User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A
Anderson, R.B.; Carter, O.T.; Pearce, K.G., and Capdevila, L.A., 2022. User perceptions of the Pleasure Point seawall in Santa Cruz county, California, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 38(4), 828–843. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Communities up and down the California coast face the l...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of coastal research 2022-07, Vol.38 (4), p.828-843 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 843 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 828 |
container_title | Journal of coastal research |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | Anderson, Ryan B. Carter, Olivia T. Pearce, Katie G. Capdevila, Liria A. |
description | Anderson, R.B.; Carter, O.T.; Pearce, K.G., and Capdevila, L.A., 2022. User perceptions of the Pleasure Point seawall in Santa Cruz county, California, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 38(4), 828–843. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Communities up and down the California coast face the looming threat of rising seas, coastal erosion, and shoreline retreat. In this paper, the researchers use anthropological methods and a user survey to explore the social dimensions of the Pleasure Point seawall to assess some of the longer-term implications of coastal armoring in California and the U.S. more broadly. The users surveyed had an overall positive to neutral opinion of a coastal retention structure (in this case a seawall). About 35% had positive opinions of the seawall, 30% had neutral opinions, and 18% had negative opinions. While these results trend positive to neutral, they also reveal divided community opinions about and experiences with the seawall. The open-ended portions of the survey, combined with participant observation and follow-up interviews, add another qualitative dimension to this data. The participants in the survey and research expressed concerns about engineering and ecological issues, whether questions about how long the structure will last or observations/opinions about its impacts on local surf conditions, backwash, and loss of beach sand. Participants also expressed concerns about the social impacts of the seawall, including access issues, crowds, growing risks, problems with increasing numbers of inexperienced users, tourism growth, and fears about gentrification and local displacement. Combined, these insights illustrate how seawalls and other coastal armoring structures can and should be understood as engineered structures with critical social impacts that intersect with their physical, material, and environmental impacts. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-21-00139.1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2686564233</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48676920</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48676920</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b227t-bc945bf3536a04e22f23cd6cda00f6a6452f2a9a75ef2b0234ebb9dff3576b143</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkN1LwzAUxYMoOKd_ghLwdan5ato-jm5-Mdiwm68h7RLsqM1MWmT-9UYre_bpXu45v3PhAHBDcEQJoXfP-XJarF_mBZohShDGhGUROQEjEscExZiJUzDCCc8Qpjg9Bxfe74JJpDwZgdeN1w6utKv0vqtt66E1sHvTcNVo5XsXFlu3HSy0-lRNA-sWFqrtFMxd_wVz27fdYQJz1dTGurZWE7iJimh6Cc6Mary--ptjsLmfr_NHtFg-POXTBSopTTpUVhmPS8NiJhTmmlJDWbUV1VZhbIQSPA4Xlakk1oaWmDKuyzLbmkAkoiScjcHtkLt39qPXvpM727s2vJRUpCIWnDIWXGJwVc5677SRe1e_K3eQBMufDuWxQzkLB_nboSQBvB7Ane-sO1I8FYnIKA46H_SytrbV_439Bpenfr8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2686564233</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Anderson, Ryan B. ; Carter, Olivia T. ; Pearce, Katie G. ; Capdevila, Liria A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Ryan B. ; Carter, Olivia T. ; Pearce, Katie G. ; Capdevila, Liria A.</creatorcontrib><description>Anderson, R.B.; Carter, O.T.; Pearce, K.G., and Capdevila, L.A., 2022. User perceptions of the Pleasure Point seawall in Santa Cruz county, California, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 38(4), 828–843. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Communities up and down the California coast face the looming threat of rising seas, coastal erosion, and shoreline retreat. In this paper, the researchers use anthropological methods and a user survey to explore the social dimensions of the Pleasure Point seawall to assess some of the longer-term implications of coastal armoring in California and the U.S. more broadly. The users surveyed had an overall positive to neutral opinion of a coastal retention structure (in this case a seawall). About 35% had positive opinions of the seawall, 30% had neutral opinions, and 18% had negative opinions. While these results trend positive to neutral, they also reveal divided community opinions about and experiences with the seawall. The open-ended portions of the survey, combined with participant observation and follow-up interviews, add another qualitative dimension to this data. The participants in the survey and research expressed concerns about engineering and ecological issues, whether questions about how long the structure will last or observations/opinions about its impacts on local surf conditions, backwash, and loss of beach sand. Participants also expressed concerns about the social impacts of the seawall, including access issues, crowds, growing risks, problems with increasing numbers of inexperienced users, tourism growth, and fears about gentrification and local displacement. Combined, these insights illustrate how seawalls and other coastal armoring structures can and should be understood as engineered structures with critical social impacts that intersect with their physical, material, and environmental impacts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0749-0208</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1551-5036</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-21-00139.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Fort Lauderdale: Coastal Education and Research Foundation</publisher><subject>20th century ; Backwash ; Breakwaters ; coastal armoring ; Coastal engineering ; Coastal erosion ; Coastal inlets ; Coastal research ; Coastal structures ; Coasts ; Dimensions ; Environmental impact ; Public access ; Qualitative analysis ; Railroads ; Sand & gravel ; Sea walls ; Seawalls ; Shoreline protection ; Shorelines ; Social factors ; Social impact ; social impacts ; Soil erosion ; Surveying ; Surveys ; Tourism</subject><ispartof>Journal of coastal research, 2022-07, Vol.38 (4), p.828-843</ispartof><rights>Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2022</rights><rights>Copyright Allen Press Inc. Jul 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b227t-bc945bf3536a04e22f23cd6cda00f6a6452f2a9a75ef2b0234ebb9dff3576b143</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48676920$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48676920$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27903,27904,57995,58228</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Ryan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Olivia T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Katie G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Capdevila, Liria A.</creatorcontrib><title>User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A</title><title>Journal of coastal research</title><description>Anderson, R.B.; Carter, O.T.; Pearce, K.G., and Capdevila, L.A., 2022. User perceptions of the Pleasure Point seawall in Santa Cruz county, California, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 38(4), 828–843. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Communities up and down the California coast face the looming threat of rising seas, coastal erosion, and shoreline retreat. In this paper, the researchers use anthropological methods and a user survey to explore the social dimensions of the Pleasure Point seawall to assess some of the longer-term implications of coastal armoring in California and the U.S. more broadly. The users surveyed had an overall positive to neutral opinion of a coastal retention structure (in this case a seawall). About 35% had positive opinions of the seawall, 30% had neutral opinions, and 18% had negative opinions. While these results trend positive to neutral, they also reveal divided community opinions about and experiences with the seawall. The open-ended portions of the survey, combined with participant observation and follow-up interviews, add another qualitative dimension to this data. The participants in the survey and research expressed concerns about engineering and ecological issues, whether questions about how long the structure will last or observations/opinions about its impacts on local surf conditions, backwash, and loss of beach sand. Participants also expressed concerns about the social impacts of the seawall, including access issues, crowds, growing risks, problems with increasing numbers of inexperienced users, tourism growth, and fears about gentrification and local displacement. Combined, these insights illustrate how seawalls and other coastal armoring structures can and should be understood as engineered structures with critical social impacts that intersect with their physical, material, and environmental impacts.</description><subject>20th century</subject><subject>Backwash</subject><subject>Breakwaters</subject><subject>coastal armoring</subject><subject>Coastal engineering</subject><subject>Coastal erosion</subject><subject>Coastal inlets</subject><subject>Coastal research</subject><subject>Coastal structures</subject><subject>Coasts</subject><subject>Dimensions</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Public access</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Railroads</subject><subject>Sand & gravel</subject><subject>Sea walls</subject><subject>Seawalls</subject><subject>Shoreline protection</subject><subject>Shorelines</subject><subject>Social factors</subject><subject>Social impact</subject><subject>social impacts</subject><subject>Soil erosion</subject><subject>Surveying</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Tourism</subject><issn>0749-0208</issn><issn>1551-5036</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkN1LwzAUxYMoOKd_ghLwdan5ato-jm5-Mdiwm68h7RLsqM1MWmT-9UYre_bpXu45v3PhAHBDcEQJoXfP-XJarF_mBZohShDGhGUROQEjEscExZiJUzDCCc8Qpjg9Bxfe74JJpDwZgdeN1w6utKv0vqtt66E1sHvTcNVo5XsXFlu3HSy0-lRNA-sWFqrtFMxd_wVz27fdYQJz1dTGurZWE7iJimh6Cc6Mary--ptjsLmfr_NHtFg-POXTBSopTTpUVhmPS8NiJhTmmlJDWbUV1VZhbIQSPA4Xlakk1oaWmDKuyzLbmkAkoiScjcHtkLt39qPXvpM727s2vJRUpCIWnDIWXGJwVc5677SRe1e_K3eQBMufDuWxQzkLB_nboSQBvB7Ane-sO1I8FYnIKA46H_SytrbV_439Bpenfr8</recordid><startdate>20220701</startdate><enddate>20220701</enddate><creator>Anderson, Ryan B.</creator><creator>Carter, Olivia T.</creator><creator>Pearce, Katie G.</creator><creator>Capdevila, Liria A.</creator><general>Coastal Education and Research Foundation</general><general>Allen Press Publishing</general><general>Allen Press Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220701</creationdate><title>User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A</title><author>Anderson, Ryan B. ; Carter, Olivia T. ; Pearce, Katie G. ; Capdevila, Liria A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b227t-bc945bf3536a04e22f23cd6cda00f6a6452f2a9a75ef2b0234ebb9dff3576b143</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>20th century</topic><topic>Backwash</topic><topic>Breakwaters</topic><topic>coastal armoring</topic><topic>Coastal engineering</topic><topic>Coastal erosion</topic><topic>Coastal inlets</topic><topic>Coastal research</topic><topic>Coastal structures</topic><topic>Coasts</topic><topic>Dimensions</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Public access</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Railroads</topic><topic>Sand & gravel</topic><topic>Sea walls</topic><topic>Seawalls</topic><topic>Shoreline protection</topic><topic>Shorelines</topic><topic>Social factors</topic><topic>Social impact</topic><topic>social impacts</topic><topic>Soil erosion</topic><topic>Surveying</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Tourism</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Ryan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Olivia T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Katie G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Capdevila, Liria A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of coastal research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Anderson, Ryan B.</au><au>Carter, Olivia T.</au><au>Pearce, Katie G.</au><au>Capdevila, Liria A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A</atitle><jtitle>Journal of coastal research</jtitle><date>2022-07-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>828</spage><epage>843</epage><pages>828-843</pages><issn>0749-0208</issn><eissn>1551-5036</eissn><abstract>Anderson, R.B.; Carter, O.T.; Pearce, K.G., and Capdevila, L.A., 2022. User perceptions of the Pleasure Point seawall in Santa Cruz county, California, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 38(4), 828–843. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Communities up and down the California coast face the looming threat of rising seas, coastal erosion, and shoreline retreat. In this paper, the researchers use anthropological methods and a user survey to explore the social dimensions of the Pleasure Point seawall to assess some of the longer-term implications of coastal armoring in California and the U.S. more broadly. The users surveyed had an overall positive to neutral opinion of a coastal retention structure (in this case a seawall). About 35% had positive opinions of the seawall, 30% had neutral opinions, and 18% had negative opinions. While these results trend positive to neutral, they also reveal divided community opinions about and experiences with the seawall. The open-ended portions of the survey, combined with participant observation and follow-up interviews, add another qualitative dimension to this data. The participants in the survey and research expressed concerns about engineering and ecological issues, whether questions about how long the structure will last or observations/opinions about its impacts on local surf conditions, backwash, and loss of beach sand. Participants also expressed concerns about the social impacts of the seawall, including access issues, crowds, growing risks, problems with increasing numbers of inexperienced users, tourism growth, and fears about gentrification and local displacement. Combined, these insights illustrate how seawalls and other coastal armoring structures can and should be understood as engineered structures with critical social impacts that intersect with their physical, material, and environmental impacts.</abstract><cop>Fort Lauderdale</cop><pub>Coastal Education and Research Foundation</pub><doi>10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-21-00139.1</doi><tpages>16</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0749-0208 |
ispartof | Journal of coastal research, 2022-07, Vol.38 (4), p.828-843 |
issn | 0749-0208 1551-5036 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2686564233 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | 20th century Backwash Breakwaters coastal armoring Coastal engineering Coastal erosion Coastal inlets Coastal research Coastal structures Coasts Dimensions Environmental impact Public access Qualitative analysis Railroads Sand & gravel Sea walls Seawalls Shoreline protection Shorelines Social factors Social impact social impacts Soil erosion Surveying Surveys Tourism |
title | User Perceptions of the Pleasure Point Seawall in Santa Cruz County, California, U.S.A |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T01%3A40%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=User%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20Pleasure%20Point%20Seawall%20in%20Santa%20Cruz%20County,%20California,%20U.S.A&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20coastal%20research&rft.au=Anderson,%20Ryan%20B.&rft.date=2022-07-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=828&rft.epage=843&rft.pages=828-843&rft.issn=0749-0208&rft.eissn=1551-5036&rft_id=info:doi/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-21-00139.1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E48676920%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2686564233&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=48676920&rfr_iscdi=true |