Coastal Vulnerability Assessment Due to Sea Level Rise: The Case Study of the Atlantic Coast of Mainland Portugal
2. Study Area and Datasets
2.1. Study Area
3. Physical Vulnerability Index Assessment
3.1. Extreme Flood Hazard Index (EFHI)
3.2. Physical Parameters
3.2.1. Hydrographic Network
3.2.2. Distance to Coastline
3.2.3. Solid Geology and Drift Geology
3.2.4. Land Use
3.3. Analytical Hierarchical Process
4.1. Physical Coastal Vulnerability Cartography
4.1.1. Year 2050
4.1.2. Year 2100
- Figure 11a shows Vila Real de Santo António, the easternmost city of the Faro district, in the Guadiana River mouth. Almost the whole city is at an extreme level of vulnerability with 2700 buildings and 8900 residents in those areas according to Census2011. This is an example of a city where there is an urgent need to define and take SLR adaptation measures.
- The city of Olhão (north of Ria Formosa), in Figure 11b, has its entire downtown classified as an extreme level of vulnerability. Olhão municipality is the most vulnerable to SLR in Algarve since it has the largest number of buildings in areas considered vulnerable; almost 4100 buildings and more than 10,400 people live in those areas.
- Figure 11c shows the Faro International Airport in the Formosa Lagoon system, the main and major infrastructures of the region also being classified in the present assessment as highly to extremely vulnerable.
- Finally, Figure 11d shows Lagos city, where the Lagos Marina is partially classified as highly and extremely vulnerable. On the western side of the river, numerous infrastructures (~1600 buildings) are in vulnerable areas, such as gas stations, a hospital, a bus station, a church.
- In Figure 12a, the downtown of the Setúbal city is classified as highly to extremely vulnerable. The Setúbal municipality is the second most vulnerable in the district, with a high number of buildings in areas considered vulnerable, almost 3000 buildings and more than 12,000 residents.
- In the case of the Barreiro city (Figure 12b), with strong urban exposure on the left margin of the Tagus estuary, there are almost 1600 buildings and 9700 residents in areas considered vulnerable.
- Figure 12c shows the Montijo Air Base (BA6), which belongs to the Portuguese Air Force, and where a second airport complementary to the Lisbon hub airport is projected.
- The last figure (Figure 12d) shows Lisbon city is one of the most vulnerable cities in the country. These result not only from the considerable number of buildings and people living in these areas (~1600 and 13,500, respectively) but also from the value of the buildings and other infrastructures present in the right margin of the Tagus estuary. This margin will be severely affected, and as a result, numerous infrastructures that already exist or are designated for future construction within the area will be at risk. Facing this problem, the Lisbon municipality has already begun to make relocation plans, imposing some restrictions for new constructions in its Municipal Director Plan. However, more serious actions will have to be taken since numerous heritage and national interest buildings, as well as important infrastructures, are located in areas of high to extreme vulnerability, such as the case of train tracks, metro stations, museums, gas stations, cruise terminal, marinas and harbors, some buildings on Praça do Comércio, the Cais do Sodré train station and fluvial station, among others.
- In Figure 13a is the Peniche Peninsula; the downtown of the city is practically classified as medium to highly vulnerable, having 834 buildings and 2072 residents in those areas.
- The municipality of Alcobaça (Figure 13b) is also one of the most vulnerable to SLR, accounting for 1494 buildings and 1428 residents in vulnerable areas. Figure 13b shows the parish of São Martinho do Porto, which despite being around a protected bay, may have in 2100 some of its infrastructure at risk, such as a police station, the train line, a health center.
- In the case of Figueira da Foz (Figure 13c), with a strong urban exposure near to the Mondego river, there are almost 1997 buildings and 4849 residents in areas considered vulnerable.
- In the Espinho municipality, 276 buildings and 747 residents are in vulnerable areas. Figure 13d shows the Engineering Regiment No. 3 (RE3), which is a military unit of the Portuguese Army located at the Paramos headquarters. This is another military facility that is located in an SLR vulnerable zone.
- The Matosinhos city is illustrated in Figure 14a, and is the second most vulnerable in the Porto district, with a high number of buildings in areas considered vulnerable, almost 830 buildings (including the port administration), and more than 2300 residents.
- The Vila do Conde municipality in Figure 14b is the most vulnerable to SLR in the Porto district, with the highest number of buildings in areas considered vulnerable, almost 1470 buildings and more than 5000 people living actually in those areas. Thus, it is important that the Vila do Conde municipality take quick SLR adaptation and mitigation measures.
- In Figure 14c, the Esposende city is the most vulnerable in the Braga district, with a strong urban pressure near the Cávado river, with almost 2250 buildings and 4000 residents in the areas considered as vulnerable.
- Finally, Figure 14d shows Viana do Castelo, the district capital. One can observe on the Lima riverbank side, several zones classified as highly to extremely vulnerable, with 1466 buildings and 4236 residents.
4.2. Web-Viewer: Sea Level Rise for Portugal
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Conflicts of Interest
- IPCC, 2018: Summary for Policymakers. In Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty; Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P.R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., et al., Eds.; World Meteorological Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; p. 32. [Google Scholar]
- IOC/UNESCO, IMO, FAO, UNDP. A Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability. An Inter-Agency Report towards the Preparation of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). Available online: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc226586/m2/1/high_res_d/UNDP%20-%20Rio%20+20.pdf (accessed on 28 January 2020).
- ESTAT. Nearly Half of the Population of EU Countries with a Sea Border Is Located in Coastal Regions. Statistics in Focus. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3433488/5281405/KS-SF-09-047-EN.PDF/121dae7c-a53c-464a-baca-a314e652f4e7 (accessed on 28 January 2020).
- EEA. The Changing Faces of Europe’s Coastal Areas; EEA Report; European Environment Agency; Copenhagen, Denmark; Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_report_2006_6 (accessed on 28 Jaunuary 2020).
- McGranahan, G.; Balk, D.; Anderson, B. The rising tide: Assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environ. Urbaniz. 2007, 19, 17–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. In Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Field, C.B.; Barros, V.R.; Dokken, D.J.; Mach, K.J.; Mastrandrea, M.D.; Bilir, T.E.; Chatterjee, M.; Ebi, K.L.; Estrada, Y.O.; Genova, R.C.; et al. (Eds.) Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA; p. 1132.
- Neumann, B.; Vafeidis, A.T.; Zimmermann, J.; Nicholls, R.J. Future coastal population growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding—a global assessment. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0118571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Floods Directive (2007/60/EC); European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2007; Volume 50-L288, pp. 27–34. [Google Scholar]
- SINIAmb—Sistema Nacional de Informação de Ambiente. Available online: https://sniamb.apambiente.pt/ (accessed on 24 July 2016).
- Mach, K.J.; Planton, S.; von Stechow, C. Annex II: Glossary. In Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K., Meyer, L.A., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 117–130. [Google Scholar]
- Gornitz, V.M.; White, T.W.; Cushman, R.M. Vulnerability of the U.S to future Sea Level Rise. J. Coast. Res. 1991, 9, 201–237. [Google Scholar]
- Gornitz, V.; Daniels, R.C.; White, T.W.; Birdwell, K.R. The development of a coastal risk assessment database: Vulnerability to sea-level rise in the U.S. Southeast. J. Coast. Res. 1994, 12, 327–338. [Google Scholar]
- Shaw, J.; Taylor, R.B.; Forbes, D.L.; Ruz, M.-H.; Solomon, S. Sensitivity of the coasts of Canada to sea-level rise. In Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 505; Geological Survey of Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1998; p. 90. [Google Scholar]
- Thieler, E.R.; Hammar-Klose, E.S. National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Atlantic Coast; U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-593; U.S. Geological Survey: Woods Hole, MA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Pendleton, E.A.; Thieler, E.R.; Williams, S.J. Coastal Vulnerability Assessment of Cape Hatteras National Seashore (CAHA) to Sea-Level Rise; U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1064; U.S. Geological Survey: Woods Hole, MA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Boruff, B.J.; Emrich, C.; Cutter, S.L. Erosion Hazard Vulnerability of US Coastal Counties. J. Coast. Res. 2005, 21, 932–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Doukakis, E. Coastal Vulnerability and Risk Parameters. Eur. Water 2005, 11/12, 3–7. [Google Scholar]
- Diez, P.G.; Perillo, G.M.; Piccolo, M.C. Vulnerability to Sea-Level Rise on the Coast of the Buenos Aires Province. J. Coast. Res. 2007, 231, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, K.N.; Subraelu, P.; Rao, T.V.; Malini, B.H.; Ratheesh, R.; Bhattacharya, S.; Rajawat, A.S.; Ajai. Sea-level rise and coastal vulnerability: An assessment of Andhra Pradesh coast, India through remote sensing and GIS. J. Coast. Conserv. 2008, 12, 195–207. [Google Scholar]
- Abuodha, P.A.; Woodroffe, C.D. Assessing vulnerability to sea-level rise using a coastal sensitivity index: A case study from southeast Australia. J. Coast. Conserv. 2010, 14, 189–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagdanavičiūtė, I.; Kelpšaitė, L.; Soomere, T. Multi-criteria evaluation approach to coastal vulnerability index development in micro-tidal low-lying areas. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2015, 104, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serio, F.; Armenio, E.; Mossa, M.; Petrillo, A.F. How to Define Priorities in Coastal Vulnerability Assessment. Geosciences 2018, 8, 415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Zhu, Z.-T.; Cai, F.; Chen, S.-L.; Gu, D.-Q.; Feng, A.-P.; Cao, C.; Qi, H.-S.; Lei, G. Coastal Vulnerability to Erosion Using a Multi-Criteria Index: A Case Study of the Xiamen Coast. Sustainability 2018, 11, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ružić, I.; Jovančević, S.D.; Benac, Č.; Krvavica, N. Assessment of the Coastal Vulnerability Index in an Area of Complex Geological Conditions on the Krk Island, Northeast Adriatic Sea. Geosciences 2019, 9, 219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Koroglu, A.; Ranasinghe, R.; Jiménez, J.A.; Dastgheib, A. Comparison of Coastal Vulnerability Index applications for Barcelona Province. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2019, 178, 104799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmood, R.; Ahmed, N.; Zhang, L.; Li, G. Coastal vulnerability assessment of Meghna estuary of Bangladesh using integrated geospatial techniques. Int. J. Disaster Risk Red. 2019, 42, 101374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coelho, C. Riscos de Exposição de Frentes Urbanas para Diferentes Intervenções de Defesa Costeira. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Coelho, C.; Silva, R.; Veloso-Gomes, F.; Pinto, F.T. A vulnerability analysis approach for the Portuguese West Coast. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2006, 91, 251–262. [Google Scholar]
- Pereira, C.; Coelho, C. Coastal risk maps due to waves actions. J. Integr. Coast. Zone Manag. 2013, 13, 27–43. [Google Scholar]
- Ceia, F.R.; Patrício, J.; Marques, J.C.; Dias, J.A. Coastal vulnerability in barrier islands: The high risk areas of the Ria Formosa (Portugal) system. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2010, 53, 478–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martins, V.N.; Pires, R.; Cabral, P. Modelling of coastal vulnerability in the stretch between the beaches of Porto de Mós and Falésia, Algarve (Portugal). J. Coast. Conserv. 2012, 16, 503–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez-Graña, A.M.; Boski, T.; Goy, J.L.; Dabrio, C.J. Coastal-flood risk management in central Algarve: Vulnerability andflood risk indices (South Portugal). Ecol. Indic. 2016, 71, 302–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Antunes, C.; Rocha, C.; Catita, C. Coastal Flood Assessment due to Sea Level Rise and Extreme Storm Events: A Case Study of the Atlantic Coast of Portugal’s Mainland. Geosciences 2019, 9, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Saaty, R.W. The Analytic Hierarchy Process – What it is and how it is used. Math Model. 1987, 9, 161–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Instituto Hidrográfico. Roteiro da Costa de Portugal Continental – do Cabo Carvoeiro ao Cabo de São Vicente, 3rd ed.; Instituto Hidrográfico: Lisboa, Portugal, 2006; p. 462. [Google Scholar]
- Andrade, C.; Pires, H.; Silva, P.; Taborda, R.; Freitas, M.C. Zonas Costeiras. In Alterações Climáticas em Portugal. Cenários, Impactos e Medidas de Adaptação—SIAM II”; Santos, F.D., Miranda, P., Eds.; Gradiva: Lisboa, Portugal, 2006; pp. 169–206. [Google Scholar]
- Andrade, C.; Freitas, M.C.; Cachado, C.; Cardoso, A.C.; Monteiro, J.H.; Brito, P.; Rebelo, L. Coastal Zones. In Climate Change in Portugal. Scenarios, Impacts and Adaptation Measures—SIAM Project; Santos, F.D., Forbes, K., Moita, R., Eds.; Gradiva: Lisboa, Portugal, 2002; pp. 175–219. [Google Scholar]
- McLaughlin, S.; Cooper, J.A.G. A multi-scale coastal vulnerability index: A tool for coastal managers? Environ. Hazards 2010, 9, 233–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antunes, C. Assessment of Sea Level Rise at West Coast of Portugal Mainland and Its Projection for the 21st Century. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Soares da Silva, A.M. Carta Litológica—Notícia Explicativa I.13; Comissão Nacional do Ambiente: Lisboa, Portugal, 1983; p. 21. [Google Scholar]
- IGP. Carta de Uso e Ocupação do Solo de Portugal Continental para 2007—Memória descritiva; Instituto Geográfico Português: Lisbon, Portugal, 2010; p. 87. [Google Scholar]
- Ayalew, L.; Yamagishi, H.; Marui, H.; Kanno, T. Landslides in Sado Island of Japan: Part II. GIS-based susceptibility mapping with comparisons of results from two methods and verifications. Eng Geol. 2005, 81, 432–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorsevski, P.; Gessler, P.; Boll, J.; Elliot, W.; Foltz, R. Spatially and temporally distributed modeling for landslide susceptibility. Geomorphology 2006, 80, 178–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yacin, A. GIS-based landside susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): Comparisons of results and confirmations. Catena 2008, 72, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ercanoglu, M.; Kasmer, O.; Temiz, N. Adaptation and comparison of expert opinion to analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2008, 67, 565–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, I.; Nath, S.; Shukla, K.; Pal, D.; Raj, A.; Thingbaijam, K.; Bansal, B. Earthquake hazard zonation of Sikkim Himalaya using a GIS platform. Nat. Hazards 2008, 45, 333–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dang, N.; Babel, M.; Luong, H. Evaluation of flood risk parameters in the Day River Flood Diversion Area, Red River Delta, Vietnam. Nat. Hazards 2011, 56, 169–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.R.; Yeh, C.H.; Yu, B. Integrated application of the analytic hierarchy process and the geographic information system for flood risk assessment and flood plain management in Taiwan. Nat. Hazards 2011, 59, 1261–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Chang, H.-K.; Liou, J.-C.; Chen, W.-W. Protection Priority in the Coastal Environment Using a Hybrid AHP-TOPSIS Method on the Miaoli Coast, Taiwan. J. Coast. Res. 2012, 28, 369–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, J.; Yin, Z.; Wang, J.; Xu, S. National assessment of coastal vulnerability to sea-level rise for the Chinese coast. J. Coast. Conserv. 2012, 16, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Cozannet, G.; Garcin, M.; Bulteau, T.; Mirgon, C.; Yates, M.L.; Méndez, M.; Baills, A.; Idier, D.; Oliveros, C. An AHP-derived method for mapping the physical vulnerability of coastal areas at regional scales. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13, 1209–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Murali, R.; Ankita, M.; Amrita, S.; Vethamony, P. Coastal Vulnerability assessment of Puducherry coast, India, using the analytical hierarchy process. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13, 3291–3311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Sekovski, I.; Río, L.; Armaroli, C. Development of a coastal vulnerability index using analytical hierarchy process and application to Ravenna province (Italy). Ocean Coast. Manag. 2019, 183, 104982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Portuguese Navy. Available online: https://www.marinha.pt/pt/os_meios/bases/Paginas/BNL.aspx (accessed on 22 November 2019).
- Antunes, C.; Rocha, C.; Catita, C. Sea Level Rise for Portugal. Available online: http://www.snmportugal.pt (accessed on 22 November 2019).
- Kulp, S.A.; Strauss, B.H. New elevation data triple estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise and coastal flooding. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 4844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Koop, R.E.; DeConto, R.M.; Bader, D.A.; Hay, C.C.; Horton, R.M.; Kulp, S.A.; Oppenheimer, M.; Pollard, D.; Strauss, B.H. Evolving Understanding of Antarctic Ice-Sheet Physics and Ambiguity in Probabilistic Sea-Level Projections. Earth’s Future 2017, 5, 1217–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Jevrejeva, S.; Jackson, L.P.; Grinsted, A.; Lincke, D.; Marzeion, B. Flood damage costs under the sea level rise with warming of 1.5 ◦C and 2 ◦C. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 074014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
|Hydrographic Network||CIGeoE, 2016||Scale: 1:25,000—Tagus Estuary, Aveiro, and Formosa Lagoons; Others: manually vectorized.|
|Coastline||IH, 2011||Scale: 1:25,000|
|Lithological chart||APA, 2015||Scale: 1:1,000,000|
|DGT, 2014||Level 1 and 2|
|DGT, 2015||Delimitation of the administrative districts.|
|Statistical Subsection||INE, 2011||Census data from Census2011 |
(population and buildings)
|Physical Parameter||1—Very Low||2—Low||3—Medium||4—High||5—Extreme|
|Hydrographic Network||Dist.||200–300 m||150–200 m||100–150 m||50–100 m||≤50 m|
|Coast Type||Rock Cliff Coast||Low and sandy coast|
|Distance to Coastline||≥1000 m||200–1000 m||50–200 m||20–50 m||≤20 m|
|Solid Geology||Plutonic, metamorphic and volcanic rocks||Sandstone and consolidated sedimentary formations||Fine and coarse unconsolidated sedimentary formations|
|Drift Geology||Urban or rock||Stone or clay||Beaches or sediments||alluvium; loose sand or gravels|
|Land Use (level 1 and 2)||Water bodies; sparse vegetation; swamp or bare rock||Coastal sands||Forest||Agriculture||Urban and industrial infrastructures|
|Intensity of Importance on an Absolute Scale||Definition||Explanation|
|1||Equal importance||Two activities contribute equally to the objective|
|3||Moderate importance of one over another||Experience and judgment strongly favor one activity over another|
|5||Essential or strong importance||Experience and judgment strongly favor one activity over another|
|7||Very strong importance||An activity is strongly favored, and its dominance demonstrated in practice|
|9||Extreme importance||The evidence favoring one activity over another is of the highest possible order of affirmation|
|2,4,6,8||Intermate values between the two adjacent judgments||When compromise is needed|
|Reciprocals||If activity i has one of the above numbers assigned to it when compared with activity j, then j has the reciprocal value when compared with i||-|
|Parameter||Extreme Flood Hazard||Hydrographic Network||Coast Type||Distance to Coastline||Solid Geology||Drift Geology||Land Use|
|Extreme Flood Hazard||1||2||3||3||5||7||8|
|Distance to coastline||1/3||1/2||1||1||3||5||7|
|Parameter||Extreme Flood Hazard||Hydrographic Network||Coast Type||Distance to Coastline||Solid Geology||Drift Geology||Land Use||Sum|
|Extreme Flood Hazard||0.38||0.43||0.39||0.39||0.32||0.27||0.21||2.39|
|Distance to coastline||0.13||0.11||0.13||0.13||0.19||0.19||0.18||1.06|
|Extreme Flood Hazard||34%|
|Distance to coastline||15%|
|District||Physical Vulnerability Areas (in km2)||Number of Buildings||Number of Residents|
|Viana do Castelo||0.0||1.0||4.7||8.0||4.2||17.9||2000||4120|
|District||Physical Vulnerability Areas (in km2)||Number of Buildings||Number of Residents|
|Viana do Castelo||0.2||3.3||10.0||12.4||5.2||31.1||3490||7960|
|GMSL (m)||Population Estimated||GMSL (m)||Population Estimated|
|RCP4.5-ModFC_2||0.11–0.51 ||145,550||0.10–1.80 ||224,830|
|RCP4.5-K14||0.15–0.41 ||N/D||0.26–1.28 ||100,000 |
|RCP8.5-K14||0.17–0.46 ||80,000 ||0.40–1.59 ||120,000 |
|RCP4.5-DP16||0.10–0.52 ||80,000 ||0.39–1.80 ||140,000 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Rocha, C.; Antunes, C.; Catita, C. Coastal Vulnerability Assessment Due to Sea Level Rise: The Case Study of the Atlantic Coast of Mainland Portugal. Water 2020, 12, 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020360
Rocha C, Antunes C, Catita C. Coastal Vulnerability Assessment Due to Sea Level Rise: The Case Study of the Atlantic Coast of Mainland Portugal. Water. 2020; 12(2):360. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020360Chicago/Turabian Style
Rocha, Carolina, Carlos Antunes, and Cristina Catita. 2020. "Coastal Vulnerability Assessment Due to Sea Level Rise: The Case Study of the Atlantic Coast of Mainland Portugal" Water 12, no. 2: 360. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020360