Basic Inconsistencies

[Jordi HessionParticipant]

Ok, So I have a reviewed a LOT of material in this challenge and basically these are my findings.

Any proposed solution, when reviewed inline with the forecasting and modelling of rising sea-levels will likely be deemed obsolete in the next 20-50 years.

So that any solution proposed would need to address this, however the only real way to address rising sea-level, that is “Supported” by real world testing is 1. Build a large wall or 2. Build things higher than the suggested level of the ocean to future proof the solution.

(This is of course, simplified to ensure a level of concise communication)

This then spins into a larger problem of $$$, because building these types of solutions is expensive. So the idea of meeting this criteria of “Meaningful, low cost, impactful/lasting solution” doesn’t actually seem possible.

Especially when you consider the information in the brief of having only 300-500 people on the island. The feasibility of attaining this level of funding for such a low population appears to those doing critical reasoning to be a “pipe dream”

This is not supposed to have any negative intent behind it. Just that in the research I have done, there appears to be a few fairly large inconsistencies that can’t really be “corrected” in a real world solution.

[Sai Rupa DevKeymaster]

Hi Jordi (please excuse me for the super long answer, but after the intropresentation, I wanted to put some more time into this response)

You’ve raised some important points in your analysis, and it’s clear that you’ve put a lot of thought into considering both the practical challenges and the broader implications of rising sea levels for the island community.

Firstly, you’re absolutely right that forecasting and modelling play a crucial role in determining the longevity of any proposed solution. The idea that traditional solutions like building walls or elevating structures might become obsolete in 20-50 years is a valid concern, especially given the rapidly changing climate. The need for solutions that not only address immediate challenges but are also future-proofed against long-term risks is a complex problem that requires innovative thinking.

Regarding the financial aspect, it’s true that large-scale infrastructure projects, such as building walls or raising structures, come with significant costs. The challenge then becomes finding a balance between the investment required and the value it brings to the community. This is where the concept of “value for money” becomes critical. If the benefit of a solution is substantial—such as protecting the community’s homes, livelihoods, and cultural heritage—then it might justify the higher cost.

When considering “human-centered design,” it’s essential to take into account the community’s intent and desire to remain on the island. The solution should not only be technically sound but also resonate with the community’s values and long-term vision for their future. If the community is deeply committed to staying on the island, then solutions that support their resilience, even if costly, might be more aligned with their needs.

You’ve identified the key challenge well—rising sea levels require long-term solutions, and traditional methods like building sea walls or elevating structures may only offer temporary relief. However, these methods, combined with strategies like managed retreat or creating buffer zones with mangroves and wetlands, can still play a role in protecting communities while we develop more sustainable, future-proof approaches.

Your analysis highlights a critical tension between the desire for a meaningful, low-cost solution and the realities of addressing significant environmental challenges. It may be worth exploring alternative approaches that incorporate adaptive strategies, such as phased implementation or community-led initiatives, which might offer more sustainable and affordable pathways forward.

Ultimately, while there may be inconsistencies or limitations in the feasibility of certain solutions, the goal is to engage in creative problem-solving that prioritizes the community’s needs, values, and long-term resilience. It’s not about finding a perfect solution but rather one that thoughtfully balances these complex factors.

It’s important to remember that this is a global issue affecting many islands. While no solution will be perfect, starting with tried-and-true methods, combined with innovative approaches, can make a meaningful difference. Even small steps can contribute to building resilience and help address the broader challenge of climate change.

[Author]

Posts