The coastal and marine areas associated with the North Sea and Baltic Sea differ in terms of their morphological and hydrodynamic properties. Steep and shallow sections alternate along the coastline, and they react differently to the impacts of climate change. Furthermore, the North Sea is influenced by strong tides, whereas the tidal activity in the Baltic Sea is much less pronounced. For the purpose of monitoring, this requires that the indicators be developed and interpreted in a differentiated way for North Sea and Baltic Sea respectively. At the same time, the nationwide design of DAS Monitoring imposes restrictions on making statements regarding state-specific or even region-specific statements. This made it necessary for the 2023 Monitoring Report to work with case studies, in order to address important themes such as coastal erosion or the increasing challenges involved in the drainage of coastal lowlands (cf. Indicators KM-I-4 and KM-I-6). Case studies, of course, do not allow drawing any generic inferences regarding German coastal regions overall. For example, the case study on changes in the cliffscape on Fischland/Baltic Sea does not permit any statements on the coastal erosion experienced along other types of coastlines. Likewise, it would be out of the question to make any direct comparisons between the drainage conditions prevailing in the area covered by the case study carried out by the Eider-Treene-Schöpfwerksverband (Pumping Station Association) – illustrated in the indicator KM-I-6 – and other pumping station associations. As far as these themes are concerned, it is important not just to explore additional data sources, but also to develop advanced conceptual ideas of how to arrive at generalising statements that take into account any prevailing heterogeneous conditions.
Likewise, there are substantial methodical, partly also data-technical, challenges regarding the description of phenomena such as the displacement of the brackish-water zone within estuarine areas or even far inland, the salination of coastal groundwater resources or even the impacts of storm surges on flood protection in inland areas. The subgroup entitled Klimaindikatoren (climate Indicators), launched by LAWA for the purpose of developing joint indicators relating to water issues, has discussed these and other themes. Nevertheless, there are further scientific debates required in order to facilitate the development of meaningful indicators. A particular problem is that especially the coastal areas, including the estuaries of watercourses, are in several parts of their course strongly influenced by anthropogenic activities, thus producing a multi-layered complex of influences. Given this background, it is to some extent simply not possible to tease out the direct effects of climate change.
Given that in Germany, investments in coastal protection are financed predominantly from GAK funding, these investments can be illustrated in the nationwide GAK Reporting system (cf. Indicator KM-R-2). However, damage caused to coastal protection systems is not covered by a central database. The situation is similar with regard to any damage to settlements and infrastructures in the hinterland. It is not possible either to assess insurance data specifically for these regions. It is conceivable, however, that the ongoing work by BMUV and UBA in setting up a nationwide climate-damage register will produce further insights.
Potential negative effects on the coasts, resulting from utilisation for tourism purposes, are covered under themes in the DAS action fields entitled ‘Tourism industry’ (cf. Indicators TOU-I-1 and TOU-I-3) as well as ‘Human health’ (cf. Indicator GE-I-7). However, so far it has not been possible to carry out a comprehensive and systematic consideration process. This is true also, and particularly, with regard to adaptation measures and activities. In this respect, too, there are – in addition to data gaps – conceptual challenges that remain to be dealt with.
Generally speaking, the links between marine protection and the adaptation to climate change have been illustrated only marginally in DAS Monitoring, while marine ecosystems have to date hardly been focused on. As before, there are still knowledge and data gaps regarding these themes whilst there is genuine concern that climate change is fast becoming the predominant driver of the extinction of marine species. There is need for an in-depth discussion on potential indicators for themes such as acidification and the loss of oxygen (also the increase in death zones without oxygen) and associated impacts on species composition.