Green Shores 2020: Impact, Value, and Lessons Learned

The Green Shores project undertaken by ESSA comprised four inter-related activities: scoping, social impact analysis, triple bottom line evaluation and an assessment of the scaling potential of Green Shores to the Atlantic region. The project ran from April 2018 – March 2020. This project uses two approaches to understand the impact and value of the Green Shores program in BC: social impact analysis and triple bottom line evaluation (also referred to as extended social cost-benefit analysis). Literature reviews and qualitative research with 13 stakeholders, including representatives from local governments, shoreline professionals and funders, informed a “theory of change” for Green Shores in BC that lays out the hypothesis for achieving social impact, using a framework that links activities and inputs to outputs, outcomes and impact. To understand the benefits the Green Shores approach to shoreline development provides to society using monetary metrics, ESSA developed a methodology grounded in the valuation of ecosystem goods and services and applied it to three Green Shores for Shoreline Development1 (GSSD) case study sites: New Brighton Park, Jericho Beach Park and Riverbend Business Park. This assessment monetizes case study sites’ improvements in generating habitat services, cultural services (mainly recreation) and regulatory services (nutrient cycling, waste processing, carbon storage and flood protection) and assesses the wider impacts of Green Shores program expenditures on BC’s economy. To do this, two different economic tools were employed: cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and economic impact assessment (EIA).

The purpose of the project highlighted in this case study was to a) evaluate the effectiveness and success of the Green Shores program in British Columbia, b) provide suggestions for improving uptake of the program in BC, and c) assess the possibility of scaling Green Shores to Atlantic Canada. Given that, recommendations for future action are included in the report; however, these actions do not represent implemented actions, but rather are actions that provide strategic direction in achieving the main objectives of this report (i.e., improve uptake of the program). Recommendations include: 1. Get the incentives right: Adoption of Green Shores techniques is voluntary at present, yet the original intent was to link certification to an incentive. Stakeholders provided a few examples to explore including payment for ecosystem service schemes and user-pay models that link implementation of best management practices on one’s property to utility bill discounts; 2. Link to other change-makers in the system: Initiatives and the community of practitioners promoting the adoption of nature-based approaches in meeting development challenges is growing in Canada; 3. Further target education and outreach in response to apparent barriers and opportunities: Stakeholder interviews and focus groups revealed the importance of i) mobilizing contractors as change agents and ii) raising awareness of the full range of benefits provided by Green Shores projects among provincial actors; and 4. Enhance learning and effectiveness monitoring (i.e., clarify priorities for implementation of Green Shores projects and use priority site archetypes to inform a targeted grant request and call for proposals).

The theory of change suggests that if awareness of Green Shores approaches and their benefits among municipal staff, local government decision makers, stewardship groups and shoreline professionals as well as knowledge, skills and confidence to explain and implement Green Shores practices are built and access to funding and expertise on where and when to apply Green Shores are in place then mainstreaming of Green Shores concepts and requirements into existing regulatory and planning instruments as well as university curricula will increase, as will trust and collaboration across disciplines. With an enabling institutional environment, enhanced capacity to support adoption of Green Shores and active Green Shores champions operating at the community level, the uptake of Green Shores will increase. Widespread uptake of Green Shores approaches in BC leads to demonstrable benefits for waterfront property owners and coastal environments, including protection from erosion, flooding and sea-level rise; enhanced status and reputation; improved functioning of coastal processes; decreased coastal pollution; and reduced cumulative impacts on shoreline ecosystems. Economic analysis further supports the merits of investing in Green Shores. The net annualized benefits (NAB) of the program are about $6.1 million (2018 dollars), with improved provision of habitat services and cultural services accounting for over 90% these benefits. The corresponding benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is about 7.1. Both indicators suggest investments by the Green Shores for Shoreline Development program represent an economically efficient use of scarce resources. Over the three restoration and development projects, social welfare was increased by about $7.10 for each $1 invested by the Green Shores program.

In addition to the recommended actions outlined in the ‘Implementation’ section, it is also recommended to enhance monitoring requirements for the selected Green Shores projects so that the performance of these projects can be assessed over time. A future goal involves the intention to scale this project to Atlantic Canada; a strategic approach in doing so is outlined within the project report, the actions of which fall within four broad strategies: 1. Ground Truth the Theory of Change for Green Shores Atlantic; 2. Identify and Develop Capacity of a Backbone Organization; 3. Put in place enablers for Green Shores deployment and adoption; and 4. Understand target audiences.

Link to Full Case Study

Additional Resources

• Best Practices and Resources on Climate Resilient Natural Infrastructure
• Canadian Cost-benefit Analysis Guide: Regulatory Proposal
• Green Shores Programs
• The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity (TEEB)