al29

Note: Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

The wider economic and employment benefits would arise from (a) the additional household consumption arising from energy bills savings and (b) the stimulus impact of investment in energy-efficiency measures – for example, impacts of the construction sector.

In the context of this study, only the former could be measured. In total, we find that the additional consumption arising from energy bills savings – in other words, the value of switching consumption from energy bills to other items – would increase coastal communities GVA by £350.5 million and support more than 10,000 additional jobs in English and Welsh coastal Local Authorities (Table 8). Results broken down by coastal Local Authority are available in Appendix A.

Table 8: Total GVA and employment benefits of improving residential energy efficiency

table8-bnd

Source: NEF based on Source: NEF based on NEED and Washan et al

*Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

These figures include the direct GVA impacts only, as they exclude potential multiplier effects throughout the UK economy. They also exclude the stimulus effects of investing in energy efficiency. As such, they are on the conservative side.

More importantly, improving energy efficiency in fuel-poor homes has multiple knock-on impacts, for example on health. It has been estimated that fuel poverty costs the NHS between £600m and £1 billion per year.

 

Benefits to Scotland and Northern Ireland

This exercise could not be replicated in Scotland and Northern Ireland as we found no publicly available estimates broken down by Local Authority. However, previous studies can be useful in gauging the potential impacts in both countries.

A report commissioned by Consumer Futures Scotland estimates that an aggressive policy to improve the energy efficiency of 835,000 fuel-poor households would create 8,900 jobs and increase Scotland’s GVA by 0.27%.

Another report commissioned by Consumer Futures Scotland considers that the impacts could be higher. It estimates that investing in energy efficiency of fuel-poor homes would increase Scotland’s and Northern Ireland’s output by 0.8%, while increasing employment by 0.8% and 0.9%, respectively. This is equivalent to an additional 20,800 jobs in Scotland and 7,600 jobs in Northern Ireland. However, it was not possible to determine localised impacts, at a coastal Local Authority level.

fisheries-para

6. FISHERIES

Overfishing, and a lack of access to fishing opportunities, have caused the devastation of many fishing communities.

But by respecting the ecological limits of fish stocks and marine ecosystems, and rebalancing the fishing industry, small-scale sustainable fishing can have a bright future – securing employment and the distinctiveness of fishing communities.

 

Where are we now?

In the past, overfishing – or our failure to properly manage this renewable resource – led to unhealthy levels of some fish stocks and the severe depletion of others. Improved fisheries management in recent years has allowed some commercially fished species to increase from very low baselines, but more work is needed.

The impact of the UK’s commercial fishing practices has not only affected fish populations. Beam trawling and scallop dredging, for example, remain widespread fishing activities, which have an impact on the seafloor, damaging sensitive species and habitats.

Inshore fishing is done in coastal waters, mostly by smaller boats, under 10 m in length. The fishing industry is a relatively small sector of the UK economy (0.03% of GDP30), but the significance of the inshore fleet to several coastal communities is much greater.

  • Over 99% of fish landed by <10 m vessels go to UK ports31, which are distributed in communities around the country. A heathy inshore fishing fleet therefore contributes to the economic sustainability of ports all around the country (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Size of UK ports and % of landings by small-scale vessels

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/29/"></iframe>

By New Economics Foundation. Source: Marine Management Organisation – Annual Catch Statistics

  • From ports to entire coastal economies, inshore fisheries support a diverse supply chain, including services to vessels’ maintenance, fish processing, fish-and-chip shops, food markets and restaurants.
  • Finally, the inshore fishing fleet has a social and cultural value, playing a role in attracting tourists to the coast and providing a sense of identity to local people (Case study 16).32

‘In over 25 years in the fishing industry I’ve seen a lot of changes and learnt a lot of lessons – and one thing still sticks out in my mind, big and small boats need each other for the UK to have a balanced fishing industry’ (David Warwick, National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations, NFFO).

But fishing communities in the UK have low expectations for the future. When asked, inshore fishers say their number one priority is maintaining existing jobs. That’s because fishing jobs have been in decline for years – there are now around 12,000 fishers, just one-third the level of the 1940s – and it is very hard to recruit people into the industry.

  • The current system for distributing fishing quotas – or fishing rights –  in the UK has left inshore fishers struggling to maintain their businesses and remain economically viable. Despite supporting the majority of jobs in the fishing industry and representing 77% of the vessels, the inshore fishing fleet only receives 1.5%33 of the share of fishing rights for quota species (Fixed Quota Allocations by tonnage), when compared to boats >10 m.34 While the gross profit margin of the large-scale fleet reached a historic high in the past years, the small-scale fleet is plagued by low profit margins.35
  • In addition, most of the vessels comprising the inshore fishing fleet 36 are not represented by Fish Producer Organisations (POs). They have been mostly excluded from membership, which has effectively distanced them from much of the decision-making around fisheries management. POs are regional trading bodies, mandated by the Common Organisation of the Market (CMO) – a key pillar of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) – to play a key public role in strengthening the role of producers in providing healthy, sustainable, affordable, fishery products. European legislation requires that ‘measures should be taken to encourage the appropriate and representative participation of small-scale producers’ in POs.37

This context of exclusion and an unequal distribution of fishing opportunities has also led to two negative environmental outcomes.

  • With less access to fishing quota, inshore fishers exert higher pressure on non-quota fish species, such as shellfish or sea bass, which can lead to overfishing.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Fishers need healthy fish stocks – today and for years to come. Biodiverse, resilient and responsibly fished marine ecosystems are essential to preserve future fishing opportunities.

  • Government must follow scientific advice to set fishing limits,38 which should be designed to restore and maintain fish stocks at healthy levels.39 All fish caught must be landed.40
  • The government should limit or ban fishing practices that are putting pressure on sensitive habitats, such as beam trawling or dredging, where it has been shown to negatively affect the marine ecosystem.

The benefits of marine biodiversity for fisheries is well-studied, particularly in the growing literature on MPAs. Outside of these more direct effects, there is also the simple fact that the species targeted by inshore fisheries are not static and will be constantly changing. Marine biodiversity is therefore important to allow for targeted harvesting of different species in the future (the ‘option value’). An analysis of landings over the past century shows that not only have the top species changed over time, but these are changing at an increasing rate, and the composition of landings is becoming much more diverse (a larger proportion of landings from outside of the top species).

Figure 6: Composition of landed value by species

figure6

By New Economics Foundation. Source: Thurstan – The effects of 118 years of industrial fishing on UK bottom trawl fisheries; Marine Management Organisation – Annual Catch Statistics. Current (2015) prices applied to historical landings.

  • With the right priority placed on sustainable fishing by governments, new business models can thrive. Fishers, communities, scientists, entrepreneurs and local authorities can work together to develop new ways of improving fishing practices, and the health of their fishery (Case study 17).

2. Smaller boats are the lifeblood of thriving ports – those that are fishing sustainably need to get a larger share of fishing opportunities. The UK currently gives only 1.5% of the national fishing quota 41 to the smallest category of boats, even though they make up over 75% of the vessels.

  • The government must increase the allocation of fishing quota to the smallest (<10 m) vessels by at least 30%, giving them a 1.94% share of the national quota.42 This would improve the economic viability of these fishers significantly and help redress the current imbalance in how fishing opportunities are allocated.
  • A share of the national quota should be set aside for performance-based allocation and facilitating entry for new fishers. This quota will be at the disposal of the government to distribute according to social and environmental criteria and give new fishers the opportunity to get started. France and Denmark have such reserves in place and it would make the UK compliant with Article 17 of the CFP. 

A rebalancing of quota would benefit many coastal communities, as the small-scale sector is spread across many ports around the UK. While there are 300 ports in the UK with over £44,000 in landings, the 10 largest ports land over half the value and the 30 largest ports land over three-quarters. As small-scale vessels tend to fish out of small ports, a rebalancing of quota from large to small vessels would result in a similar shift in port activity and increased landings in the majority of UK ports (Case study 18).

3. Fisheries management and governance need to better support fishing communities. The UK needs a small-scale Producer Organisation (PO), which can give smaller boats a voice and greater control to help rebalance power in the fishing industry.

  • Government should help establish national or regional small-scale fisheries Producer Organisations. This would give all the benefits of PO membership – marketing support and the sharing of fishing opportunities – to smaller boats that are currently excluded from the system. Government must also enforce rules that require all POs to have a transparent and more democratic governance structure.
  • Not all sustainable fisheries are certified. This often happens when smaller, or less profitable, fishing businesses can’t afford the cost of certification by a third party, or because their fishery lacks the data needed for certification. Government should work with industry and others to ensure that smaller businesses, which are fishing sustainably, are able to benefit from seafood labelling schemes.43
  • Stakeholder groups and decision-making bodies (e.g. Inshore Fishery Groups in Scotland, Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Associations in England) should ensure they are democratic and inclusive, and not replicating current inequalities of power. They can reach out to groups, with a stake in fisheries management, which might not have the same level of resources (e.g. to cover travel expenses to attend meetings) as others might do.

 

Economic benefits

Setting limits to fish at Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) by following scientific advice, can ensure: (a) that catches of quota species do not decline in the future; and (b) that catches increase for quota species which are currently overfished.

Using the BEMEF model44, we estimate the economic and employment impacts of fishing at scientific advice, per UK region and country broken down by District Authority. Calculation details are available in Appendix B.

Overall we find that capping fish catch to scientific advice would increase landings by 45%.

This would translate into an additional GVA of approximately £150 million across the UK coast, and would support an additional 2400 FTE jobs. It is worth nothing that these are not necessarily new jobs, but may simply consist in part-time workers and under-employment fishermen moving into full employment.

Figure 7: Landings at MSY per UK country

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/36/"></iframe>

Table 9 presents results broken down by UK countries and regions, while Appendix X provides detailed estimations by District Authority.

Table 9: Economic and employment impacts of fishing at MSY

table9-bnd

 * Including Jersey, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, and unclassified ports

Source: BEMEF, ONS and STECF

These figures account for direct GVA and employment impacts only. When taking into account economic and employment multipliers (knock-on effects on other sectors of the economy through supply chain expenditures) ensuring fishing does not exceed scientific advice could translate into an additional income of £440.5 million and support approximately 5,390additional FTE jobs across the UK.

aqua-para

7. AQUACULTURE

Aquaculture – the farming or cultivation of finfish (like salmon), shellfish (like mussels and oysters), and seaweed – is a growing global industry with great potential in the UK.

This is a sector ripe for innovation, focused on raising environmental standards and encouraging a variety of new business models.

 

Where are we now?

Fish farming is not new. Some forms of aquaculture – such as the cultivation of mussels and oysters, and seaweed farming – are already part of many UK communities’ history and cultural traditions, with practices dating back to Roman times. Over the centuries, societies have used aquaculture to adapt to growing populations and a changing climate.

Aquaculture is one of the world’s fastest growing food sectors, in part because of overfishing and the growing demand globally for a source of protein. The majority of the fish we consume today is farmed rather than caught by fishers in the wild. In terms of value, the UK is now the largest aquaculture producer in the EU, with Scottish Atlantic salmon by far the most valuable product.

Most of the jobs in aquaculture in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland are associated with small businesses, meeting a relatively local demand.

Figure 8: Direct marine aquaculture and total aquaculture employment in coastal Local Authorities by respective UK countries and regions

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/32/"></iframe>

Source: NEF based on Business Register Employment Survey and Seafish

Although aquaculture practices will not be suitable to every place on our coast, many coastal communities are well placed to make the most of different types of aquaculture, and in several different systems, including freshwater and coastal or offshore waters.

  • The UK has great natural conditions to support shellfish aquaculture (including the farming of oysters, mussels, scallops, and clams), which can be farmed using various techniques both offshore and in the intertidal zone. The shellfish sector already contributes around £35.6 million annually to the UK economy.45 Contrary to many types of finfish aquaculture, shellfish and seaweed farming (Case study 19) do not require feed or fertilizer inputs, nor insecticides or antibiotics. That means that these practices can deliver environmental benefits, such as water filtration or food for wading birds.
  • There is a very diverse finfish aquaculture industry in England and Wales, which produces over 30 different species or varieties of fish in both marine and freshwater. In Scotland, the most significant form of finfish aquaculture is the production of Atlantic salmon – Scotland’s largest and main food export (Case study 20). The farming of trout in offshore cages in Scotland is increasing, and could still help grow UK trout production further.
  • There is significant potential for large-scale aquaculture production in offshore waters, where there is less competition for space, as long as it is well planned and regulated. Offshore mussel farming (grown on ropes), for example, is currently being developed in Lyme Bay, southwest of England, and aims to be at full production by 2020. Given that the set-up costs, time, and business risks of this type of project are currently uncertain, the success of this farm, and other similar projects, is likely to act as a catalyst for future opportunities, which could include different species of shellfish and possibly combined with seaweed. But these kinds of innovative projects need support.

Fish are an efficient protein source, requiring lower feed inputs than terrestrial animals. Aquaculture is therefore a more sustainable source of protein than other types of meat, and finfish farming has the potential to help reduce pressure on some wild fish stocks, which are currently overfished.

Although the fishing industry remains a supplier to finfish aquaculture – with fish still being caught to feed farmed carnivorous species, such as salmon aquaculture practices, the aquaculture industry has already dramatically improved the ratio of wild fish needed to produce farmed fish.

The industry needs to be supported to continue to improve its environmental standards. And there are still further opportunities, through innovation, to continue to reduce wider impacts on marine fisheries and ecosystems (Case study 21). Aquaculture innovation could also be integrated with other activities on the coast and offshore.

For example, offshore wind energy platforms could be designed to include improvements in offshore aquaculture, limiting competition for space, and Scotland has been looking at the potential for aquaculture to co-exist with Marine Protected Areas (Case study 22).

In addition to innovation to raise environmental standards, seed supply for shellfish aquaculture (usually juvenile spat, which act much like a plant seed for agriculture), suitable site availability for cultivation, a demand for UK-grown species, and water quality are still key barriers to the development of the aquaculture sector.

  • One thing all aquaculture practices have in common is that they are all dependent on a healthy environment, and in particular good water quality, to succeed. Water management in many parts of the UK suffers from a lack of coordination and clarity over governance and financial responsibility. For example, in some areas, Local Authorities might lack resources to cover the cost of water treatment, and water companies and businesses might not be legally responsible for covering the costs from agricultural pollution or sewage (with combined sewer overflows, or CSOs46, being a significant issue for shellfish farming). As a result, waste generated inland ends up polluting estuaries and the marine environment, affecting water quality negatively, and constraining the development of shellfish aquaculture.
  • It is important to note that much of the volume and value of the fish caught or farmed in the UK is exported – not processed or consumed in the UK. Foreign seafood markets greatly value UK species such as langoustine, crab, and mackerel, while domestic consumers continue to focus mainly on a small range of species such as cod, salmon and haddock. Seafood producers (in particular smaller fishing boats and aquaculture producers) would benefit from increased collaboration with other areas of the coastal economy, including by reconnecting people with the local produce and the need for sustainable healthy food.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Aquaculture innovators need government support and commitment to pioneer new sustainable aquaculture businesses, including funding to support innovation focused on raising environmental standards.

  • Government must set out national policy and guidance for aquaculture, devised together with ecological experts, industry, and the devolved administrations (which have been making progress at different paces).
  • Government should improve the design and management of Several Orders and Regulating Orders, which grant exclusive fishing or management rights within a designated area, for the development of shellfish aquaculture. The security of tenure of Several Orders – which grant legal rights for shellfish farming – could be extended over a period of time, which is appropriate to support small to medium businesses access finance and enable the economic viability of slow growing species of shellfish (Case study 23).
  • Regulators can work with different sectors to implement socio-economic and environmental criteria when leasing aquaculture sites; and make better use of Regulating Orders – which allow management rights to designated natural shellfisheries, usually to a public authority – to enable inshore shellfish management and encourage collaboration and community involvement.47
  • Government can support different groups in disseminating information regarding the feasibility, the legal requirements, and the process of developing aquaculture in different locations, to inform communities of what is and what is not possible in their local area. Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) in England are already leading on this and developing their own aquaculture strategy to help address competition for space. They need government to provide the appropriate funding and resources to continue to develop this work. Information should also be available for communities on what kind of business or co-operative models would best serve their local needs (e.g. Community Interest Companies, co-ops).
  • Government and industry can make best use of available funding, and direct future funding opportunities, to support innovative demonstration sites, which aim to raise environmental standards and production in line with the relevant regulations. Investment should be directed towards activities the UK has a natural advantage in, and which can support a healthier marine environment (e.g. shellfish aquaculture). For example, trialling restocking and restoring native oyster beds, developing offshore aquaculture, increasing carrying capacity for existing shellfish sites, further exploring seaweed production, and raising the environmental standards of finfish aquaculture (with special attention to salmon farming).
  • Communities and businesses can invest in their own hatchery capacity to produce seed for shellfish farm development. But to meet the current needs for wild seed to a range of species, and help develop technology, government should develop a National Seed Strategy. For example, Wales has great opportunities to generate mussel seed, but this potential is not currently being realised.

2. Businesses should come together and collaborate with local authorities to set up local or regional ‘seafood hubs’ that provide support, training, and marketing opportunities to aquaculture producers and fishers, and better connect them with the local economy and communities.

  • Communities and businesses can work with local authorities to set up local or regional seafood hubs, bringing together aquaculture producers, fishers, and the wider local economies. Seafood hubs can build on, and learn lessons from, existing Fisheries Local Action Groups (FLAGs) and other locally led initiatives (Case study 24).48 Seafood hubs would need strong local leadership and could support and help raise awareness for a range of issues:
    • Sharing best practices and making the best use of transferable skills locally.
    • Marketing of local seafood produce to support stronger local and regional supply chains and help grow demand for certified sustainable UK seafood, including by leading initiatives that connect local producers and the local people and businesses (e.g. working with schools, local chefs, tourism businesses and restaurants).
    • Developing processing capacity locally, which can help strengthen supply chains and support more jobs.
    • Training on new skills and adaptation towards more sustainable fishing and aquaculture practices, as well as training on marketing and digital literacy to support producers capture more value, or add value to their products. Government should encourage best use of local skills, and support skills training schemes to allow people wishing to enter the aquaculture sector.49
  • Government should promote improved and more democratic governance of the aquaculture sector, by supporting the development of local and regional governing structures, which help producers and the marketing of more sustainable aquaculture products. For example, POs for small-scale fishers could also support small-scale aquaculture producers.

3. Clean water is essential for fish and shellfish health, and therefore crucial to the success of aquaculture businesses. As part of a wider effort to have the continent’s cleanest coastline and beaches, regulators must ensure the UK meets current EU water-quality targets, and increase, or at least keep the same, targets post-Brexit.

  • Regulators must enforce water-quality targets – such those currently imposed under the EU Water Framework Directive – and ensure that post-Brexit the UK’s water quality standards are increased.
  • Government should increase regulation requiring water companies to introduce more effective, and faster, investment to avoid CSOs. This would lead to more suitable sites50 for high-quality shellfish aquaculture and protect existing shellfish production from closures. It would also benefit bathing waters and recreational activities.

 

Measuring the impacts of the Blue New Deal for aquaculture

The Blue New Deal measures for aquaculture could support the growth of the sector in respective countries and regions of the UK.

Table 10: Direct marine aquaculture and total aquaculture employment in coastal Local Authorities by respective UK countries and regions

table10-bnd

Source: NEF based on Business Register Employment Survey, Marine Scotland and Seafish

Note: Numbers on the table are sometimes rounded, so totals may not exactly reflect the sum of each row.

Based on existing potential growth estimations for different types of aquaculture and for respective countries and regions of the UK (Appendix A) we estimate that aquaculture production could, on average, support 1,618 additional jobs throughout the UK coast over the next five years. Table 10 shows how, when accounting the indirect jobs supported by the sector through supply chains expenditures (spill overs on regional economies), aquaculture on the coast could support an additional 3,560.

planning-para

8. PLANNING FOR COASTAL CHANGE

Communities are all too aware of the constantly changing nature of the sea and the coast. But climate change raises the stakes; as it increases in severity and impact, so will the risks to communities from flooding, coastal erosion, and storm events.

National support is needed to give communities the confidence and the support they need to work together, plan, and innovate around the smartest ways to build resilience to climate change – recognising that it is no longer sufficient, or indeed affordable, to always build ‘wall defences’.

 

Where are we now?

Coastal communities have a unique challenge with regard to planning. They need to manage three distinct spatial areas simultaneously – land, coast, and seas. Climate change adds new difficulties to managing our coast, and failure to innovate today is certain to lead to greater economic, social, and environmental costs in the future.

  • In Scotland, there are over 93,000 residential and commercial coastal properties at risk of flooding and erosion; in England (excluding London), there are over 400,000. These figures, shown in Figure 9, may underestimate the total number of properties located in flood risk areas, and do not account for agricultural land. They are also expected to substantially rise because of climate change, with some assessments considering that the number of properties at risk is likely to triple over the coming decades.
Figure 9: Number of residential and commercial properties at risk of flooding and coastal erosion in coastal Local Authorities, aggregated my selected regions

<iframe width="900" height="800" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" src="https://plot.ly/~neweconomics/34/"></iframe>

Source: NEF based on HR Wallingford51

  • In November 2007, when a tidal surge and high tides resulted in partial flooding of Great Yarmouth on the Norfolk coast, it raised concerns among the town’s business leaders that tourism in the area is vulnerable to climate change. Between December 2015 and January 2016, severe flooding affected the north of England and Wales, and parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland. As a result, the government’s National Flood Resilience Review was launched. The subsequent Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) report found that the government is failing to protect communities at risk.
  • Hundreds of properties in England alone could be lost to coastal erosion by around 2030. But building in at-risk areas has continued. In 2005, the number of buildings at medium to high risk from coastal change in England was 117,000; by 2014 this had grown to 129,000. Local authorities are struggling to deal with the challenges brought by an eroding coast. They have no clear options to support people whose properties are at risk, they lack funding, and coastal adaptation is still not recognised as an option in government policy.

How we manage our coastline plays a crucial role in the resilience of coastal communities, their local economy, and the way that people experience and connect to the coastal and marine environment.

  • The mainstream approach to managing flood and erosion risks on the coast over the years has been to build hard defences (e.g. building a wall). But ‘hard’ defences – compounded with changes in agricultural practices, dredging for raw materials, and the building of new structures on the coastal zone – have caused a decline of natural coastal habitats, both in extent and in quality, since the 1950s.52
  • This approach is no longer sufficient. Natural flood management or ‘soft’ defences (as opposed to ‘hard’ defences) – aimed at supporting diverse and resilient coastal ecosystems – have been proven to provide a long-term, cost-effective defence against coastal erosion and flooding, while also maximising the potential for tourism, leisure, and recreation activities (Case study 25).53 After funding three innovative natural flood management trial schemes, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) found that the total value of the flood risk reduction, and other benefits arising from these projects, substantially outweigh the total costs involved in implementation.54 Coastal wetlands, for example, are valued at £1.5 billion annually in terms of the role they play in buffering the effects of storms and in controlling flooding.55

 

Delivering flood protection and a more resilient coast

Table 11 shows how a bold strategy and investment to reduce flood risk in coastal areas, by protecting residential and commercial properties, would translate into benefits (in terms of avoided losses) worth approximately £185 million a year. These figures assume that avoided costs are spread evenly across time. In the real world, floods are usually sudden episodes, occurring in sparse frequency, and high losses consequently occur during these episodes. For example, the floods of the winter of 2015 in the North of England translated into a £5 billion hit to the economy. Appendix A includes detailed results by coastal Local Authority, and Appendix B describes this analysis in greater length

Table 11: Annualised benefits of investing in flood reduction measures in the UK’s coastal Local Authorities (£ million)

table11-bnd

Source: NEF based on HR Wallingford56 and Environment Agency

There are also wider costs to floods. Avoided losses to households and businesses only represent a small fraction of the benefits of investing in flood protection and prevention of coastal erosion. Flood events entail health costs, negatively affect wellbeing and economic livelihoods, and imply substantial infrastructure losses. Disruptions to businesses and households also entail negative knock-on effects on local and regional economies.

Table 12 outlines the importance of these additional impacts using the example of the 2013/2014 winter floods. What this example illustrates is that the benefits of reducing flood risk through preventative approaches could be considerably higher than the estimate we provide.

Table 12: The wider costs of floods: the example of the 2013/2014 winter floods

table12-bnd

Source: Chatterton et al

  • These benefits could be attained through different approaches in the short term, including traditional methods, such as building hard coastal defences. But a range of organisations and local authorities have been working with the Environment Agency to explore innovative ways to do coastal management, including more natural solutions, looking at opportunities to deliver longer-term, more cost-effective solutions to flood protection.
  • Policy measures and investment in flood prevention have been highly effective in reducing flood risk, where and when they have been systematically implemented. For example, coastal properties located in Shoreline Management Plans sites are 92% less likely to be at risk of flooding, all else being equal. Yet, in publicising the results of the EAC report, its chair Mary Creagh MP said: ‘Local Authorities are not receiving the support they need to prepare for, and mitigate, the impacts of flooding […] it just isn’t good enough for Government to react to flooding events as they occur. Communities at risk deserve certainty from Government.’ The report concludes that a proactive approach to flood management is needed.
  • Litter and pollution are aggregating factors, when managing flood prevention. Coastal communities ultimately pay the price for marine and coastal litter and pollution, which are often a result of a range of activities on land and further upstream: revenue lost through spoilt fish catches; damage to properties and infrastructure; and sewage-related debris on beaches, which can also have adverse effects on tourism.
  • Crucially, government needs to support increase collaboration between different areas and planning spheres (land, coastal, and marine), and allow and support coastal communities and authorities to experiment in more innovative approaches so that they can build the evidence needed to prioritise different types of solutions to protect homes and businesses, keep the coastline clean and healthy, and deliver a range of additional social, economic, and environmental benefits.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Give confidence: coastal areas have unique planning challenges and they need confidence to plan robustly and innovate for the future. A regional planning tier should be re-established to integrate land, coastal, and marine planning, and make it easier for different areas, authorities, and economic sectors to work together.

  • The demographic, ecological, and economic implications of managing the coast, and its hinterland, requires joined-up working. Government should re-establish a regional planning tier that integrates land, coastal, and marine planning, as well as the energy system. A more integrated planning system could better support marine litter and downstream pollution prevention by reducing it at source; pooling investment and encouraging innovation by getting public, private and third sector working closer together in a region; and be more accommodating to new innovative energy projects and decentralised energy systems (in Section 5, under ‘energy’, we explored how the planning process should be amended to give a greater emphasis to community or locally owned energy projects).
  • While there is national policy in place to plan for flood prevention, the number of local flood plans and strategies is worryingly low and the government does not seem to be supporting local authorities to develop them. Investment should be directed to equip local areas with the expertise and capacity they need, including skills training, and resources to coastal managers and engineers on innovative solutions to coastal management. Allocation of funding should prioritise those areas most at risk (e.g. from flooding and erosion), and which lack the appropriate resources (e.g. most deprived areas).

2. Build resilience: Coastal communities need support to face the difficult decisions imposed by a rapidly changing climate and coastline, including relocation. Innovative approaches to adapt to coastal change need to be seen as an equally important measure as just defending the coast, and should be reflected as such in planning policies.

  • Adaptation to climate change needs to be seen as an equal partner with defending the coast, and should be reflected as such in planning policies. This would support local and regional authorities, in charge of coastal management, in implementing the best available solutions for their areas. For that to happen, policy and available funding must be amenable to supporting a range of innovative investments – far more than either building a wall or not doing anything.
  • Government and local authorities should also work with experts to make sure information and help is provided to communities on coastal change and its risks – as well as the options available to address them.
  • A mature discussion is needed that includes the possibility of relocation. Locally, there is a role for influential figures in the community to help tell a new, positive story of adaptation on the community’s own terms, and debate the difficult decisions it may involve.

3. Fund innovation: Experimentation is crucial to help build the evidence needed to prioritise alternative solutions to managing our coast. Government should support coastal areas in funding innovative approaches in their locality.

  • Government must set out a clear, long-term strategy and funding commitment to support more innovative and sustainable approaches to coastal management. Experimentation is crucial to help build the evidence needed to prioritise alternative solutions. Coastal areas need to have greater powers over the decision-making process (including supporting longer time-frames for the delivery of more innovative projects); and to be able to choose and implement the most appropriate solution in their locality.
  • Government should also support and help finance pilot models for help ‘harder to fund’, more innovative approaches. There are already a number of examples of innovative approaches to address flooding and erosion risks (Case study 26). Local areas could set up ‘coastal innovation hubs’ to engage the community, generate ideas, provide leadership, and connect people, expertise and funding to test new approaches.

investing-para

9. INVESTING IN THE COASTAL FUTURE

The UK coast’s potential is not being fulfilled and a transformation is needed. But coastal communities should not be expected to do it all alone.

Government needs to take the coast seriously and invest in building the capabilities of people and communities; in their physical and digital infrastructure; in protecting and enhancing the health of their environment, including the sea; and in education, skills and training.

 

Where are we now?

Communities alone can’t build cross-country railways or raise the level of money needed to restore coastal habitats. Public investment must be available and directed to support a number of the things we have covered in this action plan, to build the capability of places, people and communities on the coast.

  • If communities want to develop an app to support tourists to find local businesses and attractions, they need to count on their areas having mobile coverage and broadband connectivity. Wide Internet access and digital education are non-negotiable if we are to enable communities to take their economies into the future. Fishers, for example, could engage directly with consumers through online auctions, such as Twitter auctions used by Dreckly Fish in the southwest of England.
  • Public bodies are currently lacking the resources they need to enforce regulation and provide essential goods and services, such as public health and education, and a healthy environment. Since many of our environmental and socio-economic challenges require preventive actions, clear and strong regulations and investment in such public areas actually means less costs in the future.

Communities and businesses are often unable to implement projects and innovative ideas because they find it hard to access finance. The 2016 Seafish report on aquaculture, described how, ‘due to long, extended lead times typical of aquaculture development and the relatively short-term view taken by “high street” lenders, financial backing for aquaculture is often hard to secure from the private sector, especially when starting a venture.’ That’s only one example of many from small businesses and community projects which don’t feel supported by our private investment system.

  • The UK is unique among developed economies in being extremely dependent on a small number of large, global commercial banks (the Big 5). These banks are increasingly focused on lending against existing assets, like London housing, and on lending to other financial institutions – not investing into small businesses, affordable housing, or renewable energy. Since the mid-1980s, the share of lending going to non-financial businesses has been falling rapidly, and now represents less than 10% of total lending. Of the business lending that does occur in the UK, most is heavily concentrated in London and surrounding areas. According to the most recent available data, 33% of SME lending goes to London and the South East compared to just 8% to Scotland, 5% to Wales, and 3% to the North East. This has left whole regions starved of investment, as well as worsening the gap between those who control financial assets and those who do not.
  • In countries like Germany, the banking sector plays a more positive role by providing long-term ‘patient capital’ to areas of the economy in most need. In these countries, the banking sector is characterised by an ecosystem of local and national institutions, democratically owned, controlled, and accountable, investing sustainably in local communities. At the local level, networks of local ‘stakeholder banks’ (including public savings banks and co-operative banks) are key providers of patient capital to small businesses and play an important role in regional rebalancing of investment. Since the demutualisation of the 1980s and the wave of mergers and acquisitions that followed, the UK simply does not have these institutions. At national level, investment banks leverage relatively small amounts of public capital into a significant source of strategic and long-term finance. We need to reform our banking system and rebuild a more diverse network of national, local and regional banks (at different scales and levels), which can support communities to invest in what matters to them.

 

What needs to happen next?

1. Government should treat the coast as a unique case in its national approach to both industrial strategy and infrastructure development. There should be a coastal industrial strategy and targeted public investment to build the capabilities of places, people, and communities on the coast.

  • The government is increasingly talking about an industrial strategy, which is yet very unclear. The Blue New Deal offers the building blocks for a comprehensive coastal industrial strategy and an investment plan that cover skills, access to finance, research and innovation, energy, and infrastructure.
    • A coastal industrial strategy should be aimed at developing economic sectors in which coastal areas have a comparative advantage, by investing in building the capabilities of people and communities, strengthening local supply chains, and restoring the natural resources on which their livelihoods ultimately depend;
    • It should be supported by a much needed long-term national skills strategy to support the different sectors of the coastal economy, encompassing all educational levels. A skills strategy could look at supporting a programme of training and apprenticeships with an aim to build skills in coastal areas linked to their economic opportunities, and make employers aware of supply chain and local employment early on, highlighting the need to invest in people, and to build partnerships between industry and local educational institutions;
    • And it should develop a flexible innovation fund to support innovation in different areas, including fisheries management, technology deployment for marine energy, and coastal adaptation projects. Different communities can make the most of a region’s potential and share knowledge, skills, and benefits – a strategy could support the creation of aquaculture zones, marine energy hubs, and regional tourism packages to make the most of one area’s strength in supporting the wider region (e.g. how one popular beach can distribute benefits to an entire region).
  • As part of a wider national infrastructure plan, the National Infrastructure Commission (or the relevant body) should pay particular attention to coastal challenges.
    • Coastal communities have particular infrastructure needs, with remoteness or distance from major cities often putting them at the bottom of the queue for transport improvements or broadband access. Coastal infrastructure needs are not necessarily the same as other places. For example, ‘soft’ defences, which are created through restoring natural coastal habitats, should be considered alongside more typical ‘hard’ defences (Section 8).
    • The National Infrastructure Commission should be instructed to make recommendations to assess and set out a plan to deliver a rapid improvement in the infrastructure of coastal areas, including the retrofitting of buildings on the coast; improvements in mobile phone coverage and broadband connection; improving grid infrastructure to support decentralised energy generation; physical infrastructure; coastal defences; and public transport, including making the most of maritime routes to connect different areas of the coast (e.g. ports, harbours and ferry networks).

2. Local projects need better access to finance than the big banks are able or willing to provide. Government should encourage a more diverse network of local and regional banks – which could be supported by other financial mechanisms – to channel investment into sound local businesses.

  • To support SMEs and wider local economic activity, we need a more diverse network of local and regional banks (at different scales and levels), owned and run for the public benefit, with a mandate to lend and provide banking services locally and accountable to local communities (e.g. public savings banks, mutuals, credit unions, co-ops and Community Development Finance Institutions or CDFIs). This could be achieved through a combination of:
  • Restructuring existing state-owned banks: for example, RBS could be transformed into a network of 130 local banks modelled on the German Sparkassen.
  • Bottom-up initiatives led by communities and/or local authorities to set up new local and regional banks (such as Hampshire Community Bank and the Co-operative Savings Bank Association).
  • Changes to the regulatory framework (e.g. capital requirements, access to the payments system) to make it less difficult for these alternatives to compete with incumbent commercial banks.
  • Changes in practice and regulation are needed to reorient our investment system towards socially useful lending.57 Meanwhile, local authorities can explore the potential to invest a proportion of their pension funds in activities that both benefit the local economy and deliver strong long-term returns to their members. UK savers have over £2 trillion invested in pension funds  – including local authority pension funds. But well-documented problems, including short-termism and perverse incentives for asset managers,  mean that most of this money is channelled into speculative trading of existing assets (such as FTSE 100 shares), rather than providing new finance to productive enterprise. We can learn from initiatives like the Strathclyde New Opportunities Fund, set up to invest in local small businesses. A coastal transformation fund and/or national investment bank could also provide vehicles through which these institutional investors could invest in coastal infrastructure.

makeithappen-para

10. MAKING IT ALL HAPPEN

There has never been a more urgent need for communities to come together. The Brexit vote was a wake-up call: communities left behind by our economy and ignored by our politics are demanding to be heard.

In the face of growing inequality, political and financial instability, and increasingly urgent threats to the natural environment we depend on, we all want to see a new economy that benefits areas of the country whose potential is not being fulfilled. This action plan is just the beginning, but it offers great potential to support an exciting transformation on the UK coast. Making it all happen will require working at different levels: communities, businesses and investors, and national and devolved governments.

The coast is dotted with great ideas and projects – from sustainable shellfish farming projects in Wales and Somerset, to a world-leading hub for marine renewable energy in Orkney. Our challenge now is to build on those ideas and help them grow to become opportunities for fundamental, wide-scale change.

To communities: We are inviting coastal communities and coastal regions to continue to build on this work, to lead the development of their own ‘deals’, bringing together community groups, coastal and marine economic sectors, local authorities, environmental groups, and coastal partnerships. The New Economics Foundation will continue to work with coastal communities from all regions of the UK, to help them reinvent and take control of their local economies, and to speak with a louder voice in government and parliament.

To investors: There is huge potential for supporting the new businesses and innovative projects on our coast. These projects need the right opportunities and support to develop into new businesses and innovative ventures.

A starting point could be to support coastal and marine innovation hubs, which would provide the facilities that entrepreneurs, creatives, campaigners, and small organisations need to generate ideas, inspire local dynamism, and create jobs, while protecting and reimagining the coast and the sea. A coastal transformation fund can provide vehicles through which institutional investors could support coastal economies.

To governments: The Blue New Deal offers the building blocks for a coastal industrial strategy, which could play a key role in helping to rebalance our economy and begin to close the gaps between the UK’s marginalised and well-off regions and communities.

CONCLUSION

Whatever the future of the UK coast is, it needs to be determined by coastal communities themselves. And they are already doing incredible things.

But if we want more communities, which have been locked into a story of negativity and decline, to have the energy and the optimism to rebuild their local areas, then we need to build a political and economic structure that inspires people to reimagine their future, and provides them with the tools they need to act on it.

We also need a more positive and inclusive narrative of change to help communities face the challenges ahead.

Coastal communities can’t be expected to do it all alone. The complex challenges afflicting many communities and their environment have not developed overnight. Nor are they all particular to the coast.

Yet, everywhere we look on the UK coast, people are working hard to build a better future. From residents in St Ives coming together to exercise real democracy and tackle their common issues with second-house ownership, to hundreds of community energy schemes up and down the country, demonstrating the appetite for people to own their energy and make it cleaner for a more resilient future; from small scale fishers working together with their local authorities, environmental NGOs and tourism businesses to protect fishery nursery grounds; to communities coming together to drive management of their seas to the benefit of future generations.

dscf4329

 

There are also universities and businesses working to develop the technology to harness renewable energy from our seas; and coastal partnerships led by people who are passionate about their areas, bringing those who share a stake in the coastal and marine environment closer together to develop ideas and solutions. Government agencies are also working alongside environmental NGOs and communities, to deliver innovation in coastal management and community regeneration; and coastal businesses, like the Venus Company in Devon, are leading on environmental protection whilst making the most of the UK’s beautiful beaches.

There are a lot of people already working on all the issues we have covered. The many stories of success are proof that the vision is possible: to balance the social and economic needs of communities with those of our coastal and marine environment; to support more and better jobs, increased wellbeing, and economic sustainability, as well as more thriving wildlife and natural ecosystems.

“These are just some of the many good examples of how that is being achieved, but they are still far too few, not enough to deliver the real transformation needed.”

The mission of this action plan is to strengthen coastal areas’ existing calls and support the incredible work happening in the UK towards these goals. The unique contribution from the Blue New Deal is that it recognises that one sector can help another thrive, unleashing multiple economic benefits.

Change is a natural constant. The planet, our lives, and we as individuals, are constantly changing. For change to deliver positive outcomes, we need to take control and identify opportunities.

Over the past decades, marginalised areas of the UK have experienced change in a negative way. Changes in the political and economic system have brought unemployment, poorer quality of life, and increased environmental threats.

In addition to rebalancing wealth and power, we need a more positive and inclusive narrative of change to help communities take control over their own future. We need, for example, a more honest debate about climate change and the difficult decisions that are taking place on our coast, as our coastline changes faster and in more extreme ways.

People need increased support to positively embrace and adapt to those changes. They should be able to see change as an opportunity to reinvent their local economies and communities towards increased resilience, inclusion and happiness.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This action plan has been produced in partnership with a range of individuals and organisations working across the various themes covered, and with a particular interest and expertise in the coastal context in the UK. We have also engaged in dialogue with different government departments and devolved administrations. The Foundation would like to thank, in particular, the over 600-people strong network – who are just too many to mention here – for their invaluable contribution, excitement about this work and patient engagement and support. This work, as part of the Blue New Deal initiative, has been kindly supported by The John Ellerman Foundation and The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. However, the views expressed here are those of the authors alone; final analysis and recommendations are by the New Economics Foundation and do not necessarily reflect the views of the partners, contributors or the policies of the funding bodies. Thank you also to the entire New Economics Foundation team, with special contributions by David Powell, Griffin Carpenter, Chris Williams, Stephen Devlin, Richard Kleinjans, Christine Berry, Alice Martin, Annie Quick, Laurie Macfarlane, Marc Stears, Anke Winchenbach, Elizabeth Cox, Rachel Laurence and Aniol Esteban.


  1. This would be brought about by increasing renewable energy, aquaculture and tourism revenue in coastal Local Authorities; while investing in energy efficiency, ensuring sustainable fisheries, and reducing coastal erosion and flood risks resulting from climate change.

  2. Community economic development (CED) describes a process of economic development within a specific geographic area, to make the economy in that area work well for that community. The process is led by people living, working, and running businesses in that area. As an approach, it tackles environmental, social, and economic issues as being interconnected, and recognises the importance of connections between the local, regional, and national layers of the economy. It builds on the knowledge, experience, and resources in that community, to identify and maximise the local economic opportunities available.

  3. Definition of coastal tourism sectors: We include the following economic sectors in our analysis of jobs and GVA:  Accommodation services; restaurants, bars, and cafés; recreation activities; and heritage activities. Data at a Local Authority level was obtained through the Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES).

  4.  The Foundation’s economic analysis. To determine the scale of the coastal tourism economy in the UK, we combined data from the Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES) and the Office for National Statistics (ONS), to determine employment and Gross Value Added (GVA) impacts, respectively. The geographical scales of analysis are both Local Authorities and major and minor seaside towns and resorts. The now abandoned Annual Business Inquiry (ABI) survey was used to examine key trends in the coastal tourism economy, while Tourism Intelligence Unit data was used for examining visitor numbers and spend.

  5. Beatty C, Fothergill S, Gore T and I Wilson (2010), The Seaside Tourist Industry in England and Wales Employment, economic output, location and trends, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR), Sheffield Hallam University. Available at:  https://www4.shu.ac.uk/research/cresr/sites/shu.ac.uk/files/seaside-tourist-industry-england-wales.pdf

  6. LUC (2015), Scottish Marine Recreation and Tourism Survey 2015, report commissioned by Marine Scotland. Available at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0049/00497904.pdf

  7.  ‘A 2016 report by the National Coastal Tourism Academy outlines multiple opportunities to build a more thriving visitor economy on the coast – including increasing off-peak visitors, developing health and wellness products, reinventing the coast as a place for business events, and raising awareness among younger people (under-35s) and international visitors’ (2016 NCTA Coastal Tourism report).

  8. Research (NCTA) has shown that business support and training initiatives for coastal tourism businesses must be bite-sized, available online, or run at times to accommodate different types of businesses. Support should also be available to help businesses improve the quality of tourism jobs on offer, for example through greater employee engagement, and the development of career progression pathways.

  9. Beatty C, Fothergill S, Gore T and I Wilson (2010), The Seaside Tourist Industry in England and Wales Employment, economic output, location and trends, Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research (CRESR), Sheffield Hallam University. Available at:  https://www4.shu.ac.uk/research/cresr/sites/shu.ac.uk/files/seaside-tourist-industry-england-wales.pdf

  10. LUC (2015), Scottish Marine Recreation and Tourism Survey 2015, report commissioned by Marine Scotland. Available at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0049/00497904.pdf

  11. Deloitte and Oxford Economics (2013), Tourism, Jobs and Growth: the economic contribution of tourism to the UK economy, report commissioned by Visit Britain. Available at: https://www.visitbritain.org/sites/default/files/vb-corporate/Documents-Library/documents/Tourism_Jobs_and_Growth_2013.pdf

  12. The Foundation simulated the impacts of a combination of possible coastal tourism growth scenarios to gauge revenue and employment impacts, by combining a range of tourism spend and visitor number forecasts. Improvements in local supply chains and local money retention could not be modelled due to a lack of solid data. All scenarios were modelled against current baseline growth trend in respective coastal areas, to measure what the impacts of the measures proposed by the Blue New Deal could have over and above what would have happened anyway.

  13. Full-Time Equivalent (FTEs).

  14. Not all these jobs accrue to coastal regions but many of them do. For example, both operations and maintenance and some installation jobs are likely to be sourced locally. We estimate that these may represent about 16% of total jobs supported. In other words, marine renewables are likely to be currently supporting about 3,500 jobs in coastal areas across the UK.

  15. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable Energy Planning Database (REPD)

  16. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable electricity capacity and generation, Energy Trends 2016

  17. Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, 2015.

  18. At least an Energy Performance Certificate Band C

  19. Based on existing information around the future deployment plans in different regions of the UK, and estimations of potential, we measured the economic and employment impacts that different scenarios would imply. DECC considers that offshore wind capacity could be doubled by 2020, while NREAP considers that reaching a 12GW capacity by 2020 is attainable. Independent research goes even further; a study by the University of Strathclyde considers that the offshore renewable sector as a whole – including wave – could effectively triple in size and reach a capacity of 15GW by 2020.

  20. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable Energy Planning Database (REPD)

  21. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable electricity capacity and generation, Energy Trends 2016

  22. We estimate that onshore renewables, including wind, solar PV, small and large-scale hydro, currently support up to 26,000 jobs and up to £1.6 billion worth of income in the UK’s coastal Local Authorities.

  23. To support many more jobs and economic activity in coastal areas, growing coastal Local Authorities’ onshore renewable potential needs to be done in combination with strengthening local supply chains, as proposed by the Blue New Deal. NEF modelled the additional job and income creation that additional renewables deployment could bring to coastal communities, as measured at a coastal Local Authority level.

  24. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable Energy Planning Database (REPD)

  25. Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Renewable electricity capacity and generation, Energy Trends 2016

  26. These figures do not account for indirect jobs and GVA supported, for example manufacturing value added and jobs supported through supply chain expenditures. Indeed, those are usually not located in areas of operations; however, attempting to develop local supply chains and attract renewable manufacturing or assembly plants could contribute to a significantly higher amount of jobs in coastal Local Authorities.

  27. Washan P, Stenning P and M Goodman (2014), Building the Future: Economic and fiscal impacts of making homes energy efficient, VERCO and Cambridge econometrics, Report commissioned by the Energy Bill Revolution, E3G.

  28. National Energy Efficiency Data-framework (2015), Ad hoc requests 2014-2015: Energy efficiency ratings (LSOA level). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-energy-efficiency-data-framework-need-ad-hoc-requests-2014

  29. Washan P, Stenning P and M Goodman (2014), Building the Future: Economic and fiscal impacts of making homes energy efficient, VERCO and Cambridge econometrics, Report commissioned by the Energy Bill Revolution, E3G.

  30. Foundation calculation from MMO and ONS data.

  31. Foundation calculation from MMO and ONS data.

  32. Ford, A.E.S. & Acott, T. (Eds). (2015). Responsible Tourism: a guide for tourism and sustainability in small-scale fisheries and agri-food. TourFish cluster of the INTERREG IV A 2 Seas Programme. London: University of Greenwich

  33. Our calculations show that by tonnage, 98.55% of FQAs go to the sector and just under 1.5% to the small-scale and non-sector.

  34. Foundation calculations from MMO quota allocation data.

  35. Annual Economic Report on the EU Fishing Fleet (2016).

  36. 56 out of 4281 <10 m vessels are members of POs. vs 802/1252 >10 m. Source: MMO, 2016 vessel list

  37. The CMO (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1424680663995&uri=CELEX:32013R1379): whereas: (8) Measures should be taken to encourage the appropriate and representative participation of small-scale producers.

  38. (i.e., ICES)

  39. (above BMSY)

  40. Maintain the obligation to land all catches (i.e., landing obligation) in order to incentivise increased selectivity.

  41. This figure is for 2014 and will vary slightly in other years. Calculated from MMO, Fisheries quota allocations 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fisheries-quota-allocation-2014 

  42. As applied to 2014. This will vary in other years. See Case study 22 for details and methodology.

  43. Seafish’s Project Inshore is tackling some of these issues, by gathering better data on the sustainability of small-scale fisheries in England. Its second phase, Project Inshore II, could be promoted to ensure that those fisheries, which can be certified, get access to funding to certify their fishery.

  44. BEMEF is currently used in the Annual Economic Report on the EU Fishing Fleet for short-term projections on the economic performance of EU fishing fleets. To model fleet performance at a state of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), estimates of MSY biomass and yield are taken from scientific literature and converted into a level of total allowable catch. Wherever possible, multi-species estimates of yield are used, and where no estimate is available, the current total allowable catch is used. This means that the MSY estimates are a significant underestimate of potential. As the MMO publishes data on landings by port broken down by gear and length, the economic performance of fleets of a particular gear and length can be linked to particular ports. This linkage allows the potential fishing gains at MSY to be distributed across UK ports. While a vessel’s home port may differ from where it lands its catch, there is a high degree of correlation between the main ports of landings and for docking (from the European Fleet Register) so economic gains can safely be linked to the location of landings while capturing secondary benefits. More information on BEMEF can be found at www.fisheriesmodel.org

  45. Lee Cocker – Aquaculture Manager, EAS 2016, Edinburgh, 23rd Sept., 2016, Progress and Ambitions of the UK Shellfish Industry, Seafish PowerPoint presentation.

  46. Sewage contamination from combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and diffuse pollution remain two of the most serious water quality threats for shellfish waters, but also at popular bathing waters, surf spots and recreational coastal sites right around the UK. There are approximately 31,000 CSOs around the UK, many of which are completely unregulated. This is putting untreated human sewage effluent directly into some of the UK’s shellfish waters, bathing beaches and surf spots, with the associated health and environmental risks that it carries with it. Source: Surfers Against Sewage.

  47. ‘Under Section 155 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (MaCAA), IFCAs may make byelaws for the management of inshore fisheries for their respective districts46, 47. These byelaws allow the IFCAs to limit, condition, and charge for licenses to utilise shellfisheries within their district. Byelaws apply to everyone in a district and can give a sense of fairness and equality to all stakeholders; exceptions might occur where not all can access a limited number of permits in a fishery, but the selection criteria should be consistent. A statutory equivalent in Scotland is the five new Regional Inshore Fisheries Groups (RIFGs).’ http://www.seafish.org/media/publications/FINAL_SRO_REPORT_-_AUGUST_2016_FINAL.pdf

  48. Such as the Sustainable Fish Cities initiative; and Community Supported Fisheries (CSFs) – examples from the USA and the UK – which are run for public returns. Fisheries Local Action Groups (FLAGs) are community-led local development groups that were set up in the UK, and around Europe, using funding from the EMFF (European Maritime and Fisheries Fund).

  49. LANTRA has the National Occupational Standards for Aquaculture, and these form the basis of e.g. apprenticeships. But aquaculture apprenticeships are only currently available in Scotland, and are dominated by finfish aquaculture.

  50. Targets should aim for ‘Class A’ sites, which is the highest standard according to the Food Standards Agency.

  51. HR Wallingford (2015) for the ASC: Update analysis of the number of properties located in areas at risk of flooding and coastal erosion in England. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/hr-wallingford-2015-for-the-asc-update-analysis-of-the-number-of-properties-located-in-areas-at-risk-of-flooding-and-coastal-erosion-in-england/

  52. UK National Ecosystem Assessment. (2011) The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the Key Findings. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Retrieved from http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/natural/documents/ UKNEA_SynthesisReport.pdf

  53. UK National Ecosystem Assessment. (2011) The UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis of the Key Findings. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Retrieved from http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/natural/documents/ UKNEA_SynthesisReport.pdf

  54. Pilkington, M1., Mount, D1., Walker, J1., Allott, T2., Ashton-Waird, R3., Evans, M2., Hammond, G4., Huggett, D5., Nisbet, T6., Rose, S7. (2015) Natural Flood Management; an appraisal of current status. Moors for the Future Partnership, Edale, Derbyshire, UK. http://www.moorsforthefuture.org.uk/sites/default/files/Appraisal%20of%20the%20three%20UK%20multi-demonstration%20projects.pdf

  55. Pape, D. & Johnston, J. (December 2011). Securing the value of nature in Kent. Retrieved from http://www. kentbap.org.uk/images/uploads/Securing_the_Value_of_Nature_in_Kent.pdf

  56. HR Wallingford (2015) for the ASC: Update analysis of the number of properties located in areas at risk of flooding and coastal erosion in England. Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/hr-wallingford-2015-for-the-asc-update-analysis-of-the-number-of-properties-located-in-areas-at-risk-of-flooding-and-coastal-erosion-in-england/

  57. Berry, C. (2011). ‘Protecting Our Best Interests: Rediscovering Fiduciary Obligation’. FairPensions (now ShareAction)