Climate Change Implications for the United States Military: Analysis of Three Coastal Military Installations

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

POLITICAL SCIENCE

December 2020

By: Emily Anne Pesicka

Dissertation Committee: Jairus Grove, Chairperson Debora Halbert Nicole Grove Nevzat Soguk Makena Coffman

1 ABSTRACT

Climate change is shifting both the built and natural environments rapidly across the globe (Church & White 2006; Grant, 2017; IPCC 2007; National Research Council 2012; Wehner et al., 2018; Wuebbles et al., 2017; Wuebbles, 2018). Climate change poses new and emerging challenges for the U.S. Military in all branches and sectors; thus, it is vital to implement adaptation measures to combat the adverse effects on a branch wide basis (Brzoska, 2015; Holloway et al., 2015; Gunn, 2017; Goldstein and Greenberg, 2018). Moreover, a granular understanding of the specific impacts associated with each military installation, apparatus, command/personnel, and military property is necessary to implement the appropriate adaptation measure. Anthropogenic climate change poses many risks for the U.S. Military, including sea-level rise, extreme weather events, shoreline erosion, increased frequency and severity of storm surges, coastal flooding, shifting ecological conditions, changing marine and animal species that frequent a particular coastal area, threatened infrastructure, threatened operations, and climate change threaten the United States military operational readiness (Barnett, 2003; Beately, 2009; Hanak, 2012; Melillo, 2014; McGuire, 2013; Brzoska, 2015; Holloway et al., 2015; Gunn, 2017; Goldstein and Greenberg, 2018). The U.S. military assets threatened by climate change threats will become increasingly vulnerable to changes in seasonal, decadal, and centennial environmental conditions. Climate change will not be experienced uniformly across the nation or globe; some areas will face more significant levels and frequency of climate change threats. Therefore, a locality specific examination for each military branch and climate change impact is necessary. Effective responses will require the development of adaptive planning strategies based on the individual climate change threat and the specific location of the military installation, infrastructure, and or property (Barron 2012; Beately, 2009; Hanak, 2012; McGuire 2013; Brzoska, 2015; Holloway et al., 2015; Gunn, 2017; Goldstein and Greenberg, 2018). This dissertation includes three case studies, focusing on three branches of the military. The first two branches fall under the Department of Defense – the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps – and the third branch falls under the Department of Homeland Security – the United States Coast Guard. This dissertation postulates that the U.S. Military is undergoing a revolution prompted by external forces rather than technological advancements. The findings showed that climate change is impacting the U.S. Military in immense ways, from needing to

2 retrofit existing infrastructure to completely rebuilding after a hurricane. The findings also revealed that the U.S. Military is planning and/or trying to plan and prepare for the adverse effect of climate change impacts. Additionally, findings indicated that the U.S. Military climate change action plans would not entirely be resilient if the surrounding communities do not also enhance their climate resiliency. As such, this dissertation highlights how military installations are built into the very fabric of communities across the nation. It is critical for all U.S. Military installations, domestically and aboard, to craft climate action plans to enhance their military installations' resilience and their surrounding communities to manage the impending risks that climate threats pose effectively. The U.S. Military will be significantly hindered if continued site-specific, enterprise-wide, climate change planning and preparedness actions are not actualized. This research's significant contribution to the existing literature is as follows: first, adding to the existing body of knowledge through case study evaluation and SWOT analysis; Secondly, this study provides locality specific climate change policy and planning recommendations; and Lastly, how micro-level practices impact broader macro-level forced transformation.

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...... 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 4 LIST OF TABLES ...... 6 LIST OF FIGURES ...... 7 ABREVIATIONS ...... 8 CHAPTER ONE ...... 10 INTRODUCTION ...... 10 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...... 11 BACKGROUND: CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION AND THE U.S. MILITARY ...... 12 REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS (RMA’S): ...... 14 MILITARY REVOLUTION ...... 16 NATURE OF THE STUDY RESEARCH DESIGN ...... 20 RESEARCH QUESTIONS & HYPOTHESES ...... 22 ANALYSIS ...... 24 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CHAPTER TWO ...... 25 BACKGROUND AND CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ...... 25 INTRODUCTION ...... 25 SEA LEVEL RISE AND COASTAL FLOODING ...... 26 EXTREME WEATHER ...... 34 ICE SHEETS MELTING IN THE ARCTIC - MONITORING/EXPANDING PRESENCE IN THE ARCTIC ..... 41 RENEWABLE ENERGY AND SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS ...... 46 FORCE TRANSFORMATION AND DISSERTATION CONTRIBUTION ...... 19 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...... 52 CHAPTER THREE ...... 10 U.S. NAVY CASE STUDY ...... 53 INTRODUCTION ...... 53 STUDY AREA: REGIONAL CONTEXT ...... 55 CASE STUDY – NAVAL STATION NORFOLK ...... 56 SWOT ANALYSIS THREATS: EXTERNAL ...... 58 SUBSIDING LAND ...... 62 COASTAL EROSION ...... 64 HURRICANES ...... 66 SWOT ANALYSIS OPPORTUNITIES: EXTERNAL ...... 68 SWOT ANALYSIS STRENGTHS: INTERNAL ...... 72 SWOT ANALYSIS WEAKNESSES: INTERNAL ...... 73 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...... 79 CHAPTER FOUR ...... 81 U.S. COAST GUARD CASE STUDY ...... 81

4 INTRODUCTION ...... 81 STUDY AREA: REGIONAL CONTEXT ...... 82 CASE STUDY – U.S. COAST GUARD STATION SANDY HOOK ...... 83 SWOT ANALYSIS THREATS: EXTERNAL ...... 85 SUBSIDING LAND ...... 87 COASTAL EROSION ...... 89 LAND LOSS ...... 91 HURRICANES ...... 92 SWOT ANALYSIS OPPORTUNITIES: EXTERNAL ...... 94 SWOT ANALYSIS STRENGTHS: INTERNAL ...... 97 SWOT ANALYSIS WEAKNESSES: INTERNAL ...... 99 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...... 104 CHAPTER FOUR ...... 53 U.S. MARINE CORPS CASE STUDY ...... 106 INTRODUCTION ...... 106 STUDY AREA: REGIONAL CONTEXT AND CASE STUDY IMPORTANCE ...... 108 SWOT ANALYSIS THREATS: EXTERNAL ...... 110 COASTAL EROSION ...... 112 HURRICANES AND OTHER SEVERE STORMS ...... 113 WILDFIRES ...... 116 SWOT ANALYSIS OPPORTUNITIES: EXTERNAL OPPORTUNITIES ...... 118 SWOT ANALYSIS STRENGTHS: INTERNAL ...... 120 SWOT ANALYSIS WEAKNESSES: INTERNAL ...... 121 CHAPTER SUMMARY ...... 126 CHAPTER SIX ...... 106 DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS, AND CONCLUSION .... 128 INTRODUCTION ...... 128 DISCUSSION ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. OVERARCHING RECOMMENDATIONS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESEARCH FINDINGS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTIONS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. MILITARY REVOLUTION, EVOLUTION OR BOTH ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CLOSING REMARKS ...... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX ...... 147 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 149

5 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the Naval Station Norfolk ...... 58

Table 2: Recommendation Section ...... 76

Table 3: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook

...... 85

Table 4: Recommendation Section ...... 102

Table 5: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune ...... 109

Table 6: Recommendation Section ...... 124

Table 7: Overarching Recommendations ...... 131

Table 8: Overarching Weaknesses ...... 132

Table 9: Overarching Strengths ...... 134

6 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Military installations on the front lines of climate change ...... 26

Figure 2. Hampton Road's Region Federal Facilities and Municipalities ...... 53

Figure 3. Hampton Roads Map ...... 55

Figure 4. US Coast Guard Station and the surrounding region...... 82

Figure 5. Historical Sites within the Sandy Hook Peninsula and the current operating are of the

US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook ...... 83

Figure 6. US Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station New River, Camp

Geiger, Camp Johnson and the surrounding region...... 108

7 ABREVIATIONS

CDC Center for Disease Control

DFAS Defense Financing and Accounting Services

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DLA Defense Logisitc Agency

DoD Department of Defense

GAI Glacial Isostatic Adjustment

GDP Gros Domesitic Product

GEMS General Ensemble Biogeochemical Modeling System

ID Dependent Variable

IV Independent Variable

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NDS National Defense Strategy

NMS National Military Strategy

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NPL The Superfund Programs National Priority List

NSS National Security Strategy

RMA Revolution in Miliary Affairs

SWAN Simulating Wave Nearshore

SWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats

U.S. United States

USCS United States Coast Guard

USMC United States Marine Corps

8 USN United States Navy

WHS Washington Headquarters services

9 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The U.S Military is at a critical moment in history where they have the opportunity to be a leader, nationally and internationally, in climate risk management. Climate change is a risk both domestically and abroad. The U.S. Military will need to respond to internal challenges caused by the exogenous change in various threats. Research has shown that climate change poses one of the greatest threats environmentally. Climate change can also be a threat to both domestic and international peace and security. As such, the U.S. Military needs to respond to climate change as a threat by challenging existing lawful use-of-force models (Nevitt, 2015). In fact, in one report in 2006, a group of retired senior United States military officers defined climate change as a ‘threat multiplier for instability’ (CNA, 2007, p. 6). With imminent climate change, the U.S. Military faces multiple risks related to military assets, infrastructure damage, disrupted maintenance schedules, impacts on training, education, and troops' preparation, threats to military readiness, and forward military operations. Further identifying these risks, understanding how to manage them, and highlighting policy recommendations to decrease the risks associated with exogenous change are intrinsically linked to enhancing resilience. The U.S. Military can cultivate resilience by utilizing SWOT analysis – identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. From the information derived from the SWOT analysis. By productively and proactively managing the risks of exogenous change, the U.S. Military can adapt to its fluctuating operating environments. This dissertation includes three case studies, focusing on three branches of the military. The first two branches fall under the Department of Defense (DOD) – the United States Navy (USN) and the United States Marine Corps (USMC). The third case study focuses on the The United States Coast Guard (USCG) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). 1The DHS has very clearly articulated that “climate change will affect critical infrastructure, personnel, missions and facilities” (Department of Homeland Security, n.d.). Both the DHS and the DOD believe that climate change is a “threat multiplier” (Department of Homeland Security,

1 Providing some discussion and insight into the current climate change stance that the Department of Homeland Security is necessary. The Department of Homeland Security stated missions include “anti-terrorism, border security, immigration and customs, cyber security and disaster prevention and management” (Department of Homeland Security, 2019).

10 n.d.). In 2012, DHS issued a Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap that initiated the beginning stages of accounting for the adverse effects that climate change poses for them. In 2014, DHS issued a Climate Action Plan Addendum and the Arctic Strategy in 2013.

Problem Statement

The U.S. military and its actions to mitigate or adapt to a changing climate as an institution are not typically discussed. The majority of environment-related discussions associated with national security revolve around global destruction, global food shortages, global water shortages, decreased diversity in flora and fauna, and the ever-looming threat of the next big severe weather event (Butler, 2018; Papalexiou, AghaKouchak, Trenberth, & Foufoula- Georgiou, 2017; Shepherd et al., 2018). It is apparent that a changing climate also prompts new responses from all branches of the U.S. Military. The U.S. Military, particularly those exemplified in this research, will need to respond to internal challenges and external challenges of national and international food and water shortages, increased humanitarian needs, changed missions based on new landscapes and climates. Resolving emerging disputes over water, land, and fishing of newly formed navigable waterways will become built into U.S. Military missions in the future. These climate change threats change the U.S. Military force structure and the U.S. Military force posture fundamentally. Climate change is changing the way the U.S. military will operate on a day-today basis. The U.S. Military will be vastly hindered if continued site-specific, enterprise comprehensive climate change planning, and preparedness actions are not actualized (Mililo, Richmond, & Yohe, 2014; Schwab, 2014; United States Government Accountability Office, 2015). There is a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations. The U.S. Military’s climate change action plans will not fully be resilient if the surrounding communities do not also enhance their climate resilience (Fox, Zuidema, Bauman, Burke, & Sheehan, 2019). It is unknown to what extent the U.S. Military has provided positive outcomes for resolving climate changes. The examination of the current literature shows a gap in research on this topic. The recent study will examine this issue and will delineate supporting solutions to

11 resolve the climate change threats to fill this gap. Thus, the current study's overall purpose and goal will be to provide a detailed account of the climate change impacts threatening each military installation selected and provide recommendations for each case study. Moreover, this research will showcase the current climate change adaptation efforts for the U.S. Military, United States Navy (USN), United States Coast Guard (USCG), and the United States Marine Corps (USMC).

Background: Climate Change Adaptation and the U.S. Military

It is apparent that a changing climate prompts new responses from all branches of the U.S. Military. The U.S. Military, particularly those exemplified in this research, will need to respond to internal challenges caused by the exogenous change in the form of threats to military assets, infrastructure damage, disrupted maintenance schedules, impacts to training, education, and preparation of troops, threats to military readiness, and forward military operations. The U.S. Military as a whole will need to respond to external challenges of national and international food and water shortages, increased humanitarian needs, changed missions based on new landscapes and climates (Melilo et al., 2014). They will be put in a position to resolve emerging disputes over water, land, and fishing of newly formed navigable waterways. These climate change threats change the U.S. Military force structure and the U.S. Military force posture fundamentally. Climate change is changing the way the U.S. military will operate on a day-today basis. Climate change science has undergone tremendous scrutiny within the United States over the past several decades. The Bush Administration altered, tampered with, and denied climate- related scientific evidence (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2005). Big oil and big industry- funded climate denial science and rhetoric (Baxter, 2015; Climate Home News, 2013). The Obama administration produced an Action Plan to Fight Climate Change.2 However, these small efforts were undermined by the Trump Administration’s avoidance, denial, and dismantling of federal rules regarding carbon output and deprivation that climate change is a national security

2 Climate Change and President Obama’s Action Plan https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate-change accessed on September 6, 2015. Presidential Executive orders – Mainly from the Obama White House – EX order (EO) 13653, EO 13690, EO 13514 and Obama issues a Climate Action Plan in 2013. DoD began the task of implementing these EO’s, study conducted in 2003 however large initiatives started to gain momentum in 2009 with the founding of the Navy forming its Task Force Climate Change. However, under the Trump administration these have started to be dismantled.

12 issue.3 Throughout this political history, one thing is sure: climate change has been at the forefront of national discussion. The Department of Defense’s (DoD) stance on climate change is centered on the national security debate. The following excerpt summarizes the DoD’s view on climate change: The Department of Defense's primary responsibility is to protect national security interests around the world. This involves considering all aspects of the global security environment and planning appropriately for potential contingencies and the possibility of unexpected developments both in the near and the longer terms. In this context, the department must consider the effects of climate change -- such as sea-level rise, shifting climate zones, and more frequent and intense, severe weather events -- and how these effects could impact national security.4 Roughly twenty-eight DOD senior officials have formally and openly discussed their concerns regarding the security implications that anthropogenic climate change poses to military readiness and national security (The Center for Climate and Security, 2019). The DOD sees climate change as a present and future threat to military readiness, military training, and operational success. Under President Trump, the U.S.’s current stance on climate change can be discerned from national defense reports, documents, statements, and even social media. Three updated capstone strategic guidance documents, the National Security Strategy (NSS), the National Defense Strategy (NDS), and the National Military Strategy (NMS), have emerged since Trump was inaugurated in 2017. The National Security Strategy (NSS) is a document prepared by the executive branch for Congress, which summarizes the most pressing national security issues and subsequent plans to address these security concerns. An important nuance to consider is that the United States' executive branch dictates the critical national security concerns. The Secretary of Defense's Office produces the National Defense Strategy (NDS) as a culminating guidance directive for the DOD. This document also transforms and mobilizes the National Security

3 Climate Change and the Trump administration accessed on February 18, 2018 from the following websites: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report- finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.231ce8398def, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/donald-trump-climate-change-skeptic-denial/510359/, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40128034, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/explained- donald-trump-attack-environment-171203184502851.html, and https://www.nola.com/environment/2018/02/how_new_orleans_area_military_1.html 4 DoD Releases Report on Security Implications of Climate Change http://www.defense.gov/News-Arcticle- View/Arcticle/612710 accessed on September 5, 2015.

13 Strategy guidance, which describes how each branch of the military along with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), the Defense Financing and Accounting Service (DFAS), and the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS), has specific responsibilities toward climate-related events (Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, 2019). This strategic report outlines the effects and protocols for changing climate and how each participant can increase installation resiliency and operational viability. The NDS and the NMS are guided by the NSS document, articulating the most critical security concerns that the Executive branch should or should not deem as national security threats. The purpose of understanding these three strategic cornerstone documents is that they dictate what the U.S. military does, how they do it, where they operate, and the future of military operations. Importantly for the future of climate change readiness, President Trump has intentionally and strategically removed climate change as a national security issue. Removal of climate change from the guiding documents makes climate change planning and preparedness for the DOD and DHS increasingly difficult and underfunded. Funding for climate change action plans to prepare, adapt, and safeguard military installations and assets from climate change impacts is vital to the United States' future stability. Even in the face of climate change denial at the highest levels of the United States government, the DOD and DHS are planning and preparing for climate change impacts. Current U.S. military climate change actions and policies include infrastructure enforcement to have coastal armament in the form of seawall restructuring, the building of new seawalls, restructuring low-lying areas and infrastructure, mitigating coastal and extreme weather flooding, mitigating and training for extreme heat and cold events, along with many other adaptation efforts. Additionally, the greening of America’s Military through alternative fuels, alternative energy sources, and enhancing renewable and sustainability efforts are essential aspects of all U.S. Military branches' adaptation efforts.

Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA’s):

Revolution in Military Affairs originated by the Soviet Armed Forces in the 1970s and 1980s, most notably Marshal Nikolia Ogarkov (Metz and Kievit, 1995). Soviet officers realized technology was changing the balance of power, making the Soviet Armed Forces doctrine and technology obsolete compared to the U.S. (Reynolds and Vince, 2011). This technology included

14 computers, communications systems, space surveillance (including satellites), and long-range missiles. Andrew Marshall, who was the United States Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment from 1973-2015, introduced this concept into the United States military circles in the 1970s. Revolution in Military Affairs as a concept eventually gained credibility. Other nations started investigating shifts in their countries' military organizations and technologies – most notably China’s People’s Liberation Army, Canada, United Kingdom, and Russia, to name a few (Metz and Kievit, 1995). After the U.S. triumph in the 1991 Gulf War, the concept of revolution in military affairs reemerged with renewed interest (Metz and Kievit, 1995). A Global renewed interest in RMA’s was sparked because the U.S.’s superior technology reduced their opponent's overall power – the Iraqi military (Metz and Kievit, 1995). Moreover, in 1997 an exercise carried out by the U.S. Army called “Force 21” tested the application of private-sector technology that was modified for the U.S. military to improve communications and logistics (United States Army, 1995). Nonetheless, changing technologies have been a driving force in the concept of revolutions in military affairs. Revolution in military affairs has described different driving forces of change and has been defined in multiple ways. Three fundamental versions of revolutions in military affairs have emerged, beginning with the idea of nation-state decline, the second being a “systems to systems” perspective, and the third being that a real military revolution has not happened and is unlikely in the future. The first version of revolution in military affairs originated with authors such as Sean J.A. Edwards, Carl H. Builder, and Lt. Col. Ralph Peters. These authors note that the revolution in military affairs is in response to the decline of the nation-state, a need for different types of forces in the future, and the nature of emerging international order that is creating a need for a military revolution (Hundley, 1999). This revolution focuses on changing military force posture, changing the military force structure, and changing the way international engagements are made. The second RMA being a “systems to systems” perspective that is most commonly associated with the concept of revolution in military affairs. This type of revolution in military affairs is a widespread phenomenon and is generally categorized as a class of large-scale systems components (Owens, 1995). Common examples include enterprise-wide networks, large scale Internet mobility, and integrated transportation systems. Additionally, the five major principle

15 characteristics of a systems-to-systems of a revolution in military affairs perspective are as follows: Operational independence of elements; managerial independence of elements; evolutionary development; emergent behavior; and lastly, geographic distribution (Maier, 1997). Finally, the third being that a real military revolution has not happened and is unlikely to in the future. This third concept of revolution in military affairs can be associated with Michael E. O’Hanlon and Fredrick Kagan. These scholars point out that the fundamental bases for this concept are technological advancements. Most of the “new” technologies that the military utilizes were in production before 1991 – before the information technology boom and the internet (O’Hanlon, 2011). I would argue that fundamental bases for these technologies were in production before 1991. However, new and emergent technologies and new ways to mobilize and use them are emerging. Alternatively, to add more clarity to the discussion and balance, some critics postulate that a revolution within the military might amount to detrimental consequences producing economic strain, decreased strength as a military superpower, and could be led to counterproductive measures. These critics call for a more gradual change or shift in military affairs calling for evolution instead of a revolution (Branch-Evans, 2001). I will expand on this further as this chapter develops. I will utilize two fundamental developments within the revolution in military affairs concept. Starting with the first version of revolution in military affairs, the decline of the nation- state, a need for different types of forces in the future, and the nature of emerging international order create a need for a military revolution (Hundley, 1999). The second being a “systems to systems” perspective, that is most commonly associated with the concept of revolution in military affairs. In the following section, I will discuss the evolution of force transformation.

Military Revolution

For centuries, militaries worldwide have been at the forefront of societal change and have undergone profound and monumental changes.. Based on from the work of numerous scholars, most notably Max Boot, Geoffrey Parker, William H. McNeill, and Michael O’Hanlon, global militaries have undergone four technological revolutions: the gunpowder revolution, the first and second industrial revolutions, and finally the advent of the information age. The first military revolution, the gunpowder revolution, began in the late sixteenth century and was the first in a

16 series of revolutions that defined how wars were fought and conflicts and wars were managed. The second military revolution, the first industrial revolution, began in the late nineteenth century. This revolution brought about rapid communications, large-scale transportation, and the internal combustion engine. The third military revolution, a more radical industrial revolution, began in the early-to-mid twentieth century. This military revolution led to the mass production of sophisticated ships, planes, and tanks. The fourth military revolution, the current military revolution, or what I term the information revolution, was prompted by intelligence security and the increased connectivity of nations due to high-speed communication and globalization (Boot, 2006; McNeill, 2013; O’Hanlon, 2011; Parker, 1996). Michael Roberts proposed Military Revolution as a concept in 1955 (Roberts, 1956). Robert's focus was on Sweden during 1560- 1660, which led to his prediction that the changing European way of war led to permanent standing forces. These changes to the European military affairs also prompted changes in the political and governmental landscape, which created new financial demands, and encouraged increased administrative support (Roberts, 1956). However, support for the concept of the Military Revolution or Revolutions in Military affairs changed. Military historians, including Michael Duff and Jeremy Black, strongly criticized the idea as being misleading, simplistic, and exaggerated (Black, 1995; Duffy, 1980). Additionally, there have been some debates about the timeframe that Roberts’ military revolution occurred to include Jeremy Black's critique (Black, 1995; Eltis, 1995). Following Roberts, Duff, Black, Eltis, and others, Clifford J. Rogers developed the idea of successful military revolutions at different periods (Rogers, 2000). Rogers outlined five various revolutions beginning with the 14th century “infantry revolution,” “artillery revolution” of the 15th century, “fortifications revolution” in the 16th, “fire weapons” between 1580-1630, and the fifth revolution, the increase of the European standing armies between 1650-1715 (Rogers, 1995; Rogers, 2000). Roger's work not only outlined various military revolutions, but it also extended the period from Robert's earlier predictions. Moreover, another scholar that has furthered the development of the concept of Military Revolutions is Geoffrey Parker. Geoffrey Parker’s work focused on military innovation and the rise of the west from 1500-1800 (Parker, 1996). This period of time, Parker outlines, is when Europeans achieved hegemony over the rest of the world.

17 Needless to say, that the concept of military revolutions has developed since its inception. Just as Roberts was criticized for his argument's validity, so has the scholarly work on the evolution of the concept of military revolutions – Rogers and Parker's work (Ayton, 2011). Rogers, in his paper titled “The Military Revolutions of the Hundred Years’ War,” discusses that military revolutions can be compared to a theory originating in biology called “punctuated equilibrium evolution.” Rogers suggests the military revolutions are a short burst of rapid military innovation followed by long periods of relative inactivity (Rogers, 1993). For my dissertation, I will use the definition of military revolution by Louis E.H. Reynolds and Zoe C. Vince at the University of Birmingham War Studies: A term to describe a period in history which has witnessed widespread and irreversible development in the areas of doctrine, technology, organization, and society, leading to decisive victories on the part of the army or country employing these new methods. The adoption of such influential new techniques and technology is then emulated by all rivals and neighbors where practicable (Reynolds & Vince, 2011). This concept of military revolution, and scholarly work surrounding this concept, is vital to this research because it not only showcases a period in history that experienced massive transformation to military organization and society, military policy, and technology, but it also outlines how other militaries across the globe started to revolutionize. This concept provides a foundation for understanding military change or how the militaries undergo change. Military’s around the world have changed throughout history and will continue to in the future. The concept of military revolution was a precursor to the concept of Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). In the following paragraphs, I will discuss the evolution and definition of revolution in military affairs. This dissertation postulates whether or not the U.S. military is currently undergoing a military revolution, evolution, or both. Revolutions are far-reaching, forceable, drastic, disruptive, and create significant change (Grainer, 1989). This study outlines RMA’s evolution of how the military wages war includes changes to military doctrine, operations, and organizational concepts and ultimately changes how military operations are carried out. Internal forces have prompted past RMA’s, and the military has had the luxury to control all aspects of

18 these revolutions. However, this study proposes the fifth revolution in military affairs, prompted by external, uncontrollable forces – the environment.

Force Transformation and Dissertation Contribution

For this dissertation, it is essential to briefly discuss force transformation and how the military has transformed throughout history. This discussion gives substance and profound evidence that we are amid a new revolution in military affairs. Moreover, it provides culminating linkages between the above discussions regarding climate change and this dissertations’ research goals and design. Force Transformation, also referred to as defense transformation, as defined by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in 2003 as: A process that shapes the changing nature of military competition and cooperation through new combinations of concepts, capabilities, people, and organizations that exploit our nation’s advantages and protect against our asymmetric vulnerabilities to sustain our strategic position helps underpin peace and stability in the world.5 This definition of force transformation and the usage of both Force Transformation and defense transformation will be used interchangeably in the dissertation as discussed below. Militaries around the globe have undergone profound and monumental changes since the 1500s. Based on literature, most notably Max Boot, Geoffrey Parker, William H. McNeill, and Michael O’Hanlon, global militaries have undergone four technological revolutions: gunpowder, the first and second industrial revolutions, and finally the advent of the information age. The first military revolution, the gunpowder revolution, began in the late sixteenth century and was the first wave of revolution to how wars were fought, and conflicts and disputes were managed. The second military revolution, the first industrial revolution, began in the late nineteenth century, bringing rapid communications, large-scale transportation, and the internal combustion engine. The third military revolution, a more radical industrial revolution, began in the early-to-mid twentieth century and led to sophisticated ships, planes, and tanks. The fourth military revolution, the current military revolution, or what I term the information revolution, was

5 Rumsfeld, Donald H. "Transformation Planning Guidance." Washington, DC: Department of Defense (2003): 6-7.

19 prompted by intelligence security and the increased connectivity of nations due to high-speed communication and globalization (Boot, 2006; McNeill, 2013; O’Hanlon, 2011; Parker, 1996). This dissertation postulates that a fifth military revolution is on the horizon. This military revolution is not prompted by human ingenuity or will, but rather is emerging out of necessity due to exogenous change. Climate change is driving a revolution in military affairs, as a result, we will see a shift in how the military and nature interact. In other words, climate change is altering the military, rather than the military altering the environment, commonplace for centuries.6 The legacy of militaries being able to ‘bend’ the environment to whatever their objectives are contemporaneous with the emergence of the first human civilizations. However, the fifth US military revolution will change how militaries operate at home and in foreign territories. By utilizing SWOT analysis, this dissertation will showcase what the U.S. military is already doing and what they need to do in the future to increase their resilience to site-specific climate change impacts. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss the nature of the study research design.

Nature of the Study Research Design

The methodological approach for this research hinges on utilizing a strategic organization tool of the SWOT analysis, evaluating the Strengths – Weaknesses – Opportunities – and Threats (Helms et al., 2010). Data was collected using SWOT analysis and a climate change risk and response matrix to show if each branch has mitigated and prepared measures to acclimate to climate changes within the past ten years. The current study will examine SWOT analysis in a historical, theoretical, time frame perspective as an effective situation analysis technique that plays a vital role in requiring strategic planning. Using a SWOT analysis will determine each area’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats and where, how, or even if they have improved over the past 20 years.

6 For further information please see: Deudney, Daniel. "The case against linking environmental degradation and national security." Green Planet Blues: Critical Perspectives on Global Environmental Politics (2014): 273; Shulman, Seth. "The threat at home: Confronting the toxic legacy of the US military." (1992); Li, Quan, and Rafael Reuveny. "Democracy and environmental degradation." International studies quarterly 50, no. 4 (2006): 935-956; Finger, Matthias. Global environmental degradation and the military. No. MIR-CHAPTER-2010-057. Dartmouth Publishing, 1993; Suhrke, Astri, and Sanjoy Hazarika. "Pressure points: Environmental degradation, migration and conflict." Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1993.

20 The researcher will first measure how prepared each branch is in terms of climate changes focusing on changes based on the past two government administrations. This research will examine three case studies covering three branches of the U.S. Military – USN, USCG, and the USMC. These three branches have more bases, infrastructure, and assets located near coastal environments than the U.S. military components. These coastal installations have been identified as moderate to high vulnerability areas that can experience more severe, frequent, and consistent climate change threats. Moreover, selecting these three military bases is that these bases are located near other military installations. The three military facilities that this dissertation will examine are Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia, USCG Station Sandy Hook in New Jersey, and Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. While adaptation and mitigation are the two primary policy responses to climate change, this dissertation will focus solely on adaptation responses to exogenous change because transformation is about risk management. Managing risk is a fundamental mission of the U.S. Military. Succinctly, the current study will address the need for prevention measures against climate changes, how the USMC, USN, and USCG presently handle such mitigation, and how these three branches of the military can improve upon such methods of prevention. The use of the SWOT analysis process which includes four key areas – Strengths (internal factors), Weaknesses (internal factors), Opportunities (external factors), and Threats (external factors) (Gürel, 2017; Markovska et al. 2009; Mindtools website, 2019). SWOT analysis is useful because it provides a framework to help explore new solutions; identify barriers that could limit objectives; reveal possibilities and limitations for change and identify weaknesses and strengths. SWOT analysis, originally used as a planning tool for companies, has infiltrated beyond the organizational level to the industry sector (Kumar and Putman, 2008 and Armer and Daim, 2010), environmental planning (Terrados et al., 2007; Nikolaou et al., 2010; Yuan, 2013; and Chen et al., 2014) emergency management and planning (Adkins, 2010; Wood et al., 2014) to nation-building (Duarte et al., 2006 and Helms et al., 2011) and is a planning tool that is widely used across many academic disciplines. Because there is a need to identify all areas – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats – SWOT analysis has been identified as the methodological approach for this research (Markovska, et al. 2009; Gürel, 2017; Mindtools website, 2019).

21 Some SWOT analyses can be subjective, and sometimes the research may not provide a concise consensus (Fertel et al., 2013). Moreover, another challenge with SWOT analysis is distinguishing internal and external factors, which adds confusion regarding the strengths and opportunities or the threats and weaknesses (Fertel et al., 2013). However, clearly articulating the internal and external factors before performing the SWOT analysis for each case study should reduce this methodological concern. Moreover, having clearly stated case studies analyzed with a SWOT analysis is essential to my dissertation's rigor. This dissertation will include a recommendations section for each case study based on the SWOT analysis process's information. Because there is a need to identify all areas – strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats – SWOT analysis has been identified as the most appropriate instrumentation to use as a measurement tool for this research (Gürel, 2017; Helms et al., 2010; Markovska et al. 2009; Mindtools website, 2019). Conducting a SWOT analysis is useful in demonstrating the point about the revolution in military affairs. That is, the utilization of SWOT analysis could justify the extent to which the military is, in reality, in charge, and control of climate change threats. The use of SWOT analysis could also allow exploring new solutions, identifying barriers that could limit objectives, a revelation of possibilities and limitations for change, and identifying weaknesses and strengths in how the U.S. Military needs to adapt to a world need to adapt. For example, the opportunities section of the SWOT analysis could yield important information on the kinds of resources the U.S. Military has and how they can utilize their strengths to decrease their weaknesses at the same time. In addition to case-specific recommendations, this research will provide overarching recommendations that span all three sister services surveyed. These recommendations will showcase the significant weaknesses to climate adaptation plans for the U.S. Military by identifying the urgency and timelines for each climate change impact, categorize the resource requirements needed to implement adaptation measures, and pinpoint the strengths that the U.S. Military has to enable useful and necessary climate change adaption and preparedness plans.

Research Questions & Hypotheses

The overarching research questions below guide the exploration of this dissertation. The overall purpose and goal are to provide a detailed understanding of the climate change impacts threatening each military installation selected and provide recommendations for each case study.

22 Moreover, this research will showcase the current climate change adaptation efforts for the U.S. Military – USN, USCG, and USMC. This study's narrow focus is to try and understand how the military is a distinct kind of institution, how the military learns differently, and how the challenges of climate change affect the military differently. This dissertation's parameters exclude many other questions that hold the same significance that this research carries. Therefore, this research will not focus on the critical questions on the periphery of this research that deal with issues such as the efficacy of climate change science and how the U.S. Military is one of the world's largest contributors to climate change.

RQ1: What identifiers are found in the SWOT analysis for each case study that shows the branch of military examined are productively and proactively managing the risks of exogenous change? The U.S. Military can adapt to its fluctuating operating environments. RQ2: How can the U.S. military actualize climate change planning and preparedness actions against exogenous change risks? RQ3: What hinders the U.S. Military in climate risk management planning and preparedness actions for exogenous change risks? RQ4: Is there a need for more granular research on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations? H1: There is a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations

H10: There is not a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations RQ5: Is the U.S. Military on the brink of or amid a military revolution? H2: The U.S. Military is on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution.

H20: The U.S. Military is not on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution. RQ6: Is the U.S. Military on the brink of or amid a military evolution? H3: The U.S. Military is on the brink or in the midst of military evolution.

H30: The U.S. Military is not on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution.

23 RQ7: Is the U.S. Military’s climate change action plans fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience? H4: The U.S. Military’s climate change action plans are fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience.

H40: The U.S. Military’s climate change action plans are not fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience

Analysis

The approach to analysis for this research stems from a three-fold examination outlined below. (1) The first part focuses on investigating and establishing the USN, USCG, and the USMC installation case study area. This dissertation outlines the study area with detailed attention to climate change's vulnerability to the regional context and case study site in this area of examination. (2) The second part includes assessing the USN, USCG, and the USMC strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that climate change magnifies for each case study site (SWOT analysis). This section will provide a stepping stone for the final level of analysis. (3) The third part identifies case-specific, branch-specific, and locality specific recommendations derived throughout the first two parts of this analysis process. (4) To determine whether or not the U.S. Military is undergoing a revolution in military affairs.

In the next chapter, this dissertation will provide a literature review on the scholarly work surrounding this dissertation. Moreover, in the next chapter, this dissertation will provide some contextual information pretaining to claimte change impacts that affect the U.S. Military.

24 CHAPTER TWO

BACKGROUND AND CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS

Introduction

The earth has entered what many are calling the Anthropocene, a geological period where human activities are the most important drivers of environmental and ecological change (Ehlers, Eckart, & Kraft, 2006; Miller, Kopp, Horton, Browning, & Kemp, 2013; Mitchell et al., 2016). Anthropogenic forces have resulted in global climate change.7 The increase in global temperatures also warms seawater; the water molecules' expansion causes glacier and ice caps to melt, further warming the waters and interfering with oceanic currents, which trigger more significant weather events hurricanes and typhoons (Janin, 2012). Climate change is an environmental phenomenon that creates weather conditions that test the resiliency of human- made infrastructure. As extreme weather events such as hurricanes develop problems such as sustained sea level rise damage to coastal installations, these coastal installations missions become compromised (Morris, 2020). While climate change is currently underway, and research findings support increased frequency and damage occurring because of climatic events tied to warming, the political will to address the problem persists (Lee & Torney, 2013). Politics will continue to have a pervasive impact on decision-making, and decisions about how the US should continue to manage strategic alliances with other countries where military installations exist will remain a vital issue (Werrell & Femia, 2015). This section of the dissertation includes an exhaustive review of climate change literature and its relationship with military installations. Based on the scholarly and practical literature included in this dissertation, research is necessary to understand climate change implications on military installations. This chapter will also outline the specific threats and localities on the front lines of climate change for the US military. This chapter serves as a literature review of the current scholarship surrounding climate change. Moreover, this chapter's topics also serve as foundational knowledge to the subsequent case study chapters in this research.

7 For further exploration on the topic of the Anthropocene please refer to the following literatures; Anthropocene Journal, Encyclopedia of Earth, Department of Oceanography at Texas A&M webpage, Science Daily webpage, PJ Crutzen 2006, W Steffen et all 2007, J Zalasiewicz, In a dissertation, you really can’t say ‘and many more’. You have to list them.

Figure 1. Military installations on the front lines of climate change

Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding

The global sea level is rising primarily because global temperatures are rising. Moreover, the global sea-level rise average has increased 7 to 8 inches since 1900 – half of which has occurred since 1993 (Post, 2018). Sea level rise projections are based on sequential time intervals. With the calculated increase of sea levels, these estimated time intervals are 8-23 cm by 2030, 18-48 cm by 2050, and 50-140 cm by 2100 (National Research Council, 2012). There are variations within each calculated interval because these projections are based on future greenhouse emissions uncertainty. Future calculated sea-level rise projections pose severe threats to the USN, USCG, and USMC installations and infrastructure located near the coast. Sea level rise threatens coastal environments, both built and natural, across the globe. Climate change and its consequences are now problems that militaries across the globe must address. As greenhouse gases continue to cause arctic thawing activities, military installations remain under threat (Brzoska, 2012). Brzoska (2012) noted that global climate change can bring about domestic disasters and that sea rise problems could damage national

26 military installations. Brzoska (2012) indicated that the solution to this problem must be broad. The government should play a role, mainly where there could be a domestic policy that influences greenhouse gas creation activities. Public policy in countries with a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions such as the US, the UK, Russia, and China limits their approach to the problem, especially where they fail to implement changes that will reduce consumption through economic policies. Brzoska (2012) described the situation as one with potential national security implications because of the damage that climate change will cause to military installations. Moreover, Brzoska concluded that governments must proactively address the problem to reduce its impact and plan for the potential damage that climate change will cause through the sea-level rise. Hawkins (2012) also acknowledged the problem, focusing on the issue from US military installations. His focus was on the military facilities located in the State of Virginia. Hawkins’ (2012) discussion of the state of the issue where there is a lack of political support to address the problem was consistent with Brzoska (2012). He noted that the US Congress has failed to address the issue will continue to fail to address it. Hawkins (2012) also added that climate change would become a significant threat to US national security because sea level rise will cause substantial problems for military installations; hence, more must be understood about the current military and potential sea-level upgrade facilities the globe. The problem of sea-level rise is one that researchers continue to examine. Burks-Copes (2013) described the issue as a consequence of global warming as greenhouse gases continue to warm the atmosphere and oceans at accelerated rates, noting that polar ice caps are melting and adding to the ocean’s volume. Courchamp et al. (2014) explored climate change concerning sea- level rise and conservation, supporting further research on the issue because of the impact of rising sea levels on island biodiversity. The effect of sea-level rise on biodiversity is critical because of the implications of coastal disruption have on ecosystems. For example, Galbraith et al. (2002) discovered that sea-level rise caused by climate change was a factor disrupting shorebirds' habitats. This dissertation's findings may support understanding of the US military's role in reducing the impact of climate change through strategies to reduce the military's influence on military occupies' environments. One tool relied on to measure sea-level rise is satellite altimetry. Nerem et al. (2018) examined the problem of sea-level rise using data ranging from the beginning of the altimeter era

27 to the present to 2018. Based on their findings, there is a mean rise of 3 millimeters per year, with a standard deviation of .4 millimeters. The problem of sea-level rise has become more important because of climate change. Climate change has accelerated the annual sea level rise by .084 ± 0.025 millimeters. The projection for sea-level rise in the year 2100 by Nerem et al. (2018) falls within the range predicted by the National Research Council (2012), as Nerem et al. (2018) indicated that the mean sea level would increase 65 ± 12 cm. Based on these findings, climate change accelerates sea-level rise and can cause significant damage to military bases. However, it also has the potential to harm civilian infrastructure. Therefore, this research is relevant because the implications can be useful far beyond the scope of military infrastructure and help society in general. The issue of sea-level rise due to climate change is when military installations and units must continue to plan for the site. Shealy (2017) assessed the USCG’s engineering operation and decisions in the scope of preparation for sea-level rise. They noted that climate change has created an environment where sea level rise will occur and that there will be implications for the US armed forces. Among the consequences of sea-level rise discussed by Lassiter and Shealy was the consumption of pier facilities, which function as national security points, asset maintenance, fueling, and crew training (Lassiter & Shealy, 2017). They discussed the DoD’s climate impact assessment plan as a critical element of long-term planning. They identified the Hampton Roads assets in Virginia as the most vulnerable to the danger of climate change. While DoD’s impact assessment plan is essential, some limitations persist. Coast Guard engineers noted a gap between daily decisions to protect against immediate threats and the necessity for action, which has increased the perceived probability of damage in the future due to sea rise. USCG engineer noted that there is only limited guidance from policy and institutional finances; hence, climate change damage is challenging to plan for and implement solutions to address. The Hampton Roads assets were included in a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists (n.d.), which noted that sea-level rise is a threat for all 18 of the Eastern and Gulf Coast military installations under the control of the DoD. The Naval Air Station Oceana Dam Neck Annex in Virginia, an area that would experience some of the most significant damage from sea-level rise in the twenty-first century, with the sea level rise reaching 4.5 to 6.9 feet by 2100. Their projections supported the need for the military to prepare for, at the least, common threats to military installations and assets, and that exposure to flooding would become substantially

28 difficult in the 2050-2100 timeframe, a timeframe in which sea level rise will cause significantly higher encroachment into coastal installations because of their geographic location. Military installations along the East Coast, particularly those in Virginia, remain the focus of additional research on the topic of sea-level rise. Li et al. (2013) examined relative sea- level rise at the Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Virginia. The research relied on simulations across the twenty-first century from 2000-2100, using the Simulating WAve Nearshore (SWAN) and coastal modeling system models, including the military installation in the Lower Chesapeake Bay. The model included several meteorological phenomena, including storm surge, circulation, waves, sediment transport, and morphology evolution in the models combined with more significant climate change factors. The results indicate that relative sea-level rise shall create several significant and damaging outcomes for the local area along Hampton Roads, with projections estimating that approximately 60% of land in the site will be underwater at current sea-level estimates and that with a relative sea-level rise of 2 meters, 80% of the location will be underwater. Russo and Burks-Copes (2013) examined the adaptive capacity and tipping points for coastal military installation sustainability with storms and rising seas. Russo and Burks- Copes (2013) noted a threat from coastal storm hazards with rising sea levels. The damage done from rising sea levels will first impede military installations' operations and then make them inoperable. They noted that sea-level rise would cause performance loss in coastal military installations; therefore, they designed a multi-tier vulnerability and impact assessment for military installations. Their research focused on evaluating military installation asserts and mission capabilities regarding how they could threaten sea level rise scenarios. The results indicated that sea-level rise was a significant and pervasive threat multiplier for mission sustainability for Naval Station Norfolk. Russo and Burks-Copes (2013) concluded that military planners must work with policymakers to design solutions for the implications of sea-level rise. To create sustainability of operations. Based on these findings, military installations such as those along the East coast in Virginia are at risk of being flooded; therefore, there must be plans for addressing climate change's implications because of the damage it will cause to the location shortly. In addition to risk assessment frameworks designed by researchers such as Lassiter and Shealy (2017), there are frameworks for risk assessment created by the military for multi-criteria risk assessment. One such framework is the Louisiana Coastal Protection, and Restoration

29 Project framework developed for the Mississippi Coastal Improvements Program (Ratcliff & Smith, 2011). Ratcliff and Smith (2011) examined the issue of sea-level rise using the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Project framework to quantify sea-level rise. Risk assessment was implemented in their project to quantify eustatic sea-level rise and the impact of coastal storms to understand the likelihood of loss to military installation assets and mission capabilities. The research included four scenarios examining sea level rise in a range between 0.5 and 2.0 meters at 0.5-meter increments using strategies ranging from 2000 to 2100. The hydrodynamic storm surge and wave modeling analysis results support the existence of substantial risk for the Lower Chesapeake Bay, where their damage to installation assets and mission capabilities is possible. The findings of Ratcliff and Smith (2011) support the potential of damage from the sea- level rise on military installations; however, military installations are not the only local infrastructure which experiences injury due to sea-level elevation. The Union of Concerned Scientists (n.d.) noted that the damage done by climate change would be more significant in scope than just for the military. The national security issue is one in which there is potential damage to civil infrastructure as well. Therefore, addressing the problem of sea-level rise is one that is important for many stakeholders. All people are stakeholders in climate change. Besides, all ecosystems are dependent on conservation efforts because of the significant impact that climate change and sea-level rise have on biodiverse locations (Courchamp et al., 2014). Burks-Copes (2013) noted that sea-level height is a significant strategic concern; hence, the importance of understanding the threats and how to plan to overcome them. Courchamp et al. (2014) noted that climate change and the loss of suitable climatic conditions must be integrated into biodiversity conservation efforts. Therefore, climate change research is useful for many different communities and institutions beyond the military. Karim and Mimura (2008) examined the impact of climate change and sea-level rise on Bangladesh's cyclonic storm surge floods. Bangladesh is a South Asian country on the Bay of Bengal with several river systems flowing through the nation. Bangladesh is also the eighth-most populous country globally; hence, problems such as flooding can have a detrimental impact on life and fragile infrastructure. Based on Karim and Mimura’s research, if there is a rise in sea surface temperature, there will be a corresponding sea-level rise of .3 meters, which will create a flood risk area 15.3-22.7% within the area that is 20 kilometers from the coastline. Preparation should include the erection of 320 additional shelters to prepare the population for the more

30 significant high-risk zone. These findings support Ali (1996), who had examined Bangladesh's vulnerability to climate change and the rise of the sea level a decade prior. In Ali’s research, Ali reviewed the impact of a sea surface temperature rise of 2-4°C, finding that the temperature rise would be responsible for a sea-level rise of .3-1.0 meters. The consistency of the models supports the reliability of the results. The research by Karim and Mimura supports this research because it illustrates that coastal areas will be flooded with more significant climate change occurring. For the military, military installations located by water bodies experience a more substantial risk of climate change. The research findings discussed in this section support the need for planning for climate change damage to military installations in this century because of sea-level rise. Convertino et al. (2011) noted that military installations would individually experience climate change damage because of their existence in low-lying coastal and intertidal areas. Moreover, changes to the environment causing damage to military installations, there is the possibility that an unintended consequence for the ecological environment surrounding a military installation will disrupt habitats. Convertino et al. (2011) discussed the habitats of shoreline-dependent birds and the role that the military could play in destroying their habitats if installations must be expanded or moved because of damage because of sea-level rise. Issues such as land cover, land use, and the entire ecosystem and landscape surrounding is an adjacent issue that must be considered when designing strategies to address land-use change. Convertino et al. (2011) noted that the Snowy Plover, Piping Plover, and Red Knot are examples of birds whose habitats could be disrupted because of changes to military installations in Northwest Florida. The potential damage to avian habitats is not the only potential for damage. Chu-Agor et al. (2011) explored other coastal habitats to understand the possible vulnerability to sea-level rise through global sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. Shorelines are home to a diverse array of different organisms, and climate change will significantly impact the wetlands and beaches that these organisms live on (Chu- Agor et al., 2011). Chu-Agor et al. (2011) utilized a simulation model to determine the possible impact of wetlands on habitats. The research relied on the Sea Level Affecting Marshes Model to assess habitat vulnerability at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. Based on the findings, 88-91% of wetland organisms' changes were caused by lower elevation range, sedimentation rats, accretion, and the historical trend for sea-level rise and inundation. Inundation is the most dominant process controlling the coastline’s fate. These findings coincided with those of Convertino et al.

31 (2011), in that they predicted that changes to the habitat would significantly damage the habitat for the Plover birds. These findings are further support for considering the broad implications of climate change on military installations because, just as stakeholders must be regarded as, wildlife remains a key concern. Moreover, if there is a lack of action, there will be an impact on non-human habitats. Galbraith et al. (2002) investigated the sea-level rise caused by global climate change to understand shorebirds' loss because of intertidal habitats' disruptions. Like Nerem et al. (2018), the climate change model assumed a conservative global warming scenario with 2°C change per year at sites such as Willapa Bay, Humboldt Bay, San Francisco Bay, and Delaware Bay (Galbraith et al., 2002). Based on the findings, the loss of intertidal habitats could result in 20- 70% of current intertidal habitats to be disrupted. The loss of these habitats could have a significant and negative impact on shorebird populations reducing their numbers significantly because of sea-level rise. A solution suggested by Galbraith et al. (2002) is to implement coastal protection provisions. The use of coastal protection measures is also supported by Bostello et al. (2007) to reduce the impact of sea-level rise caused by climate change. These findings and the solutions prescribed are both supportive of this dissertation because the results of this dissertation support a more robust understanding of climate change and the role of the US military in reducing its impact, in part, on coastal areas. Estimating the impact of sea-level rise onset by climate change on the economy is essential because the economic impact is a factor that also supports the importance of this research. Bostello et al. (2007) examined the implications of future climate change on the economy, speculating on what climate change shall mean in the future. Their research focus included developing a static general equilibrium model that supports estimating the impact of sea-level rise caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Based on their findings, if governments do not implement coastal protection, several sectors of the economy will be impacted; however, agriculture is the industry that is projected to experience the most significant losses. Overall, the gross domestic product (GDP) will decrease. The energy sector of the economy will experience substantial loss as well because of the shrinking economy. Bostello et al. (2007) concluded that climate change is challenging to reverse, and that sea-level rise will continue to occur. Hence, protection from the danger of climate change is an essential strategy for policymakers to implement. If coastal protections are put in place, then the GDP will likely increase and energy

32 prices, but energy consumption will fall. The implementation of coastal protections is also supported by Galbraith et al. (2002). Therefore, this dissertation's findings can support the development of strategies to protect the land that will have implications that extend beyond the scope of benefits for the military. The problems created by climate change in sea-level rise are substantial, particularly for the US military. The US military has several installations on the border with the ocean and in close vicinity of water bodies, making sea-level rise significant. Currently, several studies on the risks of climate change and sea-level rise for military installations exist. Burks-Copes (2013) examined the dangers of climate change and sea-level elevation to Naval Station Norfolk. Their research included establishing a risk assessment framework that had an integrated, multi-criteria, multi-hazard risk assessment designed to assess changes in risks to the coastal installation assets. The framework is a quantitative assessment framework based on Bayesian networking to determine the risk of mission performance. Scores are quantified based on probabilities. The framework includes assessment for sea-level rise and storm severity and how these factors cause damage to assets of the installation along the lines of there being no damage to severe damage. The assessment then assesses assets' functionality according to how functional the assets are following a sea-level rise or a storm and assets' capabilities following a storm—a scorecard for mission performance tracks (Burks-Copes, 2013). Based on the framework, decision-makers can make risk-informed decisions through a traditional military planning process. Understanding possible solutions to the effects of sea-level rise have focused on other research involving military installations. While Burks-Copes (2013) designed a Bayesian Network as a risk assessment framework to examine the damage done by sea level rise, further research focused on understanding how to correct the damage done by sea-level rise. Hawkins (2016-2017) explored literature on the topic of sea-level rise at military installations in Virginia. His research focused on the continuous damage done by climate change and its contentious nature regarding how policy and politics impact the response. He noted that while there is general scientific support for climate change designing public policy solutions will remain challenging. Hence, the importance of developing solutions to the impact of sea-level rise. According to Hawkins (2016-2017), answers will remain challenging to implement because of a lack of appetite for legislators' actions. There is a lack of desire to address the problem on the part of the American public. Hawkins (2016-2017) noted that decision-makers must take the lead

33 when implementing a comprehensive approach to the impact of sea-level rise on roads and military installations. They must have plans ready to employ with the resources they currently hold. The design of frameworks to address sea-level rise vulnerability assessment is also crucial because of the projected increase to mean sea level rise estimations for the following century. Chadwick et al. (2011) discussed the design of vulnerability assessments for Southwest US military installations. Their research focused on responding to national security issues caused by sea-level rise onset by climate change through risk assessment. Their approach to risk assessment framework construction differed significantly from that of Burks-Copes (2013), who designed a framework based on a statistical network. Instead, Chadwick et al. (2011) developed the framework based on estimations of future sea-level conditions, pathways of impact in terms of inundation, erosion, intrusion, flooding, and the potential damage to critical infrastructure training areas for the US military. Chadwick et al. (2011) noted several sea-level rise damage sources, including local mean sea level rise, subsidence and uplift, atmospheric or oceanic processes, storm surge, precipitation, tides, and waves. Pathways for these sources included water levels, intrusion, erosion, flooding, and inundation. Receptors included buildings, civil infrastructure, waterfront structures, coastal structures, training, testing lands, and protective buffers (Chadwick et al., 2011, p. 5). The types of water level scenarios included increases to groundwater leading to vulnerability to water level and salt intrusion, protected bay overflow leading to vulnerabilities including inundation, flooding, water level, and currants, and exposed shorelines experiencing vulnerability inundation, erosion, and flooding. With the combination of sea-level rise and coastal flooding events, coastal military installations will need to employ adaption plans to continue military operations with higher sea levels. Moreover, increased vulnerabilities to coastal flooding need to adapt to ensure infrastructure stability, mission capability, and overall readiness outfits troops. Each case study selected for this research presents different challenges and showcases various vulnerabilities to rising sea levels and coastal flooding.

Extreme Weather

Climate change impacts reach far beyond rising sea levels, coastal erosion, inundation, and flooding. Extreme weather is one of the most observable consequences of anthropogenic

34 climate change. According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions website, “the National Climate Assessment finds that the number of heatwaves, heavy downpours, and major hurricanes has increased in the United States, and the strength of these events has increased, too” (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions website, 2018).8 This dissertation focuses on five extreme weather areas to include: (1) Storm surge flooding and non-storm surge flooding, (2) Wildfire, (3) Drought/rain, (4) Extreme heat/cold, and (5) Superstorms. Extreme weather events have been coined as the fingerprints of anthropogenic climate change (The Franklin Institute website, 2018). I outline a detailed discussion on all relevant climate change impacts associated with extreme weather concerns for the U.S. Military. Extreme weather events are a key issue associated with climate change and shall have significant implications for military installations, primarily because of their projected increased intensity and frequency. Dela Fuente (2019) described the problem of extreme weather events as one where while consensus exists that they will continue to be a problem, there is a lack of strategy or political will to allocate resources to military installations to address the potential issues which will come from the increase in extreme weather. Dela Fuente (2019) found that the increase in weather intensity will likely reach 10% under current global warming trends and that superstorms will remain a frequent occurrence. Climate change causing warmer sea temperatures was identified by Dela Fuente (2019) to be a pivotal contributor to hurricane activity for the remainder of this century, particularly with there being a more significant proportion of hurricane activity that becomes category 4 and 5 hurricanes. Hurricanes are expected to have a 15-20% increase in rainfall and wetness for every 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit increase in temperature. These conditions will make hurricanes particularly more dangerous for military installations as there is a higher likelihood of flooding and damage to electric and water grids in the general area. Therefore, the damage done to military facilities because of climate change will affect valuable infrastructure surrounding military installations, creating difficulty. Extreme weather conditions continue to create threats for the US's East Coast region, particularly in the Virginia area. Stiles et al. (2012-2013) examined the policy climate for climate change to understand legislators' appetite for implementing a policy that would address the problems that will come with extreme weather conditions. Stiles et al. (2012-2013)

35 acknowledged that the coastal Virginia area is a diverse economy. The military depends on the region in terms of its location for coastal transportation, shipbuilding and repair, and several military installations located along the coast. Stiles et al. (2012-2013) discussed the issue as one where there is an appetite for change and several plans that lawmakers wish to implement, and there is a lack of action to address problems. This is a problem that happens at the state level, where states consider the federal government responsible for managing the situation. In contrast, the federal government does not address the issue. Stiles et al. (2012-2013) noted the importance of leadership on climate change to address the problem. The problem of extreme weather is when an environmental change creates an increased risk to the nation's national security and defense assets. While climate change and extreme weather patterns are a significant threat to national security and the US military's infrastructure, climate change was not on the list of issues requiring future national security planning until 2010 (La Shier & Stanish, 2019-2020). La Shier and Stanish (2019-2020) discussed the Quadrennial Defense Review, a review completed for the U.S. DoD, which outlines critical defense issues, finding that climate change was essential would shape the future security environment as energy security and climate change are linked with economic stability. Following climate change as a national security concern, the DoD has added climate change to long-term planning strategies for national defense. Wickman et al. (2012) investigated environmental changes and national security to examine the impact of extreme weather and climate change on national security and defense infrastructure requirements and budget priorities. They noted that climate change is no longer straightforward to ignore and that several government organizations must cope with change. For the military, this means a change of priorities, missions, and technologies, with climate change threats causing vulnerabilities in several geographic regions. Wickman et al. (2012) also noted that risks are caused by melting ice and sea openings in the Arctic, which is contributing to sea-level rise for coastal military bases. As several US military bases are located in the Gulf Coast and Mississippi River Valley region and along the East and Wescountry's coasts, the potential locations are abundant. The problem of extreme weather creates several issues that the defense department and military leadership must consider when addressing the problems associated with climate change. Gaulin (2019) discussed the DoD’s position on climate change as a national security threat with specific threats addressed, including losing training and operational sites due to climate change

36 hazards. Gaulin (2019) acknowledged several indirect risks created by climate change, where increased heat and flooding make a higher likelihood of conflict and natural disasters. Besides, heat stress creates difficulty for service members, creating problems in terms of a loss in training and development, and creating challenges for soldiers' conditioning. Gaulin (2019) suggested implementing a framework across various sites to address the issues created by climate change. The answer should be applied in several tiers where there is a narrow focus of resource allocation for missions and at-risk sites. Extreme weather is a crucial reason for the implementation of measures for adaptation to climate change. Morris (2020) identified stakeholder collaboration as a critical path to accomplishing climate adaptation in coastal ports. She discussed the changes that will soon occur with the US's coastal regions regarding the maritime transportation system. Climate change will cause sea levels to change and significant adjustments to the coast's environmental conditions. She also noted that port climate adaptation is essential to preserve homeland security. The keys to accomplishing these goals were an adaptation to the country's physical infrastructure and changes to organizational, operational, and community in the maritime transportation system. Stakeholder collaboration was vital to facilitating adaptation strategies to address the extreme weather expected to come with climate change. Morris (2020) also noted a lack of resources available to address climate adaptation; therefore, addressing the problem will rely on implementing solutions where there are novel methods employed at individual port and regional levels. For US military installations, this means that solutions must be constructed that can be employed at the individual installation level. There can be collaboration among facilities and the communities that installations are located. Morris noted the success of stakeholder collaboration in the Hampton Roads, Virginia area emphasizing the need for collaborators to use time and effort resources. Before the defense department acknowledgment of climate change as an issue with national defense implications, there was a substantial debate surrounding whether the issue should be considered a problem of national security or not. Matthew (2011) discussed climate change and extreme weather patterns regarding the increasingly frequent push for climate change as a national security issue. He described the problem as robust yet imperfect and stated that the debate surrounding the issue I one where there was a challenge to whether its addition as a national security risk made sense. Matthew (2011) 2011 stated that the problem of climate

37 change and extreme weather was not entirely understood; however, the importance of adding it as a national security issue was evident because doing so would mean more resources and a louder voice in terms of discussion surrounding the problem and how it could be solved through public policy. Matthew (2011) argued that there are some difficulties with considering climate change and extreme weather as a national security issue primarily because of the challenges in international cooperation to address the problem and its relationship to future conflict remaining challenging to define. Therefore, climate change as an issue linked to national security remains contentious in how it fits within the national security strategy's broader framework. One solution to the problem of a lack of resources for military installations to address climate change is to link climate change to sustainable development. Bangar (2020) noted the need to connect climate change to sustainable development goals, such as those outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Climate change is a problem that is both directly and indirectly linked to other issues on the list. By connecting it to sustainable development goals, the government would contribute more resources to address the problem. Coastal flooding includes storm surge flooding and non-storm surge flooding and occurs across the United States in most coastal regions. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), the coastal flooding in most coastal areas is primarily due to climate change (Center for Disease Control Website, 2018). Coastal flooding is defined as “coastal processes – such as waves, tides, storm surge, or heavy rainfall from coastal storms – produces that flood, it is called a coastal flood or nuisance or tidal flooding” (Center for Disease Control Website, 2018). Moreover, additional coastal flooding can occur from high rainfall, urban flooding, flash flooding, overflowing streams, and rivers or watersheds. Coastal flooding has increased significantly in the number of days per year with floods since 2010 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Website, 2018). The largest and most contributing factor to increased climate change coastal flooding is intrinsically tied to sea-level rise, increased strength and intensity of storms, changing climate weather patterns, and new and emergent challenges to safeguard our coastal areas. The problems caused by extreme weather shall increase in frequency and impact with time; therefore, ports must develop resiliency. Sturgis et al. (2014) explored Hurricane Sandy's case and the effect that the storm had on the Port of New York and New Jersey, where extreme weather conditions included a 14-foot storm surge that caused hazardous waste to contaminate

38 local water landscape. Further, there was substantial debris and damage that entered local communities. The damage from Hurricane Sandy resulted in $70 billion in destruction. For military installations along the US's East Coast, Hurricane Sandy’s toll significantly disrupted port functions. At the same time, valuable commodities were restricted from entering the US port. Fuel and cargo disruptions created a national security risk. Sturgis et al. (2014) noted that while the damage done by Hurricane Sandy was significant in terms of the extreme weather events that the storm caused; the prediction was that there would be future intense storm surges that would result in more considerable damage because of climate change. The core of the problem is the prediction that the sea level is set to rise between one and four feet by 2100. The rising sea level will result in storms causing more extreme weather events, including flooding and damage from tropical storms and Hurricanes. The odds of catastrophic extreme weather events will become more significant as the sea level rises; hence, severe weather shall remain a significant problem well into the future. The increase in extreme weather shall require adaptation strategies that leadership at coastal military installations can implement. Caponigro (2017) explored the impact of climate change and sea-level rise on military installations along the US coastline, focusing on the Navy Department. According to Caponigro (2017), the implementation of plans requires military installation leadership to determine whether they must protect, adapt, or retreat from extreme weather locations. The decision should be based on unique benefits and cost, time, maintenance, and environmental impact. Caponigro (2017) also noted that some strategies should incorporate a mix of protection, adaptation, and retreating from the damage caused by extreme weather. She concluded that the procedure should follow a process of installation risk and vulnerability assessment, following a design and planning evaluation framework, and planning to implement strategies. The findings and discussion support implementing customized solutions for military installations' problems when dealing with extreme weather. Wildfires are a tangible and observable adverse effect on our climate due to anthropogenic climate change. According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, “wildfires in the United States burn more than twice the area they did in 1970, and the average wildfire season is 78 days longer” (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions Website, 2018). With warmer temperatures and drier conditions, it makes it even more challenging to put fires out once they have started – more than 80 percent of U.S. wildfires are caused by people (Center

39 for Climate and Energy Solutions Website, 2018). Wildfires have an interesting climate feedback loop that is important to discuss in this section of my dissertation. According to Earth System Science Data Journal Article on Global fire emissions estimates during 1997-2016, wildfires emitted 8 million tons of CO2 per year for the last 20 years. The released CO2 in the atmosphere from wildfires then sends a feedback loop into the atmosphere, increasing temperatures, which further amplifies anthropogenic climate change. Drought and heavy rainfall/downpours are observable changes to our Earth’s climate triggered by anthropogenic climate change. According to the 2014 National Climate Assessment, “over the last 50 years, much of the U.S. has seen increases in prolonged periods of excessively high, temperatures, heavy downpours, and in some regions, severe floods and droughts” (National Climate Assessment Website, 2018). Climate change has increased global temperatures, which trigger higher evaporations, loss of moisture, and drying of plant life and soil. Loss of plant and soil moisture coupled with increased temperatures and evaporation leads to drier, hotter climatic conditions (National Climate Assessment Website, 2018). Heavy rainfall has increased over the last three to five decades. Massive rainfall events have become more frequent and more significant in intensity, and the amount of precipitation has been above average since 1991 (National Climate Assessment Website, 2018). The U.S. areas most affected by the increased heavy rainfall include the Northeast, Midwest, and upper Great Plains – 30% above the average rainfall/downpours recorded between 1901-1960 2014 (National Climate Assessment Website, 2018). Climate change has, and is, making extreme heat and cold events more frequent and severe. Extreme heat or cold events for this dissertation can be defined as “temperatures that are either exceptionally high or low relative to typical local conditions or reach levels that may be harmful to human health and infrastructure” (Union of Concerned Scientists website, 2018). With increased temperatures and frequency of extreme heat events, the likelihood of future extreme heat events is more common and more intense as the 21st century unfolds (Vose et al., 2017; Wuebbles et al., 2014). Moreover, some studies have concluded that extreme heat is directly linked to anthropogenic climate change attributes to human mortality rates due to these extreme heat events (Mitchell et al., 2016; Uhe et al., 2016).

40 Since the 1980s, Atlantic hurricane activity has increased substantially (Blake et al., 2015; Landsea et al., 2013). Increased hurricane activity has been linked to increased sea surface temperatures influenced by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gasses, particulate pollution, and natural variability (Emanuel & Sobel, 2013; Zhang & Delworth, 2009). Hurricanes are categorized as Category 1 through 5. The number of category 4 and 5 storms is projected to increase and projections in greater rainfall rates during such more substantial hurricane events. Since the 1950s, extreme winter storms have increased in intensity and frequency, and severe winter storms have shifted northward over the United States (Vose et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2006). Tornadoes, hailstorms, and damaging thunderstorms and wind intensity and frequency are uncertain and unknown currently; however, over the past few decades, there has been a record number of damaging storms that have caused considerable financial and other losses (NOAA, 2013). For each case study, I examine a locality-specific impact of extreme weather events if such events threaten the military installation.

Ice sheets melting in the Arctic - Monitoring/Expanding presence in the Arctic

Climate change is increasing the rate of the glacier, sea ice, and ice sheets melting, making way to new navigable waterways and territories that, according to new plans by the United States Military, require increased presence in the Arctic (Borgerson & Scott, 2008; Melillo & Jerry, 2014). In 2015, a document titled A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower published by the three leading sea driven military branches of the United States military – the United States Marine Corps, the United States Navy, and the United States Coast Guard (Navy, U.S., U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Coast Guard, 2015). This detailed and timely publication describes how the United States Marine Corps, the United States Navy, and the United States Coast Guard supportive maritime strategy supports national security and national defense initiatives. Moreover, this publication identifies how these three branches will plan, shape, and engage in maritime services in the coming decade (Navy, U.S., U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Coast Guard, 2015). This publication also outlines the need for increased authority and occupation in the Arctic to access new and emerging access, conditions, safety, and security in the territory (Navy, U.S., U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Coast Guard, 2015). Additionally, this research has identified emergent strategies and roles of the United States military in the Arctic to include; ensuring the sovereignty of the United States’ Arctic

41 Region, providing ready forces to respond to crises and contingencies, preserving freedom of navigation, promoting partnerships within the US government and its international allies, expanding maritime fleet to enhance the security and safety in the region (i.e., icebreakers), training military personnel to operate and maintain active ready troops to respond to crises and contingencies.

Changing Climatic Conditions altering Military Operations Climate change is creating a need for the United States military to address new training requirements, a need for new and different equipment, and overall changing tactics in response to climate change. Examples of new training requirements, new and different equipment, and changing tactics include but not limited to; neuro futures and human cyborgs, cybernetic microchips, militarizing animals and nature, drones as climate surveillance, expanding training techniques to include new weaponry, and changing nature-military interactions concerning training and equipment. For each case study, I examine a locality-specific impact of climate change on altering day-to-day military operations. Global climate change is a problem that has several national security implications; hence, the importance of the involvement of government systems in solutions created to address the issues of changing climates. Ackerman and Jolivet (2017) explored global climate change and national security within the scope of understanding leadership and institutional culture's role as critical factors impacting the response to national security problems caused by climate change. They noted that the problems created by climate change are especially prevalent in three federal departments: The Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense. They found that the DoD has implemented limited changes to address the problems created by climate change and that these changes have focused mainly on mainstreaming climate change as an issue that must be focused on for long-term planning. The Department of State has also achieved mainstreaming, but their accomplishments are much lesser than the achievements of the DoD. The Department of Homeland Security has had the least success in implementing changes to normalize acceptance of differences, making climate change a priority to U.S. security issues. The critical problem is that while the DoD and Department of State have successfully implemented changes that impacted their organizations' culture, the Department of Homeland Security includes several internal clans. Its bureaucratic leadership style prevents the

42 changes needed to make climate change a prevalent homeland security issue in the department. Hence, climate change acceptance remains a challenge in key government areas that impact planning, which can, in turn, impact military installations. This dissertation's findings can make climate change relevant to organizations such as the Department of Homeland Security. The implications of climate change for military assets are a topic that homeland security leadership should concern about. The relationship of the DoD with climate change is an issue that has remained politically difficult for quite some time. Cochrane (2017) investigated climate change and the DoD activities associated with dealing with the problem. She focused on the issues of installation and operational concerns, the relationship between the DoD and the legislative branch of government, the relationship between the DoD and political administrations, and financial incentives to address climate change in the DoD. Cochrane (2017) noted that the DoD’s role in addressing climate change is consistent with its mission and structure. Therefore, the DoD has successfully avoided many of the political difficulties for several other government departments. However, the problem that the DoD faces is the continued politicization of climate change. Cochrane (2017) noted that DoD is in a position where the department will not be capable of avoiding the overall political nature of the problem of climate change. Because of this, there will be continued difficulties with obtaining assistance for military installations where there will be a lack of resources. The DoD must be prepared to address climate change and how it affects the organization from a political standpoint to implement solutions successfully. Climate change is expected to create climatic conditions that will place pressure on coastal infrastructure in locations worldwide. Kirshen et al. (2020) assessed storm surge barrier systems to understand the impact of current and future climatic conditions, focusing on Boston, Massachusetts. They noted that large-scale barriers are a feature of coastal protection that will increase focus because of the role in preventing damage to infrastructure. For military installations, they can be a pivotal factor in preventing damage to military assets. Kirshen et al. (2020) noted that while storm surge barriers can play a positive impact in preventing some of the problems which come with climatic events as they often have elevated walkways, open space, and playing fields, storm shields fail to provide adequate protection for harbor users, such as those using harbors for shipping. This is also a problem for military installations because of the Navy's dependence on these types of ports. Kirshen et al. (2020) also noted that storm surge

43 barrier systems need to become more reliable because of sea-level rise brought about by warming conditions. Their operational lives remain limited because of the mechanical stress placed on these systems in the future. Kirshen et al. (2020) suggest shore-based alternatives, which exploit natural aspects of the landscape. Through these types of solutions, there is the ability to manage storm and tidal coastal flooding and accomplish flexibility and adaptability to achieve longer operational lifetimes with a minimal impact on the harbor system's environment. For US military installations located in coastal regions, these solutions could help address the problems caused by climate change. The problem of climate change remains politically contentious, with several conflicting domestic interests impacting politicians' priorities. Lee and Torney (2013) discussed climate action in the US, noting the increase in extreme weather, which is projected to occur in the remainder of the century, and how the US can adapt to these problems. A significant limitation noted by Lee and Torney (2013) was the political will to address the problem and schedule resources to address it. They said that while there is a lack of research focused on understanding the impact of extreme weather on the US public's perceptions, climate change attitudes shall adjust in the future because of the personal impact that people will experience. Another limitation is that there continues to be a lack of planning for adaptation to climate change on the part of port and military installation managers. Smith (2015) analyzed ports to understand adaptation perspectives in the scope of climate change scenarios, adaptation planning timeframes, adaptation funding sources, adaptation strategies, decision support tools, and adaptation actions. The most practical scenario for decision-makers was establishing scenarios as thresholds that support flexible, adaptive decision-making based on the exploration results. Adaptation strategies should include a combination of protection, accommodation, and recover and rebuild processes. By following a robust plan to address climate change difficulties, it is possible to overcome the problematic nature of climate change problems for military installations. Climate change is an essential issue for the military and political leaders alike because of the implication’s climate change has for national security. Werrell and Femia (2015) explored the relationship between the US and the Asia-Pacific region to understand how the relationship impacts climate and national security. The Asia-Pacific region is one where there has been a substantial change from the standpoint of power shifts. Because of the changes that continue to

44 occur in the area, a rebalance is happening. Because of this rebalance and emerging problems because of foreign policy and national security issues, climate change has significantly impacted how relationships change in the region. Shifting powers and the risks to military assets in the region create a scenario where US national security interests are affected. Climate change will remain a severe problem in an area where climate resilience will be a significant issue moving forward. Werrell and Femia (2015) acknowledged that there would need to be considerations for climate change involved in establishing national security plans for the region in the future because of these issues. The problem of climate change and its impact on military installations is the focus of a growing research body. Dela Fuente (2019) completed a comprehensive analysis of the problem, noting that climate change remains a critical problem; however, the issue's polarizing nature has created difficulty in developing solutions because of differing views in political, academic, and scientific communities. Dela Fuente (2019) noted that a critical problem attached to climate change is that politics creates barriers for establishing solutions and prioritizing the issue because of the difficulty of successfully passing legislation. Therefore, military leaders must be prepared to make decisions within the constraints of a lack of resources available from the federal government before a catastrophic weather event. His research focused on two cases where climate change created a significant disaster for coastal military installations at Tyndall Air Force Base and Offutt Air Force Base. The damage at Tyndall Air Force Base is considered to be among the most significant damage done to a military base by a climatic event. Hurricane Michael made landfall at the base in October 2018, with the hurricane causing substantial damage to infrastructure and disrupting operations at the base. The category-4 hurricane included winds of 155 miles per hour and removed hangar roofs and blew debris along with the air force base’s installation. After the storm, there was damage to 95% of the buildings on the base. The problems caused by this extreme weather event were exacerbated by the lack of planning and time to implement a strategy to move personnel and people living in and around the base to safety. Dela Fuente (2019) noted that leadership on the base only had 48 hours to move 11,000 people out of the area. The hurricane was an essential case for Dela Fuente (2019) to explore because the conditions that created the storm's opportunity were similar to those currently created by climate change. The Offutt Air Force Base case is also critical because it involved a problem that is not generally considered in research on climate change's impact on

45 military installations. The problem was that snowmelt runoff and ice created a greater water flow through the Missouri River. The outcome was flooding at the military facility. The unexpected flood caused damage to 33% of the base's structures and 40% of the runway, grounding all aircraft on base. Because of the flooding, all military operations and the capability of the base was halted. Both Tyndall and Offutt, Air Force Base, are cases that illustrate the future for military installations as climate change results in problems such as the sea-level rise and more frequent events such as hurricanes. To address these problems, there needs to be a collaboration amongst stakeholders to adapt to the issues that will continue to damage military installations and the overall local infrastructure surrounding coastal ports. Morris (2020) explored the role of stakeholders to impact adaptation to climate change. She noted that because of the significant changes to the environment caused by climate change, natural hazards would push the boundaries of the nation’s capacity for resiliency; hence, the importance of stakeholders in the adaptation of military installations to secure the physical infrastructure of military bases, as well as the command, operational and organizational elements of military activity. While her review of the problem-focused on the Hampton Roads, Virginia port community, Morris (2020) noted that adaptation remains one that poses significant problems, there will continue to be the need for a sharper focus on military adaptation installations. By including several stakeholders in the issue, community efforts can support establishing sustainability efforts where the surrounding community's system works with military bases to implement successful plans to overcome the problems caused by climate change.

Renewable Energy and Sustainability Efforts

Renewable energy strategies and practices are fundamental aspects of the United States military’s efforts to advance our environment's stewardship. Examples of renewable energy efforts include but are not limited to; solar power, alternative fuels, recycling, and natural resource protection. Sustainability policies and practices are also a fundamental aspect of the United States military’s efforts to advance our environment's stewardship. Examples of sustainability efforts include; building new military structures and buildings, environmental planning, pollution prevention, water conservation and energy conservation, Great Green Fleet, exploring food security efforts for military troops, to name a few. For each case study, I examine

46 a locality specific renewable energy and sustainability efforts if the military installation is enhancing renewable/sustainability efforts. Sustainability will remain a contentious issue, just as climate change has because there is a split in public opinion related to the problem of global warming and the impact that it will have on our lives. Nagel (2011) examined the World Values Survey results to understand individual perceptions of global warming and greenhouse gases. She noted that respondents' beliefs support different beliefs among Americans than people from other countries. There is more significant skepticism about global warming and its impact in the US than in other countries. Based on the findings, there was generally a belief that global warming and the greenhouse effect is a very or somewhat serious problem. While results from all countries participating in the World Values Survey included findings where 89.3% of respondents believed that global warming was very serious or somewhat dangerous, results for Americans only were that only 81.5% thought that global warming was very serious or somewhat serious. Beliefs surrounding global warming's seriousness were considered to be on a downward trend among American citizens, while they were on an upward trend among other nations' citizens. Based on these findings, there is a rationale to understand why global warming continues to be a politically contentious issue because there remains a lack of support among the American public, which impacts the appetite among policymakers to address the issue. Sustainability is a robust issue, and climate change may re-construct how many entities address sustainability. Bloetscher et al. (2014) discussed the problem of climate change, noting that it will have a significant impact on water utility infrastructure shortly. Water utility security is closely tied to military installations because damage to outside community resources such as water will cause difficulties for military installations because of their dependence on water from external sources. For this reason, the US military should include stakeholder relations as a critical factor involved in how the issue of climate change is addressed. The issue of sustainability of military infrastructures is receiving increased interest from military leaders because of the changes that shall occur because of climate change (Merad et al. (2013). Merad et al. (2013) noted that there are interdependence and interconnectivity which exists with military installations which have created a ‘systems of systems’ structure where there are impacts which follow along with infrastructures; hence, there must be some degree of integrated solutions which come with the investigation of military installations and climate change. They noted that

47 solutions to sustainability problems involving military installations must receive an integrated approach and that organizational practices must be more participative. In all, solutions must be integrative and involve an infrastructure resilience cross-sectoral for sustainability development to work. One fundamental way the US military must involve itself in climate change sustainability is to accept its role in managing the problem from the perspective of resources used and impacted by the DoD, specifically military installations. Pincus (2013) examined the resource footprints and environmental security elements of DoD installations, particularly military installations, to understand the impact these installations have on sustainability development. Pincus (2013) noted that environmental issues are quickly becoming essential issues for the US military and that climate change is recognized as a significant, long-term threat.to installation security and management. He also noted that the DoD had taken steps to reduce the environmental footprint that the department has to address the risks which are associated with climate change. Pincus (2013) noted that the US military has taken several positive steps to reduce the amount of energy, water, and waste footprints from military installations and that this has had a positive impact on national security because of a lower level of dependence on other nations for commodities such as oil and rare earth elements. Making changes that make the US military “greener” in nature, the military is less susceptible to exposure to damages caused by market manipulation; hence, sustainability supports a significant positive impact for the government. Still, Pincus (2013) noted that the DoD must assess the risks caused by climate change and consider climate-associated risks, including projections of more powerful storms, an alteration to precipitation patterns, and increases in wildfires floods. Sustainability management must accommodate for these risks and how they could impact military installations in the future. Sustainability is recognized as a fundamental goal for military installations and cities adjacent to military installations. Harmon et al. (2013) explored sustainable military installation development and cities' adaptability to these efforts. Harmon et al. (2013) acknowledged that there are differences between the way that cities and military installations work and that the formal, top-down nature of how military installations work creates difficulties for sustainability because there is dependence on acceptance of sustainability as a goal from leadership for sustainability goals to be achieved. For adjacent cities, informal adaptations occur as cultural and economic factors that influence citizens and business leaders to make changes. Harmon et al.

48 (2013) noted that developing sustainable environments will continue to become difficult as change remains a constant factor. Top-down decision-making is not adequate to meet a sustainable environment's needs. To be adaptable and resilient, cities and military installations must maintain relationships where the entities work together to ensure sustainable environments capable of coping with the challenges brought about by climate change. Some lessons can be learned in terms of establishing the sustainability of necessary resources. Mack et al. (2013) explored efforts to develop water supply sustainability at military installations, focusing on sustainability at the military base in Kabul, Afghanistan. Mack et al. (2013) noted the importance of groundwater resources for water supply. Maintaining potable water for military and civilian needs is essential for the military in strategies focused on managing water resources. They discussed using chemical and isotopic analysis and groundwater flow modeling to establish strategies for managing groundwater resources sustainability. Mack et al. (2013) noted that there are changes to water levels occurring in the Kabul Basin, which remain a threat to sustainability. The drying of the shallow-water supply is causing significant problems with the sustainability of water. Through technologies to understand the water supply of wells and withdrawals from near-surface aquifers, it is possible to model simulations that facilitate identifying where aquifers exist and areas where there is no decline in water levels. These models supported identifying areas in the Kabul Basin where there are higher recharge rates, meaning that military installations can exploit the water in these areas more effectively than in other areas. Based on Mack et al. (2013), the sustainability of resources depends on more than just leadership within military ranks and adaptation efforts within the community; it also depends on identifying the best technologies for modeling and scenario-building to identify opportunities that can facilitate sustainability. Sustainability is also tied to maintaining the landscape and habitats that are impacted by climate change. Climate change is projected to have a significant impact on land and water masses shortly. Lozar et al. (2011) examined the effects of climate change and adaptation on military installations in the continental US. Lozar et al. (2011) utilized several global climate models to construct climate forecasts that could measure habitat and erosion of potential consequences. Habitat was considered along the lines of different perspectives regarding the ability to support training and testing and meet federal requirements related to the maintenance of lands occupied by endangered species. They noted that potential changes in weather patterns

49 would likely cause flooding, drought, and changes to seasonal temperature patterns. Lozar et al. (2011) indicated that with changes to the climate, there is a higher likelihood of there being an increase in the number of endangered species because of the loss of life that changes will cause. This can have an impact where lands occupied by currently endangered and species which will become endangered in the future will expand. With this expansion, the potential for military installation land being infringed upon as protected land and wildlife grows. Lozar et al. (2011) projected that the growth of protected land and wildlife would result in some degree of erosion to each coastal military installation in the future. While sustainability remains a crucial issue for military installations, the implementation of measures that can address the problems caused by climate change faces challenges. Efroymson et al. (2007) completed a human and ecological risk assessment to understand the threats that military installations face. Limitations cause some challenges to address the problems created by climate change in selecting measures of exposure. Some of these challenges include quantifying exposure to aggregate stressors, understanding land-cover transition states, scaling local measurements, and aggregating exposures from within and outside military installations. Several measures of effect must be considered in transboundary and regional ecological risk assessments for military installations. These include the impact of stressors, large-scale developments, habitat change effects, spatial extrapolations, and combined effects of stressors. Efromyson et al. (2007) designed a conceptual model to comprehensively understand these issues, determining that transboundary ecological risk assessment at military installations is a significant issue that must be addressed to improve sustainability. The goal for military installations is to reach the point where they are sustainable and capable of functioning without impacting the environment at large. Goltz and Turek (2017) explored current attempts to implement sustainability in military installations. They noted that military installations are quite similar to university campuses in that they both function as small cities with their resources that are unique from adjacent areas. Because of this, Goltz and Turek (2017) discussed several objectives for military installations engaged in sustainability strategies. One goal is to reduce fossil fuel use. Goltz and Turek (2017) noted that the reduction of fossil fuel use is an objective that the military has had for several years based on legislation and executive orders. One specifically requiring that energy use intensity be reduced by 30% by 2015 and 37.5% by 2020 based on a 2003 baseline. The focus for accomplishing this goal has been the

50 reduction of petroleum use. They also noted that improved water resources management is another goal for sustainability. This entails reducing potable water consumption by facilities and reducing water use for irrigation and industrial use. Besides, solid waste must be minimized and optimally managed through programs that implement activities such as reuse and recycling of waste and the practice of composting waste. Through these activities, military installations can achieve sustainability and reduce the potential damage done to water, waterways, and the coast. Therefore, sustainability is a critical element of addressing problems caused by climate change. The problem of sustainability as a response to climate change is associated with effective federal land management. Zhao et al. (2010) examined the issue of carbon sequestration and climate change in the Southeast US, focusing on the case of Fort Benning. They noted that land- use activities significantly impact the trends and spatial patterns involved in regional land and atmosphere exchange of carbon. Federal lands include substantially different land management strategies, and there must be efforts to quantify and assess carbon consequences in local areas. Zhao et al. (2010) examined the issue utilizing the General Ensemble biogeochemical Modeling System (GEMS) to compare and simulate ecosystem carbon sequestration at Fort Benning between 1992 and 2050, relying on projections from the GEMS model. They discovered that the military installation was responsible for significantly higher carbon sequestration than surrounding areas from 1992-2007. They are projected to do so still, accounting for current and projected land management activities. However, while sequestration will grow for surrounding areas, it will experience a slight reduction in the 2008-2050 timeframe. Hence, federal lands, such as that of the Fort Benning military installation, are projected to play a decisive role in conserving and sequestering carbon because of anthropogenic disturbance minimization and federal lands prevention. Therefore, coastal military installations shall hold a position in improved sustainability practices and mitigate the damage incurred due to climate change over the following century. The sustainability of military installations also remains an important issue because of the possible threat to security. Lambert et al. (2011) examined energy security for industrial and military facilities, focusing on the conditions that influence technologies' strategic selection. They noted that through efforts toward integrating scenario analysis through multiple criteria decision analysis, the military's focus must be placed on energy security in the scope of military installations. This is because of the possibility of problems such as grid disruption and power

51 outages for facilities, buildings, and structures, causing substantial threats in terms of critical activities and missions. A lack of sustainability practices creates a higher risk that there will be damage to these facilities. If damage occurred, then there is the possibility that the cost and supply of solutions could be substantial and possibly even require time and knowledge to engineer solutions. Lambert et al. (2011) included a framework of science and engineering solutions where strategic investments in energy security and sustainability could successfully implement sustainable practices capable of supporting energy security and exploiting strategic investments. While technology should be a part of how solutions are implemented, technology cannot be the only element of sustainable energy practices. There must be a greater focus on establishing a plan for sustainability development.

Chapter Summary

From Sea level rise and coastal flooding, extreme weather, ice sheets melting, changing climatic conditions altering military operations, and renewable energy and sustainability efforts, the U.S. Military is experiencing rapid change due to exogenous forces. These events and their consequences are already being observed at military installations. These related climate impacts affect many of the Department of Defense’s and Department of Homeland Security’s activities and decisions related to future military operations.9 Furthermore, the DoD’s and DHS’s ongoing efforts include research, monitoring, surveying, and reevaluating current and plans associated with climate change. Future military endeavors in response to climate change may include disaster relief, mitigating disputes over new navigable waterways and land ownership, or managing current built infrastructure. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss six climate change impacts in greater detail related to this research. The six climate change impacts include; sea-level rise, extreme weather, monitor/expanding presence in the Arctic, training/new equipment/changing tactics, renewable energy, and sustainability efforts. A combination of the climate change impacts listed below will be discussed in detail within each case study. The identified climate change threats will produce different vulnerabilities based on the specific case study and case study location.

9 These military operations include: operating environments, military readiness, stationing, environmental compliance, stewardship and infrastructure planning and maintenance, just to name a few.DOD Climate change Adaptation Roadmap accessed on May 12, 2016 http://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/Downloads/CCARprint_wForward_e.pdf

52 CHAPTER THREE

U.S. NAVY CASE STUDY

Introduction

The USN has numerous installations scattered throughout the United States to include major active USN bases, stations, medical treatment facilities, and schools. This research divided the USN installations into two categories – 62 coastal and 16 inland installations (Military.com Website, n.d.) – because geographic location lends itself to different climate change types. The USN's primary mission is to “maintain, train, and equip combat-ready Naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression and maintaining freedom of the seas” (Military.com Website, n.d.). To “maintain, train and equip combat-ready Naval forces…” it is critical for the USN to actively and immediately start adapting to climate change in hopes that the future of the Naval forces can remain combat-ready (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.; Military.com Website, n.d.). Figure 2 illustrates all of the Department of Defense and other federal facilities in the Hampton Roads’ region to further understand the regional context and military presence in this region.

Figure 2. Hampton Road's Region Federal Facilities and Municipalities This case study chapter examines the Naval Station Norfolk, which includes surrounding installations and is situated within the Hampton Roads’ southeastern region of Virginia. The case study was selected because it represents the type of base that must address the broader

53 phenomenon that this dissertation seeks to address – climate change. Naval Station Norfolk and the surrounding installations within the Hampton Roads’ region constitute the world's most extensive military concentration. Moreover, the area has been identified through numerous sources within the existing literature as being “on the front lines of climate change,” making it an excellent case study (Governor’s Commission on Climate Change, 2018; Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, 2019; The Center for Climate and Security, 2015; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The Department of Defense outlined in the 2014 Climate Adaption Roadmap that it is necessary to collaborate and build partnerships with all government levels – federal to local levels and other stakeholders – to address the complex and intricate challenges of climate change. This research examines a “whole-of-government” response to the impacts of climate change. It seeks to understand the variety of climate change impacts to the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, specifically the Naval Station Norfolk (U.S. Department of Defense, 2014). A “whole-if-government” approach means a comprehensive and collaborative partnership that reaches past traditional groups and authorities (U.S. Department of Defense, 2014). The Hampton Roads area of Virginia has experienced climate change impacts over the past decade (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016) that threaten critical infrastructure, local and regional marine ecosystems, and recreational access. This research is essential because it will highlight ways to navigate, enhance, and adapt an entire region’s resilience strategy when faced with a changing environment. With the DoD’s stance on a “whole-of-government” response to climate impacts already underway within the Hampton Roads’ region, this case study provides a very unique and holistic insight into the region’s effort to move towards resilience. Moreover, because the DoD has initiated this directive, it is essential for this case study to first discuss the case study area's background and regional context. This chapter will discuss Naval Station Norfolk and provide detailed information about the base, infrastructure, personnel, assets, mission, and strategic importance. This case study chapter will showcase the analysis derived from the SWOT analysis methodological approach discussed in the introduction chapter. Subsequently, this case study will provide recommendations for the Naval Station Norfolk based on the SWOT analysis findings. Lastly, some concluding thoughts will be discussed at the end of the chapter.

54 Study Area: Regional Context

Hampton Roads’ municipality comprises 17 local governments – 11 cities and six counties in Virginia's southeastern region (Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, 2019). The different local governments represented include Chesapeake, Franklin, Gloucester County, Hampton, Isle of Wight County, James City County, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, York County, Williamsburg, Virginia Beach, Surry County, Suffolk, South Hampton County, Smithfield, and Portsmouth (Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, 2019). Hampton Roads’ is named after both a body of water and the surrounding metropolitan cities. Hampton Roads name comes from a London Company leader that financed from 1607-1624 during the English colonization in Virginia. The “roads” refers to the navigable water, where a ship can ride to anchor relatively unimpeded by water currents – one of the world’s largest natural harbors (Virginia Places Website, 2019). Hampton Roads’ comprises roughly 7500 km^2 of low-lying coastal land situated at the Chesapeake Bay's mouth, where the James, Nansemond, and Elizabeth Rivers empty into the Chesapeake Bay (Kleinosky et al., 2007). Hampton Roads’ is the second-largest port on the East Coast, and the Center for Climate and Security articulated that Hampton Roads’ houses the “greatest concentration of military in the world…” (The Center for Climate and Security, 2015). Figure 3 depicts Hampton Roads’ municipal region and the deep-water navigable harbor that it is named after.

Figure 3. Hampton Roads Map

55 Case Study – Naval Station Norfolk

This case study, Naval Station Norfolk, was selected for the following reasons: regional importance; it is the most extensive military base in the world; scholars have identified it as being on the front lines of climate change, and the strategic need and importance to safeguard this base from the impacts of exogenous change. The Hampton Roads’ region and the military assets it harbors, is vital to U.S. national security and mission readiness. Over 29 military sites and 14 military installations are located within the Hampton Roads’ region, with Naval Station Norfolk being the most important (Connolly, 2015).10 (Military.com Website, n.d.). The Naval Station Norfolk’s mission “supports the US Atlantic Fleet's operational readiness, providing facilities and services to enable mission accomplishment” (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.). It is committed to safety, security, and continuous improvement in the quality of life and quality of service for our Sailors and families” (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.). Before moving into how the Hampton Roads’ area has begun to address climate change, some additional details about the Naval Station Norfolk can help illuminate why it is of such critical importance and why it is an exemplary case study. In Norfolk, Virginia, Naval Station Norfolk is the most extensive surface ship base of the USN and the world’s largest naval station with the largest concentration of U.S. naval forces. Built-in 1917, U.S. Naval Station Norfolk supports the United States Fleet Forces Command operating in the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Indian Ocean. U.S. Naval Station Norfolk is the principal homeport of the Atlantic Fleet consisting of 80+ ships, 14 piers, 134 aircraft, 11 aircraft hangers, each having specific and specialized fleet support missions. Naval Station Norfolk occupies 4 miles of waterfront that consists of 14 piers stretching over 11 miles of the Hampton Roads Peninsula, Sewell’s Point (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.). It is home to roughly 46,000 military and 21,000 civilian personnel and contractors (Connolly, 2015). Port services control over 3,100 ship movements annually. Air operations conduct over 100,000 flight operations each year, averaging 275 flights per day.

10 Other military installations in the area include Norfolk Naval Shipyard, United States Navy Craney Island, Joint expeditionary Base – Little Creek, Joint Expeditionary Base – Fort Story, Camp Pendleton, Naval Air Station Dam Neck Annex, Naval Air Station Ocean. Aside from these significant installations, the area hosts many other less substantive military installations, complexes, and bases as well. See: Military.com Website, n.d.

56 Additionally, over 150,000 passengers and 264,000 tons of mail and cargo depart annually via Air Mobility Command. Operational units homeported or headquartered include 20 guided-missile destroyers, four carrier strike groups, four destroyer squadrons, six aircraft carriers, seven cruisers, five amphibious assault, six submarines, 14 military sealift command, and ten shore commands headquartered to include Naval Warfare Development Command, Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, Navy Expeditionary Combat Command to name a few (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.). Naval Station Norfolk is of the highest military strategic importance on the east coast and exemplifies why the military needs to immediately plan and adapt to climate change impacts. The Naval Station Norfolk is a strategic asset because of what it does, what it houses, its support, and its location. The Naval Station Norfolk provides operational capabilities for the most extensive naval base in the world. From providing infrastructure that supports a wide array of military assets, training, and educational enrichment for military personnel to ship maintenance, Naval Station Norfolk is a strategic military asset. As discussed above, the Naval Station Norfolk houses mission-critical warships, submarines, sea, air commands, and many other commands whose missions provide and support national security interests (Commander, Navy Installation Command Website, n.d.). As mentioned previously, the Naval Station Norfolk supports commands operating in the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Indian Ocean, and the Naval Station Norfolk supports all homeported vessels for the Atlantic fleet. The Naval Station Norfolk’s location is critical to national and international efforts because of its geographic location in the Atlantic Ocean. The need and importance to safeguard this base from exogenous change impacts are essential for naval operations worldwide. Moreover, the Naval Station Norfolk has been identified as one of the most vulnerable military installations to the adverse effects of climate change (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). This is a perfect case study to research the currently visible and observable climate change impacts because this military installation is already experiencing exogenous change impacts. Some examples of climate change impacts for the Naval Station Norfolk include sea- level rise, flooding, land subsidence, and coastal erosion. Additionally, the Naval Station Norfolk has been identified as an installation that could be severely compromised if a category 1-4 hurricane hit the Hampton Roads’ region (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Furthermore, decreasing the Naval Station Norfolk vulnerability will subsequently increase this

57 installation's resiliency to exogenous change. With increased resiliency to climate change impacts, the world’s most extensive naval base can perform, train, and enhance national security efforts both nationally and internationally. This dissertation has focused on the introduction and case study area information. The following section will transition to the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of climate change impacts at the Naval Station Norfolk. This research utilizes SWOT analysis to identify possible policy and planning recommendations for the Naval Station Norfolk in the subsequent section.

Table 1: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the Naval Station Norfolk

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES 1. Department of Defense is taking climate 1. Lack of funding change seriously 2. Outdated base infrastructure 2. Profound collaborative efforts with the 3. Outdated transportation infrastructure Naval Station Norfolk and stakeholders 4. Climate change impacting the lives of 3. Most extensive military base in the word military members and their families 5. Climate change impacting day to day military operations 6. Relocation of this infrastructural base is not an option due to limitations in location, financial resources, time 7. The vulnerability of coastal assets and installations

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS 1. Implementation of the “whole of 1. Sea Level Rise government” approach to climate change 2. Flooding planning 3. Coastal Erosion 2. Focus on the measurable, visible, and 4. Land Subsidence observable impacts of climate change 5. Hurricanes and other severe weather 3. Modernize infrastructure at the Naval events Station Norfolk 6. Increased sources of conflicts due to 4. The impacts that the Naval Station natural calamities Norfolk’s’ climate change planning has 7. Infrastructure damage on other military and non-military 8. Threats to military readiness installations across the globe

SWOT Analysis Threats: External

Several threats were identified throughout the SWOT research analysis process. Currently, sea-level rise and flooding are the biggest and most constant threats to the Naval Station Norfolk. According to the existing literature, Hampton Roads is the 2nd most vulnerable

58 area in the United States to rising seas behind New Orleans (Kusnetz, 2018; Kusnetz, 2019; Lehmann, 2016; Parker, 2017). Historical Data from Sewell’s Tidal Gauge at Naval Station Norfolk shows that an average of 1.5ft increase in sea level is occurring per one hundred years (Atkinson, Ezer, & Smith, 2012; Beisner, 2017; Eggleston & Pope, 2013; Tidewater, 2017; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Put differently, sea levels rise an inch every five years in the current ocean, climate, and land subsidence conditions at Naval Station Norfolk and the entire Hampton Roads’ region (D’Angelo, 2018). Moreover, sea-level rise in the Hampton Roads region is happening at 2x the global average – because of three factors – land subsidence, ocean circulation factors, and overall warming and sea-level rise (Connolly, 2015). Various reports note the vulnerability of coastal assets and military installations due to climate change. In 2008, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) reported that more than 30 military facilities in the continental United States were already facing elevated levels of risk from sea-level rise, including Naval Station Norfolk (NIC, 2008). Due to Naval Station Norfolk’s topography, increasing sea levels and excessively heavy rainfall increase vulnerability to flooding and inundation (D’Angelo, 2018). With the increased sea level rise, coupled with land subsidence and changing ocean circulation and with the majority of Naval Station Norfolk’s topography sitting less than 10ft above sea level – this military installation is vulnerable to rising sea levels, high tide flooding, nuisance flooding, king tide flooding, coastal erosion, and storm surge flooding regardless if it is raining or the sun is shining (Union of Concerned Scientist, 2016). Alternatively, another study indicates that the Naval Station Norfolk ranges from 3 ft above sea level in some areas to over 13 feet in others (Li et al., 2012). According to Captain Pat Rios, “the issue with sea-level rise is less about the ship, it’s more about the system that supports the ship” (Kusnetz, 2018). Captain Pat Rios also explained that the support systems used to maintain ships and train and house their crews at the Naval Station Norfolk are already vulnerable to storm surges and high tide flooding (Kusnetz, 2018). The support systems that are already vulnerable include submarine piers, dry docks, massive ship piers, storage, and office facilities, housing structures, parking lots, and roads are compromised by inundation by rising seas and flooding events – or even heavy rains (Kusnetz, 2018; Kusnetz, 2019). Additionally, the primary gate access for all personnel that lives and works at Naval Station Norfolk already

59 floods, making it impassible during these flood events (Beisner, 2017; Tidewater, 2017; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Over the past ten years (2018), Naval Shipyard and Naval Station Norfolk have suffered nine major floods that have damaged equipment used to repair ships, buildings that provide mission-critical support, and the flooding is only getting worse (Kusnetz, 2018). Nuisance flooding and high tide flooding already affect the base. Roughly, ten times a year, the Naval Station Norfolk base floods, which impacts the ability to traverse from one side of the base to the other, and connecting roads become impassable (Connolly, 2015). During flood events, which include high tide, nuisance flooding, king tide events, and storm surge flooding, floodwaters overtop the 14 concrete piers shorting out the vital services such as power, water, and sewer hookups to the enormous warships (Beisner, 2017; Tidewater, 2017; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). High tide flooding is already causing extensive delays in ship repairs and disrupting repair schedules, with an estimated 14,000 lost days of operation between 2000-2016 – creating a “severe readiness issue” (Kusnetz, 2018). Sea level rise and flooding already disrupt military readiness at Naval Station Norfolk and other bases clustered around the mouth of the Chesapeake

Bay in the Hampton Roads’ region. In addition to delays in ship repairs and vulnerabilities due to Naval Station Norfolk’s topography, flooding at Naval Station Norfolk could result in infrastructure damage, deterioration, and even forced deployment, which could ultimately lead to disrupted operations. Electricity supply and utilities are also affected by climate change stressors, especially as they continue to increase and worsen over time (Clark et al., 2019). The effect of the flooding on the mission or strategic significance of the operations has more than just property damage and inconvenience. This effect has security risk capabilities, as the areas and according to the RMA, such climate changes can affect an accelerated need for strengthening strategies and doctrines. The RMA component functions on a fundamental tenet whereby throughout mankind’s history, new military doctrines, strategies, tactics, and technologies have led to a considerable and irrecoverable change in the conduct of warfare (Chin, 2019; Clark, Patt, & Schram, 2019). Moreover, there is a stark correlation between flooding in Norfolk and ice melting in the Arctic. The national security interests of the Northern Atlantic are now managed by the 2nd Fleet command operating from the Naval Station Norfolk (D’Angelo, 2018). With melting ice sheets,

60 vast areas of navigable water are and will be passable. Additionally, with increased tensions between Russia, China, and the US over resources such as oil, gas, fishing, and shipping routes in the Arctic, the USN must start to plan for different types of missions called upon to perform. Suppose the USN will be an instrumental security, defense, and military asset in the Northern Atlantic. In that case, it is imperative that the current command in Norfolk needs to be safeguarded from the impacts of climate change locally. Climate change presents different challenges globally, but it is only a challenge for the U.S. military if they don’t plan and prepare ahead of time for these environmental changes. The current actions that the military is taking to safeguard the Naval Station Norfolk against sea-level rise and flooding events include replacing the existing concrete piers with higher, more technologically advanced piers, erecting and installing floodwalls, deploying sandbags to protect installations, roads, and military assets from seawater along with a plan and proposal of a permanent barrier that protects the Naval Station Norfolk and Naval Shipyard (Kusnetz, 2018). The Navy has already replaced four out of fourteen total piers at Naval Station Norfolk, costing roughly $150 million to $200 million each (Kusnetz, 2018). Additionally, the Navy has erected temporary floodwalls and uses thousands of sandbags to protect piers, docks, roads, buildings, and other critical infrastructure and assets. One example of the types of flood protective measures that have been put in place thus far includes the flood gate on Mason Tidal Creek. The Navy has also proposed to Congress a permanent barrier estimated to cost more than $30 million, which is part of a 20-year, $21 billion-dollar plan to modernize Norfolk Station and Norfolk Shipyard (Thornton, 2018). Future actions that the military is taking to safeguard the Naval Station Norfolk against sea-level rise and flooding events include increasing the installation's resilience to future sea- level rise, flooding events, land subsidence, and extreme weather events. One study project, the Naval Station Norfolk and the surrounding Hampton Roads’ region, expects a further 2 feet rise in sea levels is expected by 2050, by 2100 sea levels are projected to rise between 4.5 to 7 feet (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). However, another sea-level rise projection by the Virginia Climate Change Commission reported that region-wide, the Chesapeake Bay area should see an increase in SLR by 2.3 – 5.2 feet by 2100 (Governor’s Commission on Climate Change, 2018).

61 According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, by 2100, Naval Station, Norfolk, will flood 280 times a year (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The Navy’s actions in the future to adapt and protect Naval Station Norfolk will need to include replacing all 14 concrete piers, build a seawall and other armoring rigid structures to safeguard the base from rising seas and floodwaters. Moreover, investing resources into infrastructure and transportation needs assessments and resilience plans and actions and investment in soft climate adaptation measures such as wetland restoration and revitalization. Increased funding has been designated for military installation resilience projects. Funding is the most massive deterrent to mitigating climate change impacts, specifically sea-level rise and coastal flooding. Future actions that the military is taking to safeguard the Naval Station Norfolk against sea-level rise and flooding events also include conduct assessments intending to assess the vulnerability of Naval Station Norfolk and its facilities to climate change. The U.S. Military has developed and implemented a climate change working group. This group has three main tasks concerning the threat of climate change: (1) aligning and mainstreaming climate change considerations into policies, guidance, and plans, (2) conducting high-level assessments of vulnerabilities, and (3) implementing pilot demonstrations at installations to integrate climate change considerations into installation plans and evaluate technical assistance essential requirements (US Department of Defense, 2013). These actions are vital in increasing the capacity of the U.S. Military to act upon climate change risks and the threat to its military installations such as the Naval Station Norfolk.

Subsiding Land

The second environmental threat faced by the Naval Station Norfolk is land subsidence. The land has subsided in and around Hampton Roads region 26 cm – 10 inches over the past 100 years (Boon et al., 2010; Davis, 1987; Eggleston & Pope, 2013). Moreover, visible changes in the geography are being witnessed at Naval Station Norfolk and throughout the greater Hampton Roads’ region. Land subsidence can be attributed to groundwater depletion, land readjusting to distortions in the earth’s crust, and land subsiding does to a bolide. A bolide is a too bright meteor that slammed into the Chesapeake Bay region 35 million years ago, which produced the 85 km diameter crater. The surrounding land is now slowly but continuously sliding inward (Eggleston & Pope, 2013). Land subsidence is a massive concern because increased flooding can

62 alter wetland and coastal ecosystems that serve as natural buffers to current tidal flooding and storm surges, damage infrastructure, and historical sites. Wetland loss in this region is intrinsically tied to land subsidence and land loss (Nerem, 1998). Nor’easters, hurricanes, and extra high tide events also exacerbate land subsidence, land destabilization, infrastructure damage, and many other effects. The current actions that the military is taking to safeguard the Naval Station Norfolk and the surrounding installations against land subsidence is still in its infancy – monitoring and planning are the only actions being accepted at this time. However, local government planning departments and districts are now requiring that all new construction and land use planning consider land subsidence and integrate this study into the Environmental Impact Assessment or EIS. In 2017, NASA led a study that concluded that land subsidence in the Hamptons Roads’ region is not uniform and actually “sinking at highly uneven rates” (Jet Propulsion Laboratory - California Institute of Technology, 2017). Although current actions to adapt to land subsidence are not fully articulated, it is vital that monitoring, information gathering, and planning options are being pursued – this is the first step to adaption. The USN and the entire Department of Defense utilize the Hampton Roads’ region to provide mission readiness, maintenance, training, and many other national security activities that safeguard our nation, troops, and the American people. These are significant and vital to protect the military installations in the area from land subsidence that are fundamental to the United States' national security endeavors. Many efforts are underway to plan and adapt to sea-level rise in the Hampton Roads’ Region. However, land subsidence contribution to relative sea-level rise is still lacking (Bekaert et al., 2017). For the Naval Station Norfolk and the surrounding military installations mentioned in this chapter, no major plans are underway to adapt to land subsidence. To successfully adapt to a changing coastline from subsiding land, the region, as a whole, needs to collaborate and unite together to formulate and achieve climate adaptation goals. Other future actions to combat the adverse effects of land subsidence would be to increase funding for land use and transportation needs studies regionally; have long term monitoring capabilities in place to measure and monitor land subsidence; collaborate with local, regional, and state governments, industries, and businesses to formulate a regional approach to manage land subsidence; and retrofit current infrastructure that is valuable to withstand future land subsidence.

63 Coastal Erosion

The third climate change threat impacting the Naval Station Norfolk is coastal erosion. Climate change impacts increase the likelihood, extent, and damage to other climate effects. Coastal erosion in and around Hampton Roads is intrinsically linked to sea-level rise, coastal flooding, storm surges, and land subsidence (City of Virginia Beach, n.d.; Kramer, 2016; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Moreover, sea-level rise, storm surges, and coastal flooding have eroded beaches used for training troops at Oceana and Joint Expeditionary bases, says Rios. More than $10 million has been spent to replenish sand (Kramer, 2016). Moreover, flooding causes shoreline erosion causing pier and bulkhead scour, destabilizing the ground, and increased loads on structures (Li et al., 2012). According to one study, the Naval Station Norfolk coastline was deemed primarily nonerodable because of the extensive landfill, concrete, and other hard surfaces and structure in place (Li et al., 2012). Laws governing this region include the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, addresses marine resources, shoreline erosion problems and the location of erosion control structures, as well as water quality protection, and the Erosion and Sediment Control Act passed in 1973, which requires local governments to adopt and enforce a local erosion and sediment control ordinance (Kramer, 2016). Current strategies employed to mitigate coastal erosion include no action taken to the eroded coastline, enhance or maintain the coastline, create shoreline action by using headland control with stone breakwater, or building seawalls to protect the shoreline from wave action, and managed retreat (Burks-Copes et al., 2014). It is unclear, and further research failed to clearly state whether these laws bound the military. As military installations increase environmental initiatives, a more holistic approach to climate change is taken. At Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story oyster reefs are being employed as an erosion control structure in mudflat areas of the installation (Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story, 2011). Oyster reefs act as a natural erosion control apparatus that also provides other ecosystem services. Other ecosystem services that oyster reefs provide to watersheds is a water filtration and purification services. Oyster provides water quality enrichment, which enhances the health and vitality of the entire watershed and its inhabitants. This is a profound example of a coastal enhancement that utilizes many ecosystem services to achieve a conservation and climate change initiative.

64 While some of the eroded coastal areas at the Naval Station Norfolk have been hardened or secured with rigid armament structures such as ripraps, other installation areas take a softer approach to coastline management. An example of a milder coastal erosion control measure is establishing a living shoreline buffer at the Naval Station Norfolk (Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, 2013). Where erosion is already prevalent and occurring, sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and storm surges are likely to increase the likelihood and severity of shoreline erosion. The military's current actions in the Hampton Roads’ region are to maintain the existing state of their installations and bases. Maintaining the current state of these military installations could be achieved by employing both hard and soft approaches outlined in the two examples above. Hard and soft approaches to adapting to climate change effects now and in the future will become increasingly more abundant at coastal military installations throughout the United States. Ways to enhance current military efforts to adapt to a changing climate could include utilizing multiple responses or adaptation strategies to provide a more holistic approach to climate change. An example of this would be to employ all three climate change adaptation strategies – enhance, protect, and retreat – in different areas of the installation. For instance, at Naval Station Norfolk, it is imperative to protect the Naval Shipyard and piers. Additionally, enhancement efforts may include areas of this military installation that are sites for wetland and mudflat restoration efforts. For the most part, a retreat is the last resort option to adapt to a changing climate. However, I would argue that is not always the case. Managed retreat does not have to be all or nothing; it can include withdrawal of some areas of or partial areas of the base or installation. There is a need to enhance all adaptation strategies to take a holistic approach to combat climate change's adverse threats. One-way adaptation strategies can be improved is by increasing the understanding of the need to share information in different ways that the military is not accustomed to. Overall, there is a need for more information sharing for all adaptation strategies to dismantle the restriction of thinking and information flow in the U.S. Military. Without a better understanding of information sharing improvement, the U.S. Military plan will not adapt to climate change.

65 Hurricanes

The fourth and last environmental threat confronting the Naval Station Norfolk is Hurricanes and other severe weather events. Hurricane frequency and severity in and around the Hampton Roads’ region has not increased over the last century, and, from 1950 to 2003, no hurricane made landfall in Hampton Roads’ or Virginia (Burt, 2007; Mabeus, 2017; Virginia Department of Emergency Management, 2016). However, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, since 1857, 65 hurricanes have passed within 150 nautical miles of the Hampton Roads area (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). The Naval Station Norfolk has suffered six hurricanes and several tropical storms since 2003. In the wake of Hurricane Isabel (2003), the USN ordered destroyers, frigates, and amphibious ships out to sea to avoid damage. The effects and damage that Hurricane Isabel had on Naval Station Norfolk included flooding roughly 6% of the installation with water depths of 2-3 feet (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, n.d.). Moreover, other hurricanes and severe weather events have impacted the Naval Station Norfolk in the following ways: increasing protection measures such as sandbags, storm surge flooding, damage to the base and infrastructure, and damage to the surrounding community (Kramer, 2016 and National Weather Service, n.d.).11 Additionally, as mentioned in other areas of the outlined climate change impacts, each climate change effect exacerbates or can trigger another effect into motion. This is another example of the phrase “threat multiplier” the DoD uses in conjunction with climate change and national security discussions (CNA, 2007, p. 6). Hurricanes increase the height and extent of ocean waters that flood the coastline during a storm event. Removing sea level rise as a contributor to the height and extent of hurricane storm surge and flooding, presently Naval Station Norfolk is susceptible to 100% installation wide flooding from a Category 3 or 4 hurricane (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Other contributing factors to installation flooding from Hurricane storm surge include flooding from high tides, wave action,

11 Other notable hurricanes to come within 150 miles of the Hampton Roads region include: Hurricane/Tropical Depression Ernesto (2006) 13,000 sandbags deployed to protect the base (Kramer, 2016); Hurricane/Tropical Depression Ida (2009) storm surge that impacted the base measured on November 13 at 7.74 ft (National Weather Service, n.d.); Hurricane Irene (2011) brought 7.5 foot storm surge to the installation (National Weather Service, n.d.); Hurricane Irene and Hurricane Joaquin (2015) (National Weather Service, n.d.); Hurricane Matthew (2016) storm surge brought 2 feet of water onto the base and surrounding community causing extensive damage to buildings, roads and local businesses – 1.2 million dollars in repairs (National Weather Service, n.d.); and Hurricane Florence and Tropical Storm Michael (2018) (National Weather Service, n.d.).

66 and rainfall – all of which could be occurring during a Category 1-4 Hurricane (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Nor’easters significantly lesser storm effects than hurricanes do; however, Nor’easters are widespread in this region to generate damaging storm surges that contribute to all of the aforementioned climate change impacts. Current actions to address the impacts of hurricanes on the Naval Station Norfolk and surrounding military installations include: tidal and storm surge data collected during extreme weather events; simulation exercises enhance emergency actions plans to prepare for and respond to hurricanes and other with the assistance of another federal organization, FEMA, which conducted a computer-simulated category four hurricanes directed into the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay, the Naval Station Norfolk is now informed on the extent and magnitude of damage a direct hit would cause from that kind of storm (Kusnetz et al., 2018). Moreover, the Navy declined to disclose the actual damage a direct/localized hit would have on the military installations (Kusnetz et al., 2018). As exemplified in the above paragraphs, Naval Station Norfolk and the surrounding military installations are vulnerable to a direct hit of a Category 1-4 Hurricane and Hurricanes that come within 150 miles of the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Future actions for the coastal military installations in this region to embrace include building cooperative risk management strategies and plans on a region-wide basis to include all stakeholders involved; continually explore, study, plan and adopt various options to mitigate the adverse impact of a category 1-4 Hurricane (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016).; and utilize the natural topography to enhance ecological services to protect the coastline from some or all of the effects of these types of storms (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Lastly, because the Navy is an important actor and its Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project has already convened without fully collaborating with all stakeholders in the region. The military needs to collaboratively address these emergency risk management issues with other stakeholders. Now, this research will transition to the empirical analysis of this case study. Climate change threats are abundant and visible at the Naval Station Norfolk; this is evidence based on the above section's analysis. However, it is fundamental to uncover the opportunities that emerge in the face of imminent threats to an organization, community, or locality. This dissertation will

67 examine the opportunities that emerged from the Naval Station Norfolk examination in the next section.

SWOT Analysis Opportunities: External

This case study showcases the first opportunity is the DoD’s emphasis on the “whole-of- government”12 approach to climate change issues by exemplifying a two-year (2014-2016) revolutionary intergovernmental pilot project addressing adaptive planning for climate change resilience. The first of its kind, DoD sponsored Pilot Project integrates leaders across Hampton Roads’ metropolitan area that are working together to establish an intergovernmental body to prepare for climate change impacts – primarily focusing on the impacts of sea-level rise (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). The Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project was formed in June 2014 (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). The mission statement of the Pilot Project is to “develop a regional “whole of government” and “whole of community” approach to sea level rise preparedness and resilience planning in Hampton Roads that also can be used as a template for other regions” (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). This pilot project aimed to formalize joint effort cooperation among federal, state, and local governments in addition to the public and private sector to adapt to climate change impacts in the region. In addition to local and regional governments, steering committee, advisory committee, private sector stakeholders, and other pilot project members, the Federal government liaisons associated with this project include USN Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic; US Navy Commanding Officer, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic, Commander, Norfolk District; US Army Corps of Engineers Commander Joint Base Langley-Eustis; the USCG Commanding Officer; USCG Shore Infrastructure Logistics Center; Commander Fifth Coast Guard District National Security Council and the Council on Environmental Quality (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). Participation in this “whole of government” or “whole of community” approach

12 For more information regarding the DoD’s “whole-of-government” approach please refer to the introduction chapter.

68 to address climate change impacts already threatening this region was completely voluntary and non-binding. Identifying the relevant and vital issues to address when planning for climate change impacts is indispensable for preparedness and resiliency planning. Climate change and resilience planning key issues that were addressed by this pilot project included identifying the extent of the authority of the intergovernmental planning project; who are the stakeholders involved in the planning, preparing, adapting; a governing body that oversees the development of the intergovernmental pilot project; the plans and policies to be incorporated and coordinated among stakeholders in the region; what resources are available and what resources are needed; and determining all of the parameters surrounding the implementation of all the planning processes mentioned above (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). Planning for climate change impacts in the region will include protecting, accommodating, and retreating (Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project, 2014). Although, the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience, this project can be employed in other coastal military localities across the nation.13 The overwhelming contribution of the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project has showcased the ability for all stakeholders in a region to collectively consider all concerns and work together on building resiliency and preparedness action plans for regional stability. Moreover, this working group did not end this project with just lessons learned and concluding remarks – they addressed recommendations of engagements, data sharing, and ways to continually build collaborative relationships across a wide array of stakeholders into the future. The development of the collaborating, studying, evaluating, and planning for climate change impacts in this area over the past 5 to 10 years has led to a tremendous amount of relationship building, vital information gathering and sharing. These actions have fostered ongoing community resilience preparation and planning techniques and paved the way for future efforts to build resiliency in the Hampton Roads’ region. The political and planning policy environment surrounding the coastal military installations in and around Hamptons roads region is actively addressing climate change-related impacts in a “whole of government” “whole of

13 Please see recommendations chapter for further development the derived recommendations for this case study.

69 community” resilience planning approach. Since climate change is a highly contested topic, the military has adopted a silent approach to media attention on climate change adaptation efforts. Although the current policy is to side-step the climate change debate, actions clearly show they address the already measurable impacts of sea-level rise, coastal flooding, land subsidence, and coastal erosion. The second opportunity that will be addressed is the military focus on the measurable, visible, and observed impacts of coastal erosion, sea-level rise, and coastal flooding to acquire funding for installation improvements instead of debating the existence of climate change. Climate change planning is heavily contingent upon direct and adequate funding. However, before I address this aspect, a discussion on how the contentious beliefs surrounding climate change in the political policy and planning circles affect fund climate change-related resiliency efforts. It is not new news that there is an apparent division between climate change non- supporters and climate change supporters (Hawkins, 2016). Moreover, some individuals, everyday citizens to the president of the United States, would add that this division has been further associated with the two major political parties in the United States – Republicans (climate deniers) and Democrats (climate change supporters) (Hawkins, 2016). This dissertation will not entertain the debate about whether or not global warming and climate change are happening. Alternately, this research will focus on the scientific evidence and the fact that most of the scientific community agrees with the existence of climate change and the causes and effects that global warming has on the environment (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Synthesis Report, 2014). This is far from the American Political realm, especially evident in the Legislative Branch – primarily in the House of Representatives (Hawkins, 2016). Climate change planning is being halted at the highest levels of our government. From 2014 and 2016, Republicans in the House of Representatives added language the Department of Defense’s spending bills prohibiting funds for climate change preparedness initiatives deeming terrorism the most significant threat that the DoD should focus on (Parker, 2017). These direct actions to restrict defense spending on climate change preparedness and planning issues threaten our military's stability and threaten national security. Alternatively, the Department of Defense is deploying a different tactic to side-step the debate on climate change. The defense department avoids the politics of climate change debate while pressing ahead to adapt to exogenous change impacts. Capt. Dean VanderLey,

70 commanding officer of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) from 2016 to 2018, states that “we [the military] don’t talk about climate change…we talk about sea-level rise. You can measure it” (Doep, 2018; Parker, 2017). The military is sidestepping the debate of climate change by reframing sea level rise and all other climate-related impacts as regional resilience planning projects. The Department of Defense's ability to increase funding opportunities for resilience planning and preparedness projects by inviting skeptics into the conversation without labeling climate change issues is a very strategic and vital opportunity. This opportunity should be at the forefront of all DoD regional resilience and preparedness planning efforts. The third opportunity identified through the SWOT analysis process is the prospect of modernization of the Naval Station Norfolk to withstand current and future climate change threats. Linking the risks that sea-level rise and coastal inundation is causing and will cause in the future and the need to modernize this WWI era base will ensure the Naval Station Norfolk's ability to perform strategic military operations into the foreseeable future. While enhancing the installation's resilience to climate change impacts, this coastal military installation can perform needed infrastructure maintenance and repairs. Modernization of the Naval Station Norfolk is critical to ensure that the military operations and assets will be mission ready. The fundamental attribute of the USN is to maintain mission readiness. Mission readiness at the Naval Station Norfolk is already vulnerable due to the impacts of exogenous change. Modernization is critical to mission readiness. Therefore, it is essential for continued military operations and national security efforts that modernization efforts get underway. The fourth opportunity showcases the impact of climate change planning and preparedness efforts on coastal and non-coastal military installations worldwide. The Naval Station Norfolk, being on the front lines of climate change for the U.S. military, is in a unique position to pave the way for the inclusion of climate change resiliency and preparedness planning at all coastal and non-coastal military installations both within and outside of the U.S. The Naval Station Norfolk is already adapting to climate change impacts, as exemplified in this case study. Other coastal military installations can replicate steps that the Naval Station Norfolk has taken by employing a “whole-of-government” approach to resilience planning. The success of the Hampton Roads’ Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project can be used as a templet for other military installations. Other military installations can

71 accomplish this by utilizing military and civilian resources to monitor and study climate change impacts and build regional alliances to enhance regional stability to exogenous change. Moreover, partnerships with the city and regional municipalities to improve regional transportation and other public services. Naval Station Norfolk will continue to be a living blueprint for other military installations adapting to exogenous change. Realizing the opportunities that an organization has to adapt to or manage threats to their organization, community, or locality is vital. This analysis will transition from discussing the Naval Station Norfolk opportunities that exogenous change presents to addressing the internal strengths that this coastal military installation possesses.

SWOT Analysis Strengths: Internal

Several strengths have been identified for the Naval Station Norfolk. The first strength is that the Department of Defense is taking climate change seriously and actively incorporating climate change planning into their missions, actions, and day to day operations. Despite the contentiousness of climate change rhetoric and science within the United States, the Department of Defense is working towards transforming climate change vulnerable military assets into resilient national security resources. From safeguarding the base from flooding, building new infrastructure that increases the resilience to sea-level rise, land subsidence, and coastal erosion that support daily naval operations, to crafting climate change preparedness plans that includes a “whole of government” and a “whole of community” approach by the Naval Station Norfolk is a living example of how the Department of Defense is changing in response to exogenous change.14 Enhancing this internal strength by monitoring, crafting, and creating climate change resilience and preparedness plans will mitigate current climate change threats. This research identified the second internal strength is the Naval Station Norfolk’s willingness and profound efforts to participate in regional collaboration efforts. This correlates with the first internal strength – the Department of Defense believes that climate change is a threat to national security and U.S. military assets' security to include military service members and their families. In the past, military branches' autonomy with land-use planning on military installations is not compatible with present-day needs. Population growth (Bae, 2017; Colby & Ortman, 2017; Ehrlich & Holdren, 1971) and increased concentration of infrastructure and

14 All of these examples are depicted throughout this chapter.

72 people living in coastal areas (Barragán & Andrés, 2015; Dinan, 2017; Surjan & Parvin, 2016) has increased the need for local communities and the military to collaborate on current and future land use planning necessities. Collaboration efforts for land use planning are already happening at the Naval Station Norfolk. Moreover, the Department of Defenses’ installations and bases in the Hampton Roads’ area contribute to approximately 46% of the local economy (Virginia Coastal Policy Center et al., 2016). It is in the best interest of the region to work together to build a resilient regional community. As mentioned in this chapter, Naval Station Norfolk and other military personnel within the Hampton Roads’ region are working with local, state, federal government agencies and numerous other stakeholders to continue building resilience and preparedness plans. Naval Station Norfolk is the highest valued military installation in the Hampton Roads’ region and the world's most extensive Naval base. The third internal strength that the Naval Station Norfolk has is its value to the U.S. Naval Forces and the installation's sheer size. As a consequence of being the most extensive military base, funding projects for climate change are already underway. As stated throughout this case study, some of these projects include building new piers that are the vital support system to naval warships, beach nourishment efforts, continue training objectives, and coastal armament efforts to decrease the impacts of coastal flooding and sea-level rise, to name a few. Naval Station Norfolk is a vital asset to mission readiness and, ultimately, national security; therefore, acquisition of future funding may prove to be less complicated than other bases and installations that are smaller and less vital. Internal strengths that this coastal military installation, the Naval Station Norfolk, have been critical to their ability to remain resilient amidst environmental change. This analysis has outlined three out of four of the SWOT analysis categories, this research will summarize the fourth and final category – Naval Station Norfolk’s’ weaknesses.

SWOT Analysis Weaknesses: Internal

The first internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is funding. Funding is labeled a strength and a weakness for the Naval Station Norfolk. Adaptation plans for climate change in the region are massively expensive, leading to the reason why funding is a weakness. All adaptive strategies, no matter the location, come with hefty economic investments – but can you put a price tag on national security? In 2017, federal climate change funding was

73 approximately 13.2 billion dollars spread across 19 different agencies (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018). Typically financing for these projects comes from the annual United States Federal budget. Because the federal government and climate change fund these projects, military planning is a part of the overall Department of Defense military budget allocation for climate change-related projects is minimal to the current need (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018). The current administration’s stance on global warming is blocking and stalling resilience and preparedness planning even further to impact climate change funding allocation further. President Trump’s removing climate change as a national security threat has delisted climate change as a threat multiplier and has made other projects more pressing than the threat of climate change. Funding for climate change preparedness and planning efforts is and will only continue to be complicated. Additionally, the funding source may be allocated through the public and private sector and through regional collaboration efforts to combat the impacts of exogenous change in the region. The second internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that the Naval Station Norfolk has outdated base infrastructure, and it is already impacting military operations. Arrival at the conclusion suggests such weaknesses, a basic notation that the current and outdated infrastructure hinders maintenance schedules, delaying necessary supply chains that support military operations, delaying training, and many other military functions. Nevertheless, outdated infrastructure is compounded with the impacts of climate change. Climate change intensifies the damage to already impaired infrastructure, which further impairs the military installation's ability to remain resilient and at full operational readiness. An independent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists showed that a 3-foot rise in sea levels would significantly threaten 55 naval installations in the US valued at $100 billion (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Alternatively, according to Harvard Business Review, “Most of the navy’s land-based assets…are on seacoasts. It’s 111,000 buildings and structures and other installations, located on 2.2 million acres around the world, would cost $220 billion to replace” (Harvard Business Review, 2017). Regardless of what source you choose, the impacts of climate change on military assets is imminent. Updating the aging infrastructure that includes safeguards for climate change impacts is one effective way to tackle both climate change and outdated infrastructure. The third internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is outdated transportation infrastructure. This research means that outdated transportation infrastructure

74 includes all transportation by a motor vehicle on the Naval Station Norfolk base and off base. Transportation to and from military installations in the Hampton Roads’ area is impaired during coastal inundation events, which impacts the installation’s ability to have the proper and necessary staffing to support operational readiness and national security efforts. If the installation is not adequately staffed and is not mission-ready, then national security is jeopardized because military personnel is not combat-ready. Mission and combat readiness are vital attributes to our nation’s overall national security initiatives. If climate change impacts the military’s ability to remain combat-ready in the face of a changing climate, then, I argue, greater attention needs to be paid to outdated transportation infrastructure both on military installations and within the surrounding community. Therefore, institutional transformation is required for the U.S. military, which is vital to plan and adapt to climate change. The fourth internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that climate change affects military members and their families' lives. Climate change impacts continue to present challenges to service members and their families by impacting their ability to: access installations, access installation services, safety and security, transferability, and climate change impacts on mental health and overall community well-being. Accessibility to and from military installations is vital for mission readiness, training needs, and overall installation protection and management. This dissertation postulates that national security is already being impacted by climate change-induced sea-level rise and coastal flooding. Accessing military installations is vital for service members to continue to support military interests within the United States and abroad. Moreover, service members and their families need to access installations because they harbor vital services that include medical facilities, subsidized shopping, recreational access, childcare, educational institutions, and other critical services. The impacts of sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and extreme weather events threaten the safety, security, and transferability of military personnel and their families because they live in the most vulnerable areas along the coast. At every new duty station, military personnel, and their families, assimilate into the community as much as possible. This assimilation process includes buying or renting a house, condo, or apartment; registering for school, sports, and other extra-curricular activities; some military spouses seek employment within the local community; the process of building a new life in the local community begins. The safety and security of

75 military members and their families that reside and work within an area already experiencing climate change is essential. If service members and their families, who are forced to relocate to every new duty station, are not safe in their new communities, then military readiness is subsequently impacted. Recent scholars have linked the physical impacts of climate change to rising mental health issues and decreased community well-being (Clayton et al., 2017). Exogenous change causes grave physical damage; however, the less and often most overlooked is the damage that climate change threats have on our mental health. Floodwaters rush through homes and communities, land sinking into harbors, the topography of your community changes, threats from extreme weather events, along with many other climate change threats can cause devastating trauma to individuals’ lives (Padhy et al., 2015). Moreover, in some cases, just the threat of something happening to your home, community, or loved ones can cause severe distress to one’s mental health (Weems et al., 2007). Additionally, significant research has been done on the impacts that climate change disasters have on children (Masten & Osofsky, 2010).). The fifth internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that climate change impacts disrupt everyday military operations. As discussed throughout the development of this chapter, climate change impacts on daily military operations are numerous. These climate change impacts also include disruptions in maintenance and military training schedules. From impacts to transportation to, while at and off base, disrupting daily mission-critical tasks, to dealing with flooded buildings and beaches that disrupt vital training operations, exogenous change is currently impacting daily military operations. Internal weaknesses that the Naval Station Norfolk has are essential to identify. Once these weaknesses are identified, measures can be taken to enhance this coastal military’s vulnerabilities to exogenous change. This analysis has outlined all four of the SWOT analysis categories, this research will transition to the recommendations section for this case study.

Table 2: Recommendation Section

76 should seek funds through facility/base modernization efforts as a way to prepare for future impacts of climate change while bringing facilities up to date. The Military should also include incremental or phased construction projects adapted if climate change impacts worsen in the future.

2. Increase monitoring and collaborative 2. Need for more data, information, and research efforts for land subsidence monitoring of some of the impacts of impacts by continuing collaboration climate change efforts that reach beyond the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project to bolster regional climate change resilience efforts. Further data is needed to understand the extent and damage that land subsidence will have on this region. Lack of information sharing is detrimental when planning for and adapting to climate change.

3. The Department of Defense should utilize 3. Looking at all options to adapt to climate all adaptation options available to them, change to include managed retreat as a viable solution to some areas. Managed retreat is the last resort option; however, a managed retreat does not have to include the entire base or facility retreating from the coastline. A managed retreat for the Naval Station Norfolk could include retreating inland in areas of the base that do not house necessary facilities and services in that location – relocating them to another location on the base. However, Naval Station Norfolk managed retreat is not an option for this installation because relocating this base is not an option - locations are limited, costly, and building infrastructure time-consuming. Additionally, combining managed retreat with soft adaptation approaches – environmental restoration – could further increase the military installation's resilience.

77 economic hardship that climate change severely impacted by climate change. poses on military funding/budgets. This harsh reality of closing some bases, moving entire installations to a new location, and retreating from the coastline may be future. This recommendation will concentrate on military assets, personnel, and infrastructure in fewer locations across the nation while decreasing the economic hardships to protect military assets from exogenous change.

5. The military’s secrecy regarding information derived from a computer- generated simulation of a category four 5. Secrecy from the military regarding hurricane hitting the mouth of the impacts of computer-generated hurricane Chesapeake Bay does not embody the with a direct hit to the mouth of “whole of government” “whole of Chesapeake Bay community” Department of Defense directive. Collaboratively addressing extreme weather risks as a region is necessary to support region-wide resilience planning efforts. Moreover, transparency through data gathering and sharing is vital for all regional stakeholders to adapt to climate change threats. An increased understanding is needed regarding sharing information in different ways that the U.S. military is not accustomed to. There is a need to dismantle the restriction of thinking and information flow in the U.S. Military to plan and adapt to climate change. With climate change, secrecy is counterproductive.

6. The Department of Defense and the military should continue to focus on the observable environmental changes instead 6. The Department of Defense’s strategy to of engaging in the contentious climate talk about the observable environmental change debate. changes – not focusing on climate change as the driver of these changes

7. Modernizing Naval Station Norfolk’s infrastructure and base facilities is necessary to ensure continued national 7. Naval Station Norfolk’s need to security endeavors. Modernization of the modernize the WWI/WWII era Naval Station Norfolk’s infrastructure infrastructure. should include climate change planning and preparedness efforts. Institutional transformation is needed, as the U.S.

78 military is no longer successfully shaping the environment/nature to its ends. For example, Naval Station Norfolk managed retreat is not an option for this installation because relocating this base is not an option - locations are limited, costly, and building infrastructure time-consuming.

8. The Naval Station Norfolk should work with local, regional, state, and federal agencies/governments to modernize and reduce the vulnerabilities that the current transportation routes have on the local 8. The region needs to modernize outdated community and the military. This is transportation routes that are impacted by essential for continued military operations current climate change threats – sea level in the region. rise, coastal inundation, and land subsidence. 9. Climate change impacts on military personnel and their families at the Naval Station Norfolk are currently observable. The military should find ways to enhance its personnel and their families' resilience 9. Climate change impacts on military through training, education, and personnel and their families assistance, to name a few. Utilizing all options to safeguard military personnel and their families against climate change impacts will support continued national security endeavors.

Chapter Summary

79 Department of Defense takes climate change seriously and the military’s willingness and collaborative efforts with all stakeholders in the region. This research identified weaknesses at the Naval Station Norfolk to include acquisition of funding for climate change preparedness and planning efforts and the weakness of outdated military infrastructure compounded when faced with the impacts of exogenous change. In addition to strengths and weaknesses, this case study provided some opportunities to consider enhancing a “whole of government” and a “whole of community’s” resilience to the impacts of climate change. To include the military’s focus on the observable and measurable threats of exogenous change rather than the debate over the validity of the science of climate change over the existence of climate change, and, the opportunity to modernize outdated and failing installation facilities. This research identified numerous threats for the Naval Station Norfolk. Some of the threats include sea-level rise, coastal inundation, coastal erosion, land subsidence and the increase of extreme weather events, increased sources of conflicts due to natural calamities, infrastructure damage, and threats to military readiness. In closing, planning for an uncertain future based on anticipated projections of a wide array of climate change impacts is difficult but necessary. This dissertation has identified site- specific strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities for the Naval Station Norfolk. The success and failures of the United States Navy and the federal government’s action to protect and ensure resilience at the Naval Station Norfolk and the Hampton Roads’ region will lend insight into climate change planning at other coastal military installations. Identifying ways to enhance resilience through effective planning is vital to coastal military installations and coastal communities. Thinking outside the box by involving all stakeholders in the process, incorporating new strategies to adapt, and utilizing new tactics to craft policies that enhance resilience is essential. Instead of the analysis performed in this research, the identified threats and weaknesses pose significant military readiness challenges, jeopardizing national security.

80 CHAPTER FOUR

U.S. COAST GUARD CASE STUDY

Introduction

The U.S. Coast Guard has numerous installations scattered throughout the United States to include major active U.S. Coast Guard bases, stations, medical treatment facilities, and training centers. I have divided the US Coast Guard installations into two categories – 205 coastal and 55 inland installations – because geographic location lends itself to different types of climate change impacts (Military.com Website, n.d.). The primary mission of the U.S. Coast Guard “is to ensure our Nation's maritime safety, security, and stewardship” (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). However, the US Coast Guard is a unique branch of the military responsible for a multitude of maritime activities at any given time. The US Coast Guard performs eleven different missions ranging from Port and Waterway security to search and rescue to Defense Readiness (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). For this dissertation, the selected case study exemplifies the impacts of climate change on the US Coast Guard in the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. The US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is located in Highlands, New Jersey, on the Sandy Hook peninsula. Figure 4 below illustrates the location of the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook along with all of the other military installations along the east coast that are deemed as being “on the front lines of climate change” (Economists for Peace and Security Website, n.d.).

81 Figure 4 illustrates the location of the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook in its regional context, providing a close up of the region that the figure1did not convey.

Figure 4. US Coast Guard Station and the surrounding region.

Study Area: Regional Context

Military operations within the New Jersey region can be traced back to when the United States of America declared independence from Great Britain. In 1874, Sandy Hook Proving Ground was established adjacent to Fort Hancock by the Army. Sandy Hook Proving Ground was a machinery and weapons testing facility. Due to the advancements and evolutions in military weaponry related to longer-range testing capacity, Sandy Hook Proving Ground was moved to a new location between 1917 and 1919, the Aderdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. The purpose of providing this regional context is that the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is located within this Historic District of Fort Hancock and Sandy Hook Proving Ground. Both are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Historic American Engineering Record, 1968). Sandy Hook Proving Ground and Fort Hancock were added to the National Register in 1980 and later designated as National Historic Landmarks in 1982 (National Park Service Website, n.d.). Sandy Hook Proving Ground and Fort Hancock National Historic Landmark comprise the entire “hook’ landmass of Sandy Hook peninsula (National Park Service Website, n.d.). This region, for decades, has had a deep tie to its rich historical military legacy. This historical legacy and connections to place will be discussed further in the analysis section of this chapter. Climate change threatens the future of these historical military landmarks and many

82 others in all coastal regions across the United States. Figure 5 depicts the Sandy Hook region and where the U.S. Coast Guard resides on the peninsula and all of the National Park recreation areas.

Figure 5. Historic Sites within the Sandy Hook Peninsula and the current operating are of the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook

Case Study – U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook

The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is one of the original Life-Saving Stations built-in 1848 (Base Directory Website, n.d.). The area surrounding the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is owned by the federal government and is National Park Service lands (Base Directory Website, n.d.). The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is located in Highlands, New Jersey. The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is attached to the Ashore unit within the New York Coast Guard sector. The region designated as Sandy Hook is a six-and-a-half-mile long peninsula surrounded by miles of guarded ocean used for recreation, historic preservation, and commerce (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). U.S. Army Fort Hancock, dating back to 181850sis located just south of the U.S. Coast Guard Station (Base Directory Website, n.d.). Today, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook houses numerous response

83 boats, Coast Guard Cutters and other lifesaving vessels (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). This U.S. Coast Guard Station performs search and rescue missions and is responsible for law enforcement, environmental protection, and regional waterways' coastal security. Roughly seventy active duty and fifty reserve personnel are stationed at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). In addition, to the U.S. Coast Guard military personnel and civilians that work, live, and recreate on this station, the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary Flotilla 014-02-02 operates in coordination with all Coast Guard personnel at Station Sandy Hook (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). The U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary was created in 1939 as a civilian volunteer organization to support and work with active duty and reserves in the U.S. Coast Guard (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.). Moreover, the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary is comprised of all volunteer members. The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is an integral part of the regional economy, making this station vital to the overall region not just for the missions they perform but for the economic stability that this military installation provides to Highlands, New Jersey (Lahr, 2013). The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook provides 1,000 jobs to local civilians and government contractors, which estimates $67 million in labor income for the region (Lahr, 2013). This U.S. Coast Guard Station is a vital economic asset to this coastal region of New Jersey. Safeguarding and protecting this station from climate change impacts ensures that this station can continue to perform mission-critical operations and decrease the potential economic devastation and social vulnerability exogenous change imposes on this region. The case study was selected because it represents the type of base that must address the broader phenomenon that this dissertation seeks to address – climate change. Moreover, this U.S. Coast Guard Station has been identified through numerous sources within the existing literature as being “on the front lines of climate change,” making it an excellent case study (Governor’s Commission on Climate Change, 2018; The Center for Climate and Security, 2015; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Additionally, this military installation is already adapting to climate change impacts. Highlighting these vital efforts is imperative so that other military facilities across the nation can carry out similar climate action plans. Furthermore, this U.S. Coast Guard Station is already adapting to exogenous change highlights the central claim that this dissertation

84 is making – that the U.S. Military is amidst the fifth revolution in military affairs.15 The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of climate change at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. This research utilizes SWOT analysis to identify possible policy and planning recommendations for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook in subsequent sections.

Table 3: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES 1. Department of Homeland Security and 1. Climate change impacting the lives of the head of the Coast Guard is taking military members and their families climate change seriously 2. Climate change impacting military 2. Adaptation to climate change impacts operations already underway 3. Need for further research, data, and 3. Historical legacy and strategic importance monitoring of climate change impacts OPPORTUNITIES THREATS 1. Implementation of the Department of 1. Sea Level Rise Defense’s “whole of government” 2. Flooding approach and the US Coast Guards “unity 3. Coastal Erosion of effort” to climate change planning 4. Land Subsidence 2. Focus on the measurable, visible, and 5. Hurricanes and other severe weather observable impacts of climate change to events acquire funding 3. The impacts that the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook’s climate change planning has on other military and non- military installations across the globe

SWOT Analysis Threats: External

Several threats were identified throughout the SWOT research analysis process. Currently, sea-level rise and flooding are the biggest and most constant threats to the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook (Governor’s Commission on Climate Change, 2018; The Center for

15 This will be discussed further in the conclusion chapter.

85 Climate and Security, 2015; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Moreover, just as exemplified in the Naval Station Norfolk case study, sea-level rise in the Sandy Hook region is happening at a higher rate than the global average. This is because of three factors – land subsidence, ocean circulation factors, and overall warming and sea-level rise (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). With the increased sea level rise, coupled with land subsidence and changing ocean circulation and with the majority of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hooks topography sitting less than 7ft above sea level, this military installation is vulnerable to rising sea levels, high tide flooding, nuisance flooding, king tide flooding, coastal erosion, and storm surge flooding regardless if it is raining or the sun is shining (U.S. Geological Survey Website, 2019). Based on the current intermediate scenarios, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook will experience a 4ft rise in sea level by 2100. Based on the highest scenarios, this Coast Guard Station will experience a 6.5 ft increase of sea-level rise by 2100. Whether considering the intermediate or highest scenarios, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook will experience a more than 50% inundation by 2100 if safeguard measures are not taken. Sea level rise also increases the depth of flooding during high tide and storms. Sea level rise will drive the high tide line and lead to increased risk of different types of coastal flooding. Today, a Category 1 storm could cause 31% flooding, and by 2100 78% of the base could be flooded (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). For the State of New Jersey, flooding is the most common natural hazard (URS Group INC, 2014). The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook has and will continue to experience many different types of flooding. As stated above, these types of flooding include high tide flooding, nuisance flooding, king tide flooding, and storm surge flooding. Currently, low-lying areas at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook are affected by daily flooding. Moreover, based on the intermediate projections of sea-level rise, dialing flooding would occur 550 times per year by 2070 (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). High tide flooding is currently affecting only small portions of the U.S. Coast Guard Station (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Additionally, based on the highest scenarios, tides would impact over half of the station and inundate transportation/access roads more than 30 times a year by 2070 (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Storm surge flooding is another source of flooding that is

86 exacerbated by sea-level rise. With the State of New Jersey experiencing numerous storm events, storm surge flooding is a significant threat to U.S. Coast Guard assets. The current actions that the military is taking to safeguard the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook against sea-level rise and flooding events include continued beach nourishment efforts and continued support of current hard structures in place to protect military assets. Existing hard structures to protect military assets include jetties located near the U.S. Coast Guard pier facilities. Hurricane Sandy crippled the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook’s ability to operate and perform mission-critical operations. The new U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook base facilities completed in 2018 were built to withstand flooding, sea-level rise, and a Category 3-level storm.16 Future actions that the military is taking to safeguard the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook against sea-level rise and flooding events include increasing the installation's resilience to future sea-level rise, flooding events, land subsidence, and extreme weather events. The Coast Guard actions in the future to adapt and protect the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook will need to include building a seawall and other armoring hard structures to safeguard the base from rising seas and floodwaters. Moreover, investing resources into infrastructure and transportation needs assessments and resilience plans and actions, and investment in soft climate adaptation measures such as wetland restoration and revitalization. Increased funding designated to military installation resilience projects is needed. Funding is the most massive deterrent to mitigating climate change impacts, more specific sea-level rise, and coastal flooding.

Subsiding Land

The second environmental threat faced by the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is subsiding land or sinking land. Sea level rise increases as land sinks due to natural causes. Land subsidence roughly accounts for ½ of the measured sea-level rise in the Sandy Hook region (Cooper et al., 2008; Houser et al. 2014; Kopp et al., 2014). During the period 1-1800 AD, when the global sea levels were not rising but stable, the New Jersey shoreline experiences a 0.6 of increased sea level per decade (Kopp et al., 2014). This rise in sea level along the New Jersey shoreline can be attributed to “glacial isostatic adjustment” (GAI), which occurs when the

16 Further discussion on this will be developed throughout the rest of this chapter. Please see the Hurricane section and the SWOT analysis section Strength section.

87 melting of ice sheets creates a seesaw effects – rising land in one area and sinking land in another (Miller et al., 2013). Sea levels rose during the 20th century roughly 12 inches at bedrock locations and 16 inches along the Jersey Shore from Sandy Hook to Cape May (Kopp et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2013). The additional increase along the coast can be attributed to sediments' natural compaction and the coast and groundwater depletion (Kopp et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2013). For the 21st century, sea levels are rising, and projections show that they will continue to rise by the end of the century. The intermediate scenario projects a rise in sea level of 0.7ft, and the highest scenario projecting an increase of 1.2ft by 2030 (Miller et al., 2013). By 2050, the estimated intermediate rise in sea levels of 1.3ft, with the highest scenario projecting a rise of 2.3ft (Miller et al., 2013). By 2100, the intermediate scenario suggests that sea levels will rise roughly 3.1ft. The highest scenario estimates that sea levels will be 5.9ft higher than today in the Sandy Hook region and along the New Jersey shoreline (Miller et al., 2013). The reason for this pronounced discussion into the seesaw effects of land subsidence and sea-level rise is that it is crucial to understand the intricacies these climate change threats have, and their relational attributes one threat has to compound other threats. Sea level rise is compounded by sand subsidence and vice versa. Add another climate change threat into the mix, and the threat of each impact becomes more significant. Currently, the Department of Defense is only monitoring and planning for a sea-level rise at U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Further monitoring and data gathering are needed to understand the full extent and severity of land subsidence poses for this station. The Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Coast Guard articulated that planning for sea-level rise and flooding is essential to sustaining overall mission readiness. However, there are no plans underway for addressing the impacts of land subsidence and the contribution of land subsidence to relative sea-level rise. For the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, no major plans are underway to adapt to land subsidence. To successfully adapt to a changing coastline from subsiding land, the region, as a whole, needs to collaborate to formulate and achieve climate adaptation goals. Other future actions to combat the adverse effects of land subsidence would be to increase funding for land use and transportation needs studies regionally; have long term monitoring capabilities in place to measure and monitor land subsidence; collaborate with local, regional, and state governments, industries, and businesses to formulate a regional approach to

88 manage land subsidence; and retrofit current infrastructure that is valuable to withstand future land subsidence.

Coastal Erosion

The third climate change threat impacting the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is coastal erosion. Coastal erosion is a natural and dynamic aspect of coastal zone management. It can result from natural (wind, wave, and storm damage) and anthropogenic causes (extreme storms, increased wave, wind, storm energy onshore, and sea-level rise). Coastal erosion can be described as the coastline's determination to include loss of material to include soil, sand, vegetation, to name a few (State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection Website, 2019). Globally, 70% of all sandy beaches and domestically 86% of all U.S. East Coast barrier beaches have eroded over the past 100 years (Zhang et al., 2004). The probability of coastal erosion in the Sandy Hook region is undoubtedly based on the most current data (Monmouth County, 2014). Put differently, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook has to experience coastal erosion and will continue to experience coastal erosion in the future. Based on the information gathered from one projection, an increase in sea level rise by 1 foot could cause areas of the New Jersey shore to recede from erosion by 120 ft by the end of the century (Zhang et al., 2004). Moreover, between 1954 and 2012, the State of New Jersey has experienced eight FEMA coastal erosion disaster declarations (URS Group INC, 2014). Monmouth county, the county within which Sandy Hook resides, was declared coastal erosion disaster regions for three out of the eight events. The three events include a coastal storm in December 1992, Hurricane Irene in 2011, and Hurricane Sandy in 2012 (URS Group INC, 2014). Additionally, information derived from the State of New Jersey website, from 1936 to 2012, there have been 12 coastal erosion occurrences, three of which were classified as the FEMA coastal erosion disasters (State of New Jersey Website, 2019). All of the Monmouth county coastal erosion events were in response to the storm, nor’easters, hurricanes, and blizzards. The impacts of coastal erosion are decreased with continuous coastal structural defense and beach nourishment measures (Monmouth County, 2014). However, coastal erosion is expected to increase in severity and scope due to other climate change impacts. Currently, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook performs beach nourishment efforts to maintain the

89 current state of the installations' geographic area. This is an expensive process, and with continued beach nourishment, the geographic footprint of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook remains the same. A report written in 2008 suggests that the 127-mile coastline of the state of New Jersey has exhausted more than $800 million in state and federal taxpayer dollars for beach fill/beach nourishment efforts (Stockton & Hafner, 2019). Moreover, the Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet project is the largest beach fill project implemented by the Army Corps of Engineers. It is the largest, in terms of the volume of beach fill needed globally (Beachapedia Website, n.d.). Additionally, the Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet project includes beach restoration, storm damage protection via a 100-foot wide beach berm, notching existing stone groins to strengthen the shoreline adjacent to the groin, and extending outfall pipes (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District Website, 2019). However, in the future, with the combined climate change threats (sea-level rise, coastal flooding, land subsidence, etc.), beach nourishment efforts may not be worth the investment. This cost-benefit analysis asserts that such opportunities will arise with investments to the program, including a preventative means for national security issues. Threat multiplier explanation in the Naval Station Norfolk case study is also measurable at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Other climate change impacts that exacerbate coastal erosion include storm surge, extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and coastal flooding (Monmouth County, 2014). Coastal erosion increases the ocean waters' mobility and wave action onshore, expanding the extent of sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and land subsidence (Leatherman et al., 2000). Therefore, coastal erosion will be exacerbated by other climate change impacts. Similar to the Naval Station Norfolk case study, increased conflict and infrastructure damage results from climate change. Current actions that the Department of Homeland Security is taking at the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is to maintain the existing state of their installation. Maintaining the current state of these military installations could be achieved by employing both hard and soft approaches. Just as discussed in the Naval Station Norfolk case study chapter, hard and soft approaches to adapting to climate change effects now and into the future will become increasingly more abundant at coastal military installations throughout the United States. Furthermore, threats to military readiness at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook are also presented. Ways to enhance current military efforts to adapt to a changing climate could include

90 utilizing multiple responses or adaptation strategies to provide a more holistic approach to climate change. Additionally, enhancement efforts may include areas of this military installation that are sites for wetland and mudflat restoration efforts. For the most part, a retreat is the last resort option to adapt to a changing climate. However, I would argue that is not always the case. Managed retreat does not have to be all or nothing. A managed retreat can include a retreat of partial areas of the base or installation. This is primarily because the base's relocation is often limited in terms of locations, funding, and time. Enhancing all adaptation strategies – restoration, armoring and managed retreat – takes a multifaceted approach to combat climate change's adverse threats. This can be simultaneously achieved by increasing information sharing and information flow in the U.S. Coast Guard. Future actions that the Department of Homeland Security can take to mitigate and adapt to coastal erosion issues at their military installations include: build and install engineered dunes and beaches to provide coastal protection, construct and install seawalls, construct and install jetties that decrease wave energy and storm surges onto shorelines, plan and implement climate action plans for the other climate change impacts affecting the given installation; look into managed retreat options combined with base re-alignment strategies to decrease the extent and expense of climate change adaptation efforts; and focus on soft approaches that include a holistic ecosystem management approach to mitigate coastal erosion.

Land Loss

The third climate change threat impacting the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is land loss. Land loss is currently not a significant issue for this station; however, this is expected to change in the future. In the future, based on intermediate scenarios, some parts of the station will become a part of the tidal zone by 2100 (Butler, 2018; Froese & Schilling, 2019; He, Yan, Holyoak, Wan, Rn, Hou, Xie, & Zhang, 2018; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Additionally, based on the highest scenarios, nearly ¾ of the station’s land area will flood during daily high tides by the end of the century (Butler, 2018; Froese & Schilling, 2019; He et al., 2018; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The current actions that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Coast Guard is taking to safeguard the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook against land loss is still in its

91 infancy – monitoring and planning are the only actions being taken at this time. Moreover, further monitoring and data gathering are needed to understand the full extent and severity of land subsidence poses for this station. Sustaining the current U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook’s geological footprint is essential to supporting overall mission readiness. For the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, no major plans are underway to adapt to land subsidence. To successfully adapt to a changing coastline from land loss, the region, as a whole, needs to unite together to formulate and achieve climate adaptation goals. Other future actions to combat the adverse effects of land loss would be to increase funding for land use and transportation needs studies regionally; have long term monitoring capabilities in place to measure and monitor land loss; collaborate with local, regional, and state governments, industries, and businesses to formulate a regional approach to manage land loss; and retrofit current infrastructure to withstand future land subsidence.

Hurricanes

The fourth and last environmental threat confronting the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is hurricanes. Since 1858, roughly twenty-two hurricanes have passed within 150 nautical miles of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook (NOAA, n.d.). The most notable hurricanes include Donna (1960), Felix (1995), Irene (2011), and Sandy (2012) (NOAA, n.d.). Hurricane Sandy caused devastating effects on the state of New Jersey. Hurricane Sandy (October 2012) was the most destructive hurricane in the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season. Moreover, Hurricane Sandy was the second-costliest hurricane in all U.S. History and the most devastating natural disaster to impact the State of New Jersey (Office of Science New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2015). The damage of Hurricane Sandy was widespread from loss of power, drinking water systems, wastewater treatment plants affected, homes and water-born vessels destroyed, missing or damaged, and the entire coastline of beaches experienced some form of coastal erosion (Office of Science New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2015). Hurricane Sandy caused widespread devastation to the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Hurricane Sandy wiped out Coast Guard buildings, pier and range facilities, and the entire homeport of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Hurricanes Sandy’s devastation permeated through the lives of all servicemembers, their families, and all who have a personal tie

92 to this region. Moreover, hundreds of service members, families, and civilians were forced to abandon their homes, jobs, and possessions to seek shelter and safety. New Jersey is no stranger to extreme storms, nor’easters and tropical storms. These storms that affect New Jersey coastline, to date, have caused extensive damage to property, infrastructure, and communities in the billions of dollars (Halpin, 2013). Today Category 1 storms expose 90% of the station’s area to flooding related to storm surge. Based on intermediate scenarios, this threat raises slightly by 2050, and, by 2100, exposure to flooding increases to 100% of the entire U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). In years to come, storms and hurricanes will increase in frequency and intensity, making storm tracing data more important (Monmouth County, 2014). Hurricanes gain strength and intensity from increased seawater temperatures, which are also projected to increase in the future (Monmouth County, 2014). With increases in the frequency and intensity of future hurricanes, the extent of the damage caused will likely be more extensive in the years to come (Monmouth County, 2014). Current actions that the Department of Homeland Security is taking to safeguard the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook includes coastal defense in the form of hard structures (jetties and seawalls) and beach nourishment efforts (Monmouth County, 2014). Enhancing monitoring efforts to detect storms, their strength, their path, and the possible devastation they could incur is of the utmost importance to minimize the adverse effects of all types of storms. As exemplified in the above paragraphs, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook and the surrounding regions are vulnerable to a direct hit of a Category 1-4 Hurricane and Hurricanes that come within 150 miles nautical miles (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Future actions for the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook to embrace include: building cooperative risk management strategies and plans on a region-wide basis to include all stakeholders involved; continually explore, study, plan and adopt various options to mitigate the adverse impact of a category 1-4 Hurricane (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016); and utilize the natural topography to enhance ecological services to protect the coastline from some or all of the effects of these types of storms (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Lastly, because the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is an important actor and its installations are an integral part of the regional planning process within the New York and New Jersey harbor area, the military

93 needs to collaboratively address these emergency risk management issues with other stakeholders in the region. Now, this research will transition to the empirical analysis of this case study. Climate change threats are abundant and visible at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. This is evident based on the research in the above section. However, it is fundamental to uncover the opportunities that emerge in the face of imminent threats to an organization, community, or locality. This dissertation will survey the opportunities that arose from examining the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. in the next section

SWOT Analysis Opportunities: External

This case study showcases the first opportunity to implement the “whole of government” approach to climate change planning as directed by the Department of Defense. As stated in the introduction, the U.S. Coast Guard is an entity of the Department of Homeland Security; however, they operate as partners to ensure our nation’s security against a wide array of threats. The whole government approach has been fulfilled differently for the U.S. Coast Guard than we saw at the Naval Station Norfolk. The U.S. Coast Guard has identified the need to ensure mission success and lasting resilience in the face of changing climate by building a “unity of effort.” This research has identified in the USCG Commandant’s Strategic Intent 2015-2019 that the U.S. Coast Guard will seek to unify effort and build beneficial relationships with a broad range of partners to strategically enable mission success increasingly interconnected world. The U.S. Coast Guard “will build upon robust interagency relationships with federal, state, and local partners to improve … operations while performing our shared missions” (Department of Homeland Security Website, 2016). The climate change planning process for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is different than the region-wide planning efforts in the Naval Station Norfolk case study. The climate change planning process is different for the following ways: land surrounding and occupied by the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is government- owned land and cultural and historical connections to the Sandy Hook region. The “hook” of the peninsula where the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is located is owned and occupied by the government. While government entities are still required to follow all land use requirements, this region has not needed to coordinate their climate action plans with the adjacent communities. This is starkly different than what was uncovered through the research

94 process at the Naval Station Norfolk – where the region as a whole came together to address climate change impacts collectively. Cultural and historical connections to the Sandy Hook region have permeated in this small 6-mile peninsula for decades. The one constant throughout time has been the military presence and occupation of the “hook.” As stated in the above section, this region is now occupied by the U.S. Coast Guard and National Park Service. With the U.S. Coast Guard station off-limits to the general public, the remained of the land, Gateway National Recreation Area, is open for recreational purposes. From historical site seeing, biking, birding, hiking to enjoying a day at the beach - Gateway National Recreation Area has become a part of recreational life. Roughly eight million people per year visit the Gateway National Recreation Area at Sandy Hook (Newman, 2013). The majority seeking out recreational opportunities at the Gateway National Recreational Area in the Sandy Hook Region are mostly “day-trippers” in the spring and summer months. Showcasing the rich and vibrant community ties to the Sandy Hook peninsula's national military legacy is essential to fully understand the community’s ties to the Sandy Hook region. In 2014, historical groups voiced their concerns and distress because they were unaware of the proposal to rebuild after Hurricane Sandy and environmental impact assessment, including the public comment process, until well into the planning stages. Moreover, Betsy Barrett, president of the Sandy Hook Foundation, stated in a letter to the Coast Guard that the Sandy Hook Foundation did not know about the project until the later stages of the public comment period. Barrett states further that she and the foundation were “baffled and exasperated by the Coast Guard’s lack of sensitivity to Sandy Hook’s landmark status” (Spoto, 2014). Furthermore, community member Richard King, of Highlands, stated that “the Coast Guard seems to have ignored their obligations under the law to preserve and maintain assets under their control” (Spoto, 2014). Coast Guard officials reassured local community members and Historic groups that they considered all historic preservation regulations in their project to rebuild U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook after Hurricane Sandy. Additionally, the U.S. Coast Guard stated that its property located at the Sandy Hook peninsula's northern tip is not within national landmark designated lands (Spoto, 2014). The need to have a modern U.S. Coast Guard with the appropriate support facilities is essential to carry out the Coast Guard’s mission in the 21st century. However, safeguard the historical legacy that service members in the past created is also

95 an essential aspect of perpetuating our nation's identity, our nation’s security, and, ultimately, our nation’s defense. The second opportunity that will be addressed focuses on the measurable, visible, and observable impacts of climate change to acquire funding for the “recapitalization” project to rebuild after Hurricane Sandy. Climate change may not be a priority for the white house. Still, the previous admiral and the U.S. Coast Guard's current admiral have pressed the necessity to address the implications of climate change on military operations and missions. Hurricane Sandy caused over $50 million in damage to the U.S. Coast Guard Facilities at Sandy Hook (Sherman, 2014). A handful of the individual but related “recapitalization” projects occurred at this station in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. The recapitulation projects carried out at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook integrated the new construction of a multi-mission building, dredging of the waterfront and installing new piers to accommodate all marine vessels, construction of a boat maintenance facility, and construction of a small arms firing range (Sherman, 2014). The need to rebuild facilities at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook was apparent. The U.S. Coast Guard, and the Department of Homeland Security, acquired funding for the recapitalization project through the 2013 Disaster Assistance Supplemental Act (URS Group INC, 2014). Moreover, the contingencies to utilize disaster relief funding also articulated that “new” construction of “critical facilities” needed to build into their project mitigation efforts to safeguard the new facilities from future impacts. The U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook facilities were required to withstand a 500-year flood level and meet or exceed facility construction requirements for other superstorms like Hurricane Katrina and Ike (URS Group INC, 2014). Additionally, the U.S. Coast Guard took these requirements a step further and initiated their mandate that highlighted the need “to reduce the overall Federal footprint and right-size all facilities” (URS Group INC, 2014). These building requirements and mandates are evidence that climate change is changing the way the military is thinking about, operating within, and planning for exogenous change. The third opportunity identified through the SWOT analysis process is the impact that the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook climate change planning has on other military and non- military installations worldwide. Through appropriated funds through federal disaster assistance funding, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook set the precedence to build beyond the mandated natural and human-induced climate impacts. As stated in the above paragraph, the U.S.

96 Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook built their new facilities to withstand a Category 3 hurricane and raised the new multi-mission building 14 feet to withstand the 500-year floodplain flood event. Aggressively planned and built to the highest projections, the new U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook facilities have created a benchmark for other installations to match. U.S. Representative Frank Pallone Jr., New Jersey’s 6th congressional district representative, articulated at the ribbon cutting of the new multi-mission building at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook in July of 2018, that “what you’ve [US Coast Guard] done here is truly magnificent and I do believe it’s going to be an example for around the country” noted U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (NJ-6) (Cook, 2018). Moreover, taking a more in-depth look into the planning and mandates, one can uncover, that the U.S. Coast Guard is planning for exogenous change, and so is the legislative branch of the federal government – Congress. Realizing the opportunities that an organization has to adapt to or manage threats to their organization, community, or locality is vital. This analysis will transition from discussing the opportunities U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook to the strengths that exogenous change presents for this coastal military installation possesses.

SWOT Analysis Strengths: Internal

Several strengths have been identified for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. The first strength is that the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, and the Coast Guard's head are taking climate change seriously. As made evident in the paragraphs above, the U.S. Coast Guard is actively trying to incorporate climate change planning into their missions, actions, and day to day operations. Despite the contentiousness of climate change rhetoric and science within the United States, the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Coast Guard are transforming climate change vulnerable military assets into resilient national security resources. From safeguarding the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook from flooding, building new infrastructure that increases the resilience to sea-level rise, coastal flooding, land subsidence, and coastal erosion that support daily U.S. Coast Guard operations, to crafting climate change preparedness plans that includes a “unity of effort” is a living example of how the Department of Homeland Security is changing in response to exogenous change.17 Enhancing

17 All of these examples are depicted throughout this chapter.

97 this internal strength by monitoring, crafting, and creating climate change resilience and preparedness plans will mitigate current climate change threats now and into the future. The second internal strength that this research identified is that adaptation to climate change impacts is already underway. Because of Hurricane Sandy's devastating effects, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook was able to rebuild utilizing the best and most advanced climate change data available. The new facilities built under the “recapitalization project” at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook have empowered, that if faced with severe flooding or another superstorm, this coast guard station and its servicemen and women will be able to perform mission-critical operations relatively unimpeded. Rear Admiral Andrew J. Tiongson stated at the unveiling of the new facilities at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook that “our presence here today, I believe, is a silver lining from the storm,” “the bricks and mortar that we dedicate today will house new generations of Coast Guard men and women who will selflessly serve our nation well for many years to come” (Cook, 2018). This is critical for U.S. National Security and U.S. National Defense. Moreover, by utilizing these highest scenarios to dictate building requirements, the U.S. Coast Guard, along with the Department of Homeland Security, has initiated a standard for other military branches and partners to meet or hopefully surpass. The third internal strength that this research identified is the historical legacy and strategic importance of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. The Sandy Hook region's historical heritage and strategic importance coincides with the birth of the United States of America. From the Original Life-Saving Station, Fort Hancock, Sandy Hook Proving Ground to now the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, the US military has resided in this region for many years. Historical legacies have been fostered with the military operating in this area over the years. Moreover, the United Nations General Assembly utilizes the Sandy Hook outpost as the staging ground for deliberations every September (Cook, 2018). As discussed at the beginning of this chapter, the strategic importance is vital to the Sandy Hook region. It is also critical for a larger geographical area that includes the New York and New Jersey coastline. The operations that the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook performed after 9/11 were critical to many citizens' well-being and safety that witnessed the tragic and devastating actions that occurred that day. Rear Admiral Andrew J. Tiongson stated at the ribbon-cutting for the new multi-mission building in July 2018 that the US Coast Guard Station was “one of the first groups of boats on the scene” 9/11 terrorist attacks and helped

98 evacuate 500,000 people from Lower Manhattan (Cook, 2018). If the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook was not operational capacity that day, live-saving evacuations of half a million people would not have occurred. Strategically, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook must remain operational to carry our region-wide missions and operations that safeguard the American people. Internal strengths that this coastal military installation, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, has been critical to their ability to remain resilient amidst environmental change. Now that this analysis has outlined three out of four of the SWOT analysis categories, this research will summarize the fourth and final category – U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook’s weaknesses.

SWOT Analysis Weaknesses: Internal

The first internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that climate change impacts military members and their families' lives. Climate change impacts continue to present challenges to service members and their families by affecting their ability to: access the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook; access the station services; safety and security; transferability, recall ability, and climate change impacts on mental health and overall community well-being. As discussed in the Naval Station Norfolk case study, accessibility to and from military installations is vital for mission readiness, training needs, and overall installation protection and management. This dissertation postulates that national security is already being impacted by climate change induced sea-level rise, coastal flooding, coastal erosion, land subsidence, and Hurricanes. Hurricane Sandy not only impaired military servicemen and women’s accessibility to the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, but it also impacted every aspect of their lives. Accessing military installations is vital for service members to continue to support military interests within the United States and abroad. Moreover, service members and their families need to access installations because they harbor medical facilities, subsidized shopping, recreational access, childcare, educational institutions, and other vital services. The impacts of sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and extreme weather events threaten the safety, security, and transferability of military personnel and their families because they live in the most vulnerable areas along the coast. At every new duty station, military personnel, and their families, assimilate into the community as much as possible. This assimilation process

99 includes buying or renting a house, condo, or apartment; registering for school, sports, and other extra-curricular activities, seeking employment within the local community; and building a new life in the local community. Hurricane Sandy unearthed a significant vulnerability that the U.S. US Coast Guard has to severe weather events and highlighted the overwhelming need to safeguard the station’s facilities and assets and servicemembers and their families. Service members were profoundly impacted by the destruction that occurred at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Lt. Katherine Ustler, commanding officer of Sailfish, stated after Hurricane Sandy hit, the U.S. Coast Guard set out to perform search and rescue mission. Moreover, Ustler noted that “it was one of the scariest transits we had ever seen – dodging entire trees to get on the scene” (Parker, 2013). Moreover, Lt. Ustler stated that “Sandy Hook is a hidden gem, nearly surrounded by the ocean – a small base so everyone knows each other…It’s home and we look forward to the day when we can return” (Parker, 2013). Additionally, Petty Officer 1st Class Tab Parker, operations petty officer for Sailfish, said in an article written in 2013 that “it was hard to be away from our families at this time, especially since they had to evacuate…our families stayed with friends or in hotels – we made sure they were safe and felt comfortable to ride out the storm before we got underway” (Parker, 2013). Furthermore, Chief Warrant Officer Seth Hunt, commanding officer of Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook, stated “we’ve got to have the type of capability to respond to any type of big national security threat or natural disaster” and “we can’t do that if our facilities don’t support our people” said (Parker, 2013). The safety and security of military members and their families that reside and work within an area already experiencing climate change is essential. If service members and their families, who are forced to relocate to every new duty station, are not safe in their new communities, then military readiness is subsequently impacted. This measurable loss of readiness has tremendous significance on life coping mechanisms for families, especially military dependents who are uprooted continuously from their known surroundings. As showcased in the Naval Station Norfolk case study, recent scholars have linked the physical impacts of climate change to rising mental health issues and decreasing community well-being (Clayton et al., 2017). Exogenous change causes grave physical damage; however, the often most overlooked is the damage that climate change threats have on our mental health. Floodwaters rush through homes and communities, land sinking into harbors, the topography of

100 your community changes, extreme weather events, along with many other climate change threats can cause devastating trauma to individuals’ lives (Padhy et al., 2015). Moreover, in some cases, just the threat of something happening to your home, community, or loved ones can cause severe distress to one’s mental health (Weems et al., 2007). Additionally, significant research has been done on the impacts of climate change disasters on children (Masten & Osofsky, 2010). Hurricane Sandy's effects on service members' lives and their families have not been fully articulated or understood. Further research into these impacts is necessary to support service members, their families, and the communities in which they operate and reside. If the U.S. Military’s greatest assets are their servicemen, servicewomen, and the families that support them, then, I argue, greater attention needs to be paid to safeguard our troops and their families from the adverse threats of exogenous change. There is currently no U.S. Military response or solution to manage the problems arising from the exogenous change; that is, there is an inability to control these sanctions and alliances. Research has been called for in developing exogenous indicators of climate stress or environmental stress, which could help manage the problems arising from exogenous changes (Salehyan, 2008). The U.S. Military has yet to examine this area, collecting pertinent information on truly exogenous factors (Salehyan, 2008). There is a need to further explore and research solutions for this gap in response or solution. This focus could help mitigate the issues that are arising from exogenous change. The second internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that climate change impacts military operations at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. As discussed throughout the development of this chapter, climate change impacts on military operations are numerous. The most massive climate change impact discussed in this chapter is Hurricane Sandy. Hurricane Sandy caused roughly $50 million of damage to the US Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Furthermore, multiple facilities to include piers, waterway access, building facilities, and training grounds were impacted by Hurricane Sandy's destruction. Internal weaknesses that the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook has are essential to identify. The third internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that there is a need for further research, data, and climate change monitoring. Other research, data, and monitoring of climate change impacts at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook include all impacts and analysis areas showcased in this chapter. From sea-level rise, coastal erosion, coastal flooding,

101 and land subsidence to climate change impacts on military members and their families. As of May 2019, House of Representatives mandated an act that requires the Commandant of the Coast Guard to submit a report outlining the vulnerabilities of U.S. Coast Guard Installations as a result of climate change to the Committee on Transportation and infrastructure and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation was proposed. This directive from the House of Representatives and the Senate is mandated to include a list of the top ten most vulnerable Coast Guard installations, the climate change-related impacts affecting the U.S. Coast Guard, and an overview of mitigation efforts to ensure mission and operational capacity in the face of a changing environment (GovTracks.us website, 2019). Additionally, outside independent research and data gathering are essential to have a holistic understanding of climate change's impacts on military installations throughout the nation and abroad. Once these weaknesses are identified, measures can be taken to enhance this coastal military’s vulnerabilities to exogenous change. This analysis has outlined all four of the SWOT analysis categories, this research will transition to the recommendations section for this case study.

Table 4: Recommendation Section

EMERGING ISSUES RECOMMENDATION 1. Need for more data, information, and 1. Increase monitoring and collaborative monitoring of the climate change threats research efforts for all climate change impacting the U.S. Coast Guard Station impacts. Building and fostering a Sandy Hook “unity of effort” is necessary to bolster regional climate change resilience efforts. Further data is needed to understand the extent and damage that all climate change impacts will have on this region.

2. Need to involve all stakeholders when 2. Although, from what this research historical legacy and strategic importance could unearth, the Department of are a vital attribute to the military Homeland Security and the U.S. installation Coast Guard did include all stakeholders in the “recapitalization project.” However, it is essential to showcase the communities and Historic preservation groups' comments within this study's bounds. The purpose of utilizing the examples of the importance of historical legacy,

102 communities’ ties to place, and sensitivities to historical landmarks is because these many military installations have historical attributes associated with their facilities. Preserving these important national legacies while enhancing community relations with military installations are fundamental to all branches’ military missions.

3. Looking at all options to adapt to climate 3. The Department of Homeland change Security should utilize all adaptation options available to them, to include managed retreat as a viable solution to some areas. Managed retreat is the last resort option; however, a managed retreat does not have to include the entire base or facility retreating from the coastline. A managed retreat for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook could consist of relocating them to another region location. Unfortunately, this small peninsula relocation to another area within the Sandy Hook region would not be feasible. Additionally, combining managed retreat with soft adaptation approaches – environmental restoration – could further increase the military installation's resilience.

4. The Department of Homeland Security 4. The Department of Homeland and the U.S. Coast Guard strategy to talk Security and the U.S. Coast Guard about the observable environmental should continue to focus on the changes – not focusing on climate change observable environmental changes as the driver of these changes instead of engaging in the contentious climate change debate.

5. Climate change impacts on military 5. Climate change impacts on military personnel and their families personnel and their families at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook are currently observable. The military should find ways to enhance the resilience of its personnel and their families' through training, education, assistance, to name a few. Utilizing all options to safeguard

103 military personnel and their families against climate change impacts will support continued national security endeavors.

6. Funding was not an issue for the US 6. The Department of Homeland Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook; Security should diversify funding however, it is a very real issue for other options through the “unity of effort” US Coast Guard installations. planning approach. Alternatively, the Department of Homeland Security should seek funds through facility/base modernization efforts as a way to plan for future impacts of climate change while bringing facilities up to date. The Military should also include incremental or phased construction projects adapted if climate change impacts worsen in the future.

Chapter Summary

Planning for the impacts of climate change is essential for the safety of coastal military installations, coastal communities, and ecosystems alike. Planning for coastal military installations in the future will need to encompass collaborative efforts among all stakeholders involved. For the U.S. Coast Guard, Station Sandy Hook, the climate change adaptation efforts already completed may prove to be a valuable case study for future planners because it can be used as a template for other military installations to prepare for the impacts of climate change. Understanding all of the emerging issues with a given military installation is essential when developing a comprehensive plan for the future with environmental change. This dissertation study examines and highlights all four areas of the SWOT analysis process for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. A few of the strengths are that the Department of Homeland Security and the head of the Coast Guard are taking climate change seriously, adaptation to climate change is already underway, and the historical legacy and strategic importance of the Sandy Hook region. This research identified weaknesses at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook to include climate change impacting military members and their families' lives, climate change affecting military operations, and the need for further research data and monitoring of climate change impacts. In addition to strengths and weaknesses,

104 this case study provided some opportunities to consider that enhance the Department of Defense’s directive of a “whole of government” and the Department of Homeland Security’s mandate to enhance the ‘unity of effort’ across all partners and stakeholders, U.S. Coast Guards focus on the observable and measurable threats of exogenous change rather than the debate over the validity of the science of climate change over the existence of climate change, and, the impacts that the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook’s climate change planning has on other military installations across the nation and abroad. This research identified numerous threats for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. Some of the threats include sea-level rise, coastal inundation, coastal erosion, land subsidence, land loss, and extreme weather events. In closing, planning for an uncertain future based on anticipated projections of a wide array of climate change impacts is difficult but necessary. This dissertation has identified site- specific strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities for the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook. The success and failures of the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the federal government’s actions to protect and ensure resilience at the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook will lend insight into climate change planning at other coastal military installations. Identifying ways to enhance resilience through effective planning is vital to coastal military installations and coastal communities. Thinking outside the box by involving all stakeholders in the process, incorporating new strategies to adapt, and utilizing new tactics to craft policies that enhance resilience is essential. Instead of the analysis performed in this research, the identified threats and weaknesses pose significant challenges to military readiness, ultimately jeopardizing national security and national defense, which the overall goal of adaptation; preserve national defense.

105 CHAPTER FIVE

U.S. MARINE CORPS CASE STUDY

Introduction

The U.S. Marine Corps has numerous installations scattered throughout the United States to include major active U.S. Marine Corps bases, stations, medical treatment facilities, and schools. I have divided the U.S. Marine Corps installations into two categories – 38 coastal and 16 inland installations18 – because geographic location lends itself to different climate change types. The USMC Base, Camp Lejeune, was selected as a case study because it exemplifies the impacts climate change will have on the U.S. Marine Corps, which is "on the front lines of climate change" (Coastal Review Online, 2017; Defense News Website, 2019; The Center for Climate and Security, 2015; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016; Marine Corps Times, 2018). The USMC Base, Camp Lejeune, is a situation over a large amount of land and has numerous and expansive resources. This base is also known as the "home of expeditionary force readiness" (Military.com website, 2019). Camp Lejeune was selected because of its regional importance, given that it has the largest concentration of marines and sailors in the world. Scholars have identified Camp Lejeune as being on the front lines of climate change and because of the strategic importance of safeguarding this base from the impacts of exogenous climate change. With Camp Lejeune being the "home of expeditionary force readiness" that balances air- ground logistics, it is necessary to have dependable landscapes to perform training exercises. Climate change poses increased challenges to base-wide and military-wide operations, whether the Marine Corps is responding to, engaging in, training for, or deterring crises and contingencies. The future of U.S. Marine Corps bases and assets is in jeopardy if they are not safeguarded from climate change's adverse effects. Camp Lejeune is a vital asset to the U.S. Military because of its location, the military operations it fulfills, and the broader military-wide support missions it executes. The USMC Base Camp Lejeune occupies roughly 250-square miles in Onslow County, North Carolina. The Camp Lejeune specializes in amphibious assault training on the vast 14-mile beach area owned by the U.S. military (Marines.mil website, n.d.). Camp Lejeune is strategically situated between

18Militaryrates.com website accessed November 30, 2018 https://www.militaryrates.com/military-bases-marines

106 two deep-water ports, Wilmington and Morehead City, enabling fast mobility and immediate deployments when necessary (Marines.mil website, n.d.). Moreover, the Marine Corps Air Station New River is a part of the Camp Lejeune, occupying the entire region known as the Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune (see Figure 6). The opportunity that will be addressed focuses on the measurable, visible, and observable impacts of climate change to acquire funding for installation improvements instead of debating the existence of climate change. Climate change planning is heavily contingent upon direct and adequate funding. However, before I address this aspect, a discussion on how the contentious beliefs surrounding climate change in the political policy and planning circles directly affects the ability to fund climate change-related resilience efforts, it is not new news that there is an apparent division between climate change non-supporters and climate change supporters (Hawkins, 2016). Moreover, the division has become ideologically associated with the two major political parties in the United States – Republicans (climate deniers) and Democrats (climate change supporters) (Hawkins, 2016). This dissertation will not entertain the debate about whether or not global warming and climate change are happening. Alternatively, the DoD is deploying a tactic to side-step the discussion on climate change by pressing ahead on efforts to adapt to exogenous change impacts. The US Marine Corps is under the Department of the U.S. Navy. As quoted in the Naval Station Norfolk case study chapter, Capt. Dean VanderLey, commanding officer of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) from 2016 to 2018, states that "we [the military] don't talk about climate change…we talk about sea-level rise. You can measure it" (Doep, 2018; Parker, 2017). Thus, the military is reframing sea level rise and other climate-related impacts as regional resilience planning projects or infrastructure repair efforts after natural disasters. The Department of Defense's ability to increase funding opportunities for resilience planning and preparedness projects by inviting skeptics into the conversation without labeling the issues as "climate change" is a strategic and essential opportunity. This opportunity should be at the forefront of all DoD regional resilience and preparedness planning efforts.

107

Figure 6. US Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station New River, Camp Geiger, Camp Johnson, and the surrounding region.

Study Area: Regional Context and Case Study Importance

Camp Lejeune harbors the largest concentration of United States Navy and United States Marines in the world. Built-in 1941, Camp Lejeune is home to roughly 46,000 active duty military, 53,000 family members, 27,000 retirees, family members, and 6,000 civilian personnel and contractors (DOD, 2016). There are multiple types of training units, preparedness schools, and support facilities. The base also boasts an emergency response and anti-terrorism/force protection agency. This base is of the highest military strategic importance on the east coast for the U.S. Navy and the US Marines. Moreover, this case study exemplifies why the military needs to plan and adapt to climate change impacts immediately. Camp Lejeune and the military assets it harbors, is vital to U.S. national security and mission readiness because this base has been identified as one of the most vulnerable military installations to the adverse effects of climate change (Coastal Review Online, 2017; Defense News Website, 2019; Marine Corps Times, 2018; The Center for Climate and Security, 2015). Camp Lejeune displays the currently visible and observable climate change impacts as this military installation has continually experienced exogenous change effects. There are numerous tenant commands and satellite facilities within the roughly 250 square miles that Camp Lejeune occupies. Camp Lejeune base harbors over 20 resident commands that support military operations, including education, logistics, expeditionary forces, and intelligence (Marines.mil website, n.d.). Camp Lejeune is also home to six satellite facilities that include Marine Corps Air Station New River, Camp Geiger, Stone Bay, Courthouse Bay, Campy Johnson, and Greater

108 Sandy Run Training Area (Marines.mil website, n.d.). Before moving into how Camp Lejeune has begun to address climate change, some additional details about Camp Lejeune can help illuminate why it is of such critical importance and why it is an exemplary case study. Camp Lejeune is a strategic asset because of what it does, what it houses, its support, and its location. From providing infrastructure that supports a wide array of military assets, training, and educational enrichment for military personnel, medical facilities to amphibious assault training, Camp Lejeune is a strategic military asset. As discussed above, Camp Lejeune houses mission air, land, sea commands, and many other commands whose missions support national security interests (Marines.mil website, n.d.). Camp Lejeune's location is critical to national and international operations because of its geographic location in the Atlantic Ocean. The need and importance to safeguard this base from exogenous change impacts are essential for marine and naval activities worldwide.

Table 5: SWOT Analysis of Climate Change Impacts at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES 1. Department of Defense is taking climate 1. Lack of funding. change seriously. 2. Outdated base infrastructure. 2. Camp Lejeune and New River Air Station 3. Outdated transportation infrastructure – host the largest concentration of Marines Interstate 40 floods. and Sailors in the world. 4. Climate change impacting the lives of 3. USMC Camp Lejeune is already caring military members and their families. for the environment 5. Climate change impacting day to day military operations OPPORTUNITIES THREATS 1. Implementation of the "whole of 1. Sea Level Rise government" approach to climate change 2. Flooding planning. 3. Coastal Erosion 2. Focus on the measurable, visible, and 4. Hurricanes and other severe weather observable impacts of climate change. events 3. Modernize infrastructure at the USMC 5. Wildfires Camp Lejeune. 6. Infrastructure damage 4. The impacts that the USMC Camp 7. Threats to military readiness Lejeune climate change planning has on other military and non-military installations worldwide.

109 SWOT Analysis Threats: External

Several threats were identified throughout the SWOT research analysis process. Currently, sea-level rise and flooding are the biggest and most constant threats to Camp Lejeune. According to Lieutenant General Berger, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, "The two biggest challenges are the rising water levels and severe storms that roll up the coast and through our bases and stations" (The Center for Climate & Security, 2019). According to the existing literature of the intermediate and highest sea-level rise projections, Camp Lejeune will experience an increase of sea-level rise of 1.0 – 1.6 feet by 2050, 1.9 – 3.1 by 2070, and 3.7 – 6.1 feet by 2100 (Chen et al., 2013; DeConto & Pollard, 2016; Rignot et al., 2011; Trusel et al. 2015; Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The areas most affected by rising sea levels at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune include low-lying regions, mainly wetland. Rising sea levels will lead to an increased risk of different types of flooding at Camp Lejeune. Today, these areas flood roughly eight times per year (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). However, by 2100 these locations within Camp Lejeune will be submerged nearly year-round (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Roughly, 90% of flood-prone areas at Camp Lejeune will be inundated and lost by 2100 (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Similarly, based on the highest seal level rise projections, roadways that provide critical navigation within the Camp Lejeune will flood multiple times per year by the end of the century (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The greatest assets that Camp Lejeune has to defend against climate change are the barrier islands off the coast. However, by 2070, utilizing the highest projected sea-level rise scenario, these barrier islands could flood daily during high tide events. These high tide flooding events could cause uncontrolled effects for sea life as well as land erosion and displacing both mammal and human populations (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). Nuisance flooding and high tide flooding already affect the barrier islands, beach areas, and low-lying locations. During flood events, including high tide, nuisance flooding, king tide events, storm surge flooding, floodwaters overtop the barrier islands and overtopping of floodwaters, bring wave energy onto the beaches to further coastal erosion at the base. Moreover, flooding and erosion of these low- lying coastal areas of the USMC Base Camp Lejeune affect critical military training and infrastructure. Sea level rise and flooding already disrupt military readiness at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune, and all of the tenants command this installation harbors.

110 The military is currently taking action to safeguard the USMC Base Camp Lejeune against sea-level rise and flooding events. These safeguard measures include monitoring, wetland revitalization, restoration efforts, endangered species protection, and solar farm construction, which has enabled this base to be viewed as a "key location to the U.S. military response to climate change" (DeWitt, 2015). Monitoring and data collection are measures needed to produce climate action plans that will enable successful adaptation to climate change. Although this military installation is in the preliminary stages of climate change adaptation, the process is at least started. This coastal military installation has the attention of multiple organizations and agencies able to assist in climate change adaptation efforts. Future actions that the military is taking to safeguard the USMC Base Camp Lejeune against sea-level rise and flooding events include building seawalls and armoring hard structures to protect the base from rising seas and floodwaters, investing resources into infrastructure and transportation needs assessments, resiliency plans, and actions, as well as continuing installations investment into soft climate adaptation measures such as wetland restoration and revitalization. Research has shown that the U.S. Military can do more to safeguard military base camps against sea-level rise and flooding risks. To do so, researchers have noted the importance of developing approaches to analyze and evaluate the impacts of sea-level rise, specifically on Naval Base settings and Marine Corps Base Camps such as in USMC Base Camp Lejeune. This is especially given that sea-level rise and flooding are the biggest and most constant threats to Camp Lejeune. Recommended actions to safeguard against the primary threat of sea-level rise and flooding include adopting a sustainable vulnerability framework to apply to coastal military installations. Moreover, efforts to characterize and predict the strength, frequency, and chances and risks of underlying factors influence and control regional sea level in Marine Corps Base Camps such as in USMC Base Camp Lejeune. The U.S. Military can also attempt to mitigate the risks and threat of sea-level rise and flooding by gathering extant data on critical bio-geophysical and infrastructure for each installation to plot in a three-dimensional GIS modeling setting (U.S. Department of Defense, 2013, 2014). With the utilization of visualization tools, this strategy could enable the U.S. Military to predict and expect the physical effects of sea-level rise within the region. This military-relevant strategy could also allow the U.S. Military to evaluate the potential for impacts on installation infrastructure in USMC Base Camp Lejeune and its vulnerability to sea-level rise

111 and flooding events. Increased funding has been designated to military installation resilience projects; however, funding is the most massive deterrent to adapting to climate change impacts, including the necessary protections against rising sea levels and coastal flooding.

Coastal Erosion

The third climate change threat impacting the USMC Base Camp Lejeune is coastal erosion. Climate change exacerbates typical climate effects by increasing the likelihood of more severe weather events and the corresponding damage caused by such events. Camp Lejeune is committed to environmental stewardship even if it changes military practice and procedures that have been practiced for decades (Martino and Marine Corps Installations East, 2019; Snow, 2018). Coastal erosion is the norm at this location due to continued climatic events such as sea- level rise, coastal flooding, storm surges, and hurricanes. Moreover, sea-level rise, storm surges, and coastal flooding have eroded beaches used for training troops, and these beaches require repair and replenishment (Li et al., 2012). Additionally, as mentioned in previous chapters, flooding causes shoreline erosion, destabilizing the ground, which ultimately increases the loads on structures and leads to further coastal erosion (Li et al., 2012). The New River Estuary and surrounding waterways will help Camp Lejeune develop a robust shoreline management plan supporting the environment and military training efforts and missions. According to the study conducted by the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Sciences,19 the Camp Lejeune coastline has been eroding over the last century. Between 1956 to 2004, the New River Estuary has eroded by 15 meters or 49 feet (Allen, 2019). It is important to note that some New River Estuary areas have experienced accretion while others have receded along the shoreline. Additionally, different types of shoreline experience more excellent erosion rates than others. Shorelines with sparse vegetation and lower elevations tend to experience a higher erosion rate than other shoreline types in the New River Estuary system. Ways to enhance current military efforts to adapt to a changing climate include utilizing multiple adaptation strategies to provide a more holistic approach to climate change. For

19 This study was one study out of 26 research projects that spanned over 10 years (2007-2012) focusing on Camp Lejeune coastal and estuarine ecosystems: https://www.coastalreview.org/2018/01/camp-lejeune-focus-10-year- study/.

112 example, the climate change adaptation strategies – enhance, protect, and retreat – can be deployed in different installation areas depending upon the climate impacts each region faces. It is imperative to protect the mission and training critical areas as well as vital infrastructure. Enhancement efforts may include wetland and mudflat restoration efforts. Also, coastal armoring that may consist of ripraps or seawall construction to protect the most vulnerable and most critical areas of the base may prove to be necessary. For the most part, a retreat is the last resort option to adapt to a changing climate, but a managed retreat must be considered an option to ensure the installation's most vital functions. A managed retreat can include retreat from some critical areas to operations while salvaging or protecting others. Developing the range of adaptation strategies holistically will safeguard coastal military installations across the globe. Camp Lejeune has the potential to mitigate and adapt to coastal erosion and the issues that are associated. Such mitigation would include planning and implementing climate action plans for other climate change impacts affecting the given installation. Also, the base personnel could employ one or more of the coastal erosion actions such as observing managed retreat options combined with base realignment strategies to decrease the extent and expense of climate change adaptation efforts, With the focus on soft approaches and incorporation of a holistic ecosystem management approach and coastal armoring mitigation of coastal erosion potentially could be decreased.

Hurricanes and Other Severe Storms

The fourth environmental threat confronting Camp Lejeune is hurricanes and other severe weather events. Hurricane frequency and severity in the greater North Carolina region has stayed constant (Snow, 2018). According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, since 1842, 104 hurricanes or tropical storms have passed within 75 miles of Onslow County (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Camp Lejeune has suffered critical damage from sixteen direct hit storms, and about 24 of these storms traversed parts of the county (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). In September of 2018, on the eve of Hurricane Florence making landfall, military officials at Camp Lejeune ordered personnel to shelter in place (Snow, 2018). Record-setting storm surges of 9-13 feet and higher along with record-breaking rainfall caused extensive damage. A year after the storm, the damage was still an issue (Snow, 2018).

113 This storm was also to blame for a sewage spill above 80,000 gallons (Martino and Marine Corps Installations East, 2019; Snow, 2018). Moreover, other hurricanes and severe weather events have impacted Camp Lejeune in the following ways: increasing the need for damage protection measures such as sandbags, storm surge flooding, damage to the base and infrastructure, damage to the barrier islands that are a safeguard measure to this region and damage to the surrounding community (The Center for Climate and Security, n.d.; Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Today, Camp Lejeune is still in disarray in the wake of Hurricane Florence. Assets and infrastructure at USMC Base Camp Lejeune "remain frozen in time" (Kube & Mosheh, 2019). Marine Corps commands are operating out of trailers that host multiple tenant commands within one trailer. Mission-critical tasks take 3 – 4 times longer now than before Hurricane Florence's catastrophic damage (KPBS Public Media Website, 2019). Top Marine Officers are warning that Camp Lejeune's readiness – that encompasses one-third of all the Marines combat power – is declining and "will continue to degrade given current conditions" (Sisk, 2019). Commandant Gen. Robert Neller recently cited that one of the major obstacles to rebuilding and repairing USMC Base Camp Lejeune is redirecting active-duty military personnel to patrol the U.S. Mexico Border proposed diversion of military funding to pay for the U.S. Mexico Border wall (Sisk, 2019). While Marines, Sailors, and civilians continue to operate and work out of compromised facilities, this year's hurricane season is now upon us with no additional safeguard measures in place. $600 million in tentative Department of Defense funds have been allocated to those military installations that have experienced hurricane damage over the past few years, with a large portion going to Camp Lejeune (Sisk, 2019). However, money for recovery efforts will not be made available until the fiscal year 2020. Until then, Camp Lejeune, its workforce, and occupants have to be ever vigilant amidst the current hurricane season. An example of these hurricane safeguard measures is that sheltering in place will not be an option and should not be an option for all personnel's safety because there are no facilities to protect the surrounding population. Other severe disasters that can affect Camp Lejeune include tornadoes, earthquakes, thunderstorms and lightning, tsunamis, and pandemic influenza. Camp Lejeune has a robust Emergency Management Program to "ensure mitigation, preparation, response and recovery to emergencies and disasters in all hazardous environments" (Emergency Management Marine

114 Corps Installations East, 2019). Emergency Management Marine Corps Installations East also provides education and briefings in many different forms to reach as many military personnel, civilian employees, and their family members that work or live on or near the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. Additionally, as mentioned in other case studies, each climate change effect acts as a "threat multiplier," a term used by the DoD in conjunction with climate change and national security discussions. Hurricanes increase the height and extent of ocean waters that flood the coastline during a storm event. Presently, although most Camp Lejeune infrastructure is located on high ground, this base is susceptible to severe damage if a category 3 or 4 hurricane was to directly hit this coastal military installation (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Another flooding during tropical storms and Category 1-4 Hurricanes includes high tides, wave action, riverine flooding, and rainfall (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Nor' easters deliver significantly lesser storm effects than hurricanes; however, Nor' easters are common, generating damaging storm surges that contribute to all of the aforementioned climate change impacts. The USMC Base Camp Lejeune has one of the most vigorous environmental management and environmental stewardship plans out of all the case studies showcased in this dissertation. Research and monitoring of ecological systems and military activities have been in place since the late 1980s (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017). Current actions to address the impacts of hurricanes and other severe natural disasters on the USMC Base Camp Lejeune include tidal and storm surge data collected during extreme weather events; simulation exercises enhance emergency actions plans to prepare for and respond to hurricanes and other natural hazards, and research and data collection to monitor the barrier islands and riverine systems to measure the damage and prolong effects to these systems. As exemplified in the above paragraphs, USMC Base Camp Lejeune is vulnerable to a direct hit of a Category 1-4 hurricane and hurricanes that come within 75 miles (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Future actions for the coastal military installations in this region to embrace include building cooperative risk management strategies and plans on a region-wide basis to include all stakeholders involved; continually explore, study, plan and adopt various options to mitigate the adverse impact of a category 1-4 Hurricane (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016); and utilize the natural topography to enhance ecological services to

115 protect the coastline from some or all of the effects of these types of storms (Union of Concerned Scientists Website, 2016). Lieutenant General Berger, in the context of Camp Lejeune's recovery efforts, stated the undeniable importance of addressing climate change threats when rebuilding after Hurricane Florence. Lieutenant General Berger noted that "When we recover from a storm like we are now in North Carolina, we need to look at the location of the buildings. We need to look at the construction standards of the buildings to make sure that they'll survive what the climate is going to throw at them" (The Center for Climate and Security, 2019). Lastly, because this U.S. Marine Corps coastal military installation is a vital asset to training, maintaining, and forward deployment of marines across the world, the military needs to collaboratively address these emergency risk management and natural disaster issues on a region-wide basis to build resilience throughout the region.

Wildfires

The fifth and last environmental threat confronting the USMC Base Camp Lejeune is wildfires. Wildfires are a tangible and observable negative effect caused by anthropogenic climate change. According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, "wildfires in the United States burn more than twice the area they did in 1970, and the average wildfire season is 78 days longer" (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, n.d.). Warmer temperatures and drier conditions make it even more challenging to put fires out once they have started – more than 80 percent of U.S. wildfires are caused by people (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, n.d.). Wildfires have an interesting climate feedback loop that is important to discuss. According to Global fire emissions estimates during 1997-2016, wildfires emitted 8 million tons of CO2 per year for the last 20 years (Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, n.d.). The released CO2 in the atmosphere from wildfires creates a feedback loop into the atmosphere, increasing temperatures that further amplifies anthropogenic climate change. There have been three significant wildfires at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune over the last ten years – 2011, 2012, and 2019 (WITN Website, 2011). A collaborative relationship between the North Carolina Forest Service and the military is well established. Despite the vigorous forestry management plans, wildfires at or near this installation still occur. Base Forestry officials have routinely incorporated prescribed burns into their forestry management practices, a forestry management method that reduces the fuel load when fires erupt.

116 The 2011 wildfire originated at the Camp Lejeune firing range and burned over 9500 acres (WITN Website, 2011). The state's cost to fight this fire was well over $300,000, and, while no civilian assets were damaged during this fire, numerous buildings on Camp Lejeune were damaged beyond repair (WITN Website, 2011). In 2012, 1,200 acres burned, which created thick smoke causing severely impaired visibility (WWAY TV Website, 2012). Major road closures impaired base access because of this wildfire. In 2019, another wildfire erupted, originating in the G-10 impact area and spreading to the live firing ranges (Daily News Website, 2019). Fires in this area of the USMC Base Camp Lejeune are widespread. Damage to base assets was reported from this fire, and a prescribed burn was started to control the extent and fuel available to this wildfire, causing damages. The current plan is to maintain the installation's existing state by ensuring base forestry officials execute a robust forestry management plan. Maintaining the current state of the military installation could be achieved by employing a forestry management plan in collaboration with the N.C. Forestry Service. At USMC Base Camp Lejeune, it is imperative to protect the mission and training critical areas and vital infrastructure that wildfires threaten. Monitoring and data collection and continued collaboration efforts across all agencies and organizations are essential to ensure continued forestry management practices. These practices ensure that military assets and infrastructure at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune are safeguarded against current and future wildfires. Future actions that can be employed to mitigate and adapt to wildfire include: continued planning and implementing of forestry management practices; looking into managed retreat options combined with base realignment strategies to decrease the extent and expense of wildfire damage to base assets, and focusing on holistic forestry management practices that improve the environment and the safety of the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. Now, this research will transition to the empirical analysis of this case study. Climate change threats are abundant and visible at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. This is evident based on the research in the above section. However, it is fundamental to uncover the opportunities that emerge in the face of imminent threats to an organization, community, or locality. This dissertation will examine the opportunities that emerged from examining the USMC Base Camp Lejeune in the next section.

117 SWOT Analysis Opportunities: External Opportunities

The first opportunity is the implementation of the "whole of government" approach to climate change planning. The USMC Base Camp Lejeune has fostered relationships with other agencies and organizations. However, this military installation has yet to take on the Department of Defense directive, outlined in the 2014 Climate Adaption Roadmap, to collaborate and build partnerships with all levels of government – federal to local levels as well as other stakeholders – to address the complex and intricate challenges of climate change. Identifying the relevant and vital issues to address when planning for climate change impacts is essential to preparedness and resiliency planning. Data gathering, monitoring, and collection is the first step to building climate change action plans. This step can foster ongoing community resilience preparation and planning techniques and pave the way for future efforts to build regional resiliency. It is vital that all military installations, Camp Lejeune included, start to foster and build relationships within the communities they so heavily depend on. This is a significant and necessary opportunity for this coastal military installation and should be started immediately. Additionally, implementing a "whole-of-government" approach to climate change will safeguard Camp Lejeune from climate change impacts by providing increased stability. Climate change has been coined as an "accelerant to instability" by numerous sources (Revkin, 2019). Instability decreases the productivity and effectiveness of any organization. Moreover, ensuring stability is not always an option – unexpected issues, unpredictable natural hazards, and covert enemy operations make planning stability even trickier. Therefore, if an organization, agency, or country has an opportunity to safeguard themselves from the impacts of future projections of instability, it should be a priority to safeguard themselves as much as possible. In 2016, former Secretary of Defense James Mattis stated that "Climate change is impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today... [T]he effects of a changing climate — such as increased maritime access to the Arctic, rising sea levels, desertification, among others — impact our security situation" (Revkin, 2019). The future of this military installation depends on its personnel's ability to foster and develop climate change action plans and build relationships that span all levels of government and private sector organizations. The enlisted SWOT analysis process presented the modernized infrastructure found at Camp Lejeune and introduced reasoning methods to withstand current and future climate change

118 threats. It is evident from this analysis that the need to modernize this WWII era base will ensure the ability of Camp Lejeune to perform strategic military operations into the foreseeable future. While enhancing the installation's resilience to climate change impacts, this coastal military installation can perform needed infrastructure maintenance, repairs, and replacement. Modernization of the USMC Camp Lejeune is critical to ensure that military assets will be mission ready. The fundamental goal of the U.S. Marine Corps is to maintain mission readiness. Mission readiness at Camp Lejeune is already vulnerable due to the impacts of storm damage and exogenous change. Modernization is critical to mission readiness. Therefore, it is essential for continued national security that modernization efforts get underway. Modernization can begin by integrating climate change resiliency into the rebuilding that must happen in the wake of Hurricane Florence. The fourth opportunity showcases the impacts that the Camp Lejeune climate change planning has on other military and non-military installations worldwide. The Camp Lejeune, being on the front lines of climate change for the U.S. Military, is in a unique position to pave the way for the inclusion of climate change resiliency and preparedness planning at all coastal and noncoastal military installations both within and outside the U.S. However, Camp Lejeune is still in the preliminary stages of adapting to the impacts of climate change. Other coastal military installations can replicate steps that have been taken by Camp Lejeune and other installations showcased in this dissertation. Specifically, by employing a "whole-of-government" approach to resilience planning, inviting and eliciting research projects that provide data and information about climate change impacts that are threatening Camp Lejeune, and inviting suggestions on how to mitigate and adapt to these impacts, progress can be achieved whereas most based in the U.S. fail to provide adaptive methods for such mitigation. The success of the 10-year New River Estuary Study, as discussed in the coastal erosion section above, can be used as a templet for other military installations to utilize military and civilian resources for monitoring and studying the impacts of climate change, build regional alliances to enhance regional stability to exogenous change, and partner with the city and regional municipalities to enhance regional transportation and other public services. Moreover, with the natural disaster rebuilding funds hopefully allocated to Camp Lejeune in the fiscal year 2020, this installation will continue to be a living blueprint for other military installations adapting to exogenous change.

119 Realizing the opportunities that an organization has to adapt to or manage threats to their organization, community, or locality is vital to the continuance of preventative measures against climate change. This analysis will transition from discussing the opportunities for the USMC Camp Lejeune that exogenous change presents to addressing the internal strengths that this coastal military installation possesses.

SWOT Analysis Strengths: Internal

Several strengths have been identified for the USMC Camp Lejeune. The first strength is that the Department of Defense is taking climate change seriously and actively incorporating climate change planning into their missions, actions, and day to day operations. Despite the contentiousness of climate change rhetoric and science within the United States, the Department of Defense is working towards transforming climate change vulnerable military assets into resilient national security resources. Enhancing this internal strength by monitoring, crafting, and creating climate change resilience and preparedness plans will mitigate current climate change threats. The second internal strength is that Camp Lejeune is already caring for the environment. As discussed previously in this chapter, Camp Lejeune has one of the most vigorous environmental management and environmental stewardship out of all the case studies showcased in this dissertation. Research and ecological monitoring systems and military activities have been in place since the late 1980s (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017). The Environmental Protection Agency placed Camp Lejeune on "the Superfund Program's National Priority List (NPL) in 1989 because of contaminated groundwater, sediment, soil and surface water resulting from base operations and waste handling practices" (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017). The site contamination negatively threatened military members and civilians at Camp Lejeune. Since being placed on the NPL, Camp Lejeune has complied with all regulations, site cleanup endeavors, and continued monitoring efforts. The military installation transformed its environmental management practices to become environmental stewards because Camp Lejeune was listed and deemed as a Superfund site. It is transforming standard practices that have been used for decades – military-wide practices – into sustainable environmental management practices that ensure the health and safety of the built, the natural, and human environments.

120 A third internal strength is that Camp Lejeune harbors the largest military-owned waterfront ocean area used for vital military training and ensures that marines are combat-ready for riverine and coastal environments. The USMC Base Camp Lejeune has 14 miles of beach area to conduct a vast array of necessary military training and operations. No other military base within the United States owns this extensive amount of beach area. This alone makes Camp Lejeune valuable to the Department of Defense. How the U.S. Military responds to this inevitable exogenous change will dictate how Camp Lejeune and all other military installations weather these impending threats. Internal strengths are critical to Camp Lejeune's ability to remain resilient amidst environmental change. The fourth and final category is USMC Camp Lejeune's' weaknesses.

SWOT Analysis Weaknesses: Internal

The first internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is the lack of funding for military climate change efforts. Just as discussed in previous chapters, adaptation plans for climate change are massively expensive. Again, as with the USN and no matter the location, adaptive strategies come with hefty economic investments. Most curiously, funding was the most common issue for all branches of the military in terms of establishing more robust measures against climate change (Coutu, 2019; Ferreira, Cardosa, Borges, Gabriel, de Azevedo, Elias, 2019; Werz & Hoffman, 2016) In 2017, federal climate change funding was approximately 13.2 billion dollars spread across 19 different agencies (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018). Because these projects are funded by the federal government and climate change military planning is a part of the overall Department of Defense military budget, allocations for climate change-related projects do not meet the current need (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018). To impact climate change funding allocation further, the current administration's stance on global warming blocks resilience and preparedness planning. President Trump's removal of climate change as a national security threat means it has been delisted as a threat multiplier. Other projects deemed more pressing by the President than the threat of climate change have been prioritized. Funding for climate change preparedness and planning efforts will only continue to be complicated. Additionally, funding sources may be allocated through the public and private sector and through regional collaboration efforts to combat the impacts of an exogenous change in the

121 region. Moreover, funding to rebuild after Hurricane Florence has proven to be limited. Meanwhile, base facilities continue to be dilapidated, and personnel is displaced. The current damage at the USMC Camp Lejeune continues to be a military readiness issue, potentially disrupting our national security. If military readiness is compromised, then so is U.S. national security. The second internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that the USMC Camp Lejeune has outdated base infrastructure already impacting military operations. Outdated infrastructure hinders maintenance schedules, delaying necessary supply chains that support military operations, delaying training, and many other military functions. Nevertheless, outdated infrastructure is compounded with the impacts of climate change. Climate change intensifies the damage to already impaired infrastructure, further degrading the military installation's ability to remain resilient and at full operational readiness. An independent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists showed that a 3-foot rise in sea levels would significantly threaten 55 naval installations in the U.S. valued at $100 billion (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2016). The impacts of climate change on military assets is imminent. Updating the aging infrastructure that includes safeguards for climate change impacts is one effective way to tackle both climate change and outdated infrastructure. The third internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is an outdated transportation infrastructure to and from the USMC Camp Lejeune. Outdated transportation infrastructure includes all transportation by motor vehicle to and from the USMC Camp Lejeune. Transportation to and from military installations at the USMC Camp Lejeune is impaired during coastal inundation events, impacting the installation's ability to have the proper and necessary staffing to support operational readiness and national security efforts. Accessibility to and from military installations is vital for mission readiness, training needs, and overall installation protection and management. Accessing military installations is essential for service members to continue to support military interests within the United States and abroad. Moreover, service members and their families need to access installations because they harbor services that include medical facilities, subsidized shopping, recreational access, childcare, educational institutions, and other similar services. Additionally, wildfires, hurricanes, other severe weather events, and coastal erosion all impair the ability to traverse this military's 250+ square miles. If the installation is not adequately

122 staffed, military personnel cannot navigate the installation, and it is not mission ready. National security is jeopardized because military personnel is not combat-ready, a vital attribute for our nation's overall national security. If climate change impacts the military's ability to remain combat-ready in the face of a changing climate, then, I argue, greater attention needs to be paid to outdated transportation infrastructure both on military installations and within the surrounding community. The fourth internal weakness identified through this SWOT analysis is that climate change impacts military members and their families' lives. Climate change impacts continue to present challenges to service members and their families by impacting their ability to: access installations, access installation services, safety and security, and transferability. Also, climate change affects the mental health and overall community well-being of service members and their families. The impacts of sea-level rise, coastal flooding, and extreme weather events threaten the safety, security, and transferability of military personnel and their families. At every new duty station, military personnel, and their families, assimilate into the community as much as possible. The safety and security of military members and their families who reside and work within an area already experiencing climate change are essential. If the threat of climate change impacts compromises service members and their families, who are forced to relocate to new duty stations every 2-5 years, and the safety of the new communities, military readiness will be subsequently impacted. As discussed in previous chapters, recent scholars have linked the physical impacts of climate change to rising mental health issues and decreased community well-being (Clayton et al., 2017). Exogenous change can cause grave physical damage. However, the often-disregarded impact is the damage climate change threats have on our mental health. Floodwaters rush through homes and communities, land sinks into harbors; extreme weather events threaten the topography of a community changes or individuals, all can cause devastating trauma to individuals' lives (Padhy et al., 2015). Moreover, in some cases, just the threat of something happening to your home, community, or loved ones can cause severe distress to one's mental health (Weems et al., 2007). Additionally, significant research has been done on the impacts climate change disasters have on children (Masten & Osofsky, 2010). If the U.S. military's greatest assets are their servicemen, servicewomen, and the families that support them, then, I

123 argue, greater attention needs to be paid to safeguard our troops and their families from the adverse threats of exogenous change.

Table 6: Recommendation Section

EMERGING ISSUES RECOMMENDATION 1. Funding issues for military climate 1. The Department of Defense should seek change planning and preparedness to diversify funding options through the projects. "whole of government" "whole of community" planning approaches. Alternatively, the Department of Defense should seek funds through facility/base modernization efforts as a way to prepare for future impacts of climate change while bringing facilities up to date. The Military should also include incremental or phased construction projects adapted if climate change impacts worsen in the future— possibly seeking funding through climate change funding outside the military.

2. Increase monitoring and collaborative 2. Need for more data, information, and research efforts for all climate change monitoring of some of the impacts of impacts are essential to create lasting and climate change, which could be used to robust climate change action plans. predict conflict events. Furthermore, increased knowledge sharing and information regarding climate change needs to be advocated. Further data is required to understand the extent and damage that all of the climate change threats outlined in this chapter will have on the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. Additionally, it is vital to develop better exogenous measures of environmental stress to reduce endogeneity. That is, it is vital to gather data and information on exogenous factors. For example, Natural calamities such as rainfall, drought, coastal flooding, and hurricanes are not within human control, and these may be included in predictive models of conflict. Other studies have utilized this strategy and employed rainfall measures, specifically in sub-Saharan Africa, to predict conflict events (Hendrix & Glaser, 2007; Miguel, Satyananth, & Sergenti, 2004).

124

3. The Department of Defense should utilize 3. Looking at all options to adapt to climate all adaptation options available to them, change to include managed retreat as a viable solution to some areas. Managed retreat is a last resort option; however, managed retreat does not have to include the entire base or facility retreating from the coastline. A managed retreat for the USMC Base Camp Lejeune could include retreating inland in areas of the base that do not house necessary facilities and services in that location – relocating them to another location on the base. Additionally, combining managed retreat with soft adaptation approaches – environmental restoration – could further increase the military installation's resilience. However, for the USMC Base Camp Lejeune, coastal training locations are essential to training and mission- critical operations. Retreating entirely away from the coastline may not be possible for this military installation due to various time, finances, and capacity constraints.

4. The Department of Defense should 4. Department of Defense should seek consider another wave of base alternative measures to mitigate the realignments or base relocations to other economic hardship that climate change areas of the nation and will not be poses on military funding/budgets. severely impacted by climate change. This harsh reality of closing some bases, moving entire installations to new locations, and retreating from the coastline maybe in the future. This recommendation will concentrate on military assets, personnel, and infrastructure in fewer locations across the nation while decreasing the economic hardships to protect military assets from exogenous change.

5. The Department of Defense should 5. The Department of Defense's strategy to continue to focus on the observable talk about the observable environmental environmental changes instead of changes – not focusing on climate change engaging in the contentious climate as the driver of these changes change debate.

125

6. Infrastructural and institutional 6. USMC Base Camp Lejeune needs to transformation is needed in the USMC modernize WWII era infrastructure. Base Camp Lejeune. Modernizing USMC Base Camp Lejeune infrastructure and base facilities is necessary to ensure continued national security endeavors. Modernization of the USMC Base Camp Lejeune infrastructure should include climate change planning and preparedness efforts. This can be achieved through the Department of Defense funding for Hurricane disasters threatening DoD facilities. Funding should be available to the USMC Base Camp Lejeune in the fiscal year 2020.

7. USMC Base Camp Lejeune should work 7. The region needs to modernize outdated with local, regional, state, and federal transportation routes impacted by current agencies/governments to modernize and climate change threats – sea level rise, reduce the vulnerabilities that the current coastal inundation, and land subsidence. transportation routes have on the local community and the military. This is essential for continued military operations in the region.

8. Climate change impacts on military 8. Climate change impacts on military personnel and their families personnel and their families at the USMC Base Camp Lejeune are currently observable. The military should find ways to enhance its personnel and their families' resilience through training, education, assistance, mental health support, to name a few. Utilizing all options to safeguard military personnel and their families against climate change impacts will support continued national security endeavors.

Chapter Summary

126 most destructive climate change impacts for coast military installation. Once the Defense Department allocates funds to rebuild and repair the USMC Base Camp Lejeune facilities, this military installation may prove to be a valuable case study for future planners because it can be used as a template for other military installations prepare for the impacts of climate change. Hurricanes and other natural hazards are not something humans can stop, but we can adapt our infrastructure to accommodate these destructive storms. Understanding all of the emerging issues with a given military installation is essential when developing a comprehensive plan for the future with environmental change. This is vital to address given that climate change impacts require effective and proactive risk management measures. Understanding the impacts of climate change is necessary, prompting a military revolution that is not driven by human ingenuity or will. Climate change requires a new viewpoint regarding current military affairs and the shift needed to address climate change. This dissertation study examines and highlights all four areas of the SWOT analysis process for the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. In addition to strengths and weaknesses, this case study provided some opportunities to consider that enhance a "whole of government" and a "whole of community's" resilience to the impacts of climate change to include the military's focus on the observable and measurable threats of exogenous change rather than the debate over the validity of the science of climate change over the existence of climate change and the opportunity to modernize outdated and failing installation facilities. This research identified numerous threats for the USMC Base Camp Lejeune. Some of the threats include sea-level rise, coastal erosion, hurricanes, and the increase of extreme weather events.

127 CHAPTER SIX

DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS, AND CONCLUSION

Introduction

As William Cronon suggests, there is not just "One Big Problem" called the environment or climate change. Instead, there is an infinite number of smaller problems that express the interconnected interactions between the people and the world around them – he describes this as telling parables that trace the connections between human history and ecological change (Cronon, 1993). These parables tell a story that together makes up the history of human- environmental change. For centuries, militaries across the globe have been at the forefront of societal change. My dissertation seeks to unveil if the U.S. Military is the forerunner of yet another societal change caused by environmental stressors – climate change. My dissertation is just that, a parable of ambiguous associations between human history and ecological change that will hopefully contribute to contemporary environmental politics literature. The U.S. Military is currently addressing climate-related impacts and stressors through adaptation and mitigation efforts. Preparing for climate change impacts is essential. In particular, the literature surrounding this dissertation, climate change science and climate change adaptation, is profound and well developed. Despite the intrinsic value of the current literature, a gap remains. Site-specific research that uncovers granular vulnerabilities to the present and future climate change impacts for the U.S. military is necessary. The necessity lies within planning for an inevitable future that is uncertain, coupled with a need for military readiness and unfettered military capabilities if the need arises. In this chapter culminating reflections on various topics will be discussed. First, this chapter will reflect on this study's initial research questions and hypotheses. Secondly, this chapter will provide overarching recommendations based on the recommendations derived from each case study. Next, this chapter will have a section that addressed the significant research findings followed by this dissertation's theoretical contributions to the existing literature. Subsequently, this chapter will discuss one of the fundamental research questions that this dissertation sought out to answer, is the U.S. military undergoing a military revolution, evolution, or both? Lastly, this dissertation will end with a few closing remarks.

128

Discussion The current study sought answers to the following research questions and proof of the following hypotheses. RQ1: What identifiers are found in the SWOT analysis for each case study that shows the branch of military examined are productively and proactively managing the risks of exogenous change? The U.S. Military can adapt to its fluctuating operating environments. RQ2: How can the U.S. military actualize climate change planning and preparedness actions against exogenous change risks? RQ3: What hinders the U.S. Military in change planning and preparedness actions for exogenous change risks? RQ4: Is there a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations? H1: There is a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations

H10: There is not a need for more granular research conducted on the risks associated with exogenous change and the impacts that these risks have on military installations, assets, and operations

RQ5: Is the U.S. Military on the brink of or amid a military revolution? H2: The U.S. Military is on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution. H20: The U.S. Military is not on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution. RQ6: Is the U.S. Military on the brink of or amid a military evolution? H3: The U.S. Military is on the brink or in the midst of military evolution.

H30: The U.S. Military is not on the brink or in the midst of a military revolution. RQ7: Is the U.S. Military's climate change action plans fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience? H4: The U.S. Military's climate change action plans are fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience.

129 H40: The U.S. Military's climate change action plans are not fully resilient if the surrounding communities enhance their climate resilience The U.S. Military is at a critical moment in history where they have the opportunity to be in the forefront of climate change planning and preparedness. Procedures and planning for climate change adaption are still contemporary. Universal designs for managing climate threats are not established, nor would they be useful because each locality is vulnerable in different ways. Additionally, site-specific vulnerabilities require additional mechanisms to enhance resilience. Moreover, each place along the coastline of the United States, and the world, will require other procedures and planning strategies. Protection against the impacts of climate change is vital to all coastal military installations. Moreover, it is essential to retain ecological and biological resources within and around these military installations. Additionally, it is necessary to all military installations and the surrounding community where they are located that adaptation plans create more robust and resilient areas after the planning and implementation phases. The planning and implementation of military climate change action plans need to enhance the diversity of ecological and biological resources in the process. Increased environmental systems' resilience is vital because ecological systems' health is vital when enhancing resilience to climate threats. Cultivating a diverse ecological system that is not reliant on just one or two functions to rebound after the disturbance is also essential. The system's diversity increases the localized environment's chances to rebound and stabilize after a climate change-induced disruption. Planning for an uncertain future based on anticipated projections of a wide array of climate change impacts is difficult but necessary. This dissertation has identified military-wide climate change weaknesses and strengths. The success and failures of the U.S. Military will lend insight into climate change planning for the rest of the nation and, ultimately, the world. Identifying ways to enhance resilience through effective planning is vital to coastal military installations and coastal communities. Protecting and ensuring the resilience of the most vulnerable coastal military installation across the nation is critical for the future strength, capability, and capacity of the U.S. Military. This research has suggested that the U.S. Military needs to embrace the current military revolution and evolution that they are experiencing because of exogenous change. Furthermore, embracing this change elicits crafting climate change risk management plans that enable the U.S. Military's survivability into the future.

130 Overarching Recommendations In the preceding chapters, this dissertation examined and highlighted all four areas of the SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, Threats) analysis process for all three case studies in this bounded study. In addition to the case study’s specific recommendations, this research will provide overarching recommendations that span all three sister services surveyed. All of the recommendations at the end of each case study are vital and necessary for the military to consider when drafting climate change adaptation and preparedness plans. Beyond the site- specific recommendations, the research found several shared weaknesses and strengths between all three military installations. Thus, the concluding recommendations showcase the significant weaknesses and strengths of climate adaptation plans for the U.S. Military as a whole, identify the urgency and timelines for each climate change weakness and strength, categorize the resource requirements needed to implement adaptation measures for each specific climate change weakness and strength, and lastly, pinpoint the strengths that the U.S. Military has to enable useful and necessary climate change adaption and preparedness plans. These findings are disseminated below in Table 7.

Table 7: Overarching Recommendations

OVERARCHING RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The U.S. Military needs to do an enterprise-wide examination of all owned infrastructure and assets that have outdated or failing bases that are also vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. There is a need to create a systematic mechanism (codified or established process) for multiple agencies to discuss, plan, and implement sea-level rise adaptation plans. 2. The U.S. Military must adopt a regional integrative approach to climate change adaption planning and preparedness. 3. The U.S. Military should seek all avenues and means to acquire funding for climate change action and preparedness plans. 4. The U.S. Military needs to gather further data on all military installations that are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Once the U.S. Military has the required

131 information, they can prepare climate change action and preparedness plans more effectively. 5. The U.S. Military should invest in research and practical assistance for all impacts on military service members and their families due to the effects of climate change threats.

Table 8: Overarching Weaknesses

Weakness Recommendation Implementation Resource Timing Requirement Outdated & The U.S. Military needs Now and into High to Failing Infrastructure location-specific, region-specific the foreseeable Very High cost assessments to modernize future resource the most vulnerable requirement infrastructure threatened by climate change. It is also important to point out that not all of the current outdated and failing infrastructure can or should be saved. Relocation of infrastructure will be a necessary part of climate change adaptation efforts The Need for Region Increase monitoring and Now and into The monetary Wide Collaboration collaborative efforts for all climate the foreseeable resource Efforts to Climate change adaptation efforts, including future requirement Change research, planning, implementation is low. of climate action plans, and However, reevaluation, are essential on a human region-wide basis. Continuing to capital to build and foster a "unity of effort" foster and and implementing a "whole of build community" approach is necessary relationships to bolster regional climate change on a region- resilience preparedness plans. wide basis is Further data is needed to High understand the extent and damage that all climate change impacts will have on a region and the military entities that occupy them. Each military installation should work with local, regional, state, and federal agencies/governments/stakeholders to modernize and reduce the vulnerabilities that the climate

132 change impacts have on the local community and the military.

Lack of Adequate The U.S. Military should seek to Now and into Human Funding diversify funding options through the foreseeable capital to the "whole of government" "whole future secure of community" planning funding for approaches. Alternatively, the U.S. climate Military should seek funds through change action facility/base modernization efforts and as a way to prepare for future preparedness impacts of climate change while planning is bringing facilities up to date. The moderate to U.S. Military should also include high incremental or phased construction projects that can be adapted if climate change impacts worsen in the future

Need for More Data/ Further data/information/research is Phases based on Moderate Information/Research needed to understand the damage each specific resource that climate change impacts will climate change requirement have on the most vulnerable impact: Now – 5 regions within the U.S. Increase years, 5-10 monitoring and collaborative years, 10-20 research efforts for all climate years, 20-30 change impacts is needed on a years, 30-50 region-wide basis years

Climate Change Impacts Climate change impacts on military Now and into Low to on Military Service Members personnel and their families were the foreseeable moderate and Their Families observable within all three case future resource studies. The military should find requirement ways to enhance its personnel and their families' resilience through training, education, and assistance, to name a few. Utilizing all options to safeguard military personnel and their families against the impacts of climate change will support continued national security endeavors as well as enhance regional resilience to withstand climate change impacts Need for the U.S. Military, There is a need for joint force Now and into Low to all services, to have a efforts to research, plan, and the foreseeable moderate coordinated effort to combat adapt to the impacts of climate future resource the effects of climate change change military-wide basis in requirement the U.S. This unity of effort will establish a mainstream blueprint

133 for all military installations grappling with climate change effects to enhance resilience. Having this top-down directive will enable uniform and effective climate change adaptation measures. Moreover, this will support compliance with climate change adaption on a wide military basis

Table 9: Overarching Strengths

Strength Recommendations Implementation Resource Timing Requirement U.S. Military's The U.S. Military Now and into the Low resource Unwavering Stance must continue its foreseeable future requirement on Climate Change efforts on climate change. Without the acknowledgment that climate change is a threat to U.S. Military readiness and ultimately national security, climate change action, and preparedness plans would never materialize Climate Change Planning This is a critical Now and into the Low resource is Already Underway strength for the U.S. foreseeable future requirement Military because climate change action and preparedness planning that has already been completed or is underway sets a precedent for future climate change planning efforts. Successful climate change action and preparedness plans allow for the U.S. Military to enhance some or all of the

134 barriers listed above. For example, providing examples of successful climate change plans would help to secure funding for new and emergent U.S. Military climate change preparedness planning

Precedent for Planning The U.S. Military must Now and into the Depends, low to high Based on the Highest continue to plan and foreseeable future Climate Change build new Scenarios infrastructure based on the worst-case climate change projections and scenarios

Environmental The U.S. military Now and into the Depends, low to high Stewardship of should continue its foreseeable future the U.S. Military efforts to enhance and bolster environmental stewardship at all its military installations

Significance of Research Findings

This research has identified five overall significant research findings from the analysis performed within this study. The first conclusion is that climate change is impacting the U.S. Military in immense ways, and because of these impacts, the U.S. military is changing in response to exogenous circumstances. This research has showcased some of the ways that climate threats are impacting the U.S. Military. Climate change impacts are severe and unpredictable, from needing to retrofit existing infrastructure to completely rebuilding after a hurricane. Aside from the environmental and asset vulnerabilities, climate threats also impact military force structure, military force posture, and have lasting implications for service members and their families. Therefore, one thing is for sure: climate change adaption is far from simplistic or unvaried. As stated throughout this research, climate adaption preparedness should be crafted utilizing site-specific,

135 region-specific climate change information that highlights the particular vulnerabilities to each military installation and their surrounding communities. The procedures of building U.S. Military climate resilience can be developed on an enterprise-wide basis; however, the details of how to plan to build that resilience needs to be determined by each locality. The second contribution is that the U.S. Military is planning and/or trying to plan and prepare for the adverse effect of climate change impacts. Military bases, both in coastal and noncoastal regions within the U.S., are under threat due to climate change. From the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy to the U.S. Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune preparing to rebuild after Hurricane Florence, it is evident that the U.S. Military is "on the front lines" of climate change. Additionally, the U.S. Military can create a decisive stance on climate change and cultivate resilience military-wide. These changes in micro- planning that the U.S. military is undergoing create long-lasting, macro-level change. This provides clear evidence that the U.S. military is in the midst of a revolution and evolution simultaneously.20 The third contribution is that U.S. Military climate change action plans will not fully be resilient if the surrounding communities do not also enhance their climate resiliency. Therefore, if a military installation is resilient enough to withstand the devastating threats that climate change poses and the community is not, then the military installation is still vulnerable. The military installation is still vulnerable because the support service that the installation is dependent upon will not be safeguarded. Surrounding communities rely upon military installations because in most localities, military installations and the service members that support them account for regional job markets and increased economic capital. Moreover, in all three case studies, roughly two-thirds of military service members and their families live in civilian community housing off base. Additionally, military installations are dependent upon local services to include electricity, water, transportation, wastewater, and telecommunications. This dissertation has exposed the necessity to foster a "whole of government" and a "whole of community" approach to crafting climate change action plans in response to the looming threats of climate change. Developing a "whole of government" and a "whole of community" adaptation plans will provide stability to the entire community or region. Building resilience into the fabric of both military

20 This will be discussed further in the following section under Theoretical Contributions.

136 and civilian climate action and preparedness plans is vital to the future of coastal communities within the U.S. and abroad. The fourth contribution that this dissertation is postulating is that the U.S. Military is amidst a new military revolution and simultaneously undergoing an evolution. Whether it is categorized as a military revolution, a revolution in military affairs, military evolution, or just force transformation, the inference is still the same. The U.S. Military is changing in response to exogenous factors. The change that the U.S. Military is undergoing is vast and permeates all aspects of military operations. Moreover, some climate impacts will be gradual and happen over a period of time. These impacts call for a more gradual evolution to military force structure and military force posture. Therefore, this research has concluded that the U.S. military is undergoing a military revolution while simultaneously experiencing a military evolution. The fifth and final contribution that this dissertation suggests is that the U.S. Military will, not could, but will, be vastly hindered if continued site-specific, enterprise-wide, climate change planning and preparedness actions are not actualized. According to the recent study by the United States Army War College, Implications of Climate Change for the U.S. Army (2019), climate change threats pose profound implications for U.S. national security, ultimately affecting the capabilities missions of the U.S. Military. Moreover, the article warns that the U.S. Military will face increasing challenges domestically and in theater on all levels pertaining to national security objectives. Similarly, this research echoes the same conclusions for the other three sister services of the U.S. Military. If the U.S. Military does not take immediate and effective action against climate impacts and build military resilience to the threats of climate change, then the efficacy of the U.S. military will be threatened – ultimately leading to its demise. This research has made it apparent that climate change threats weaken military capabilities, mission readiness, and overall force posture and structure. Without the fundamental tenant of the U.S. Military – military readiness – the U.S. Military's effectiveness is in jeopardy. In the following section, I will discuss the theoretical contributions to the literature derived from this study. Theoretical Contributions We currently don't know enough about the evolving climate crisis and the impact on organizations such as the U.S. Military. This dissertation, in the previous chapters, sought to explain how a new military revolution is occurring. This military revolution is not prompted by

137 human ingenuity or will, but rather is formulated around the necessity for risk management measures because of climate change. Climate change is driving this revolution in military affairs, and because of this, we see and will continue to see a shift in how the military and nature interact. By the previous statement, climate change is altering the military, not the military altering the environment, commonplace for centuries.21 The legacy of militaries being able to 'bend' the environment to their objectives is contemporary with the emergence of the first human civilizations. However, the current revolution that the U.S. military is undergoing has already and will continue to change how militaries operate at home and in foreign territories because of military institutions' inability to contain or even effectively manage environmental change. However, as described by this study22, the modified RMA provides some conceptual coherence to understand these changes due to exogenous change for the U.S. Military. Additionally, this dissertation in previous chapters has attempted to provide a detailed analysis of the current threats, weaknesses, strengths, and opportunities (SWOT analysis) that the U.S. military is experiencing because of exogenous change. SWOT analysis has been deployed to help reveal if the U.S. military is, in reality, in charge, and control of climate change threats. Moreover, SWOT analysis allows an organization to develop a full awareness of all the determining factors when making decisions now and into the future. Without the utilization of SWOT analysis, the information gathered on the three case studies surveyed in this study would not provide a complete understanding of the current situation or current impacts that climate change has on the U.S. Military. By combining RMA theory (how militaries undergo change and the driving forces of change) with SWOT analysis (the current threats, weaknesses, strengths, and opportunities), this

21 For further information please see: Deudney, Daniel. "The case against linking environmental degradation and national security." Green Planet Blues: Critical Perspectives on Global Environmental Politics (2014): 273; Shulman, Seth. "The threat at home: Confronting the toxic legacy of the US military." (1992); Li, Quan, and Rafael Reuveny. "Democracy and environmental degradation." International studies quarterly 50, no. 4 (2006): 935-956; Finger, Matthias. Global environmental degradation and the military. No. MIR-CHAPTER-2010-057. Dartmouth Publishing, 1993; Suhrke, Astri, and Sanjoy Hazarika. "Pressure points: Environmental degradation, migration and conflict." Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1993. 22 Referring back to chapter one of this study, military revolutions a precursor to RMA’s were based on the transformations that militaries across the globe have undergone due to technological advancements. This study’s modified RMA is not a revolution based on technological advancements but a revolution none the less. This modified RMA utilizes the foundational concepts of military revolutions that has been used to describe different driving forces of change. The major difference or nuance between previous revolutions and the revolution currently is the driving force prompting military change. This study’s driving force of change is the environment, an uncontrollable variable to any military operation, exercise or installation.

138 dissertation has provided a detailed understanding of how climate change is altering the U.S. Military. Moreover, as combined in this study, SWOT and RMA theories offer new insights and interpretations on what is currently happening, the known weaknesses, threats, strengths, and opportunities to transform to a continually changing environment. Additionally, utilizing both theories allows organizations like the U.S. Military to make sense of both of the physical, behavioral, external, and internal organizational changes that are occurring, the challenges they are facing or will face, or the lack thereof that the U.S. Military is undergoing due to climate change. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss how this research has contributed to the existing body of literature. The first meaningful contribution to the literature is the evaluation of what the U.S. Military is currently managing actions that are being taken to build resilience to climate risks at the three identified case studies. This granular evaluation has not been performed at this scale or depth at these three coastal military installations. For example, understanding that the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook is located on a six-mile-long multi-use peninsula is necessary because climate risk management practices need to incorporate all stakeholders. Moreover, this contextual knowledge reinforces the regional significance of the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook by providing evidence that this military installation is vital to the overall region for its missions and the economic stability that this military installation provides to the region. Foundational knowledge in any area of study is essential. However, for this research, the evaluation of the current status of each coastal military installation examined in this study was particularly imperative because, without the understanding of physical environmental changes that are occurring and the recent responses to these changes, a SWOT analysis could not have been performed. Moreover, the U.S. Coast Guard showcases an alternative way force transformation changes the U.S. Military because of the current climate crisis (aka how the U.S. Coast Guard is revolutionizing because of climate change). This case study highlighted how the U.S. Military is becoming more and more reliant on private subject matter experts on climate change, sustainability, and green building practices. With the increased extremity of weather events, it is necessary that all new military infrastructure construction base all new builds off of the best science available while utilizing the highest sea-level rise/storm surge predictions. As discussed

139 in chapter four, the U.S. Coast Guard Station Sandy Hook "recapitalization project" to rebuild after Hurricane Sandy's destruction required that the Department of Homeland Security implement specific contingencies with rebuilding because of the utilization of federal money. These contingencies required that all new construction implement mitigation efforts to defend the new facilities from future climate change events. These revolutionary building enforcement mandates derived from the need to preserve new construction post-climate crisis events show that climate change is externally and uncontrollably altering U.S. military readiness, mobility, infrastructure, and military doctrine. The second significant contribution to the literature is a cohesive SWOT analysis evaluation of the three case study sites bounded by this study. SWOT analysis has not been widely used to bridge the divide between physical environmental change and institutional transformation. SWOT analysis unearthed that the U.S. Military is at a unique moment in history, and based on the identified strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, the opportunities for the U.S. Military to adapt to or transform to the external forces of the climate crisis are abundant. This study's SWOT analysis created a spotlight on the areas that the U.S. Military is making daily micro-level changes that have lasting large scale implications. These findings revealed, for example, that the Naval Station Norfolk is making changes to when and in what intervals large warships enter dry dock for ship maintenance because sea level rise is rendering these support systems vulnerable. Moreover, at Camp Lejeune, the Marine Corps are shifting training locations and training schedules due to sea-level rise and high tide flooding events that make training in previous areas impossible. The U.S. Military can harness opportunities and utilize their innate strengths to build lasting resilience to an assiduous changing operational environment. The third noteworthy contribution is that this study provides recommendations based on the SWOT analysis for each case study. Since the understanding of climate risk management is continuously evolving, prescribed recommendations also needed to be fluid and stable at the same time. New issues will continually emerge as climate threats become more profuse and abundant. For example, an overarching theme throughout all three case studies was the need for further studies, information, and monitoring of climate change impacts. This emergent issue focuses on the recommendation for more collaboration between private, non-profit, and military organizations to pull their expertise together to bolster regional climate resilience as a

140 community. Moreover, another example of the third contribution to the existing literature is the pervasive theme throughout all three case studies was how these coastal military installations were going to deal with outdated, aging infrastructure. The recommendation for this issue is that climate change will magnify the deteriorating infrastructure faster, which will leave the U.S. Military with the same choice to make – either rebuild or retreat from the vulnerable area. Modernization of aging infrastructure that incorporates climate risk preparedness and planning efforts is essential. One example of the third contribution to the literature is the formulation of recommendations based on the SWOT analysis information. As discussed above, it also provides a foundation for understanding how the U.S. Military is currently revolutionizing because of the current climate crisis. For example, the U.S. Marine Corps base Camp Lejeune is a critical asset for the U.S. Military because of its strategic location, the military personnel and assets it houses, and the vast array of military readiness it carries out. Exogenous change is profoundly transforming Camp Lejeune's infrastructure and is an overall threat to this eastern U.S. strategic military readiness location. Referring back to Chapter five of this study, the 2018 Hurricane Florence crippled military capacities, assets, and military readiness in a matter of hours. To this day, two years after the wake of Hurricane Florence, although great strides towards recovery have been made, many buildings remain in disrepair, sited for demolition or remain unaltered, and training grounds and facilities remain unusable after the devastation that Hurricane Florence created. According to Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment, Honorable Robert McMahon, "Our installations are key platforms for our nation's defense. They are our power projection platforms and support every mission the DoD Components undertake to defend this nation "…[from] a wide range of challenges – regardless of the source – to include weather, climate, natural events, disruptions of energy or water supplies and direct or physical cyber- attacks" (McMahon, 2019). Suppose military installations are our nation's power projection. Why has it taken over two years for rebuilding efforts to bring some sort of normalcy, routine, and readiness back to Camp Lejeune, which houses the largest concentration of U.S. Marine and U.S. Naval personnel in the U.S.? The answer is multifaceted but put simply, it takes a great deal of money, resources, planning, and coordination to rebuild after the large-scale destruction that Hurricane Florence caused. The changing nature of military competition and capacities due to the climate crisis is altering military readiness and strategic military assets at Camp Lejeune.

141 This study has made evident that force transformation is occurring within the U.S. Marine Corps because of exogenous change. Furthermore, continued and sustained force transformation at Camp Lejeune will occur well into the future, given this military installation's specific vulnerability to climate change threats. Another example of the third contribution to the existing literature this study will discuss is how the U.S. Naval Station Norfolk is transforming because of the climate crisis. The U.S. Naval Station Norfolk case study highlights how the military is transforming due to climate change in the following ways: new and increased partnerships among and between military branches as new and increased partnerships with private and public organizations. Referring to page 51 of this study, the U.S. Naval Station Norfolk outlined the pivotal response to climate change that the DoD has taken with its "whole-of-government" directive to build comprehensive and collaborative partnerships that far surpass past joint efforts. Situated in the Hampton Roads' region, this case study detailed the unique and holistic approaches forged by regional efforts to decrease vulnerability and increase the community's resilience due to exogenous change. This example of military change at the Naval Station Norfolk vividly showcases how force transformation is happening through new capabilities, forging new cooperative efforts, relying on alternative stakeholders and organizations, and increasing the military's capacities. Lastly, the most significant contribution to the literature that this study provides is new ways of understanding or rethinking micro-level practices and the broader macro-level significance they have on transformation. In chapter three of this study, force transformation is a dynamic force transformation lens to view and make visible how the military is transforming due to climate change.23 This study has showcased how the U.S. military is transforming in three of the different military branches. Military force transformation due to exogenous change is altering how the military defines its missions; operates in and outside of theater at home and abroad; changing training schedules and training environments; altering military readiness and training exercises; creating the need for new and increased partnerships across military branches, public

23 A process that shapes the changing nature of military competition and cooperation through new combinations of concepts, capabilities, people, and organizations that exploit our nation’s advantages and protect against our asymmetric vulnerabilities to sustain our strategic position, which helps underpin peace and stability in the world.23

142 organizations, private companies, and other nations; emerging operational capacities and readiness to include new territories, terrain, and/or new personnel requirements; new places, people, assets to protect for national and global interest; and, climate change also requires the U.S. military and its subsequent branches to be ready for emergency-related climate change impacts on the home front in the form of humanitarian assistance, protection, security and safety of the American people. U.S. military force transformation should reach far beyond just coastal military infrastructure enhancement – force transformation should permeate all U.S. military aspects. Some examples from this study of exogenous change prompting far-reaching change include the establishment of new military joint doctrine that dictates how joint climate change information gathering, sharing, and implementation of this doctrine will be carried out; new and emergent partnerships; reliance on subject matter experts to decrease the U.S. military's vulnerabilities to climate change while enhancing regional resilience; and the widespread acknowledgment of how the environment is changing how the military operates in the 21st century. In the following paragraphs, this study will merge the three case studies into the larger argument about force transformation, military revolution, and military evolution arguments outlined in chapter one of this study. Military Revolution, Evolution or Both This dissertation has hypothesized whether or not the U.S. military is currently undergoing a military revolution, evolution, or both. In the previous sections of this chapter, this study has provided detailed examples of how the U.S. military is undergoing a military revolution. However, a detailed discussion of whether or not the U.S. military is undergoing evolution or both a revolution and evolution has not transpired. In the following paragraphs, this study will examine the differences between military revolution vs. military evolution. Moreover, this section will explicitly discuss how military revolutions and evolutions relate to military force transformation. Revolutions are far-reaching, forceable, drastic, disruptive, and create significant change (Grainer, 1989). Revolution in military affairs, as discussed on page 11 of this study, outlines that RMA's change how the military wages war to include changes to military doctrine, operations, organizational concepts and ultimately changes how military operations are carried out. Internal forces have prompted past RMA's, and the military has had the luxury to control all aspects of these revolutions. However, this study has proposed a fifth revolution in military affairs, prompted by external, uncontrollable forces – the environment.

143 In contrast with RMA's is the concept of military evolutions, which include a gradual change in adaptation, progression, and metamorphosis. Climate change threats happen at different time intervals. Some immediate when a severe weather event or extreme fire occurs, others such as coastal erosion or sea-level rise transpire over many years or decades. Some scholars might argue that sea-level rise and coastal erosion are products of the U.S. military evolving. That the changing nature of military training, operations, and readiness along coastal military installations are evolving, and they have always been fluid. This is true; however, the timeframe and extent to the changing nature of the U.S. military is exacerbated by climate change at a rate that has not to be qualified in our nation's history before. What I mean by this is that a revolution and evolution are occurring simultaneously – prompting prolonged disruptive military change. Whether one calls this a revolution, an evolution or force transformation, change is occurring. The best way to view this particular military transformation is by understanding that this is a revolution on the move throughout time. The problem is that the military is rooted in past decisions, doctrine, and procedures. The most productive way to combat rooted military strategy is by implementing a phased transformation approach starting with the most vulnerable military installations to the least vulnerable or areas/commands that are in high demand for reform or transformation due to exogenous change. Another important consideration when discussing future adaptation efforts by the U.S. military is future sustainability efforts that need and should be coupled with all adaptation efforts. Adaptation is not enough. Mitigation alone will not solve climate change. Embracing climate change will require adaptation, mitigation, and sustainability efforts. This will require gradual and far-reaching enterprise-wide planning and implemental change. The U.S. military has an obligation to the American people, our nation, and the rest of the world to embrace sustainability and implement sustainability efforts profusely throughout the organization. Climate change is both a threat and an opportunity for the U.S. military. This climate crisis is an opportunity for the U.S. military as long as proactive, pervasive, and climate change preparedness planning permeates through all aspects of its organization. Change cannot happen in one area and not another; just like safeguarding necessary military infrastructure from sea level rise in one area and not all vulnerable areas is an effort in futility. Holistic climate change

144 preparedness planning that incorporates enterprise-wide planning is the only path forward for the U.S. military as the world moves further into the 21st century. Based on this study, it is conclusive that the U.S. military is in the early stages of adaptation to exogenous change. More action is required if necessary and lasting climate change planning and preparedness to ensure U.S. military readiness and strategic force well into the future. Additionally, more focus on renewable resources, alternative energy sources, minimizing waste enterprise-wide, decreasing their carbon footprint, self-reliance on food, water, power and fuel, and many more. This will require new and increased partnerships with experts that are specialized in all areas of climate change. These are not the only ways in which the military is and will transform due to climate change. These are just three case study examples of how climate change is transforming these localities. This study is a small snapshot of a larger panoramic picture that needs to be examined in great detail. Military adaptation planners should pay particular attention to the slow, gradual shifts in operations, readiness, training, environments, supply, and so on because those small changes over time represent more extensive organizational transformation. Climate change adaptation will materialize and require different approaches in different areas across the nation and globe. The overall generalizability of this research is vital. This study has provided a formula for replicability for other military installations, whether foreign, domestic, coastal or inland. By gathering information to understand what is happening at the granular level, the research can then extrapolate recommendations. From the recommendations, the analysis can then derive patterns of evolutionary or revolutionary change. Understanding if force transformation is occurring is not this research template's only goal. However, understanding how and how to force transformation at the micro-level practices has macro-level significance for all institutions.

Closing Remarks My contribution to the literature is primarily a descriptive dissertation that reveals what the U.S. Military's actual efforts are to change in response to climate change – focusing mainly on my three-case studies U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Marine Corps. In addition to a descriptive scholarly work, this research will provide recommendations based on the SWOT analysis. My dissertation may not change the entire field of environmental history or its subfields; however, reflexivity in the era of climate change is essential before irrevocable

145 actions and plans are carried out – and that alone seems like a beneficial thing to contribute. In closing, this dissertation is not just about making the U.S. Military superior, more advanced, or solely enhancing the U.S. Military's capacity to withstand the threats of climate change. It highlights the very real fact that military installations across the nation are embedded within communities and regions where these communities and regions share a mutually dependent relationship. Military installations are built into the very fabric of communities across the nation. Climate change doesn't care about federal government property lines. Climate change will permeate all areas within a community without prejudice. It is critical for all U.S. Military installations, domestically and aboard, to craft climate action plans to enhance their military installations' resilience and their surrounding communities to manage the impending risks that climate threats pose effectively.

146 APPENDIX

Areas for Future Research

1. Additionally, because of the work that was done in this dissertation another site for future research is researching the effects of climate change on military service members and their families. My dissertation, the methodology and analysis that I have performed has laid the foundation to understand the vulnerabilities and weaknesses that the US military is currently grappling with. Because I live in a military community and I'm likely to continue to live and seek employment this inquiry into researching the effects of climate change on military service members and their families would ultimately benefit the communities in which I belong to. I would like to make the people that I live and work with less vulnerable to the adverse impacts of the current climate crisis.

2. Moreover, because of what I've learned from this dissertation, I would really like to look at individual branches and think about not just how militaries learn differently than civilian institutions but if there is actually a learning difference between or among the different military branches. This research would enable me to not treat the military as a whole but instead examine different branches of the military that have different operating capacities and objectives. Additionally, this research would explore each branches vulnerability to climate change that would provide a cohesive and well-rounded understanding of all of the vulnerabilities of climate change for each branch of the military.

3. Likewise, because of what I have done at the domestic level particularly focused on coastal areas knowing how significant these installations are, I would like to take the initial research that I have done and think about how foreign bases are impacted differently, do they communicate with the DoD differently, do they learn differently, do they have different types of information flows, what are the unique community relations challenges when we're dealing with foreign non-citizen populations or populations outside of the US given how I have shown the difficulty still exist in places such as

147 Sandy Hook where seemingly there is no language barrier or cultural barriers or animosity to the US presence.

4. Additionally, because this research is focused on coastal military installations for the US military it has set me up to perform research at other military installations that are facing climate change impacts that are not associated with coastal environments such as severe drought and pervasive wildfires. This research could include both foreign and domestic bases.

148 BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Camp Lejeune Base Guide." Military.com Website. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.military.com/base-guide/marine-corps-base-camp-lejeune.

"Camp Lejeune Base Guide." Military.com Website. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.military.com/base-guide/marine-corps-base-camp-lejeune.

"Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base in Jacksonville, NC." Military Bases Website. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://militarybases.com/north-carolina/camp-lejeune/.

"Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base in Jacksonville, NC." Military Bases Website. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://militarybases.com/north-carolina/camp-lejeune/.

"Climate Change Flooding: A Threat to National Security?" PBS. February 25, 2019. Accessed

April 27, 2019. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/climate-change-flooding-a-threat-

to-national-security/.

"Hampton Roads." Geography of Virginia. Last modified April 13, 2019.

http://www.virginiaplaces.org/regions/hr.html.

"Marine Corps Combat Service Support Schools." Training Command Website. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Units/South-Atlantic/MCCSSS/.

"Marine Corps Combat Service Support Schools." Training Command Website. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Units/South-Atlantic/MCCSSS/.

"On the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina." Union

of Concerned Scientists Website. July 27, 2016. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/impacts/sea-level-rise-

flooding-marine-corps-base-camp-lejeune.

149 "On the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina." Union

of Concerned Scientists Website. July 27, 2016. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/impacts/sea-level-rise-

flooding-marine-corps-base-camp-lejeune.

"On the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia." Union of Concerned

Scientists. July 27, 2016. Accessed April 27, 2019. https://www.ucsusa.org/global-

warming/science-and-impacts/impacts/sea-level-rise-flooding-naval-station-norfolk.

"Tidewater." American Resilience Project. 2017. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://www.amresproject.org/tidewater-film.

"U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit." Norfolk Establishes Strategy for Coastal Resilience | U.S.

Climate Resilience Toolkit. Accessed April 27, 2019. https://toolkit.climate.gov/case-

studies/norfolk-establishes-strategy-coastal-resilience.

"Virginia: Tidewater Area." CPO NOAA HOME. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://cpo.noaa.gov/sites/cpo/Projects/SARP/CaseStudies/2013/Tidewater%20VA%20C

ase%20Study%20Factsheet%20Extreme%20Weather%20Events_2013-1-30v1.pdf.

2014 National Climate Assessment website accessed October 15, 2018

https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report-findings/extreme-weather

Ackerman, J., & Jolivet, J. G. G. (2017). Global climate change and national security:

Institutional culture and leadership within three federal departments. International

Relations, 5(7), 389-411.

Adkins, Gabriel L. "Organizational networks in disaster response: An examination of the US

government network’s efforts in hurricane Katrina." The handbook of crisis

communication (2010): 93-114.

150 affairs. OTH. Retrieve from https://othjournal.com/2019/04/29/decision-maneuver-the-

next-revolution-in-military-affairs/ allations: Policy implications. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program, US

Department of Defense. Retrieved from:

https://climateandsecurity.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/serdp-coastal-assessment-white-

paper_january-2013.pdf

Allen, James, and Brian Deal. "Military Climate Resilience Planning and Contemporary Systems

Thinking." Projections (2018).

Allen, Jennifer. "Camp Lejeune Focus of 10-Year Study." Coastal Review Online Website.

January 04, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019. https://www.coastalreview.org/2018/01/camp-

lejeune-focus-10-year-study/.

Allen, Jennifer. "Camp Lejeune Focus of 10-Year Study." Coastal Review Online Website.

January 04, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019. https://www.coastalreview.org/2018/01/camp-

lejeune-focus-10-year-study/.

Amer, Muhammad, and Tugrul U. Daim. "Application of technology roadmaps for renewable

energy sector." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 77, no. 8 (2010): 1355-

1370.

Atkinson, Larry P., Tal Ezer, and Elizabeth Smith. "Sea level rise and flooding risk in

Virginia." Sea Grant L. & Pol'y J. 5 (2012): 3.

Bae, Chang-Hee Christine. Urban sprawl in western Europe and the United States. Routledge,

2017.

151 Bangar, V., Goyal, R., & Pandey, R. (2020). Climate Change Responses and Sustainable

Development: Integration of Mitigation and Adaptation. Sustainable Development Goals,

203-214.

Barnett, Jon. "Security and climate change." Global environmental change 13, no. 1 (2003): 7-

17.

Barragán, Juan Manuel, and María de Andrés. "Analysis and trends of the world's coastal cities

and agglomerations." Ocean & Coastal Management 114 (2015): 11-20.

Barron, Sara, Glenis Canete, Jeff Carmichael, David Flanders, Ellen Pond, Stephen Sheppard,

and Kristi Tatebe. "A Climate Change Adaptation Planning Process for Low-Lying,

Communities Vulnerable to Sea Level Rise." Sustainability 4, no. 12 (2012): 2176-2208.

Base Directory Website, n.d. Accessed on June 22, 2019 from

https://www.basedirectory.com/uscg-sandy-hook-nj-directory

Bates, Todd B. "'Nuisance Flooding' Climbed 626 Percent at Sandy Hook." Asbury Park Press.

July 29, 2014. Accessed July 03, 2019.

https://www.app.com/story/news/local/monmouth-county-bayshore/2014/07/28/sandy-

hook-flooding/13272573/.

Baxter, Cindy. "Climate Denial Machine." PolluterWatch | Holding Polluters Accountable. Last

modified September 17, 2015. http://polluterwatch.org/category/freetagging/climate-

denial-machine.

Beachapedia Website. N.d. State of the Beach/State Reports/NJ/Beach Fill. Accessed June 22,

2019. http://www.beachapedia.org/State_of_the_Beach/State_Reports/NJ/Beach_Fill.

Beatley, Timothy. Planning for coastal resilience best practices for calamitous times.

Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2009.

152 Beisner, Calvin. "Is Rising Sea Level Threatening Norfolk Naval Base and the Chesapeake Bay

Area?" Townhall. August 26, 2017. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://townhall.com/columnists/calvinbeisner/2017/08/26/is-rising-sea-level-threatening-

norfolk-naval-base-and-the-chesapeake-bay-area-n2373295.

Bekaert, D. P. S., B. D. Hamlington, B. Buzzanga, and C. E. Jones. "Spaceborne synthetic

aperture radar survey of subsidence in Hampton Roads, Virginia (USA)." Scientific

reports 7, no. 1 (2017): 14752.

Blake, R., R. Khanbilvardi, L. Ferrand, D. Rind, and C. Rosenzweig, 2015: Assessing climate

change impacts on Jamaica's Rio Cobre River Basin. In Hydrology in the Humid Tropical

Environment: Proceedings of a Symposium Held at Kingston, Jamaica, November 1996.

A.I. Johnson and C.A. Fernández-Jáuregui, Eds., IAHS Publ. 253. International

Association of Hydrological Sciences, pp. 185-193.

Bloetscher, F., Hammer, N. H., & Berry, L. (2014). How climate change will affect water

utilities. American Water Works Association, 106(8), 176-192.

Boon, John D., John M. Brubaker, and David R. Forrest. "Chesapeake Bay Land Subsidence and

Sea Level Change An Evaluation of Past and Present Trends and Future Outlook."

(2010).

Boot, Max. "War made new." Gotham, New York (2006).

Borgerson, Scott G. "Arctic meltdown-The economic and security implications of global

warming." Foreign Aff. 87 (2008): 63.

Broder, John M. "Climate change seen as threat to US security." The New York Times 9 (2009):

153 Brzoska, M. (2012). Climate change and the military in China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and

the United States. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68(2), 43-54.

Brzoska, Michael. "Climate change and military planning." International Journal of Climate

Change Strategies and Management 7, no. 2 (2015): 172-190.

Burks-Copes, K. (2013). Quantifying Risks of Climate Change and Sea Level Rise to Naval

Station Norfolk, Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise/Flooding Adaptation Forum, 1-5.

Burks-Copes, Kelly A., Edmund Russo Jr, Scott Bourne, Mike Case, Austin Davis, Craig

Fischenich, Mike Follum et al. Risk Quantification for Sustaining Coastal Military

Installation Assets and Mission Capabilities. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

VICKSBURG MS VICKSBURG United States, 2014.

Burt, Christopher C. Extreme weather: a guide & record book. WW Norton & Company, 2007.

Butler, C. D. (2018). Climate change, health and existential risks to civilization: A

Caponigro, M. S. B. (2017). Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for Coastal Military

Installations: Design and Planning Principles for Naval Facilities Engineering

Command (Doctoral dissertation, Washington University).

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions website accessed on October 15, 2018

https://www.c2es.org/content/extreme-weather-and-climate-change/

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, n.d."Wildfires and Climate Change." Center for

Climate and Energy Solutions. July 12, 2019. Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.c2es.org/content/wildfires-and-climate-change/.

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, n.d."Wildfires and Climate Change." Center for

Climate and Energy Solutions. July 12, 2019. Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.c2es.org/content/wildfires-and-climate-change/.

154 Center for Disease Control website accessed on October 15, 2018

https://www.cdc.gov/climateandhealth/pubs/CoastalFloodingClimateChangeandYourHea

lth-508.pdf

Center for Disease Control website accessed on October 15, 2018

https://www.cdc.gov/climateandhealth/pubs/CoastalFloodingClimateChangeandYourHea

lth-508.pdf

Center for Sea Level Rise, Old Dominion University, "Center For Sea Level Rise" (2017).

Hampton Roads Intergovernmental Pilot Project: Website. 1.

Center, Virginia Coastal Policy, George Van Houtven, Brooks Depro, Daniel Lapidus, Justine

Allpress, and Benjamin Lord. "Economic Consequences of Not Adapting to Sea Level

Rise in the Hampton Roads Region." (2016).

Chadwick, B., Flick, R., Helly, J., Nishikawa, T., Wang, P. F., O'Reilly, W., & Wild, B. (2011).

A framework for sea level rise vulnerability assessment for southwest US military

installations. OCEANS'11 MTS/IEEE KONA, 1-10.

Chadwick, D. B., Flick, R. E., Helly, J., Nishikawa, T., Wang, P. F., O'Reilly, W. C., & Wild, B.

(2011). A Framework for Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment for Southwest US

Military Installationsmework for Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment for Southwest

US Military Installations. Marine Technology Society Journal, 11, 1-10.

Chen, J.L., C.R. Wilson, and B.D. Tapley. 2013. Contribution of ice sheet and mountain glacier

melt to recent sea level rise. Nature Geoscience 6(7):549-552.

Chen, J.L., C.R. Wilson, and B.D. Tapley. 2013. Contribution of ice sheet and mountain glacier

melt to recent sea level rise. Nature Geoscience 6(7):549-552.

155 Chen, Wei-Ming, Hana Kim, and Hideka Yamaguchi. "Renewable energy in eastern Asia:

Renewable energy policy review and comparative SWOT analysis for promoting

renewable energy in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan." Energy Policy 74 (2014): 319-

329.

Chin, W. (2019). Technology, war and the state: past, present and future. International Affairs,

95(4), 765–783. doi:10.1093/ia/iiz106

Chu-Agor, M. L., Muñoz-Carpena, R., Kiker, G., Emanuelsson, A., & Linkov, I. (2011).

Exploring vulnerability of coastal habitats to sea level rise through global sensitivity and

uncertainty analyses. Environmental Modelling & Software, 26(5), 593-604.

Church, John A., and Neil J. White. "A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise."

Geophysical Research Letters 33, no. 1 (2006): 44-68.

City of Virginia Beach. N.d. "Sandbridge Beach Replenishment: City of Virginia Beach."

VBgov.com, City of Virginia Beach. Accessed April 15, 2019.

https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/public-works/coastal/Pages/sb-bch-

replenish-5-5-17.aspx.

Clark, B., Patt, D., & Schramm, H. (2019). Decision maneuver: The next revolution in military

Clayton, Susan, Christie Manning, Kirra Krygsman, and Meighen Speiser. "Mental health and

our changing climate: impacts, implications, and guidance." Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association and ecoAmerica (2017).

Climate Change and President Obama’s Action Plan https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate-

change accessed on September 6, 2015.

156 Climate Change Research Distorted and Suppressed http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-

science-and-democracy/promoting-scientific-integrity/climate-

change.html#.Vl8zW4eQbzI accessed on September 6, 2015.

Climate Denial Machine: Polluter Watch http://polluterwatch.org/category/freetagging/climate-

denial-machine accessed on September 6, 2015.

Climate Home News Website. "Dealing in Doubt: How Big Oil Funds Climate Denial." Climate

Home News. Last modified October 9, 2013.

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/10/dealing-in-doubt-how-big-oil-funds-

climate-denial/.

CNA (2007). National security and the threat of climate change. Alexandria, VA: CNA

Corporation

Cochrane, M. (2017). The Politicization of Climate Change and the United States Department of

Defense.

Colby, Sandra L., and Jennifer M. Ortman. "Projections of the size and composition of the US

population: 2014 to 2060: Population estimates and projections." (2017).

Commander, Navy Installation Command. (n.d.). "Mission and Vision." Commander, Navy

Installations Command. Accessed November 18, 2018.

https://www.cnic.navy.mil/regions/cnrma/installations/ns_norfolk/about/mission_and_vis

ion.html. comprehensive review (1989–2013). International Journal of Environmental Research

Connolly, Matt. "Hampton Roads, Virginia and the Military’s Battle Against Sea Level Rise."

The Center for Climate and Security. Last modified October 14, 2015.

157 https://climateandsecurity.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/hampton-roads-virginia-and-

military-battle-against-sea-level-rise.pdf.

Connolly, Matt. 5 Things to Know About Hurricanes, Hampton Roads and National Security.

Center for Climate and Security, October 8, 2015.

https://climateandsecurity.org/2015/10/02/5-things-to-know-about-hurricanes-hampton-

roads-and-national-security/.

Convertino, M., Kiker, G. A., Chu-Agor, M. L., Munoz-Carpena, R., Martinez, C. J., Aiello-

Lammens, M., & Linkov, I. (2011). Integrated Modeling to Mitigate Climate Change

Risk Due to Sea Level Rise. In I. Linkov & T. Bridges (eds.), Climate, 433-464.

Cook I, Jay. "Coast Guard's $54 Million Jewel Opens on Sandy Hook." The Two River Times.

Last modified July 13, 2018. https://tworivertimes.com/coast-guards-54-million-jewel-

opens-on-sandy-hook/.

Cooper, Matthew JP, Michael D. Beevers, and Michael Oppenheimer. "The potential impacts of

sea level rise on the coastal region of New Jersey, USA." Climatic Change 90, no. 4

(2008): 475.

Cooper, Nicholas J., and John S. Pethick. "Sediment budget approach to addressing coastal

erosion problems in St. Ouen's Bay, Jersey, Channel Islands." Journal of Coastal

Research (2005): 112-122.

Corps Installations East." Marine Corps Installations East. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.mcieast.marines.mil/Staff-Offices/Emergency-Management/MCB-Camp-

Lejeune/.

158 Corps Installations East." Marine Corps Installations East. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.mcieast.marines.mil/Staff-Offices/Emergency-Management/MCB-Camp-

Lejeune/.

Coutu, Peter. "DoD Could Start Funding Off-Base Infrastructure Fixes for Sea Level Rise."

Military.com. February 08, 2019. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/08/dod-could-start-funding-base-

infrastructure-fixes-sea-level-rise.html.

D'Angelo, Pamela. "Experts Say What Happens In The Arctic Affects Norfolk Flooding."

WVTF. Last modified July 26, 2018. https://www.wvtf.org/post/experts-say-what-

happens-arctic-affects-norfolk-flooding#stream/0.

D'Angelo, Pamela. "Flood-Proofing Virginia's Military Bases Could Be A Very Expensive

Venture." WVTF. Last modified November 8, 2017. https://www.wvtf.org/post/flood-

proofing-virginias-military-bases-could-be-very-expensive-venture#stream/0.

Daily News Website. "UPDATE: Camp Lejeune Wildfire Contained." The Daily News. May 22,

2019. Accessed July 18, 2019. https://www.jdnews.com/news/20190522/update-camp-

lejeune-wildfire-contained.

Daily News Website. "UPDATE: Camp Lejeune Wildfire Contained." The Daily News. May 22,

2019. Accessed July 18, 2019. https://www.jdnews.com/news/20190522/update-camp-

lejeune-wildfire-contained.

Davis, George H. "Land subsidence and sea level rise on the Atlantic Coastal Plain of the United

States." Environmental Geology and Water Sciences 10, no. 2 (1987): 67-80.

159 Dealing in Doubt: how big oil funds climate denial

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/10/dealing-in-doubt-how-big-oil-funds-

climate-denial/ accessed September 6, 2015

DeConto, R.M., and D. Pollard. 2016. Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level

rise. Nature 531:591-597.

DeConto, R.M., and D. Pollard. 2016. Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level

rise. Nature 531:591-597.

Department of Defense (DOD). 2014. Climate change adaptation roadmap. Washington, DC.

Online at http://ppec.asme.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/10/CCARprint.pdf, accessed

May 31, 2016.

Department of Defense (DOD). 2014. Climate change adaptation roadmap. Washington, DC.

Online at http://ppec.asme.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/10/CCARprint.pdf, accessed

May 31, 2016.

Department of Defense (DOD). 2016. Camp Lejeune, North Carolina: Fast Facts. Washington,

DC: Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Community and

Family Policy. Online at www.militaryinstallations.dod.mil/MOS/f

?p=132:CONTENT:0:: NO::P4_INST_ID,P4_INST_TYPE:3805,INSTALLATION,

accessed May 31, 2016.

Department of Defense (DOD). 2016. Camp Lejeune, North Carolina: Fast Facts. Washington,

DC: Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Community and

Family Policy. Online at www.militaryinstallations.dod.mil/MOS/f

?p=132:CONTENT:0:: NO::P4_INST_ID,P4_INST_TYPE:3805,INSTALLATION,

accessed May 31, 2016.

160 Department of Defense, Defense Coastal/Estuarine Research Program, https://dcerp.serdp-

estcp.org/#/resources/techReports

Department of Defense, Defense Coastal/Estuarine Research Program, https://dcerp.serdp-

estcp.org/#/resources/techReports

Department of Defense. 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap. Office of the Deputy Under

Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, 2014.

https://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/downloads/CCARprint_wForward_e.pdf.

Department of Homeland Security. "Mission." Department of Homeland Security. July 03, 2019.

Accessed August 19, 2019. https://www.dhs.gov/mission.

Department of Homeland Security. 2016. "United States Coast Guard Commandant's Strategic

Intent 2015 - 2019: Mid-Term Report." Hsdl.orgland Security Digital Library at NPS.

Accessed June 22, 2019. https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=794148.

Department of Homeland Security. N.d. "Taxonomy Term." Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.dhs.gov/keywords/climate-change.

Department of Homeland Security. N.d. “Taxonomy Term. Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/07/08/written-testimony-plcy-house-homeland-security-

subcommittee-oversight-and-management

DeWitt, Dave. "The Changing Carolina Coast: Camp Lejeune And Climate Change." WUNC |

Bringing the World Home to You. Last modified June 12, 2015.

https://www.wunc.org/post/changing-carolina-coast-camp-lejeune-and-climate-change.

DeWitt, Dave. "The Changing Carolina Coast: Camp Lejeune And Climate Change." WUNC |

Bringing the World Home to You. Last modified June 12, 2015.

https://www.wunc.org/post/changing-carolina-coast-camp-lejeune-and-climate-change.

161 Dinan, Terry. "Projected increases in hurricane damage in the United States: the role of climate

change and coastal development." Ecological Economics 138 (2017): 186-198.

DoD Climate change Adaptation Roadmap accessed on May 12, 2016

http://www.acq.osd.mil/eie/Downloads/CCARprint_wForward_e.pdf

DoD Releases Report on Security Implications of Climate Change

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article-View/Article/612710 accessed on September 5,

2015.

Doep, Jeffrey C. "NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic Holds Change of Command Ceremony." Navy.mil

The Official Website of the United States Navy: Home Page. Last modified August 10,

2018. https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=106692.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.792

Duarte, Carolina, Lawrence P. Ettkin, Marilyn M. Helms, and Michael S. Anderson. "The

challenge of Venezuela: a SWOT analysis." Competitiveness Review: An International

Business Journal 16, no. 3/4 (2006): 233-247.

Economists for Peace and Security Website. The Climate and the Military Issue

http://www.epsusa.org/publications/newsletter/2016/december16/spanger-siegfried.html

Efroymson, R. A., Dale, V. H., Baskaran, L. M., Chang, M., Aldridge, M., & Berry, M. W.

(2005). Planning transboundary ecological risk assessments at military

installations. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 11(6), 1193-1215.

Eggleston, Jack, and Jason Pope. "Land subsidence and relative sea-level rise in the southern

Chesapeake Bay region." US Geological Survey Circular 1392 (2013): 30.

Ehlers, Eckart, and Thomas Krafft. Earth system science in the anthropocene. Berlin: Springer,

2006.

162 Ehrlich, Paul R., and John P. Holdren. "Impact of population growth." Science 171, no. 3977

(1971): 1212-1217.

Emanuel, Kerry, and Adam Sobel. "Response of tropical sea surface temperature, precipitation,

and tropical cyclone‐related variables to changes in global and local forcing." Journal of

Advances in Modeling Earth Systems 5, no. 2 (2013): 447-458.

Emergency Management Marine Corps Installations East. "Emergency Management Marine

Erika Spanger-Siegfried, Kristina Dahl, Astrid Caldas, and Shana Udvardy, “The US Military on

the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Exposure to Coastal Flooding at US Coast Guard Station

Sandy Hook, New Jersey”, Union of Concerned Scientists, August 2016,

http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/07/front-lines-of-rising- seas-coast-

guard-station-sandy-hook.pdf

Ferreira MT, Cardoso P, Borges PAV, Gabriel R, de Azevedo EB,.& Elias, R. B. (2019).

Implications of climate change to the design of protected areas: The case study of small

islands (Azores). PLOS ONE 14(7): e0219583. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.021958

Fertel, Camille, Olivier Bahn, Kathleen Vaillancourt, and Jean-Philippe Waaub. "Canadian

energy and climate policies: A SWOT analysis in search of federal/provincial

coherence." Energy Policy 63 (2013): 1139-1150.

Fox, M., Zuidema, C., Bauman, B., Burke, T., & Sheehan, M. (2019). Integrating public health

into climate change policy and planning: State of practice update. International Journal

of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(18), 3232.

doi:10.3390/ijerph16183232

163 Froese, R., & Schilling, J. (2019). The nexus of climate change, land use, and conflicts. Climate

Change Reports, 5, 24-35. doi:10.1007/s40641-019-00122-1

Fuente, N. J. D. (2019). Comprehensive Analysis of Climate Change Effects on Military Bases.

eScholarship, University of California.

Galloway, Devin L., and Michelle Sneed. "Analysis and Simulation of Regional Subsidence

Accompanying Groundwater Abstraction and Compaction of Susceptible Aquifer

Systems in the USA." Boletín De La Sociedad Geológica Mexicana65, no. 1 (2013): 123-

36. doi:10.18268/bsgm2013v65n1a10.

Gaulin, C. L. (2019). Understanding climate change risks to the United States military (Doctoral

dissertation, Boston University).

Goldstein, Bernard D., and Michael R. Greenberg. "Global Climate Change and the “So What?”

Issue: Reversing the Impact of Donald Trump." (2018): S78-S79.

Goltz, M. N., & Turek, N. F. (2017). Sustainable Military Installations. Sustainability Practice

and Education on University Campuses and Beyond, 212.

Governor's Commission on Climate Change. "Final Report: A Climate Change Action Plan."

Virginia Institute of Marine Science. Last modified December 15, 2018.

https://www.vims.edu/research/units/legacy/icccr/_docs/gov_commision_report.pdf.

GovTracks.us website, In the House of Representatives. Text of H.R. 1322: To Require a Report

on the Effects of Climate Change on the Coast Guard, ... (Reported by House Committee

Version). House of Representatives, 2019.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1322/text.

Grant, Peter R. "Evolution, climate change, and extreme events." Science 357, no. 6350 (2017):

451-452.

164 Gunn, Lee. "National security and the accelerating risk of climate change." Elem Sci Anth 5

(2017).

Gürel, Emet, and Merba Tat. "SWOT ANALYSIS: A THEORETICAL REVIEW." Journal of

International Social Research 10, no. 51 (2017).

Hall, J.A., S. Gill, J. Obeysekera, W. Sweet, K. Knuuti, and J. Marburger. 2016. Regional sea

level scenarios for coastal risk management: Managing the uncertainty of future sea level

change and extreme water levels for Department of Defense coastal sites worldwide.

Washington, DC: US Department of Defense, Strategic Environmental Research and

Development Program. Online at www.serdp-estcp.org/News- and-Events/News-

Announcements/Program-News/DoD-Report-on- Regional-Sea-Level-Scenarios,

accessed May 25, 2016.

Hall, J.A., S. Gill, J. Obeysekera, W. Sweet, K. Knuuti, and J. Marburger. 2016. Regional sea

level scenarios for coastal risk management: Managing the uncertainty of future sea level

change and extreme water levels for Department of Defense coastal sites worldwide.

Washington, DC: US Department of Defense, Strategic Environmental Research and

Development Program. Online at www.serdp-estcp.org/News- and-Events/News-

Announcements/Program-News/DoD-Report-on- Regional-Sea-Level-Scenarios,

accessed May 25, 2016.

Halpin, SH. The impact of Superstorm Sandy on New Jersey towns and households. Report,

Rutgers University School of Public Affairs and Administration; Newark, NJ: 2013.

Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Website accessed on April 13, 2019 from

https://www.hrpdcva.gov/news/article/june/30/2016/why-hampton-roads-should-be-a-

uasi-region/.

165 Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot

Project. "Phase 2 Report: Appendices." CCRFR – Building Virginia’s Flooding

Resiliency. Last modified October 10, 2014. https://www.floodingresiliency.org/wp-

content/uploads/2016/09/IPP-Phase-2-Appendices.pdf.

Hanak, Ellen, and Georgina Moreno. "California coastal management with a changing climate."

Climatic Change 111, no. 1 (2012): 45-73.

Harmon, B. A., Goran, W. D., & Harmon, R. S. (2014). Military installations and cities in the

twenty-first century: Towards sustainable military installations and adaptable

cities. Sustainable Cities and Military Installations, 21-47.

Harvard Business Review. "Managing Climate Change: Lessons from the U.S. Navy." Harvard

Business Review. Last modified July 1, 2017. https://hbr.org/2017/07/managing-climate-

change.html.

Hawkins, P. (2016-2017). Waging War on the Rising Seas: Fashioning a Comprehensive

Approach to Combating the Effects of Sea Level Rise on Hampton Roads, Virginia

Military Installations Under Existing Frameworks. Wm. & Mary Envtl. L. & Pol'y

Rev., 41, 265.

He, J., Yan, C., Holyoak, M., Wan, X., Ren, G., Hou, Y., Xie, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2018).

Quantifying the effects of climate and anthropogenic change on regional species loss in

China. PLoS ONE 13(7), e0199735. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0199735

Helms, Marilyn M., and Judy Nixon. "Exploring SWOT analysis–where are we now? A review

of academic research from the last decade." Journal of strategy and management 3, no. 3

(2010): 215-251.

166 Helms, Marilyn M., Martín A. Rodríguez, Lisandro de los Ríos, and William Hargrave.

"Entrepreneurial potential in Argentina: a SWOT analysis." Competitiveness review: An

international business journal 21, no. 3 (2011): 269-287.

Hendrix, Cullen S., 2008. ‘Leviathan in the tropics? Environment, state capacity, and civil

conflict in the developing world’, PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.

Historic American Engineering Record, Creator. U.S. Coast Guard Sandy Hook Station, West of

intersection of Canfield Road & Hartshorne Drive, Highlands, Monmouth County, NJ.

Highlands Monmouth County New Jersey, 1968. Documentation Compiled After.

Photograph. https://www.loc.gov/item/nj1259/.

Holloway, Jane, Michael Durant Thomas, and Cheryl Durrant. "Strategic military geography:

Climate change adaptation and the military." Handbook of Climate Change

Adaptation (2015): 493-514.

Ions, Christopher G., and Christopher Cook. "Adapting to Flooding in Norfolk." Samenews.org.

Accessed April 27, 2019. http://themilitaryengineer.com/index.php/tme-articles/tme-

magazine-online/item/481-adapting-to-flooding-in-norfolk.

Janin, Hunt, and Scott A. Mandia. Rising sea levels: an introduction to cause and impact.

Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2012.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory - California Institute of Technology. "NASA Finds VA Metro Area Is

Sinking Unevenly." NASA/JPL. Last modified November 28, 2017.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7010.

Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story. Major East Coast Base Supporting Overseas

Contingency Ops: Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story. Presentation to City

of Virginia Beach Vision 2040 Committee: Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort

167 Story, 2011. https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/sga/envision%202040/6-

3-11Military-JointExpeditionaryBaseLittleCreek-FortStoryassets.pdf.

K.G. Miller, R.E. Kopp, B.P. Horton, J.V. Browning, and A.C. Kemp, 2013, A geological

perspective on sea-level rise and its impacts along the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast. Earth’s

Future 1: 3-18, doi:10.1002/2013EF000135.

Kemp, A.C., B.P. Horton, D. Reide Corbett, S.J. Culver, R.J. Edwards, and O. van de Plassche.

2009. The relative utility of foraminifera and diatoms for reconstructing late Holocene

sea-level change in North Carolina, USA. Quaternary Research 71:9–21.

Kemp, A.C., B.P. Horton, D. Reide Corbett, S.J. Culver, R.J. Edwards, and O. van de Plassche.

2009. The relative utility of foraminifera and diatoms for reconstructing late Holocene

sea-level change in North Carolina, USA. Quaternary Research 71:9–21.

Kirshen, P., Borrelli, M., Byrnes, J., Chen, R., Lockwood, L., Watson, C., & Thurson, K. (2020).

Integrated assessment of storm surge barrier systems under present and future climates

and comparison to alternatives: A case study of Boston, USA. Climatic Change, 1-20.

Kleinosky, Lisa R., Brent Yarnal, and Ann Fisher. "Vulnerability of Hampton Roads, Virginia to

storm-surge flooding and sea-level rise." Natural Hazards 40, no. 1 (2007): 43-70.

KPBS Public Media Website. American Homefront. "Hurricane Florence Repairs At Camp

Lejeune Will Cost Billions, And More Big Storms Are Likely." KPBS Public Media.

January 28, 2019. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2019/jan/28/hurricane-florence-repairs-camp-lejeune-will-

cost-/.

KPBS Public Media Website. American Homefront. "Hurricane Florence Repairs At Camp

Lejeune Will Cost Billions, And More Big Storms Are Likely." KPBS Public Media.

168 January 28, 2019. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2019/jan/28/hurricane-florence-repairs-camp-lejeune-will-

cost-/.

Kube, Courtney, and Mosheh Gains. "Camp Lejeune Is Still a Mess 6 Months after Hurricane

Florence. Where's the Money for Repairs?" NBCNews.com. March 31, 2019. Accessed

July 17, 2019. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/camp-lejeune-still-mess-6-

months-after-hurricane-florence-where-n986456.

Kube, Courtney, and Mosheh Gains. "Camp Lejeune Is Still a Mess 6 Months after Hurricane

Florence. Where's the Money for Repairs?" NBCNews.com. March 31, 2019. Accessed

July 17, 2019. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/camp-lejeune-still-mess-6-

months-after-hurricane-florence-where-n986456.

Kumar, Sameer, and Valora Putnam. "Cradle to cradle: Reverse logistics strategies and

opportunities across three industry sectors." International Journal of Production

Economics 115, no. 2 (2008): 305-315.

Kusnetz, Nicholas, Georgina Gustin, and Bob Berwyn. "Rising Seas Are Flooding Virginia's

Naval Base, and There's No Plan to Fix It." Inside Climate News. December 13, 2018.

Accessed April 27, 2019. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/10252017/military-norfolk-

naval-base-flooding-climate-change-sea-level-global-warming-virginia.

Kusnetz, Nicholas. "Norfolk Wants to Remake Itself as Sea Level Rises, but Who Will Be Left

Behind?" Inside Climate News. March 07, 2019. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15052018/norfolk-virginia-navy-sea-level-rise-

flooding-urban-planning-poverty-coastal-resilience.

169 Kusnetz, Nicholas. "Rising Seas Threaten Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Raising Fears of 'catastrophic

Damage' to Key Military Facility." NBCNews.com. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rising-seas-threaten-norfolk-naval-shipyard-

raising-fears-catastrophic-damage-n937396.

La Shier, B., & Stanish, J. (2019). The national security impacts of climate change. J. Nat'l Sec.

L. & Pol'y, 10, 27.

Lambert, J. H., Karvetski, C. W., Ditmer, R. D., Abdallah, T., Johnson, M. D., & Linkov, I.

(2011). Energy security for industrial and military installations: emergent conditions that

influence the strategic selection of technologies. Energy Security, 317-331.

Landsea, Christopher W., and James L. Franklin. "Atlantic hurricane database uncertainty and

presentation of a new database format." Monthly Weather Review 141, no. 10 (2013):

3576-3592.

Lassiter, J., & Shealy, T. (2017). An assessment of the Coast Guard’s engineering operation and

design decisions in preparation for sea level rise due to climate change. International

Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure, 38-48.

Leatherman, Stephen P., Keqi Zhang, and Bruce C. Douglas. "Sea level rise shown to drive

coastal erosion." Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union 81, no. 6 (2000): 55-

57.

Lee, B., & Torney, D. (2016). new Drivers of US Climate action? The politics of extreme

weather and adaptation. The EU, the US and Global Climate Governance, 163-180.

Lehmann, Evan. "ADAPTATION: Inside One Naval Base's Battle with Sea-level Rise." E&E

News -- The Essential News for Energy & Environment Professionals. Last modified

October 27, 2016. https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060044863/print.

170 Li, H., Lin, L., & Burks-Copes, K. A. (2013). Modeling of coastal inundation, storm surge, and

relative sea-level rise at Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk, Virginia, USA. Journal of

Coastal Research, 29(1), 18-30.

Li, Honghai, Lihwa Lin, and Kelly A. Burks-Copes. "Modeling of coastal inundation, storm

surge, and relative sea-level rise at Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk, Virginia,

USA." Journal of coastal research 29, no. 1 (2012): 18-30.

Locklear III, A. S. J. (2015). The US Asia-Pacific rebalance, national security and climate

change.

Lohan, Tara. "Why Virginia Could Be a Leader on Sea-level Rise Solutions • The Revelator."

The Revelator. November 14, 2018. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://therevelator.org/virginia-sea-level-rise/.

Lozar, R. C., Hiett, M. D., & Westervelt, J. D. (2011). Climate change impacts and adaptation on

CONUS military installations. Climate, 333-371.

Mabeus, Courtney. "Navy Is Preparing for Hurricane Season with 2-Week Storm Simulation."

Military.com. Last modified May 17, 2017. https://www.military.com/daily-

news/2017/05/17/navy-is-preparing-hurricane-season-2-week-storm-simulation.html.

Mack, T. J., Chornack, M. P., & Verstraeten, I. M. (2014). Sustainability of water supply at

military installations, Kabul Basin, Afghanistan. Sustainable Cities and Military

Installations, 199-226.

Maier, Mark W. "Architecting principles for systems‐of‐systems." Systems Engineering: The

Journal of the International Council on Systems Engineering 1, no. 4 (1998): 267-284.

Markovska, Natasa, Verica Taseska, and Jordan Pop-Jordanov. "SWOT analyses of the national

energy sector for sustainable energy development." Energy 34, no. 6 (2009): 752-756.

171 Martino, Andrew, and Marine Corps Installations East. "Media Get Tour of Hurricane Florence

Damage on Camp Lejeune." Camp Lejeune Globe. February 14, 2019. Accessed July 17,

2019. https://www.camplejeuneglobe.com/news/media-get-tour-of-hurricane-florence-

damage-on-camp-lejeune/article_bb4c7716-2fd7-11e9-b88a-c391fb196ec5.html.

Martino, Andrew, and Marine Corps Installations East. "Media Get Tour of Hurricane Florence

Damage on Camp Lejeune." Camp Lejeune Globe. February 14, 2019. Accessed July 17,

2019. https://www.camplejeuneglobe.com/news/media-get-tour-of-hurricane-florence-

damage-on-camp-lejeune/article_bb4c7716-2fd7-11e9-b88a-c391fb196ec5.html.

Masten, A. S., and J. D. Osofsky. 2010. Disasters and their impact on child development:

introduction to the special section. Child Development 81 (4): 1029–1039. Online July

15, 2010.

Matthew, R. A. (2011). Is Climate Change a National Security Issue?. Issues in Science and

Technology, 27(3), 49-60.

Maucione, Scott. "What Military Bases Are Most Vulnerable to Climate Change? A New DoD

Report Will Tell You." Federal News Network Website. April 10, 2019. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2019/04/what-military-bases-

are-most-vulnerable-to-climate-change-a-new-dod-report-will-tell-you/.

Maucione, Scott. "What Military Bases Are Most Vulnerable to Climate Change? A New DoD

Report Will Tell You." Federal News Network Website. April 10, 2019. Accessed July

18, 2019. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2019/04/what-military-bases-

are-most-vulnerable-to-climate-change-a-new-dod-report-will-tell-you/.

McGuire, Chad J.. Adapting to sea level rise in the coastal zone: law and policy considerations.

New York : Oxford University Press , 2013.

172 McNeill, William H. The pursuit of power: Technology, armed force, and society since AD 1000.

University of Chicago Press, 2013.

Melillo, J. M., Richmond, T. C., & Yohe, G. W. (2014). Highlights of climate change impacts in

the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change

Research Program. Washington D.C.: US Government Printing Office.

Melillo, Jerry M. Climate change impacts in the United States, highlights: US national climate

assessment. Government Printing Office, 2014.

Merad, M., Wilbanks, T. J., Halfaoui, L., Marcomini, A., John, C. S., & Tkachuk, A. (2014).

Integrated perspectives on sustainable infrastructures for cities and military

installations. Sustainable Cities and Military Installations. 301-328.

Michael E. O’Hanlon, “Forecasting Change in Military Technology, 2020-2040,” (Washington,

DC: Brookings Institution, 2018).

Michael E. O’Hanlon, Technological Change and the Future of Warfare (Washington, DC:

Brookings Institution Press, 2000), 65.

Miguel, E., Shanker, S., and Ernest S. 2004. Economic shocks and civil conflict: An instrumental

variables approach. Journal of Political Economy 112(4): 725–753.

Military Rates Website. "Naval Bases and Ports." Military Pay Charts, Rates, Guidelines, and

Articles. Accessed May 5, 2019. https://www.militaryrates.com/military-bases-navy.

Military.com Website. "Navy Base Guide List." Military.com. Accessed April 5, 2019.

https://www.military.com/base-guide/browse-by-service/navy.

Military.com Website. "U.S. Navy's Values and Missions." Military.com. Last modified May 7,

2012. https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/navy-missions-values.html.

173 Militaryrates.com website accessed November 30, 2017 https://www.militaryrates.com/military-

bases-navy

Militaryrates.com website accessed November 30, 2017 https://www.militaryrates.com/military-

bases-marines

Militaryrates.com website accessed November 30, 2017 https://www.militaryrates.com/military-

bases-coastguard

Mindtools Website, "SWOT Analysis: Discover New Opportunities, Manage and Eliminate

Threats". www.mindtools.com. 1006. Retrieved 24 February 2018

Mitchell, Daniel, Clare Heaviside, Sotiris Vardoulakis, Chris Huntingford, Giacomo Masato,

Benoit P. Guillod, Peter Frumhoff, Andy Bowery, David Wallom, and Myles Allen.

"Attributing human mortality during extreme heat waves to anthropogenic climate

change." Environmental Research Letters 11, no. 7 (2016): 074006.

Monmouth University. N.d. "Climate Change Vulnerabilities in the Coastal Mid-Atlantic

Region” Monmouth University. Last modified May 2018.

https://www.monmouth.edu/uci/documents/2018/10/climate-change-vulnerabilities-in-

the-coastal-mid-atlantic-region.pdf/.

Morales, E. (2015). Global climate change as a threat to U.S. national security. Journal of

Strategic Security, 8(5), 134-148.

Morris, L. L. (2020). Stakeholder collaboration as a pathway to climate adaptation at coastal

ports. Maritime Policy & Management, 1-15.

Nagel, J. (2011). Climate change, public opinion, and the military security complex. The

sociological quarterly, 52(2), 203-210.

174 National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 2011. National security implications of climate change

for US naval forces: A report by the Committee on National Security Implications of

Climate Change for US Naval Forces. Washington, DC. Online at

www.nap.edu/download.php?record_ id=12914, accessed May 24, 2016.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 2011. National security implications of climate change

for US naval forces: A report by the Committee on National Security Implications of

Climate Change for US Naval Forces. Washington, DC. Online at

www.nap.edu/download.php?record_ id=12914, accessed May 24, 2016.

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Sciences Website. "NCCOS, USACE Help Marines Keep

Pace with Sea Level Rise at Camp Lejeune (video)." National Centers for Coastal Ocean

Sciences Website. July 09, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/news/nccos-usace-help-marines-keep-pace-with-sea-

level-rise-at-camp-lejeune-video/.

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Sciences Website. "NCCOS, USACE Help Marines Keep

Pace with Sea Level Rise at Camp Lejeune (video)." National Centers for Coastal Ocean

Sciences Website. July 09, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/news/nccos-usace-help-marines-keep-pace-with-sea-

level-rise-at-camp-lejeune-video/.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). No date. Historical hurricane

tracks. Washington, DC. Online at https:// coast.noaa.gov/hurricanes/, accessed March

23, 2016.

175 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). No date. Historical hurricane

tracks. Washington, DC. Online at https://coast. noaa.gov/hurricanes/, accessed March

23, 2016.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). No date. Historical hurricane

tracks. Washington, DC. Online at https://coast. noaa.gov/hurricanes/, accessed March

23, 2016.

National Park Service Website, n.d. https://www.nps.gov/gate/learn/historyculture/hancock.htm

National Research Council. A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting

concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press, 2012.

National Weather Service (NWS). No date. Hurricane Bertha: Event overview.

Newport/Morehead, NC: Weather Forecast Office. Online at

www.weather.gov/mhx/Jul121996EventReview, accessed June 13, 2016.

National Weather Service (NWS). No date. Hurricane Bertha: Event overview.

Newport/Morehead, NC: Weather Forecast Office. Online at

www.weather.gov/mhx/Jul121996EventReview, accessed June 13, 2016.

National Weather Service. N.d. "THE HURRICANE HISTORY OF CENTRAL AND

EASTERN VIRGINIA." National Weather Service. Accessed May 15, 2019.

https://www.weather.gov/media/akq/miscNEWS/hurricanehistory.pdf.

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic. Integrated Natural Resources

Management Plan - Naval Station Norfolk and Craney Island Fuel Terminal. Naval

Facilities Engineering Command Mid-Atlantic: Environmental Planning and

Conservation, 2016. https://www.navfac.navy.mil/navfac_worldwide/atlantic/fecs/mid-

176 atlantic/about_us/environmental_norfolk/environmental_planning_and_conservation.htm

Navy, U. S., US Marine Corps, and US Coast Guard. "A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century

Seapower." Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved January 3 (2017):

2015.

Navy.mil website accessed November 30, 2017 http://www.navy.mil/navydata/organization/org-

top.asp

Nerem, R. S., T. M. Van Dam, and M. S. Schenewerk. "Chesapeake Bay subsidence monitored

as wetlands loss continues." Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union79, no. 12

(1998): 149-157.

Nevitt, M. P. (2015). The commander in chief's authority to combat climate change. Cardozo L.

Rev., 37, 437. Retrieved from:

https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/cdozo37&div=16&id=&

page=

Newbold, T. (2018). Future effects of climate and land-use change on terrestrial vertebrate

community diversity under different scenarios. The Royal Society, 285(1881), 792.

Newman, Cathy. "A Tale of Two Ponds: NYC Park After the Storm." Last modified April 27,

2013. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130426-gateway-national-

parks-new-york-city-hurricane-sandy/.

Nikolaou, Ioannis E., and Konstantinos I. Evangelinos. "A SWOT analysis of environmental

management practices in Greek Mining and Mineral Industry." Resources Policy 35, no.

3 (2010): 226-234.

177 NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2004. North Carolina

Bathmetry/Topography Sea Level Rise Project: Determination of Sea Level Trends.

NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 041. Available at

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt41.pdf.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2004. North Carolina

Bathmetry/Topography Sea Level Rise Project: Determination of Sea Level Trends.

NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 041. Available at

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/techrpt41.pdf.

NOAA website, 2013, accessed on December 12, 2018 via website

at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/201312

NOAA, EPA, WERF, WaterRF, CTC, and Nobis. 2103. Case study: Virginia: Tidewater area.

Silver Spring, MD: NOAA Climate Program Office. Accessed April 1, 2019:

//cpo.noaa.gov/sites/cpo/Projects/SARP/

CaseStudies/2013/Tidewater%20VA%20Case%20Study%20

Factsheet%20Extreme%20Weather%20Events_2013-1-30v1.pdf.

O'Hanlon, Michael E. Technological change and the future of warfare. Brookings Institution

Press, 2011.

Office of Science New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Damage Assessment

Report on the effects of Hurricane Sandy on the State of New Jersey’s Natural Resources.

Office of Science New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2015.

https://www.nj.gov/dep/dsr/publications/hurricane-sandy-assessment.pdf.

178 Onslow County Emergency Services. Online at www.onslowcountync.

gov/uploadedFiles/Emergency_Services/EM/Files/PUBLISH%20 2015-

00%20Onslow%20County%20MJ-HMP%20(DRAFT).pdf, accessed May 12, 2016.

Onslow County Emergency Services. Online at www.onslowcountync.

gov/uploadedFiles/Emergency_Services/EM/Files/PUBLISH%20 2015-

00%20Onslow%20County%20MJ-HMP%20(DRAFT).pdf, accessed May 12, 2016.

Onslow County. 2015. Multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan, Onslow County, NC.

Jacksonville, NC:

Onslow County. 2015. Multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan, Onslow County, NC.

Jacksonville, NC:

Padhy, Susanta Kumar, Sidharth Sarkar, Mahima Panigrahi, and Surender Paul. "Mental health

effects of climate change." Indian journal of occupational and environmental

medicine 19, no. 1 (2015): 3.

Papalexiou, S. M., AghaKouchak, A., Trenberth, K. E., & Foufoula-Georgiou, E. (2017). Global,

regional, and megacity trends in the highest temperature of the year: Diagnostics and

evidence for accelerating trends. Earth’s Future, 6, 71–79. doi:10.1002/2017EF000709

Parker, Geoffrey. The military revolution: Military innovation and the rise of the West, 1500-

1800. Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Parker, Laura. "Who's Still Fighting Climate Change? The U.S. Military." National Geographic.

February 07, 2017. Accessed April 27, 2019.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/02/pentagon-fights-climate-change-sea-level-

rise-defense-department-military/.

179 Parker, PA1 Kelly. "Taking Care of Our Own." Coast Guard Compass Archive. Last modified

January 22, 2013. https://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2013/01/taking-care-of-our-own/.

Parris, A., P. Bromirski, V. Burkett, D. Cayan, M. Culver, J. Hall, R. Horton, K. Knuuti, R.

Moss, J. Obeysekera, A. Sallenger, and J. Weiss. 2012. Global sea level rise scenarios

for the National Climate Assessment. NOAA tech memo OAR CPO-1. Washington, DC:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Online at http://

scenarios.globalchange.gov/sites/default/files/NOAA_SLR_r3_0.pdf, accessed April 25,

2016.

Parris, A., P. Bromirski, V. Burkett, D. Cayan, M. Culver, J. Hall, R. Horton, K. Knuuti, R.

Moss, J. Obeysekera, A. Sallenger, and J. Weiss. 2012. Global sea level rise scenarios

for the National Climate Assessment. NOAA tech memo OAR CPO-1. Washington, DC:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Online at http://

scenarios.globalchange.gov/sites/default/files/NOAA_SLR_r3_0.pdf, accessed April 25,

2016.

PBS. "Sea Level Rise in New Jersey." PBS: In Depth: Sea Level Rise in New Jersey. October

26, 2017. Accessed June 22, 2019. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/peril-and-

promise/2017/10/sea-level-rise-new-jersey/.

Pincus, R. (2014). Survey: Resource footprints and environmental security at DoD installations.

Sustainable Cities and Military Installations, 63-77.

Post, Michelle Brunetti. "New Jersey Shore Sees Sea Level Change - and It Can't Be Denied."

Press of Atlantic City. April 09, 2018. Accessed July 03, 2019.

https://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/new-jersey-shore-sees-sea-level-

change-and-it-can/article_bfb3ef36-99d9-546b-88fd-48b8cf5dd214.html.

180 Post, Michelle Brunetti. "New Jersey Shore Sees Sea Level Change - and It Can't Be Denied."

Press of Atlantic City. April 09, 2018. Accessed July 03, 2019.

https://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/new-jersey-shore-sees-sea-level-

change-and-it-can/article_bfb3ef36-99d9-546b-88fd-48b8cf5dd214.html.

Price, Jay. "Cost To Military Of Extreme Weather Events Is Likely To Grow." NPR Website.

January 15, 2019. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/15/685656198/cost-to-military-of-extreme-weather-events-

is-likely-to-grow.

Price, Jay. "Cost To Military Of Extreme Weather Events Is Likely To Grow." NPR Website.

January 15, 2019. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/15/685656198/cost-to-military-of-extreme-weather-events-

is-likely-to-grow.

R.E. Kopp, R.M. Horton, C.M. Little, J.X. Mitrovica, M. Oppenheimer, D.J. Rasmussen, B.H.

Strauss, and C. Tebaldi, 2014, Probabilistic 21st and 22nd century sea-level projections at

a global network of tide gauge sites. Earth's Future, doi: 10.1002/2014EF000239.

Ratcliff, J., & Smith, J. M. (2011). Sea level rise impacts to military installations in lower

Chesapeake Bay. In Solutions to Coastal Disasters, 740-752.

References

Revkin, Andrew. "Trump's Defense Secretary Cites Climate Change as National Security

Challenge." ProPublica. March 09, 2019. Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-defense-secretary-cites-climate-change-

national-security-challenge.

181 Revkin, Andrew. "Trump's Defense Secretary Cites Climate Change as National Security

Challenge." ProPublica. March 09, 2019. Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://www.propublica.org/article/trumps-defense-secretary-cites-climate-change-

national-security-challenge.

Rich, Brad. "Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change." Coastal Review Online Website.

September 05, 2017. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.coastalreview.org/2017/09/climate-change-concerns-prompt-study/.

Rich, Brad. "Military Shows Concern Over Climate Change." Coastal Review Online Website.

September 05, 2017. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.coastalreview.org/2017/09/climate-change-concerns-prompt-study/.

Rignot. E., I. Velicongna, M.R. van den Broeke, A. Monaghan, and J.T.M. Lenaerts. 2011.

Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to sea level

rise. Geophysical Research Letters, doi: 10.1029/2011GL046583.

Rignot. E., I. Velicongna, M.R. van den Broeke, A. Monaghan, and J.T.M. Lenaerts. 2011.

Acceleration of the contribution of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to sea level

rise. Geophysical Research Letters, doi: 10.1029/2011GL046583.

RTI International. N.d. "Report: Sea Level Rise in Hampton Roads, Va. Will Exact A Profound

Economic Toll Unless Adaptive Measures Taken." RTI. Last modified June 29, 2017.

https://www.rti.org/news/report-sea-level-rise-hampton-roads-va-will-exact-profound-

economic-toll-unless-adaptive.

Rumsfeld, Donald H. "Transforming the military." Foreign Aff.81 (2002): 20.

Russo, E. J., & Burks-Copes, K. A. (2013). Adaptive capacity and tipping points of coastal

military installation sustainability with storms and rising seas. Coasts and Ports 2013:

182 21st Australasian Coastal and Ocean Engineering Conference and the 14th Australasian

Port and Harbour Conference, 659.

Sadler, Jeffrey M., Nicole Haselden, Kimberly Mellon, Allison Hackel, Veronica Son, Jordan

Mayfield, Abigail Blase, and Jonathan L. Goodall. "Impact of sea-level rise on roadway

flooding in the Hampton Roads region, Virginia." Journal of Infrastructure Systems 23,

no. 4 (2017): 05017006.

Salehyan, I. 2008. From climate change to conflict? No consensus yet. Journal of Peace

Research, 45(3), 315-326. doi:10.1177/0022343308088812

Schwab, J. C. (2014). Planning for post-disaster recovery: Next generation. American Planning

Association. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1425503479190-

22edb246b925ba41104b7d38eddc207f/APA_PAS_576.pdf

Shepherd, A., Ivins, E., Rignot, E., Smith, B., van den Broeke, M., Velicogna, …& Krinner, G.

(2018). Mass balance of the Antarctic ice sheet from 1992 to 2017. Nature, 556, 219–

222. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0179-y

Sherman, T. 2014. Coast guard and NJ National Guard still feeling effects of Sandy, two years

after the storm. Star-Ledger, August 17. Online at

www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2014/08/coast_guard_and_nj_national_

guard_still_feeling_effects_of_sandy_two_years_after_the_storm.html, accessed April

11, 2016.

Sherman, Ted. "Coast Guard and N.J. National Guard Still Feeling Effects of Sandy, Two Years

After the Storm." Nj.com. Last modified August 17, 2014.

https://www.nj.com/news/2014/08/coast_guard_and_nj_national_guard_still_feeling_effe

cts_of_sandy_two_years_after_the_storm.html.

183 Shoreline evolution and coastal resiliency at two military installations: Investigating the

potential for and impacts of loss of protecting barriers. SERDP Project RC-1702.

Alexandria, VA: US Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and

Development Program (SERDP). Online at www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/

Resource-Conservation-and-Climate-Change/Climate-Change/ Vulnerability-and-

Impact-Assessment/RC-1702, accessed June 6, 2016

Shoreline evolution and coastal resiliency at two military installations: Investigating the

potential for and impacts of loss of protecting barriers. SERDP Project RC-1702.

Alexandria, VA: US Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and

Development Program (SERDP). Online at www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/

Resource-Conservation-and-Climate-Change/Climate-Change/ Vulnerability-and-

Impact-Assessment/RC-1702, accessed June 6, 2016

Sisk, Richard. "Congress Comes Up With $400 Million for Camp Lejeune Storm Repairs."

Military.com. April 05, 2019. Accessed July 17, 2019. https://www.military.com/daily-

news/2019/04/05/congress-comes-400-million-camp-lejeune-storm-repairs.html.

Sisk, Richard. "Congress Comes Up With $400 Million for Camp Lejeune Storm Repairs."

Military.com. April 05, 2019. Accessed July 17, 2019. https://www.military.com/daily-

news/2019/04/05/congress-comes-400-million-camp-lejeune-storm-repairs.html.

Sisk, Richard. "Congress Comes Up With $400 Million for Camp Lejeune Storm Repairs."

Military.com Website. April 05, 2019. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/04/05/congress-comes-400-million-camp-

lejeune-storm-repairs.html.

184 Smith, R. W. (2015). The good, the bad, and the robust: Climate change adaptation choices for

the port of Rotterdam, Port of San Diego, and Naval Base Kitsap-

Bremerton (Washington University, doctoral dissertation).

Smith, W., Schultz, D., Whitford, D., Barry, J., Uyesugi, D., Mitchell, W., & Stamey, B.

(2010). Climate change planning for military installations: findings and implications.

USDOD.

Snow, Shawn. "$3.6 Billion Price Tag to Rebuild Lejeune Buildings Damaged by Hurricane

Florence." Marine Corps Times. December 13, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/12/12/36-billion-

price-tag-to-rebuild-lejeune-buildings-damaged-by-hurricane-florence/.

Snow, Shawn. "$3.6 Billion Price Tag to Rebuild Lejeune Buildings Damaged by Hurricane

Florence." Marine Corps Times. December 13, 2018. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/12/12/36-billion-

price-tag-to-rebuild-lejeune-buildings-damaged-by-hurricane-florence/.

Snow, Shawn. "$3.6 Billion Price Tag to Rebuild Lejeune Buildings Damaged by Hurricane

Florence." Marine Corps Times. December 13, 2018. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/12/12/36-billion-

price-tag-to-rebuild-lejeune-buildings-damaged-by-hurricane-florence/.

Snow, Shawn. "Climate Change Threatens to Block Marines' Access to the Sea." Defense News

Website. May 06, 2019. Accessed July 18, 2019. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-

show-dailies/navy-league/2019/05/06/climate-change-threatens-to-block-marines-access-

to-the-sea/.

185 Snow, Shawn. "Climate Change Threatens to Block Marines' Access to the Sea." Defense News

Website. May 06, 2019. Accessed July 18, 2019. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-

show-dailies/navy-league/2019/05/06/climate-change-threatens-to-block-marines-access-

to-the-sea/.

Solomon, Susan, Dahe Qin, Martin Manning, Zhenlin Chen, Melinda Marquis, K. B. Averyt,

Melinda Tignor, and H. L. Miller. "IPCC, 2007: Climate change 2007: The physical

science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change." SD Solomon (Ed.) (2007).

Spoto, MaryAnn. "Coast Guard Plan to Rebuild Sandy-damaged Buildings Angers Historic

Groups." Nj.com. Last modified September 11, 2014.

https://www.nj.com/monmouth/2014/09/coast_guard_plan_to_rebuild_sandy-

damaged_buildings_angers_historic_groups.html.

State of New Jersey Website. New Jersey Coastal Management Program. "NJDEP-Coastal

Management Program." The Official Web Site for The State of New Jersey. Last

modified June 19, 2019. https://www.state.nj.us/dep/cmp/.

State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection Website. NJDEP-SEEDS.

Accessed June 22, 2019. https://www.nj.gov/dep/seeds/bescch/2_bkgrdinfo.htm.

State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection. "BACKGROUND

INFORMATION: Coastal Resiliency and Building Ecological Solutions." NJDEP-

SEEDS. Accessed July 03, 2019. https://www.nj.gov/dep/seeds/bescch/2_bkgrdinfo.htm.

Stiles, W., Mitchell, M., & Hartley, T. (2012). The policy climate for climate change in Virginia:

Overview of adaptation policy, planning and implementation landscape. Sea Grant L. &

Pol'y J., 5, 15.

186 Stockton, Richard, and Steven Hafner. Beach Stabilization Structure & Beach Nourishment

Alternatives. College of New Jersey and Coastal Research Center. Accessed June 22,

2019. http://intraweb.stockton.edu/eyos/coastal/25yrConference/Beach-Stabilization.pdf.

Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). Assessing Impacts of

Climate Change on Coastal Military Installations: Policy Implications. Strategic

Environmental Research and Development Program, 2013.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a575273.pdf.

Surjan, Akhilesh, Gulsan Ara Parvin, and Rajib Shaw. "Expanding Coastal Cities: An Increasing

Risk." In Urban Disasters and Resilience in Asia, pp. 79-90. Butterworth-Heinemann,

2016.

T. Houser, R. Kopp, S. Hsiang, R. Muir-Wood, K. Larsen, M. Delgado, A. Jina, P. Wilson, S.

Mohan, D. J. Rasmussen, M. Mastrandrea, and J. Rising, 2014, American Climate

Prospectus: Economic Risks in the United States. Oakland: Rhodium Group.

http://www.climateprospectus.org/

Terrados, Jorge, Gemma Almonacid, and Leocadio Hontoria. "Regional energy planning through

SWOT analysis and strategic planning tools.: Impact on renewables

development." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 11, no. 6 (2007): 1275-1287.

The Center for Climate & Security. 2019."U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Nominees Highlight the

Threat from Climate Change." Accessed July 19, 2019.

https://climateandsecurity.org/2019/05/02/u-s-navy-and-marine-corps-nominees-

highlight-the-threat-from-climate-change/.

The Center for Climate & Security. 2019."U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Nominees Highlight the

Threat from Climate Change." Accessed July 19, 2019.

187 https://climateandsecurity.org/2019/05/02/u-s-navy-and-marine-corps-nominees-

highlight-the-threat-from-climate-change/.

The Center for Climate and Security. 2019. "UPDATE: Chronology of U.S. Military Statements

and Actions on Climate Change and Security: Jan 2017- April 2019." The Center for

Climate & Security. May 03, 2019. Accessed July 03, 2019.

https://climateandsecurity.org/2019/05/03/update-chronology-of-u-s-military-statements-

and-actions-on-climate-change-and-security-jan-2017-april-2019/.

The Center for Climate and Security. N.d. Climate Change Impacts on North Carolina’s Coastal

Military Communities. PDF. Unknown: The Center for Climate and Security.

The Center for Climate and Security. N.d. Climate Change Impacts on North Carolina’s Coastal

Military Communities. PDF. Unknown: The Center for Climate and Security.

The Franklin Institute website accessed on October 15, 2018

https://www.fi.edu/blog/fingerprints-of-climate-change-in-extreme-weather-events

Thornton, David. "Navy’s Oldest Shipyard Prepares for 20-year Upgrade Effort." Federal News

Network. Last modified November 27, 2018. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/navy-

2018/2018/11/navys-oldest-shipyard-prepares-for-20-year-upgrade-effort/.

Trusel, L.D., K.E. Frey, S.B. Dias, K.B. Karnauskas, P. Kuipers Munneke, E. van Meijgaard,

and M.R. van den Broeke. 2015. Divergent trajecto- ries of Antarctic surface melt under

two twenty-first-century climate scenarios. Nature Geoscience 8: 927–932.

Trusel, L.D., K.E. Frey, S.B. Dias, K.B. Karnauskas, P. Kuipers Munneke, E. van Meijgaard,

and M.R. van den Broeke. 2015. Divergent trajecto- ries of Antarctic surface melt under

two twenty-first-century climate scenarios. Nature Geoscience 8: 927–932.

188 U.S. Department of Homeland Security Website, n.d.

http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=014-02-02

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency website accessed on October 15, 2018

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-coastal-flooding

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Climate Change: Analysis of Reported Federal

Funding. U.S. Government Accountability Office, March 13, 2018.

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-223.

Uhe, P., F. E. L. Otto, K. Haustein, G. J. van Oldenborgh, A. D. King, D. C. H. Wallom, M. R.

Allen, and H. Cullen. "Comparison of methods: Attributing the 2014 record European

temperatures to human influences." Geophysical Research Letters 43, no. 16 (2016):

8685-8693.

Union of Concerned Scientists (n.d.). The US military on the front lines of rising seas. USUSA,

1-8. https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/07/front-lines-of-rising-seas-

oceana-dam-neck-annex.pdf.

Union of Concerned Scientists website accessed October 18, 2018,

https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2018/08/extreme-heat-science-fact-

sheet.pdf

Union of Concerned Scientists Website. 2016. "On the Front Lines of Rising Seas: Naval Station

Norfolk, Virginia." Union of Concerned Scientists. Accessed April 5, 2019.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/impacts/sea-level-rise-

flooding-naval-station-norfolk.

189 Union of Concerned Scientists. "Climate Change Research Distorted and Suppressed." Union of

Concerned Scientists. Last modified June 2005. https://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-

science-and-democracy/promoting-scientific-integrity/climate-change.html.

United States Coast Guard website. 107 USCG active projects include recapitalizing shore

facilities at Sandy Hook that were destroyed during Hurricane Sandy: ‘Project Execution

– Active’, May 2016, https://www.uscg.mil/fdcc/projects.asp - accessed August 2016.

United States Department of Defense. Department of Defense 2014 Climate Change Adaptation

Roadmap. Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and

Environment, 2014.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. "CAMP LEJEUNE MILITARY RES.

(USNAVY) Site Profile." EPA. October 20, 2017. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.Cleanup&id

=0403185#bkground.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. "CAMP LEJEUNE MILITARY RES.

(USNAVY) Site Profile." EPA. October 20, 2017. Accessed July 17, 2019.

https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.Cleanup&id

=0403185#bkground.

United States Geological Survey Website accessed June 12, 2019

https://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=gnispq:3:0::NO::P3_FID:882562

United States Government Accountability Office. (2015). Climate information: A national

system could help federal, state, local, and private sector decision makers use climate

information. United States Government Accountability Office. Retrieved from

190 https://cartwright.house.gov/sites/cartwright.house.gov/files/GAO%20Report--

Climate%20Information%2012-8-15.pdf

Upton, John. "Sinking Atlantic Coastline Meets Rapidly Rising Seas." Scientific American:

Climate Central. April 14, 2016. Accessed July 03, 2019.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sinking-atlantic-coastline-meets-rapidly-

rising-seas/.

URS Group, INC. 2014. "Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Monmouth

County, New Jersey." Monmouth County Sheriff's Office. Accessed June 22, 2019.

https://www.mcsonj.org/wp-

content/uploads/2015/06/Hazmat%20Mitigation%20Plan%20-%201%20-

%20REDACTED.pdf.

URS Group, INC. 2014. “RECAPITALIZATION PROJECT USCG STATION SANDY HOOK

NEW JERSEY”. US Department of Homeland Security and the US Coast Guard.

Accessed June 22, 2019.

https://www.atlanticarea.uscg.mil/Portals/7/Fifth%20District/Public%20Notices/SHook_

PublicDEA_081514_email_version.pdf

US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2015. North Atlantic Coast comprehensive study:

Resilient adaptation to increasing risk. Brooklyn, NY. Online at

www.nad.usace.army.mil/Portals/40/docs/NACCS/ NACCS_main_report.pdf, accessed

May 25, 2016.

US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2015. North Atlantic Coast comprehensive study:

Resilient adaptation to increasing risk. Brooklyn, NY. Online at

191 www.nad.usace.army.mil/Portals/40/docs/NACCS/ NACCS_main_report.pdf, accessed

May 25, 2016.

US Army Corps of Engineers, New York District Website. "FACT SHEET - Sea Bright to

Manasquan, NJ." New York District. January 01, 2019. Accessed June 22, 2019.

https://www.nan.usace.army.mil/Media/Fact-Sheets/Fact-Sheet-Article-

View/Article/487661/sea-bright-to-manasquan-nj-beach/.

US Department of Defense (2013). Assessing impacts of climate change on coastal military inst

US Marine Corps (USMC). 2013. Marine corps installations east economic impact 2013. Camp

Lejeune, NC: MCIEAST-MCB CAMLEJ, Business Performance Office. Online at

www.mcieast. marines.mil/Portals/33/Documents/COMREL/FY13-MCIEAST-

ECONOMIC-IMPACT.pdf, accessed April 21, 2016.

US Marine Corps (USMC). 2013. Marine corps installations east economic impact 2013. Camp

Lejeune, NC: MCIEAST-MCB CAMLEJ, Business Performance Office. Online at

www.mcieast. marines.mil/Portals/33/Documents/COMREL/FY13-MCIEAST-

ECONOMIC-IMPACT.pdf, accessed April 21, 2016.

US Marine Corps (USMC). No date. The official website of the United States Marine Corps.

Online at www.marines.mil/, accessed March 8, 2016.

US Marine Corps (USMC). No date. The official website of the United States Marine Corps.

Online at www.marines.mil/, accessed March 8, 2016.

USMC Life. "See Where the Marines Rank in the Top 10 Bases for Heat-related Incidents."

USMC Life. July 24, 2017. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.usmclife.com/2017/07/see-marines-rank-top-10-bases-heat-related-

incidents/.

192 USMC Life. "See Where the Marines Rank in the Top 10 Bases for Heat-related Incidents."

USMC Life. July 24, 2017. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.usmclife.com/2017/07/see-marines-rank-top-10-bases-heat-related-

incidents/.

Van Der Werf, Guido R., James T. Randerson, Louis Giglio, Thijs T. Van Leeuwen, Yang Chen,

Brendan M. Rogers, Mingquan Mu et al. "Global fire emissions estimates during 1997-

2016." (2017): 697-720.

Van Der Werf, Guido R., James T. Randerson, Louis Giglio, Thijs T. Van Leeuwen, Yang Chen,

Brendan M. Rogers, Mingquan Mu et al. "Global fire emissions estimates during 1997-

2016." (2017): 697-720.

VDEM. History: Virginia Hurricanes. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

August 23, 2016. https://www.vaemergency.gov/news-local/hurricane-history/.

Vergakis, Brock. "5 Things That Could Affect the Future of Naval Station Norfolk." Virginian-

Pilot. Last modified November 16, 2017.

https://pilotonline.com/news/military/local/article_51750c0e-6362-5c93-92d7-

aa8dfcc9e677.html.

Vose, R.S., D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, A.N. LeGrande, and M.F. Wehner, 2017: Temperature

changes in the United States. In Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National

Climate Assessment, Volume I. D.J. Wuebbles, D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken,

B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program, pp. 185-

206, doi:10.7930/J0N29V45.

193 Walsh, John, Donald Wuebbles, Katherine Hayhoe, James Kossin, Kenneth Kunkel, Graeme

Stephens, Peter Thorne et al. "Our changing climate." Climate change impacts in the

United States: The third national climate assessment (2014): 19-67.

Wang, Weile, Bruce T. Anderson, Nathan Phillips, Robert K. Kaufmann, Christopher Potter, and

Ranga B. Myneni. "Feedbacks of vegetation on summertime climate variability over the

North American grasslands. Part I: Statistical analysis." Earth Interactions 10, no. 17

(2006): 1-27.

Weems, C. F., A. A. Pina, N. M. Costa, S. E. Watts, L. K. Taylor, and M. F. Cannon. 2007.

Predisaster trait anxiety and negative affect predict posttraumatic stress in youths after

hurricane Katrina. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 75(1):154–159.

Wehner, M. F., K. Hayhoe, D. J. Wuebbles, D. R. Easterling, D. W. Fahey, S. J. Doherty, J. P.

Kossin, W. Sweet, R. S. Vose, and K. Kunkel. "Our Changing Climate: National Climate

Assessment NCA4 Vol. 2, Chapter 2." In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2018.

Werz, M., & Hoffman, M. (2016). Europe’s Twenty-first Century Challenge: Climate Change,

Migration and Security. European View, 15(1), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-

016-0385-7

Wickman, L. A., & Clayson, M. H. (2012). Environmental changes and national security space

programs. IEEE Aerospace Conference, 1-11.

WITN Website. "FIRE WATCH: Camp Lejeune Wildfire 100% Contained." WITN Website.

March 23, 2011. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.witn.com/home/headlines/Camp_Lejeune_Wildfire_Remains_75_Percent_C

ontained.html.

194 WITN Website. "FIRE WATCH: Camp Lejeune Wildfire 100% Contained." WITN Website.

March 23, 2011. Accessed August 18, 2019.

https://www.witn.com/home/headlines/Camp_Lejeune_Wildfire_Remains_75_Percent_C

ontained.html.

Wood, Nathan, Jeanne Jones, John Schelling, and Mathew Schmidtlein. "Tsunami vertical-

evacuation planning in the US Pacific Northwest as a geospatial, multi-criteria decision

problem." International journal of disaster risk reduction 9 (2014): 68-83.

Wuebbles, D. J. "Using the 4th National Climate Assessment to Inform National Security."

In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2018.

Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, B. DeAngelo, S. Doherty, K. Hayhoe, R. Horton,

J.P. Kossin, P.C. Taylor, A.M. Waple, and C.P. Weaver, 2017: Executive Summary. In:

Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I

[Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K.

Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 12-

34 doi: 10.7930/J0DJ5CTG.

WWAY TV Website. "NC 172 Reopened aboard Lejeune as Smoke from Wildfire Clears."

WWAY TV Website. January 06, 2012. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.wwaytv3.com/2012/01/06/nc-172-reopened-aboard-lejeune-smoke-from-

wildfire-clears/.

WWAY TV Website. "NC 172 Reopened aboard Lejeune as Smoke from Wildfire Clears."

WWAY TV Website. January 06, 2012. Accessed July 18, 2019.

https://www.wwaytv3.com/2012/01/06/nc-172-reopened-aboard-lejeune-smoke-from-

wildfire-clears/.

195 Yuan, Hongping. "A SWOT analysis of successful construction waste management." Journal of

Cleaner Production 39 (2013): 1-8.

Zhang, Keqi, Bruce C. Douglas, and Stephen P. Leatherman. "Global warming and coastal

erosion." Climatic change 64, no. 1-2 (2004): 41.

Zhang, Rong, and Thomas L. Delworth. "A new method for attributing climate variations over

the Atlantic Hurricane Basin's main development region." Geophysical Research

Letters 36, no. 6 (2009).

Zhao, S., Liu, S., Li, Z., & Sohl, T. L. (2010). Federal land management, carbon sequestration,

and climate change in the southeastern US: A case study with Fort

Benning. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(3), 992-997.

196