Abstract
Across the Mississippi Gulf Coast, hardened infrastructure (e.g., bulkheads, seawalls) is the dominant method of shoreline stabilization among private properties. In recent years, living shorelines have become an increasingly popular alternative; however, formal economic analyses of small-scale green and grey shoreline protection infrastructure in the region are lacking. Therefore, I conducted an ex post cost-benefit analysis on a 46 m shoreline at Camp Wilkes along Biloxi Bay, MS. Camp Wilkes, a privately-owned recreational campground, installed a bulkhead in 2016 that failed shortly after and replaced it with a living shoreline in March 2019. Using NIST’s Economic Decision Guide Software (EDGe$) Online, I performed a comparative cost-benefit analysis of both shoreline protection measures – namely the existing living shoreline and a hypothetical wooden bulkhead – over a 60-year time interval. While initial costs of living shorelines and bulkheads are similar, living shorelines have significantly lower maintenance and replacement costs and are often more effective at mitigating coastal erosion under biophysical conditions like those experienced at Camp Wilkes. Additionally, the living shoreline poses several unquantified non-market benefits (e.g., increased community involvement and educational opportunities) not offered by the bulkhead. It follows that similar coastal properties with conditions suitable for living shorelines are likely to see a greater return on investment when installing living shorelines rather than bulkheads or other hardened structures. This cost-benefit analysis will help to inform the shoreline stabilization decision-making process for coastal property owners in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
