ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering

ISSN: 0971-5010 (Print) 2164-3040 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tish20

Remote sensing and GIS application in assessment

of coastal vulnerability and shoreline changes: a
review

K.S.S. Parthasarathy & Paresh Chandra Deka

To cite this article: K.S.S. Parthasarathy & Paresh Chandra Deka (2019): Remote sensing and
GIS application in assessment of coastal vulnerability and shoreline changes: a review, ISH Journal
of Hydraulic Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/09715010.2019.1603086

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2019.1603086

Published online: 15 Apr 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tish20
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING
https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2019.1603086

Remote sensing and GIS application in assessment of coastal vulnerability and

shoreline changes: a review
K.S.S. Parthasarathy and Paresh Chandra Deka
Department of Applied Mechanics and Hydraulics, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Coastal zones are the transition between the land and sea. With the advancements in the technol- Received 17 October 2018
ogy in past few decades lead to the increase in the need for the transportation in turn leading to Accepted 1 April 2019
the construction of harbors, roads, industries, settlements and recreational activities making the KEYWORDS
coastal environment a fragile one. Spite of overexploitation and unsustainable use of the resources Coastal vulnerability;
leads the researchers to assess the rate of change and the vulnerability of the coast. In this review shoreline changes; multi-
two aspects, shoreline changes and the coastal vulnerability index (CVI), had been reviewed and hazard vulnerability;
discussed in detail. Authors refined the set of parameters to determine the vulnerability, depending shoreline prediction; remote
on the physical and socio-economic condition of the coast. Finally, an attempt is made to review the sensing
research work carried out in the vulnerability assessment and shoreline change studies that were
reported from different coastal zones at different time-spans and methodologies helping the
researchers to frame their parameters required for the particular study depending on the nature
of the study region. Thus, providing the insight knowledge for the authors to determine the critical
parameter that influences the coast to a greater extent for a particular study.

1. Introduction the coastal floodplain at least 200 million people resided,

and the numbers are likely to increase up to three times by
A coastal region is the area of land bordering a large water
the year 2100 (Nicholls and Mimura 1999). Global climate
body, mainly sea or ocean. Despite its productivity, they are
change taking place all over the world had been a threat to
vulnerable to even small impacts that are taking place in the
accelerated sea level rise affecting the existing shoreline in
world. These coastal belts are severely affected by various
the worst manner. It further increases the high risks of
processes and remains to be in hotspot, as these regions
storm surges, severe waves and tsunamis, as we know the
regularly inundate due to weather and climate influences
fact that there is a growing concentration of human popula-
and natural events such as tsunami, shoreline erosion and
tion, socioeconomic status and the industries very adjacent
devastation due to calamities like cyclones (European
to the coast (Brooks et al. 2006; Gommes et al. 2005). In the
Commission 2009; European Environment Agency 2006;
twenty-first century, there will be a significant increase in
Nicholls et al. 2010; Sterr et al. 2003). The coastal regions
the risk to the low-lying areas (IPCC 2014). Such projec-
are severely affected by the greenhouse effect leading to
tions will affect the sustainability of coastal management as
global warming. In an estimate made by the IPCC
they lead to change in the geomorphology and severe
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2001), 7 mil-
damage to ecosystems and resources in the coastal region
lion people will lose their homes if the sea level rises to 1 m
(Mani Murali et al. 2013). Sustainable management and
from the current situation. According to a projection esti-
utilization of natural resources are very critical, and there
mated by IPCC (2007), it is reported that there will be a 0.2°
exists a complex and dynamic relationship between the
C increase in the global climate per decade for the next
environment and the people (Bevacqua et al. 2018; Wisner
20 years. Thus, by projecting it, we can analyze that by the
et al. 2004). The accelerated sea level rise and the increase in
end of this century, the sea level may rise to 1.5m due to
the intensity of cyclones (Unnikrishnan and Shankar 2007)
effects such as glacier melting leading to decrease in the ice
related to increased sea surface temperature, resulting in
sheets. Climate change impacts both the biophysical system
severe coastal problems. Populated areas near the estuaries,
and the socio-economic system of the coastal zones (Satta et
low-lying urban areas adjacent to the coast, and islands are
al. 2017). These coastal zones were exposed due to climate
critical hotspots of coastal vulnerability (Nicholls et al. 2007;
changes and the consequences like seawater intrusion, sea
de Sherbinin et al. 2007).
level rise and storm surges (IPCC 2007; Nicholls et al. 2010;
Shoreline changes and coastal vulnerability had posed a
Torresan et al. 2012).
significant threat to both environment and the human lives.
In the last few decades increase in the population put
These coastal-related problems had increased exponentially
tremendous pressure in the coastal region (Neumann
in the last few decades. The natural factors controlling the
Vafeidis et al. 2015). Thus the trend in the socio-economic
shoreline are winds, currents, tides and waves.
and environmental change along the coast is expected to
Anthropogenic activities taking place within the coastal
continue in the near future (Saravanan et al. 2019b). More
belts, such as mining activities in the beach, offshore dred-
than 44% of the world’s population likely to reside within
ging, etc. (Lamberti et al. 2005) and the human
150 km from the coast (Ocde 2016). It is estimated within

CONTACT K.S.S. Parthasarathy parthas1993@gmail.com

© 2019 Indian Society for Hydraulics
2 K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA
encroachment serves as the reason behind the increase in
salinity in the groundwater (Saravanan et al. 2019a). Thus,
this study aims to provide the detailed review of the CVI
and the shoreline changes and its associated studies in order
to bring a clear insight of coastal processes taking place in
many places around the world.
2. Role of remote sensing and GIS in shoreline
changes and vulnerability assessment
The application of geospatial technology helps the user by
providing the better synoptic coverage of the region of
interest and remains as a promising tool for analyzing
multi-temporal satellite images to estimate shoreline
changes periodically (Saravanan et al. 2015). Remote sen-
sing (RS) applications play an essential role in the monitor-
ing of the shorelines and other coastal-related activities
temporally. Any small changes in the coast can be analyzed
using the RS imagery due to its very long spectral bands and
good spatial resolutions. Geographic Information System
(GIS) is a computer system for capturing, storing, querying,
analyzing and displaying the geospatial data for decision
making an inventory and problem-solving purposes. It is
also helpful in the field of coastal related activities by calcu-
lating the rate of change of shoreline and other statistical
parameters. All the hazard-related data with the help of GIS
can be transferred into visual information as a map
(Thomas et al. 2007). Due to the eagle eye view in associa-
tion with a multispectral and temporal resolution, these
satellite imageries gained a lot of attention to map the
vulnerabilities (Sudha Rani et al. 2015). Better forecasting
of the discovery of disaster-prone regions as well as the
regions of security measures can be achieved with the help
of RS and GIS (Lawal et al. 2011). The main intention of
GIS is to make it useful to the interested public so that their
participatory can enhance the needs of the stockholders.
This is known as Participatory GIS (PGIS). In this technol-
ogy, the involvement of both commercial as well as open
source software allows the user to a certain degree of pro-
gramming interface (Jankowski 2009).
2.1. Methods to analyze shoreline changes
The shoreline is the line that acts as a boundary between
land and sea which is dynamic in nature. Beaches/seashores
are an environment that is ephemeral between land and sea
with unique and fragile ecosystems which change position
continuously due to dynamic conditions (Natesan et al.
2015). Shoreline changes occur in various time scales from
geologic to very short span (Addo et al. 2008). Accelerated
sea level rise due to climate change is expected to exacerbate
this problem (IPCC 2007) thus leading to take more man-
ageable strategies to control the shoreline changes. The
shoreline may lead either to erosion or to accretion pro-
cesses induced by wave action, sea level rise and sediment
transportation though the morphology of the coast plays a
vital role in determining processes of the coast, while littoral
drift has a significant impact in modifying the coastal land-
forms and orienting the coast (Kunte et al. 2001). Though
hard structures were constructed in order to increase the
land progradation, but these hard structures backfire by
being a barrier to the natural coastal activities and disturb-
ing the coastal cycle (Pandian et al. 2004) resulting in
modification of the shorelines by disturbing the active
sites of erosion/deposition (Saravanan et al. 2019c). Thus,
for coastal zone management, sustainable development of
the coastal region and decision making, it is essential to
monitor, extract and detect the shoreline (Gens 2010).
Mapping the shoreline with the least percentage of error
is always uncertain due to the variable and the dynamic
nature. The shoreline mapping and change analysis all
started during the evolution of aerial photographs. These
aerial photographs are quite expensive, and they have lim-
itations like the tilt in camera and relief distortion in the
photographs. Yet these errors can be overcome by obtaining
accurate results by making measurements on the photo-
graph (Stafford and Langfelder 1971).
Nowadays to calculate a historic change rate of shoreline
and to predict the change of the shorelines in the near future
with a high degree of accuracy is possible. For the past seven
decades, the science of shoreline mapping had been changed
to a great extent, due to technological advances (Addo et al.
2008). Unites States Geological Survey (USGS) developed a
toolbar using GIS as a platform named Digital Shoreline
Analysis System (DSAS) using an observation-based
approach. It generates transects that cast perpendicular to
the reference baseline at a user-specified spacing alongshore.
The distance between the baseline and each shoreline inter-
section point on the transect helps in computing the change
in shoreline by either distance measurements or in the sta-
tistics resulting all the calculations in a table linked to the
transect file by the attribute table. DSAS helps to determine
the morphodynamic behavior of the shoreline and the shift
associated with its foreshore geometry (Moussaid et al. 2015).
Le Cozannet et al. (2014) evaluated the recent impacts of sea
level rise on shoreline changes using the observation-based
approach and the model-based approach studies. They
observed the observation-based approach helps in analyzing
the spatial or temporal patterns of sea level and shoreline
changes to examine the relationship whereas the model-
based approach compares the shoreline change with that of
the outcome of the coastal model.
2.2. Methods to analyze coastal vulnerability
According to IPCC (2007) vulnerability can be defined as
the degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to
cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including cli-
mate variability and extremes. Vulnerability assessment is
used to estimate the amount of damage to the community
resulting due to any of the hazardous event of about certain
severity; this may include harm to the structures that are
intact, injuries to people and interruption to normal human
life (Wisner et al. 2004).
To assess the vulnerability of the coast many tools and
techniques like Synthesis and Upscaling of Sea level Rise
Vulnerability Assessment Studies (SURVAS), Coastal
Vulnerability Index (CVI) (e.g. Thieler and Hammar-
Klose (1999)), IPCC common methodology (e.g.
Capobianco et al. (1999)), BRUUN model (e.g. Addo et al.
(2008)), Coastal Zone Simulation Model (CZSM), Dynamic
Interactive Vulnerability Assessment (DIVA) (e.g. Vafeidis
et al. (2004)), Fiscal Coastal Vulnerability Index (FCVI) (e.g.
Kantamaneni (2016)), Simulator of Climate Change Risks
and Adaptation Initiatives (SimCLIM) (e.g. Warrick et al.
(2005)), True Geometric Mean (e.g. Cogswell et al. (2018)),

Community Vulnerability Assessment Tool (CVAT) (e.g.
Flax et al. (2002)) and Coastal Social Vulnerability Index
(e.g. Bjarnadottir et al. (2011)) were available, where CVI is
the most commonly used model (Sudha Rani et al. 2015)
and is discussed in a detailed manner in this paper. Gornitz
(1990) proposed the methodology for CVI assessment using
seven parameters which were later modified by Thieler and
Hammar-Klose (1999) to analyze the impact of the sea level
rise in the United States coastline. Thus, CVI allows the set
of six number of physical variables to be related. This
method yields numerical data that cannot be directly equa-
ted with particular physical effects. Each variable is assigned
with the weight to assess the vulnerability of the coastline.
CVI is calculated by taking the square root of the geometric
mean, or the square root of the product of the ranked
variables divided by the total number of variables. For
example, in terms of product it was formulated as:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
abcdef
CVI ¼ (1)
6
where
a = Geomorphology,
b = Coastal slope,
c = Relative sea level rise rate,
d = Shoreline change rate,
e = Mean tide range,
f = Mean wave height.
Equation (1). Modified CVI proposed by Thieler and
Hammar-Klose (1999) by reducing the variables making it
more useful (Duriyapong and Nakhapakorn 2011). Each
variable influences the vulnerability of the coast in a specific
manner as follows:
Geomorphology is the general processes involved in
the formation of geomorphic features are fluvial, aeolian,
glacial, tectonic, hill slope, igneous and biological pro-
cesses. These processes may lead to beach formations
either with boulders and rocky outcrops leading to the
less vulnerable region or a fine sandy beach leading to a
highly vulnerable zone.
The coastal slope is the change in the altitude to its
horizontal distance within two points on the coast. The
low sloping coastal region will be inundated faster than
the steeper slope leading to greater land loss (Pilkey and
Davis 1987).
Relative sea level rise is one of the critical parameters
that impact the other physical parameter by inundating into
the land as well affecting the low-lying region. Shoreline
change rate determines the characteristics of the coast with
respect to the activities that are taking place along the coast.
Productive or destructive environment characterizes the
accretion or erosion of the coast respectively.
Mean tidal range is due to the rise and fall of sea level
due to the rotation of the earth and the gravitational pull of
the other planetary objects around the earth. Thus tidal
range is the difference between the low tide and high tide.
Larger mean tide range represents a higher vulnerability to
the coast. Mean wave height depends on the wind energy
that dominates the water surface. More intense wind poses a
great threat to the coast.
Due to the technological advancement in the field of
remote sensing, the availability of data and the accessibility
is increased to the greater extent. It led the researchers to
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 3
identify the critical parameter that is site specific for a study
and also to include the new parameter that may influence
the vulnerability of the region. Some of the notable studies
are the inclusion of Tsunami run-up model in the physical
variable (Kumar et al. 2010b) for the Orissa coast and the
tourism and population data (Kunte et al. 2014) for the Goa
coast.
3. Discussion based on reported works in shoreline
changes
A lot of examples (Table 1) that discuss the shoreline
changes, delineation technique, incorporated methods to
study the shoreline changes and shoreline forecasted tech-
niques are attempted to discuss in the literature. The sub-
section below illustrates a few studies that were carried out
in the shoreline changes technique in a different aspect of
the region.
Table 1. Discussion based on various themes on shore-
line changes and its delineation techniques in different
locations
3.1. Shoreline change study using aerial photographs
In the early 1900s, vertical aerial photographs began to
capture the shorelines (Anders and Byrnes 1991; Boak
and Turner 2005; Crowell et al. 1999). But in late 1930s
quality stereo aerial photographs were available. Even
though the aerial photos provide a good spatial resolu-
tion; temporal resolution depends on the post-storm
shoreline analysis. These photographs also possess a lot
of distortions such as tilt, relief, change in altitude and
scale variation. Aerial photography was the earlier avail-
able source for determining the past shoreline position
(Boak and Turner 2005).
Stafford and Langfelder (1971) using aerial photo-
graphs conducted reconnaissance for a long section of
North Carolina coast. A stable reference point is taken
to have control over the data helping to measure the
distance between the point to that of the beach. During
the period of aerial coverage change in the high tide line
and the dune line were taken into consideration.
Standard deviation and the rate of change were computed
at the reference point of the beach.
Dolan et al. (1978) used historical aerial photographs to
measure shoreline erosion and storm surge penetration by
using a new photogrammetric method called The
Orthogonal Grid Address System (OGAS). The baseline is
prepared from the base map where the long axis lying
entirely on the ocean is the baseline. On the other hand,
the aerial photographs were rescaled to the base map and
overlaid on the base map to extract the shoreline. In OGAS,
the data is extracted by placing a 100 m interval rectilinear
transparent grid over the shoreline with respect to the base
map and their position were measured to the nearest 5 m
with the high-resolution movable cursor grid. So now the
data constitute of the transects with the 100 m interval
perpendicular to the trend of the shoreline. Thus, the data
in OGAS output represent the change in shoreline with
respect to time in a 100 m transect interval. Thus, the
mean and standard deviation of the rate of change of the
shoreline is identified.
4 K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA

Table 1. Discussion based on various themes on shoreline changes and its delineation techniques in different locations.
Sl. Delineation
No. The theme of the study technique Location Data used Reference
1. Survey on coastal erosion Manual North Carolina coast Aerial photograph (Stafford and Langfelder
1971)
2. Determining the shoreline erosion using The Manual New Jersey coast Aerial photograph (Dolan et al. 1978)
Orthogonal Grid Address System (OGAS)
3. Shoreline change study using RS and GIS Manual Mumbai coast Toposheet and IRS 1D satellite (Tirkey et al. 2005)
imagery
4. Change and prediction analysis in shoreline Manual Accra, Ghana Bathymetric map and digital (Addo et al. 2008)
recession topographic map
5. Shoreline change detection Automatic Cuu Long estuary Landsat and Aster satellite (Van and Binh 2009)
imagery
6. Sea level rise and shoreline study Automatic Bhitarkanika wildlife Landsat (Chand and Acharya 2010)
sanctuary, Orissa
7. Shoreline changes and Spit morphology Automatic Southern Karnataka Toposheet and IRS 1C and P6 (Kumar et al. 2010a)
analysis coast satellite imagery
8. Shoreline change study Manual Tharangampadi coast, Toposheet, Village map, IRS 1B, (Saranathan et al. 2011)
Nagapattinam 1C, P6 and 1D satellite images
district
9. Shoreline change study Manual Vedaranyam coast, Toposheet, Landsat, IRS 1D and (Natesan et al. 2013)
Tamil Nadu P6
10. Shoreline change study Manual Karwar to Gokarna, Toposheet, IRS P6 (Choudhary et al. 2013)
Karnataka
11. Shoreline change study Manual Kanyakumari to Toposheet and IRS satellite data (Mujabar and Chandrasekar
Tuticorin coast, 2013b)
Tamil Nadu
12. Mangrove shoreline changes Automatic Mui Ca Mau, Vietnam Aerial photograph, Landsat, (Tran Thi et al. 2014)
SPOT satellite imagery
13. Shoreline change study Manual Chennai coast, Tamil Landsat, Cartosat, Resources at (Kankara et al. 2014)
Nadu satellite imagery
14. Coastal erosion study Manual Indian coast SPOT and IRS satellite imagery (Rajawat et al. 2015)
15. Shoreline change study Manual Chennai coast, Tamil Landsat imagery (Saravanan et al. 2015)
Nadu
16. Shoreline change study Manual Tamil Nadu, India Landsat Imagery (Natesan et al. 2015)
17. Shoreline change study Automatic Cuddalore coast, Tamil Landsat imagery (Parthasarathy et al. 2018)
Nadu
18. Estuary shoreline shift response to climate Manual Central west coast of Landsat imagery (Rajasree and Deo 2018)
change India
19. Shoreline change study Automatic Cuddalore coast, Tamil Landsat imagery (Saravanan et al. 2019c)
Nadu

3.2. Long-term shoreline change analysis studies Choudhary et al. (2013) evaluated the shoreline changes
in two-phase of study to determine the erosion and accre-
In the later period with the evolution of the computers,
tion took place, that is one phase constitutes study made in
advancements in the technologies, availability of the satellite
the span of 30 years and the other took in the span of 7
data, and accessibility to the software helped the researchers to
years. The analysis depicted there was a massive shift in the
study hassle-free multi-temporal shoreline change analysis
Kali River mouth of 426.3 m to the north within 30 years
with the more advanced statistical report. To understand the
span. Even river mouth narrowed down and spit area has
morphology of the coast long-term shoreline mapping is car-
increased near the mouth. Conversion of the sandy ridge to
ried out using the help of available data such as toposheets,
agricultural land has taken place. Mujabar and
aerial photographs and satellite imageries (Rajawat et al. 2015;
Chandrasekar (2013b) had analyzed both long time (1969–
Tirkey et al. 2005; Tran Thi et al. 2014; Vinayaraj et al. 2011).
1999) and short time shoreline analysis (1999–2006) for
Tirkey et al. (2005) had analyzed the shoreline changes for
Kanyakumari and Tuticorin coast of India. Based on the
the period between 1966 and 2002 using toposheet and Indian
modelling of coastal dynamic segmentation length of the
Remote Sensing (IRS) satellite 1D image respectively. It is
shoreline and their linear changes were calculated. They
stated that the mudflats and mangroves that are much affected
found that the sediment gets drifted from the southern
by the anthropogenic activities were the sensitive geomorphic
part to the northern part of the study during the monsoons
units along the coast. It is stated that in the above study landfill
leading to the erosion in the southern coast and accretion in
and extension of the built-up area significantly decreased the
the northern coast. The factors like geology and geomor-
width of the beach. Saranathan et al. (2011) analyzed the
phology, waves, currents, sediment transport, human inter-
change in the shoreline of Tharangampadi Village in India.
ventions and anthropogenic activities as well other natural
The data considered for analysis are the land record of village
causes (e.g. sea level changes, shortage of sediments) were
map for the year 1918, Survey of India (SOI) toposheets for the
modifying the shorelines. Coastal erosion assessment for the
year 1852 and 1972, IRS images for the year 1991, 2004 and
Indian coast (Rajawat et al. 2015) is carried out in two
2006. The above study stated that construction of retaining
periods from 1989 to 1991 and 2004 to 2006 using
walls in the Tharangampadi village induced the high rate of
Satellite Pour l’Observation de la Terre (SPOT) series and
erosion in the northern part of the village and followed by the
IRS series of satellite data. The displacement of shoreline is
sediment deposition in the southern part. Results on the beach
carried out along the main shoreline excluding the river
to respond to the forces and conditions depending on the time.

mouth, creeks, streams and other inner parts. The study
found that the constructions of breakwaters along the coast
alter the longshore sediment transport that is occurring
naturally and triggers the coastal erosion further due to
littoral drift obstruction.
3.3. Model-based shoreline change analysis studies
There are numerous studies based on the models that compute
the rate of the shoreline change using various statistics like
squared regression, weighted interval, linear regression, stan-
dard error, etc. In a study conducted by Chand and Acharya
(2010) Linear Regression Rate (LRR) is selected since End
Point Rate (EPR) does not take all the shoreline in the account
and can be done for the only shorter period. While LRR
considers all the intersection point of the various shorelines
along the transect line. Natesan et al. (2013) analyzed the
change in the shoreline as well the trend of sediment transport
along the Vedaranyam coast by field methods. To compute the
rate of shoreline change two statistical methods, EPR and LRR,
were followed. From the shoreline dynamic study between
1930 and 2004 it was found that the maximum shoreline
displacement of 1.3 km toward the sea.
Shoreline change study was carried out by Saravanan et
al. (2015) for the Chennai coast, using the Net Shoreline
Movement (NSM) and EPR to analyze the change in dis-
tance as well rate of shoreline change. Above mentioned
study stated that the port breakwater is one of the main
reasons for coastal changes. Natesan et al. (2015) carried out
the regional study across the shoreline of Tamil Nadu using
multi-date satellite data from 1978 to 2014. Wave charac-
teristics and pattern were taken into account along the coast
since it plays a significant role in the configuration of the
shoreline position. The above study computed the LRR and
EPR statistics and found the maximum erosion rate of
26 m/yr is observed. Parthasarathy et al. (2018) analyzed
the change detection study across the Cuddalore region
using the EPR and NSM. From the analysis, it is depicted
that the Northern Vellar River mouth is accreted at the rate
of an average of around 4.2 m/yr during the study period of
2000–2015. From the review of papers it is found even
various other researchers like Chand and Acharya (2010),
Kankara et al. (2014), Rajasree and Deo (2018), Tahri et al.
(2017) and Tran Thi et al. (2014) have used the statistical
technique like either EPR or LRR or even both.
3.4. Image processing technique-based shoreline
delineated study
Importance of image processing raised for the improvement in
the representation of the image and processing the data for
machine perception (Kumar and Shaik 2016). For delineating
the shoreline using image processing image arithmetic method
and histogram thresholding methods were commonly used.
Image arithmetic method involves multispectral images to
detect differences between spectral bands in a similar way of
the variables used in a mathematical equation. Most commonly
used arithmetic function is the band ratio technique. This tech-
nique can be used in any instances when the absorption in one
band is different from the other. Hence, the land can be and
delineated from the water, as the water pixels have greater
absorption in the Near Infrared Band (NIR) band. Histogram
thresholding method involves the process of thresholding the
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 5
values. The thresholding selection involves user to choose the
threshold value by manually, or the thresholding algorithm
computes a value automatically called automatic thresholding
(Raju and Neelima 2012). Van and Binh (2009) used the histo-
gram thresholding technique in NIR to separate the land mass
from the water body. Band ratio technique helps in extracting
the land pixels using the green/NIR band as well as green/
Middle Infrared band (MIR) to delineate the vegetated and
non-vegetated land respectively. Multiplying histogram thresh-
old image and band ratioed images help in the extraction of the
shoreline. Tran Thi et al. (2014) mapped the mangrove shoreline
in which mangrove forest edge is used as a shoreline indicator.
Normalized Differential Vegetation Index (NDVI) had been
carried out to distinguish the vegetated area from that of water
or land. To improve the accuracy clustering threshold technique
of Otsu (1979) is used. Kankara et al. (2014) delineated the
shoreline by using NIR band in Landsat image using Grey
Level Thresholding technique and by the edge enhancement
technique. Saravanan et al. (2019c) used Modification of
Normalized Difference Water Index (MNDWI). MNDWI
used the band ratio of blue and Short-Wave Infrared Band 1
(SWIR 1). Usage of the k-mean cluster to the band ratioed image
delineates the water pixel from that of the land pixel as the water
pixel possess the mean value of greater than one.
3.5. Studies based on shoreline change prediction
Study about the historic shoreline behavior and its change
enable the researcher to predict the future recession of the
shoreline. Addo et al. (2008) predicted the change in mor-
phology of the coast for the 250-year using the process-
based numerical model, SCAPE model, BRUUN model,
modified BRUUN model and Sunamura’s shore platform
model to each sub-region of the shoreline that suits the
condition of the model well. From their analysis wetlands
and the region of elevation up to 0.48 m will be inundated
between 2052 and 2082. Kumar et al. (2010a) computed the
future predicted shoreline positions based on the conceptual
morphodynamic model and the past shoreline. In the above
study, the future shoreline of 10 and 24 years was predicted
with respect to 2005. Using the regression coefficient and
root mean square error method the prediction of the shore-
line was cross-validated.
Rajasree and Deo (2018) predicted the future change in
shoreline by analyzing the historical shorelines using the
numerical model. The numerical modelling is carried out by
using the common feed forward back propagation type
architecture of the neural network by constructing the
three layers of the neuron where input neuron consisting
of the baseline for the transect, hidden neurons were the
trials aimed to get desired output using the statistical tech-
niques. Output neuron corresponds to the output of the
shoreline. From the study, they observed that the increase in
the wave height and change in the direction of the wave,
increase the net and gross sediment transport to 131.7% and
114.3% respectively.
4. Discussion based on reported works in coastal
vulnerability studies
Gibb (2018) examined the use and critiques of fundamental
understanding of vulnerability in the context of the disaster.
Tahri et al. (2017) used Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical
6 K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA
Process (AHP) and the spatial analytical techniques to
assess the vulnerability of the coast. Bagdanavičiute et al.
(2015) had used/utilized two scenarios, one is followed by
Thieler and Hammar-Klose (1999) and the other involving
AHP modelled by Saaty (1977). Many researchers like
Hereher (2015), Pendleton et al. (2004), Rao et al. (2009)
and Thieler and Hammar-Klose (1999, 2000) have studied
the vulnerability analysis to the regional scale. An extensive
literature review on coastal vulnerability studies has
attempted to carry out in the upcoming sub-section.
4.1. Vulnerability studies based on sea level rise
In a study carried out by Gornitz et al. (1991) for U.S. coast
made use of seven parameters like coastal relief, erodible
substrate, evidence of subsidence in present and past, shore-
line retreat, tidal and wave energy. The square root of the
geometric mean is taken to analyze the vulnerability of the
study. Coastal vulnerability due to sea level rise study is
carried out by Thieler and Hammar-Klose (1999). They
inferred that the CVI values have correlated better with
the Geomorphology and the small-scale variation in the
vulnerability values are primarily influenced by that of the
shoreline changes parameter. The relative vulnerability for
the coast is quantified at the national level using the neces-
sary information available like Geomorphology, Sea level
rise, past shoreline evolution and other factors. A simple
as well as effective method to develop a coastal vulnerability
for the U.S, coastal regions are made by summarizing the
six physical variables using equation . In the very next year,
analysis of the vulnerability for the Gulf of Mexico coastline
is done by Thieler and Hammar-Klose (2000). As the sec-
ond phase work of Thieler and Hammar-Klose (1999), the
study comprises about the integration of the dataset to map
the inundated area in the coast due to rise in the sea level.
In the dataset, the most complex, as well as the variable that
is documented poorly, is shoreline changes.
Vulnerability Assessment in Cumberland Island (CUIS)
is studied (Pendleton et al. 2004). The first perspective of
the study is to map future sea level rise within the area. The
CVI is ranked in terms of their physical contribution to sea
level rise related coastal change. Physical changes that occur
due to the sea level rise had been figured out. Vulnerability
to erosion due to a potential rise in sea level for Hellenic
Aegean Coast is assessed by Alexandrakis et al. (2007) and
the study mainly focused at the sea level rise and the
inundation effect, where the two variables such as geological
variable and marine processes are analyzed to identify the
change in physical characteristics of the coastal system
according to environmental condition and estimate the
vulnerability to sea level rise.
Rao et al. (2009) conducted the study based on the sea
level rise and coastal vulnerability with five physical vari-
ables such as geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal
slope, mean tidal range, mean wave height. The above study
stated 0.59 m rise in the sea level would submerge 565 km2
area of Andhra Pradesh at low tide level including the
Krishna and Godavari delta region. Natesan and
Parthasarathy (2010) evaluated to study the inundation
model by projecting the sea level rise by 0.5 and 1m.
Digital Elevation Model is with the sea level rise scenarios
used to prepare inundation of the region. While these data
integrated with the Land use land cover (LU/LC) data, the
area of submergence and number of significant places sub-
merged were analyzed using the data, and high risk of the
coastal inundated region along the Kanyakumari district of
Tamil Nadu is demarcated. Ozyurt et al. (2011) used the
physical variables like coastal erosion, inundation, flooding
due to storm surge, salinity intrusion from groundwater
and estuaries and the other human-influenced parameters
to analyze the vulnerability of the coast due to sea level rise
coupled with AHP technique.
Duriyapong and Nakhapakorn (2011) assessed the low-
lying topography of the Samut Sakhon coastal zone with
both physical and socio-economic variables. Some of the
socio-economic variables accounted are land use, popula-
tion density, cultural heritage and roads/railways. In their
analysis slope and erosion rate varies along the coast con-
tributing significant impact for the vulnerability. Palmer et
al. (2011) assessed the vulnerability of the coast using five
parameters like beach width, dune width, Rocky outcrop,
the distance of vegetation behind the beach and distance to
the 20m isobaths. In addition, the historical erosion data
were considered to support the ongoing process of moni-
toring and refinement of the technique to make a better
decision support system progressively. The same set of
parameters were considered to identify the relative risk
assessment of Loughor Estuary in South Wales by Denner
et al. (2015) where they adopted the additional weight to the
estuarine parameter.
Lichter and Felsenstein (2012) assessed the cost of sea
level rise and extreme flooding at the local level. The struc-
tured framework for inundation and flooding scenario and
monetize cost of the events were provided by analyzing the
permanent inundation and periodic flooding regions and
damage to capital stock were estimated. Hereher (2015) had
depicted that the even low tides and low height waves
caused one-third of the thousand kilometers of Egypt’s
Mediterranean coast falls under severely vulnerability cate-
gory along with the Nile delta region where coastal slope
remained as one of the critical parameters in response to the
sea level rise.
Parthasarathy and Natesan (2015) have analyzed the
gentle slope and topography are responsible for the vulner-
ability of the coast along the Tuticorin coast. They made use
of the beach width as a parameter to the equation to
determine the extent of resistance to wear and to identify
the risk due to coastal inundation. Pramanik et al. (2016)
assessed the inundation to the coastal land due to the future
sea level rise and its associated physical changes taking
place. The inundation of the sea and potential risk zone
on a different level of sea level rise makes the ocean water
reach up to 35 km in the land is depicted.
4.2. Vulnerability studies based on cyclone and coastal
flooding
Cyclones and coastal flooding are the important coastal
hazard making the coast vulnerable to a greater extent.
Dwarakish et al. (2009) analyzed the coastal vulnerability
for Udupi coastal zone using the equation . In addition, LU/
LC map and inundation map was prepared in order to
calculate the coastal flooding and the areas of different
LU/LC gets submerged in the coastal flooding. Kumar et
al. (2010b) assessed the vulnerability of the coast by devel-
oping the tsunami run-up model as a parameter that is

grouped under the physical parameter for CVI. It is inferred
that areas with low coastal slopes falling in the areas of high
coastal elevation are not as much vulnerable as one with
that area falling in low coastal elevation. Boori (2010) used
the CVI model and BRUUN rule to identify the risk assess-
ment of the estuary and found that the minimum inunda-
tion of 1m of flooding affects the recreational areas,
agricultural and natural ecosystem. Balica et al. (2012) had
analyzed flood vulnerability index in the coastal cities by
having political administrative, socio-economic and hydro-
geological components that help in understanding the vul-
nerability due to the climate change in the cities.
Kumar and Kunte (2012) added up the bathymetry,
elevation and extreme storm surge as an additional para-
meter for the Chennai coast which is severely affected by the
2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. As the bathymetry is an impor-
tant parameter in case of a disaster like a tsunami because
the arrival time and amplitude of the earlier part of the
tsunami are determined by the long-wavelength bathyme-
try. There is more chance of coastal flooding to take place if
the elevation is less and vice versa. The extreme storm surge
and return period were determined to analyze the vulner-
ability of the coast.
Poompavai and Ramalingam (2013) assessed the risk
of cyclones along the northern coast of Tamil Nadu using
four components such as Environmental Vulnerability,
Social Vulnerability, Hazard Potential and Mitigation
Capacity to determine the risk to the coast by the
cyclones. From the analysis, it is found that the threat
to the land and population is by the frequently occurring
cyclone events than the other rarely occurring natural
hazard events. Storm surge amplitude and the extent to
which the coast inundates usually depend on the track
and intensity of the cyclones.
Nayak and Bhaskaran (2014) assessed that extreme
waves are taking place at Kalpakkam coast due to the
cyclones occurring in the east coast of India, that is Bay
of Bengal using available historical data. A multi-scale
modelling approach was used in order to stimulate and
analyze the synthetic track of the cyclone. 31 best cyclone
tracks were considered to construct the probable
hypothetical/synthetic track for the region. The wave
height is computed using Simulating Waves Nearshore
(SWAN) wave model and concluded that wave height
varies from 2.5 m to 7 m.
Sankari et al. (2015) analyzed the Cuddalore-Pichavaram
Coastal Tract of Tamil Nadu as the area is severely affected
by the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and also by many
cyclones. To assess the vulnerability due to cyclones and
the tsunami two more additional parameters offshore bathy-
metry and land use/land cover (LU/LC) were considered.
Bathymetry helps in understanding the vulnerability of the
coast during the disaster like coastal flooding, and LU/LC
helps in determining the severity of the cyclones of the
particular study.
Seenath et al. (2016) had made the flood vulnerability
assessment using bathymetry, elevation and tidal range data
along with current and future predicted mean sea level data
to create a structured and unstructured gridded model
using LISFLOOD-FP and TELEMAC-2D codes, respec-
tively. Bathymetry and elevation data were used to develop
the coastal digital elevation model (DEM) in GIS to flood
analysis.
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 7
4.3. Vulnerability studies based on the climate change
phenomenon
Anticipated future sea level rise associated with the climate
change being a threat to the population living in the low-
lying coastal areas. Lin and Lee (2012) studied the unusual
oceanographic phenomena due to climate change and its
associated vulnerability. The coast is determined by floods
or sea level rise resulting from climatic changes. The three
coastal vulnerability dimensions, namely man-made facil-
ities, environmental geography and social economy, are
adopted, in which seawall length relative ratio, seawall
height relative ratio, and tide gate relative ratio are consid-
ered under man-made facilities. The disaster risk assess-
ment was calculated by analyzing the overall vulnerability
and hazard analysis.
Addo (2013) assessed CVI to climate changes for Accra,
Ghana. The study includes the major driving factors in the
coastal environment such as land subsidence trend, geology
and elevation. One part of the study entailed the impact of
shoreline whereas the other entailed relative vulnerability of
the region due to sea level rise. This combined effect of the
several factors in a coastal domain increases the risk factor
to climate change at a higher level. The consequences and
challenges of the climate change impact on natural hazard
were reviewed by Gallina et al. (2016).
Nguyen et al. (2016) had reviewed theoretical concepts
that are operational in climate change, and vulnerability
assessment is participatory stimulation model-based and
indicator-based approaches. Ahammed et al. (2016) stated
the coastal vulnerability and morphological changes in the
coast are due to the climatic changes that result in sea level
rise and shoreline erosion. Coastlines are under high vul-
nerability in the areas of Andhra Pradesh due to frequent
cyclones and storm surges along the Bay of Bengal.
4.4. Studies on multi-hazard vulnerability assessment
Multi-hazard mapping helps to see through the different
inducing and triggering mechanism that interconnects sev-
eral hazards (Mahendra et al. 2012). A multi-scale coastal
vulnerability index (McLaughlin et al. 2010) was assessed in
which three different set of sub-indices such as coastal
characteristics, tidal forcing and socio-economic attributes
were summed and normalized for identifying the coastal
vulnerability of the coast. Mahendra et al. (2012) have
studied using the parameters sea level trend, shoreline
change rate, elevation and return periods. The projection
of the sea level for the next 50 years is carried out with the
help of sea level trend. But the study devoid from consider-
ing the LU/LC patterns in the area.
Mani Murali et al. (2013) assessed the Puducherry coast
of India. In the study, physical vulnerability index (PVI)
had been derived using the physical and geologic variables,
social vulnerability index (SVI) was derived from the socio-
economic variables such as population, LU/LC, road net-
work, cultural heritage. Finally, CVI is derived by analyzing
the equal contribution of PVI and SVI. Mujabar and
Chandrasekar (2013a) found geological and physical vari-
ables involve the modification of the coast and the geomor-
phology and shoreline changes are the influential variables
in determining the coastal vulnerability. As well the natural
processes and climatic conditions are some of the essential
 8

Table 2. Studies based on coastal vulnerability scenario.

Sl.
No. The theme of the study Variables considered Location Technique used Reference
1. Vulnerability study to future sea level rise Coastal relief, erodible substrate, evidence of subsidence in U.S. GIS (Gornitz et al. 1991)
present and past, shoreline retreat, tidal and wave energy
2. Coastal vulnerability assessment to sea level Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, sea level Atlantic coast of U.S. GIS (Thieler and Hammar-Klose 1999)
rise rise, mean tidal range, mean wave height
3. Coastal vulnerability assessment to sea level Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, sea level Gulf of Mexico coastline GIS (Thieler and Hammar-Klose 2000)
rise rise, mean tidal range, mean wave height
4. Coastal vulnerability assessment to sea level Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, sea level Cumberland Island National GIS and field survey (Pendleton et al. 2004)
rise rise, mean tidal range, mean wave height Seashore in Georgia
5. Coastal vulnerability assessment to sea level Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, sea level Hellenic Aegean Coast - (Alexandrakis et al. 2007)
rise rise, mean tidal range, mean wave height
6. Integrated coastal zone management plan LU/LC, bathymetry, shoreline change rate, mean wave height, Udupi coast, Karnataka Remote Sensing and GIS, User Interface on VB (Dwarakish et al. 2008)
mean tidal range, coastal slope, sea level rise, geomorphology, 6.0
K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA

elevation, CRZ maps, transportation network, drainage map,

7. Sea level rise and Coastal Vulnerability
assessment
8. Coastal Multi-Hazard Vulnerability Mapping
9. Coastal Vulnerability Index
10. Coastal Vulnerability using physical process
and socioeconomic variables vulnerability
index
11. Coastal Vulnerability Index
12. Multi-criterion vulnerability and risk
assessment due to climate changes
13. Coastal Vulnerability Index
14. Sea level rise and extreme flooding at the
local level
15. Coastal erosion hazard and vulnerability
assessment
16. Assessment of CVI due to climate changes
17. Analysis for Coastal Risk Assessment to
Cyclones
18. Vulnerability assessment using physical and
socioeconomic variables
Global Positioning System (GPS) based map
Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, mean tidal Andhra Pradesh coast Remote Sensing and GIS (Rao et al. 2009)
range, mean wave height
Storm surge, sea level rise, shoreline change rate and elevation Coast of Nellore District, Tamil Remote Sensing and GIS (Mahendra et al. 2012)
Nadu
Shoreline change rate, sea level rise, coastal slope, elevation, Coast of Orissa state, India Remote sensing and GIS (Kumar et al. 2010b)
mean tidal range, mean wave height, geomorphology and
tsunami run-up
Coastal slope, shoreline change rate, mean tidal range, mean Samut Sakhon coastal zone Remote sensing and GIS (Duriyapong and Nakhapakorn
wave height, LU/LC, population density, cultural heritage and 2011)
roads/railways
Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, mean Chennai coast, Tamil Nadu Remote sensing and GIS (Mariappan and Devi 2013)
wave height, mean tidal range and bathymetry
Seawall length relative ratio, seawall height relative ratio, tide Taijiang coastal areas Remote sensing, GIS and AHP (Lin and Lee 2012)
gate relative ratio, elevation, mean tidal range, land
subsidence rate, shoreline change rate, land utilization,
population density, education level ratio, providing ratio and
enterprise compensation
Shoreline change rate, sea level rise, mean wave height, mean Chennai, Tamil Nadu Remote sensing and GIS (Kumar and Kunte 2012)
tidal range, elevation, bathymetry, geomorphology, storm
surge and return periods
Sea level rise, extreme flood scenario, elevation contour layer and Tel Aviv and Haifa and other Remote sensing and GIS (Lichter and Felsenstein 2012)
vector shoreline layer, residential regions, industrial region, Northern coastal strips of
building layer, LU/LC, road layer Israel
Geomorphology, shoreline change rate, coastal slope, mean The southern coast of Tamil Remote sensing and GIS (Mujabar and Chandrasekar 2013a)
wave height and mean tidal range Nadu from Tuticorin to
Kanyakumari
Elevation, shoreline change rate, local subsidence trend, mean Accra, Ghana Remote sensing, GIS and field survey (Addo 2013)
tidal range, mean wave height, geomorphology and geology
LU/LC, geomorphology, elevation and bathymetry, proximity to Kattivakkam to Kovalam, Remote sensing and GIS (Poompavai and Ramalingam
the coast, the magnitude of wind speed, population density, northern coast of Tamil Nadu 2013)
rainfall potentials frequency, duration/speed of the hazard
Geomorphology, coastal slope, shoreline change rate, elevation, Puducherry coast Remote sensing, GIS and field survey (Mani Murali et al. 2013)
mean wave height, sea level rise, mean tidal range,
population, roads, LU/LC and tourist places
(Continued)
 ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 9

parameters in determining the nature of the wave, erosion,

accretion and even sediment transportation.

(Nayak and Bhaskaran 2014)

(Parthasarathy and Natesan

Kunte et al. (2014) analyzed the multi-hazards coastal

(Ahammed et al. 2016)

vulnerability for Goa state. Many studies focused in incor-

(Pramanik et al. 2016)

Reference
porating the physical and geologic variables whereas in the

(Kunte et al. 2014)

study they’ve incorporated the socioeconomic variable
population density and the unique parameter tourism infor-

2015)
mation which is entirely different and advantageous from
the other studies as the study region is an essential place for
tourism.
Bagdanavičiute et al. (2015) incorporated beach width
A multi-scale modelling approach to create a
synthetic track of cyclone, Remote sensing

and height, underwater slope or sandbars, beach sediment

variables into the study and incorporated AHP technique to
derive the vulnerability of the study. Ashraful Islam et al.
Technique used

(2016) analyzed that along the Ganges deltaic coast of

Bangladesh have higher erosion due to change in sediment
Remote sensing and GIS

Tuticorin, Gulf of Mannar, Tamil Remote sensing and GIS

Remote sensing and GIS

Remote sensing and GIS

flow from the river due to upstream water regulation, land

subsidence along the delta and change in sedimentation
process due to the construction of hard structures.
Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) study
and GIS

(Dwarakish et al. 2008) was carried out by making two

types of analysis: CVI using GIS and Coastal Zone
Information System using Visual Basic (V.B.) 6.0 for the
good Coastal Zone Management Plan. It acts as a decision
Krishna-Godavari delta region,

support system with a click where the data like existing

Coast of Andhra Pradesh
Kalpakkam, Tamil Nadu

development status, ecological sensitivity map, census,

Location

regional development plan maps can be obtained for the

Andhra Pradesh

proper planning of the coastal zones.

Thus Table 2 describes the work took place in deter-
Goa, India

mining the coastal vulnerability scenario. Some of the

Nadu

limitations can be considered in part of the work are

due to the lack of robustness of the theoretical frame-
change rate, sea level rise, storm surge, and mean tidal range

coastal slope, mean tidal range, mean wave height, population

Sea level rise, elevation, geomorphology, shoreline change rate,

geomorphology, bathymetry, sea level rise, mean tidal range

geomorphology, bathymetry, sea level rise, mean tidal range

work based on the recent IPCC findings. The trend in

geomorphology, sea level rise, mean tidal range and mean
Shoreline change rate, elevation, coastal slope, beach width,

Shoreline change rate, elevation, coastal slope, beach width,

Shoreline change rate, elevation, coastal slope, beach width,

Geomorphology, coastal slope, mean wave height, shoreline

changing climate which is measured on the historical

past data cannot be applied for the future predictions.
There is a lack of freely available fine resolution satellite
images for delineating the shorelines resulting in reduced
accuracies in determining the exact rate of changes of the
Variables considered

shoreline. Thus many researchers (Alesheikh et al. 2007;

Ghoussein et al. 2018; Kaliraj et al. 2014; Kankara et al.
2014; Kumar et al. 2010b; Mageswaran et al. 2015; Mani
Murali et al. 2013; Rao et al. 2013) at different times have
and mean wave height

and mean wave height

successfully investigated shoreline change and vulnerabil-

ity studies using RS and GIS. This study on coastal
and tourist data

engineering is more useful for various aspects of coastal

wave height

rejuvenation.
The coastal belt is a fragile environment and the impact
of marine hazards such as tsunami, cyclones, and associated
storm surges are significant. These hazards subjected to a
varying degree of coastal vulnerability. The study describes
geological variables and physical variables
19. Coastal vulnerability due to extreme waves

the number of models that are present for assessing the

mainly based on the tropical cyclones

22. Coastal vulnerability assessment of the

21. Coastal vulnerability assessment using

vulnerability of the coast, shoreline and the CVI phenom-

The theme of the study

20. Multi-hazards coastal vulnerability

ena with the number of literature reviews. From the review,

23. Coastal Vulnerability Assessment

it is clear that sea level rise phenomena lead to the change in

the shoreline, making the coast more vulnerable. The
predicted sea level rise

impact of salt water on the fresh water should also be

considered in the regions of estuary when it comes to the
sea level rise. PGIS approach should be implemented in
Table 2. (Continued).

assessment

decision making that involves the stakeholders’ participa-

tion in order for the sustainable development of the coast.
In order to prevent the casualty and economic losses, the
coastal managers should know about the sensitivity of the
No.
Sl.

coast which can be determined by the physical and

10 K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA
ecological coastal features, shoreline trends, etc.
Considering the socio-economic aspect of the region (e.g.
population, tourist data) for the vulnerability aspect influ-
ences the coast which is more site-specific. The ICZM came
into the account to monitor as well to safeguard the coastal
zone all over the world. It imposes a set of rules that can be
implemented and restricted within the Coastal Regulation
Zone (CRZ). Though the strict rules are implemented, yet it
is the duty of the common individual to live in harmony
with the coast for sustainable development of the coast and
to preserve it for the future generations. Hence, efforts are
taken by researchers to bring awareness to the vulnerability
of the coastal region and resultant coastal erosion being the
threat to the community.
The derived result should be considered for the ICZM to
develop a sound and sustainable long-term development of
the coast. The progressing coast can be made useful for
beneficial purposes with due consideration given to preser-
ving the coastal wetland and other recreational activities
such as beaches. They should be taken into high-risk cate-
gories, and they should be monitored regularly. From the
literature that had been reviewed, we can come to the
conclusion that the sustainable development of the coast is
greatly affected by constructing the hard structures (e.g.
Groynes, seawall). These structures disturb the naturally
occurring phenomena where in turn soft structures (e.g.
beach nourishments dune reconstruction, coastal re-vegeta-
tion) were the best suited for economic as well as sustained
long-term development. Thus, this study is made as there is
a need for the comprehensive review about the CVI as well
Shoreline change applications that help the decision and
policymakers as well as for academic purpose to give an
insight into the coastal processes and their dynamic
interactions.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
ORCID
K.S.S. Parthasarathy http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0936-4065
References
Addo, K.A. (2013). “Assessing coastal vulnerability index to climate
change: The case of Accra – Ghana.” J. Coastal Res., 165, April,
1892–1897. doi:10.2112/SI65-320.1.
Addo, K.A., Walkden, M., and Mills, J.P. (2008). “Detection, measure-
ment and prediction of shoreline recession in Accra, Ghana.” ISPRS
J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 63(5), 543–558.
Ahammed, K.B., Mahendra, R.C., and Pandey, A.C. (2016). “Coastal
vulnerability assessment for Eastern Coast of India, Andhra
Pradesh by using geo- spatial technique geostatistics : An overview
coastal vulnerability assessment for Eastern Coast of India, Andhra
Pradesh by using geo-spatial technique.” Geoinformatics &
Geostatistics, June, 4(3) 2–8.
Alesheikh, A.A., Ghorbanali, A., and Nouri, N. (2007). “Coastline
change detection using remote sensing.” Int. J. Environ. Sci.
Technol., 4(1), 61–66.
Alexandrakis, G., Karditsa, A., Poulos, S., Ghionis, G., and Kampanis.
(2010). "An assessment of the vulnerability to erosion of the coastal
zone due to a potential rise of sea level: the case of the Hellenic
Aegean coast." Environmental Systems, Encyclopedia of Life
Support Systems (EOLSS), Developed under the Auspices of the
UNESCO, I. Sydow, eds., Oxford, U.K.: Eolss.
Anders, F., and Byrnes, M. (1991). “Accuracy of shoreline change rates
as determined form maps and aerial photographs.” Shore and
Beach, 59(1), 17–26.
Ashraful Islam, M., Mitra, D., Dewan, A., and Akhter, S.H. (2016).
“Coastal multi-hazard vulnerability assessment along the Ganges
deltaic coast of Bangladesh-A geospatial approach.”Ocean Coast.
Manag., 127, 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.03.012.
Bagdanavičiute, I., Kelpšaite, L., and Soomere, T. (2015). “Multi-cri-
teria evaluation approach to coastal vulnerability index develop-
ment in micro-tidal low-lying areas.” Ocean Coastal Manage., 104,
124–135.
Balica, S.F., Wright, N.G., and van der Meulen, F. (2012). “A flood
vulnerability index for coastal cities and its use in assessing climate
change impacts.” Nat. Hazards, 64(1), 73–105. doi:10.1007/s11069-
012-0234-1.
Bevacqua, A., Yu, D., and Zhang, Y. (2018). “Coastal vulnerability:
Evolving concepts in understanding vulnerable people and places.”
Environ Sci Policy, 82, 19–29.
Bjarnadottir, S., Li, Y., and Stewart, M.G. (2011). “Social vulnerability
index for coastal communities at risk to hurricane hazard and a
changing climate.” Nat. Hazards, 59(2), 1055–1075. doi:10.1007/
s11069-011-9817-5.
Boak, E.H., and Turner, I.L. (2005). “shoreline definition and detec-
tion: A review.”J. Coastal Res., 214, 688–703. doi:10.2112/03-0071.1.
Boori, M.S. (2010). “Coastal vulnerability, adaptation and risk assess-
ment due to environmental change in Apodi - Mossoro estuary,
Northeast Brazil.” Int. J. Geomatics Geosci., 1(3), 620–638.
Brooks, N., Hall, J., and Nicholls, R. (2006). “Sea level rise: Coastal
impacts and responses.” Norwich WBGU, 49, 33–64.
Capobianco, M., DeVriend, H.J., Nicholls, R.J., and Stive, M.J.E.
(1999). “Coastal area impact and vulnerability assessment: The
point of view of a morphodynamic modeller.” J. Coastal Res., 15
(3), 701–716.
Chand, P., and Acharya, P. (2010). “Shoreline change and sea level rise
along coast of Bhitarkanika wildlife sanctuary, Orissa : An analytical
approach of remote sensing and statistical techniques.” Int. J.
Geomatics Geosci., 1(3), 436–455.
Choudhary, R., Gowthaman, R., and Sanil Kumar, V. (2013).
“Shoreline change detection from Karwar to gokarna - south west
coast of India using remotely sensed data.” Int J Earth Sci. Eng., 6
(3), 489–494
Cogswell, A., Greenan, B.J.W., and Greyson, P. (2018). “Evaluation of
two common vulnerability index calculation methods.” Ocean
Coast. Manag., 160, 46–51.
Crowell, M., Honeycutt, M., and Hatheway, D. (1999). “Coastal ero-
sion hazards study: Phase one mapping.” J. Coastal Res., 28, 10–20
de Sherbinin, A., Schiller, A., and Pulsipher, A. (2007). “The vulner-
ability of global cities to climate hazards.”Environ Urbanization, 19,
39–64. doi:10.1177/0956247807076725.
Denner, K., Phillips, M.R., Jenkins, R.E., and Thomas, T. (2015). “A
coastal vulnerability and environmental risk assessment of Loughor
Estuary, South Wales.” Ocean Coast. Manag., 116, 478–490.
Dolan, R., Hayden, B., and Heywood, J. (1978). “A new photogram-
metric method for determining shoreline erosion.” Coastal Eng., 2,
21–39.
Duriyapong, F., and Nakhapakorn, K. (2011). “Coastal vulnerability
assessment: A case study of Samut Sakhon coastal zone.”
Sonklanakarin J. Sci., 33(4), 469–476.
Dwarakish, G.S., Vinay, S.A., Dinakar, S.M., Jagadeesha, B., Pai,
Mahaganesha, K., and Natesan, U. (2008). “Integrated coastal
zone management plan for Udupi coast using remote sensing,
geographical information system and global position system.” J.
Appl. Remote Sens., 2(1), 023515.
Dwarakish, G.S., Vinay, S.A., Natesan, U., Asano, T., Kakinuma, T.,
Venkataramana, K., Pai, B.J., and Babita, M.K. (2009). “Coastal
vulnerability assessment of the future sea level rise in Udupi coastal
zone of Karnataka state, west coast of India.” Ocean Coastal
Manage., 52(9), 467–478.
European Commission. (2009). “Summary for policymakers.” Climate
change 2013 - The physical science basis. Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change, ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1–
30.
European Environment Agency. (2006). The changing faces of Europe’s
coastal areas, Publications of the European Communities,
Copenhagen.

Flax, L.K., Jackson, R.W., and Stein, D.N. (2002). “Community vulner-
ability assessment tool methodology.” Nat. Hazard. Rev., 3(4), 163–
176. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2002)3:4(163).
Gallina, V., Torresan, S., Critto, A., Sperotto, A., Glade, T., and
Marcomini, A. (2016). “A review of multi-risk methodologies for
natural hazards: Consequences and challenges for a climate change
impact assessment.”J. Environ. Manage., 168, 123–132. doi:10.1016/
j.jenvman.2015.11.011.
Gens, R. (2010). “Remote sensing of coastlines: Detection, extraction
and monitoring.” Int J Remote Sens., 31(7), 1819–1836.
Ghoussein, Y., Mhawej, M., Jaffal, A., Fadel, A., El Hourany, R., and
Faour, G. (2018). “Vulnerability assessment of the South-Lebanese
coast: A GIS-based approach.” Ocean Coastal Manage., 158, 56–63.
Gibb, C. (2018). “A critical analysis of vulnerability.”Int. J. Disaster
Risk Reduct., 28, 327–334. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.11.007.
Gommes, R., Du Guerny, J., Nachtergaele, F.O., and Brinkman, R.
(2005). “Potential impacts of sea-level rise on populations and
agriculture.” Clim. Change Afr., 18, 191–203.
Gornitz, V. (1990). “Vulnerability of the East Coast, U.S.A. to future
sea level rise.” J. Coastal Res., 9, 201–237.
Gornitz, V., White, T.W., and Cushman, R.M. (1991). “Vulnerability
of the US to future sea level rise.” Proc. 7th Symp. Coastal Ocean
Manage., United States.
Hereher, M.E. (2015). “Coastal vulnerability assessment for Egypt’s
Mediterranean coast.” Geomatics, Nat. Hazards Risk, 6(4), 342–
355. doi:10.1080/19475705.2013.845115.
IPCC. (2001). Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation, and vulner-
ability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by
J. J. McCarthy, O. F. Canziani, N. A. Leary, D. J. Dokken and K. S.
White (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New
York, USA.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007 : The physical science basis.
Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of
the intergovenemental panel on climate change. Working group I
contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY,
USA. doi:10.1094/PDIS-91-4-0467B
IPCC. (2014). Climate Change 2013 - The Physical Science Basis.
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, (Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, I. Sydowed, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Jankowski, P. (2009). “Towards participatory geographic information
systems for community-based environmental decision making.” J.
Environ. Manage., 90(6), 1966–1971. doi:10.1016/j.
jenvman.2007.08.028.
Kaliraj, S., Chandrasekar, N., and Magesh, N.S. (2014). “Impacts of
wave energy and littoral currents on shoreline erosion/accretion
along the south-west coast of Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu using
DSAS and geospatial technology.” Environ. Earth Sci., 71(10),
4523–4542. doi:10.1007/s12665-013-2845-6.
Kankara, R.S., Selvan, S.C., Rajan, B., and Arockiaraj, S. (2014). “An
adaptive approach to monitor the Shoreline changes in ICZM
framework: A case study of Chennai coast.” Indian J. Mar. Sci., 43
(7), 1266–1271.
Kantamaneni, K. (2016). “Counting the cost of coastal vulnerability.”
Ocean Coast. Manag., 132, 155–169.
Kumar, A., Narayana, A.C., and Jayappa, K.S. (2010a). “Shoreline
changes and morphology of spits along southern Karnataka, west
coast of India: A remote sensing and statistics-based
approach.”Geomorphology, 120, 133–152. doi:10.1016/j.
geomorph.2010.02.023.
Kumar, A., and Shaik, F. (2016). Importance of image processing, Image
Processing in Diabetic Related Causes. SpringerBriefs in Applied
Sciences and Technology., Springer, Singapore, 5–7.
Kumar, A.A., and Kunte, P.D. (2012). “Coastal vulnerability assess-
ment for Chennai, east coast of India using geospatial techniques.”
Nat. Hazards, 64(1), 853–872. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0276-4.
Kumar, T.S., Mahendra, R.S., Nayak, S., Radhakrishnan, K., and Sahu,
K.C. (2010b). “Coastal vulnerability assessment for Orissa State,
East Coast of India.” J. Coastal Res., 263, 523–534.
Kunte, D.P., Jauhari, N., Mehrotra, U., Kotha, M., Hurthouse, S.A.,
and Gagnon, S.,.A. (2014). “Multi-hazards coastal vulnerability
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 11
assessment of Goa, India, using geospatial techniques.” Ocean
Coast. Manag., 95, 264–281. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.
ocecoaman.2014.04.024.
Kunte, P.D., Wagle, B.G., and Sugimori, Y. (2001). “Littoral transport
studies along west coast of India - A review.” Indian J. Mar. Sci., 30,
57–64.
Lamberti, A., Archetti, R., Kramer, M., Paphitis, D., Mosso, C., and Di
Risio, M. (2005). “European experience of low crested structures for
coastal management.” Coastal Eng., 52(10–11), 841–866.
doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2005.09.010.
Lawal, D.U., Matori, A.N., Hashim, A.M., Chandio, I.A., Sabri, S.,
Balogun, A.L., and Abba, H.A. (2011). “Geographic information
system and remote sensing applications in flood hazards manage-
ment: A review.” Res. J. Appl Sci. Eng. Technol., 3(9), 933-947.
Le Cozannet, G., Garcin, M., Yates, M., Idier, D., and Meyssignac, B.
(2014). “Approaches to evaluate the recent impacts of sea-level rise
on shoreline changes.”Earth-Sci. Rev., 138, 47–60. doi:10.1016/j.
earscirev.2014.08.005.
Lichter, M., and Felsenstein, D. (2012). “Assessing the costs of sea-level
rise and extreme flooding at the local level: A GIS-based approach.
”Ocean Coastal Manage., 59, 47–62. Elsevier Ltd.
Lin, Y., and Lee, T. (2012). “Assessment of vulnerability and risk of
taijiang coastal areas to climatic changes.” Int. J. Environ. Chem.
Ecol. Geol. Geophys. Eng., 6(7), 1179–1187.
Mageswaran, T., Mohan, R.V., Selvan, C.S., Arumugam, T., Usha, T., and
Kankara, R.S. (2015). Assessment of shoreline changes along
Nagapattinam coast using geospatial techniques. INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL OF GEOMATICS AND GEOSCIENCES, 5(4), 555-563.
Mahendra, R.S., Mohanty, P.C., Srinivasa Kumar, T., Shenoi, S.S.C.,
and Nayak, S.R. (2012). “Coastal multi-hazard vulnerability map-
ping: A case study along the coast of Nellore District, East Coast of
India.” Ital J Remote Sens., 42(3), 67–76.
Mani Murali, R., Ankita, M., Amrita, S., and Vethamony, P. (2013).
“Coastal vulnerability assessment of Puducherry coast, India, using
the analytical hierarchical process.” Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 13
(12), 3291–3311. doi:10.5194/nhess-13-3291-2013.
Mariappan, V.E.N., and Devi, R.S. (2013). “Chennai coast vulnerability
assessment using optical satellite data and GIS techniques.” Int. J.
Remote Sens & GIS, 1999, 175–182.
McLaughlin, S., Andrew, J., and Cooper, G. (2010). “A multi-scale
coastal vulnerability index: A tool for coastal managers?” Environ.
Hazards, 9(3), 233-248.
Moussaid, J., Fora, A.A., Zourarah, B., Maanan, M., and Maanan, M.
(2015). “Using automatic computation to analyze the rate of shore-
line change on the Kenitra coast, Morocco.”Ocean. Eng., 102, 71–
77. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.044.
Mujabar, P.S., and Chandrasekar, N. (2013a). “Coastal erosion hazard
and vulnerability assessment for southern coastal Tamil Nadu of
India by using remote sensing and GIS.” Nat. Hazards, 69(3), 1295–
1314. doi:10.1007/s11069-011-9962-x.
Mujabar, P.S., and Chandrasekar, N. (2013b). “Shoreline change ana-
lysis along the coast between Kanyakumari and Tuticorin of India
using remote sensing and GIS.” Arabian J. Geosci., 6(3), 647–664.
doi:10.1007/s12517-011-0394-4.
Natesan, U., and Parthasarathy, A. (2010). “The potential impacts of
sea level rise along the coastal zone of Kanyakumari District in
Tamilnadu, India.” J. Coastal Conserv., 14(3), 207–214.
Natesan, U., Parthasarathy, A., Vishnunath, R., Kumar, G.E.J., and
Ferrer, V.A. (2015). “Monitoring longterm shoreline changes
along Tamil Nadu, India using geospatial techniques.” Aquat.
Procedia, 325–332. Elsevier B.V., 4(Icwrcoe). doi:10.1016/j.
aqpro.2015.02.044.
Natesan, U., Thulasiraman, N., Deepthi, K., and Kathiravan, K. (2013).
“Shoreline change analysis of Vedaranyam coast, Tamil Nadu,
India.” Environ. Monit. Assess, 185(6), 5099–5109. doi:10.1007/
s10661-012-2940-2.
Nayak, S., and Bhaskaran, P.K. (2014). “Coastal vulnerability due to
extreme waves at Kalpakkam based on historical tropical cyclones
in the Bay of Bengal.” Int. J. Climatol., 34(5), 1460–1471.
Neumann Vafeidis, A.T., Zimmermann, J., and Nicholls, R.J.,.B.
(2015). “Future coastal population growth and exposure to sea-level
rise and coastal flooding–A global assessment.” PLOS ONE, 10(3),
e0118571.
Nguyen, T.T.X., Bonetti, J., Rogers, K., and Woodroffe, C.D. (2016).
“Indicator-based assessment of climate-change impacts on coasts: A
12 K.S.S. PARTHASARATHY AND P.C. DEKA
review of concepts, methodological approaches and vulnerability
indices.”Ocean Coastal Manage., 123, 18–43. doi:10.1016/j.
ocecoaman.2015.11.022.
Nicholls, R.J., Cazenave, A., and Rise, S. (2010). “Sea-level rise and its
impact on coastal zones.” Science, 328(5985), 1517–1520.
doi:10.1126/science.1183980.
Nicholls, R.J., and Mimura, N. (1999). “Regional issues raised by sea-
level rise and their policy implications.” Clim. Res, 11, 5-18.
Nicholls, R.J., P.P. Wong, V.R. Burkett, J.O. Codignotto, J.E. Hay, R.F.
McLean, S. Ragoonaden and C.D. Woodroffe, 2007: Coastal systems
and low-lying areas. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der
Linden and C.E. Hanson, eds., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK, 315-356.
Ocde, O. (2016). Ocean economy in 2030, OECD Publishing, Paris.
doi:10.1787/9789264251724-en.
Otsu, N. (1979). “A threshold selection method from gray-level histo-
grams.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 9(1), 62-66.
Ozyurt, G., Ergin, A., and Baykal, C. (2011). “Coastal vulnerability
assessment to sea level rise integrated with analytical hierarchy
process.” Coastal Eng. Proc., 1(32), 6.
Palmer, B.J., van der Elst, R., Mackay, F., Mather, A.A., Smith, A.M.,
Bundy, S.C., Thackeray, Z., Leuci, R., and Parak, O. (2011).
“Preliminary coastal vulnerability assessment for KwaZulu-Natal,
South Africa.” J. Coastal Res., SI (64), 1390–1395.
Pandian, P.K., Ramesh, S., Murthy, M.V.R., Ramachandran, S., and
Thayumanavan, S. (2004). “Shoreline changes and near shore pro-
cesses along Ennore Coast, East Coast of South India.”J Coast Res.
West Palm Beach, 20, 828–845. doi:10.2112/1551-5036(2004)20[828:
SCANSP]2.0.CO;2.
Parthasarathy, A., and Natesan, U. (2015). “Coastal vulnerability
assessment: A case study on erosion and coastal change along
Tuticorin, Gulf of Mannar.”Nat. Hazards, 75, 1713–1729.
doi:10.1007/s11069-014-1394-y.
Parthasarathy, K.S.S., Subbarayan, S., and Abijith, D. (2018).
“Shoreline change detection using geo-spatial techniques- a case
study for Cuddalore Coast.” 6th Int. Symp. Adv. Civil Environ.
Eng. Prac. Sustainable Dev. (ACEPS-2018), Faculty of Engineering,
University of Ruhuna Hapugala, Galle, Sri Lanka, 33–39.
Pendleton, E.A., Thieler, E.R., Williams, S.J., and Beavers, R. (2004).
“Coastal vulnerability assessment of Cumberland Island National
Seashore (CUIS)to sea-level rise.” U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
Report 2004-1196.
Pilkey, O.H., and Davis, T.W. (1987). “An analysis of coastal recession
models: North Carolina coast.” Sea-Level Fluctuation Coastal Evol.,
D. Nummedal, O.H. Pilkey, and J. Howard, eds., Society of
Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Special Publication
No. 41, pp. 59–68.
Poompavai, V., and Ramalingam, M. (2013). “Geospatial analysis for
coastal risk assessment to cyclones.” J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens., 41
(1), 157–176.
Pramanik, M.K., Biswas, S.S., Mondal, B., and Pal, R. (2016). “Coastal
vulnerability assessment of the predicted sea level rise in the coastal
zone of Krishna–Godavari delta region, Andhra Pradesh, east coast
of India.”Environ. Dev. Sustainability, 18, 1635–1655. doi:10.1007/
s10668-015-9708-0.
Rajasree, B.R., and Deo, M.C. (2018). “Evaluation of estuary shoreline
shift in response to climate change: A study from the central west
coast of India.” Land Degrad. Dev., 29(10), 3571–3583.
Rajawat, A.S., Chauhan, H.B., Ratheesh, R., Rode, S., Bhanderi, R.J.,
Mahapatra, M., Kumar, M., Yadav, R., Abraham, S.P., Singh, S.S.,
and Keshri, K.N. (2015). “Assessment of coastal erosion along the
Indian coast on 1 : 25, 000 scale using satellite data of 1989 – 1991
and 2004 – 2006 time frames.” Curr. Sci., 109(2), 347–353.
Raju, P.D.R., and Neelima, G. (2012). “Image segmentation by using
histogram thresholding.” IJCSET, 2(1), 776–779.
Rao, K.N., Subraelu, P., Rao, T.V., Malini, B.H., Ratheesh, R.,
Bhattacharya, S., Rajawat, A.S., and Ajai. (2009). “Sea-level rise and
coastal vulnerability: An assessment of Andhra Pradesh coast, India
through remote sensing and GIS.” J. Coastal Conserv., 12(4), 195–207.
Rao, V.R., Subramanian, B.R., Mohan, R., Kannan, R., Mageswaran, T.,
Arumugam, T., and Rajan, B. (2013). “Storm surge vulnerability
along Chennai-Cuddalore coast due to a severe cyclone THANE.”
Nat. Hazards, 68(2), 453–465. doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0630-1.
Saaty, T.L. (1977). “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical
structures.”J. Math. Psychol., 15, 234–281. doi:10.1016/0022-2496
(77)90033-5.
Sankari, T.S., Chandramouli, A.R., Gokul, K., Surya, S.S.M., and
Saravanavel, J. (2015). “Coastal vulnerability mapping using geos-
patial technologies in Cuddalore-Pichavaram Coastal Tract, Tamil
Nadu, India.” Aquat. Procedia, 4, 412–418.
Saranathan, E., Chandrasekaran, R., Manickaraj, D.S., and Kannan, M.
(2011). “Shoreline changes in Tharangampadi Village,
Nagapattinam District, Tamil Nadu, India-a case study.” J. Indian
Soc. Remote Sens., 39(1), 107–115. doi:10.1007/s12524-010-0052-4.
Saravanan, S., Jegankumar, R., Selvaraj, A., Jacinth Jennifer, J., and
Parthasarathy, K.S.S. (2019a). “Utility of landsat data for assessing
mangrove degradation in Muthupet Lagoon, South India.” Coastal
Zone Manage., 20, 471–484. Elsevier.
Saravanan, S., Parthasarathy, K.S.S., and Kumaresan, P.R. (2015).
“Shoreline change detection for chennai coast using geospatial.” 20th
Int. Conf. Hydraulics, Water Res. River Eng., IIT Roorkee, India, 17–19.
Saravanan, S., Parthasarathy, K.S.S., and Sivaranjani, S. (2019b).
“Assessing coastal aquifer to seawater intrusion: Application of
the GALDIT method to the Cuddalore Aquifer, India.” Coastal
Zone Manage., 10, 233–250. Elsevier.
Saravanan, S., Parthasarathy, K.S.S., and Vishnuprasath, S.R. (2019c).
“Monitoring spatial and temporal scales of shoreline changes in the
Cuddalore Region, India.” Coastal Zone Manage., 4, 99–112.
Elsevier.
Satta, A., Puddu, M., Venturini, S., and Giupponi, C. (2017).
“Assessment of coastal risks to climate change related impacts at
the regional scale: The case of the mediterranean region.” Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduct., 24, 284-296.
Seenath, A., Wilson, M., and Miller, K. (2016). “Hydrodynamic versus
GIS modelling for coastal flood vulnerability assessment: Which is
better for guiding coastal management?” Ocean Coastal Manage.,
120, 99–109.
Stafford, D.B., and Langfelder, J. (1971). “AIR PHOTO SURVEY OF
COASTAL EROSION.” Photogramm. Eng., 37(6), 565–575.
Sterr, H., Klein, R., and Reese, S. (2003). “Climate change and coastal
zones : An overview of the state-of-the-art on regional and local
vulnerability assessment.” Climate change in the Mediterranean, C.
Giupponi and M. Shechter, eds., Cheltenham, UK, 245–278.
Sudha Rani, N.N.V., Satyanarayana, A.N.V., and Bhaskaran, P.K.
(2015). “Coastal vulnerability assessment studies over India: A
review.” Nat. Hazards, 77(1), 405–428.
Tahri, M., Maanan, M., Maanan, M., Bouksim, H., and Hakdaoui, M.
(2017). “Using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process multi-criteria and
automatic computation to analyse coastal vulnerability.” Prog. Phys.
Geogr., 41, 268–285.
Thieler, E.R., and Hammar-Klose, E.S. (1999). “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.
Thieler, E.R., and Hammar-Klose, E.S. (2000). “National assessment of
coastal vulnerability to sea-level rise : Preliminary results for the U.
S. Gulf of Mexico Coast.” U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
00-179.
Thomas, D.S.K., Ertuˆgay, K., and Kemec¸, S. (2007). The Role of
Geographic Information Systems/Remote Sensing in Disaster
Management. Springer, New York, NY, 83–96. doi:10.1094/PDIS-
91-4-0467B
Tirkey, N., Biradar, R.S., Pikle, M., and Charatkar, S. (2005). “A study
on Shoreline changes of Mumbai coast using remote sensing and
GIS.” J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens., 33(1), 85–91. doi:10.1007/
BF02989995.
Torresan, S., Critto, A., Rizzi, J., and Marcomini, A. (2012).
“Assessment of coastal vulnerability to climate change hazards at

the regional scale: The case study of the North Adriatic Sea.” Nat.
Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 12(7), 2347–2368. doi:10.5194/nhess-12-
2347-2012.
Tran Thi, V., Tien Thi Xuan, A., Phan Nguyen, H., Dahdouh-Guebas,
F., and Koedam, N. (2014). “Application of remote sensing and GIS
for detection of long-term mangrove shoreline changes in Mui Ca
Mau, Vietnam.” Biogeosciences, 11(14), 3781–3795. doi:10.5194/bg-
11-3781-2014.
Unnikrishnan, A.S., and Shankar, D. (2007). “Are sea-level-rise trends
along the coasts of the north Indian Ocean consistent with global
estimates?” Glob. Planet. Change, 57(3–4), 301–307.
Vafeidis, A., Nicholls, R., and McFadden, L. (2003). “Developing a
database for global vulnerability analysis of coastal zones: The
DINAS-COAST project and the DIVA tool.” Remote Sens.
Transition, R. Goosens. eds., Millpress Science Publishers,
Rotterdam, 333–341.
ISH JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING 13
Van, T.T., and Binh, T.T. (2009). “Application of remote sensing for
shoreline change detection in Cuu Long estuary.” VNU J. Sci., 25
(4), 217–222.
Vinayaraj, P., Johnson, G., Udhaba Dora, G., Sajiv Philip, C., Sanil
Kumar, V., and Gowthaman, R. (2011). “Quantitative estimation of
coastal changes along selected locations of Karnataka, India: A GIS
and remote sensing approach.” Int. J. Geosci., 02(04), 385–393.
Warrick, R., Ye, W., Kouwenhoven, P., Hay, J.E., and Cheatham, C.
(2005). “New developments of the SimCLIM model for simulating
adaptation to risks arising from climate variability and change.”
MODSIM05 – Int. Congress Modell. Simul.: Adv. Appl. Manage.
Decis. Making, Proc., Canberra, Australia, 551–558.
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., and Davis, I. (2004). “At risk –
natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters second edi-
tion: Routledge, London.” J. Homeland Secur. Emergency Manage.,
2, 2.