Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rsase

Evaluation of coastal vulnerability for the District of Buenaventura,

Colombia: A geospatial approach
Bryan Ernesto Gallego Perez, John Josephraj Selvaraj *
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Palmira, Facultad de Ingeniería y Administraci�
on, Departamento de Ingeniería, Grupo de Investigaci�
on en Recursos
Hidrobiol�ogicos, Cra 32 No. 12 - 00, Palmira, C�
odigo Postal, 763533, Colombia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The District of Buenaventura is in the west of Colombia and of vital importance for the country in many aspects.
Coastal vulnerability index (CVI) Apart from being a robust economic contributor to the region, and the country, because of its ports, tourists and
Sea level rise biodiversity, it is the urban nucleus with the largest population in the Colombian Pacific. It has a varied coastline
Geospatial techniques
with several types of the geomorphological elements ranging from hills with cliffs, extensive mangrove plains to
Climatic change
Colombian Pacific coast
barriers islands with beach fronts forming most of the coastline. This study applied the coastal vulnerability
index (CVI) using eight variables, three physical/hydrodynamical, three geological/geomorphological, and two
socioeconomic variables, which are as follows: Rate of Sea Level Rise, Mean Tidal Range, Significant Wave
Height, Shoreline Change Rate, Geomorphology, Regional Coastal Slope, Land Use and Coverage, Population –
coastal settlements and economic activities, respectively. The variables considered are parameters of relative
vulnerability and are evaluated using the geographic information system (GIS) and remote sensing procedures,
employing a geospatial approach. The littoral was classified into five ranges of relative vulnerability, evaluating
276 sections; 19.57% (54 km) is in the range of very high vulnerability, 19.93% (55 km) in the high vulnerability
range, 19.20% (53 km) in the moderate vulnerability range, 21.01% (58 km) in the low vulnerability range, and
20.29% (56 km) in the very low vulnerability range. These results can be used as an essential tool allowing
decision-makers to establish management measures aiming to reduce risks and for communities to adapt to
future changes in the face of the relative rise in sea level.

1. Introduction
An inherent challenge that today’s society must face is climate
change. It is widely recognised and studied since it disrupts the socio­
economic and environmental systems, in various areas, at a global level.
The phenomenon is magnified due to the increase of anthropogenic
activities in the recent past. Its variability will continue to intensify in
the coming decades, with significant repercussions, especially for
countries suffering from poverty (Comte et al., 2018; Islam et al., 2016;
Torresan et al., 2008).
A key indicator of climate change is the sea level rise (SLR), as it is
closely related to global warming. The key factors behind the contem­
porary shift in the sea level are the thermal expansion of the ocean and
the transfer of water found in terrestrial reservoirs in the form of ice
(glaciers and ice sheets). However, sea level change at the local level
may not follow the same trend as the global or regional scale, therefore,
local studies are essential to guide decision making (Church et al., 2013;
Ghoussein et al., 2018).
The coastal areas of the planet are most affected by this process.
According to the different projections, due to the SLR in this century, the
adverse impacts will continue to increase. Additionally, it is estimated
that half of the world’s population will reside less than 100 km from the
coast by the year 2030 (Ozyurt
€ and Ergin, 2009). Thus, there are sig­
nificant challenges facing coastal areas in terms of risk management,
such as the interests of the actors of the territory and the forms of
occupation of the same, the use of natural resources, the management of
areas with high population density, the protection of ecosystems, and
the SLR in response to climate change, among others (Ozyurt € et al.,
2010).
Coastal zones are dynamic and complex territories, offering ecosys­
temic goods and services of great importance for subsistence. However,
without an adequate adaptation capacity of these areas when faced with

* Corresponding author. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Palmira, Facultad de Ingeniería y Administraci�
on, Departamento de Ingeniería, Grupo de
Investigaci�
on en Recursos Hidrobiol� ogicos, Cra 32 No. 12 - 00, Palmira, C�
odigo Postal, 763533, Colombia.
E-mail address: jojselvaraj@unal.edu.co (J.J. Selvaraj).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2019.100263
Received 21 April 2019; Received in revised form 21 August 2019; Accepted 11 September 2019
Available online 19 September 2019
2352-9385/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
the increasing pressure of population growth and different climatic
events, such as floods and accelerated coastal erosion, among others,
they will be extremely vulnerable. In fact, due to their great importance,
these areas have been the subject of several studies regarding this topic
(IPCC, 2014; Kantamaneni et al., 2018).
Among one of the most widely used methods to measure coastline
vulnerability is the coastal vulnerability index (CVI) and its possible
variants. A CVI can be defined as a process or methodology, through
which it becomes feasible to combine a certain number of variables of
different categories that allow for the creation of a single indicator
providing relevant information regarding the vulnerability of the coasts
(Szlafsztein and Sterr, 2007). The application of the CVI was proposed
and pioneered for the first time by (Gornitz, 1991), and it is closely
related to the SLR potential, because it is a relative index in terms of the
vulnerability of the coast (Ojeda et al., 2009).
In some coastal areas of Colombia, such as the Pacific region, the
impact of climate change is associated with floods, marine intrusion, and
erosion. In the Buenaventura District, erosion occurs in some parts of its
coast, which has forced the population to continuously relocate. This
territory, providing enormous environmental services, in the present
state, faces the threat of abandonment governmental, making it highly
Fig. 1. Location of the study area.
2
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
vulnerable. Facing the threats and challenges of climate change is not a
simple task (INVEMAR, 2003; Posada et al., 2009; Tilley et al., 2018).
The objective of this study is to determine the degree of coastal
vulnerability through the calculation of a CVI against the SLR for the
Buenaventura area.
2. Description of the study area
The geographic coordinates of the study area correspond to the
points 4� 70 4900 N and 77� 260 2700 W, to 3� 130 130 N and 77� 320 5800 W, as
shown in Fig. 1. It includes the coastal areas of the special industrial
port, biodiversity, and ecotourism districts of Buenaventura – located in
Colombia, in the Valle del Cauca, in the central zone of the Colombian
Pacific, with an extensive geographical area of 6297 km2 (Martínez
et al., 2013). The geomorphology presents cliffs that alternate with
sandy beaches, tidal flats, barrier islands, muddy marshes, intertidal
marshes, and mangroves (Stronkhorst et al., 2018). The tide behaviour is
a mixed, semi-diurnal type since it has two high and two low tides in a
tidal day, with the periods approaching at 12:25 o’clock (Espinosa,
2010; INVEMAR, 2003).
The precipitation has a monomodal behaviour, with an annual
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

average that oscillates between 7673 mm and 6821 mm, and the average
temperature is within the range of 30 to 21 � C (Posada et al., 2009;
Viloria, 2008). Besides, the Colombian Pacific zone belongs to the
Choco �/Dari�en/Western Ecuador hotspot, which is a biogeographic re­
gion with high ecosystemic importance, due to its significant levels of
biodiversity and endangered reduction (Myers et al., 2000).
Economically, it is the main port of the Colombian Pacific and the
Regional Port Societies of Colombia. It mobilises the most significant
percentage in terms of foreign trade volume. In fact, in 2016, it was
reported that of the 24.6 million tonnes of cargo that were mobilised by
the ports of the country, 47% corresponded to Buenaventura (Vega
et al., 2019). Regarding the tourist and ecotourism vocation of the area,
the National Maritime Authority (DIMAR) reports an average of 243,915
tourist visits annually for the coastal zone of the District, from 2013 to
2016, frequenting sites such as the National Natural Park Uramba –
M�alaga Bay, La Sierpe Natural Regional Park, Juanchaco beach,
Ladrilleros beach, the La Bocana area, and Piangüita, among others
(Ospina, 2017).
The population of the area forms the most significant urban core of
the Colombian Pacific, with 432,385 inhabitants (DANE, 2005), with a
varied ethnic composition comprising of Afro-descendants, indigenous
people and mestizos, who have drastically modified the terrestrial and
marine landscape (Espinosa, 2010). Part of the population resides in
palafíticas dwellings that are exposed to low tide areas, increasing their
degree of exposure to the tidal regime. Similarly, some beaches associ­
ated with the barrier islands and mangrove swamps have gradually lost
their surface or altered their shape, partly due to marine erosion, bio­
erosion, or runoffs (Posada et al., 2009).
which were analysed. These variables correspond to the geo­
morphology, the erosive rates, and the coastal slope. And finally, the
third category is related to the socio-economic relations with the terri­
tory such as land use and coverage, population density – coastal settle­
ments and economic activities (Iglesias et al., 2010; Kunte et al., 2014).
The spatial data type refers to information from remote perception or
previous cartographic analysis and the conventional data type refers to
information that is non-spatial in nature.
3.1. Hydrodynamics variables
3.1.1. Rate of sea level rise
It is widely accepted that at higher rates of SLR, the level of
vulnerability is more significant and vice versa (Islam et al., 2016; Lo
�pez
Royo et al., 2016; Ojeda et al., 2011). The data record of the daily sea
level of the Buenaventura tide gauge (3� 53.40 N, 77� 3.70 W), was pro­
vided by the Sea Level Centre of the University of Hawaii (UHSLC).
These data have a rigorous control for research quality data (RQD)
(Caldwell et al., 2015). Although there is another nearby tide gauge in
the Juanchaco area, the data from this one was not used, because the
time lapse was not enough to estimate any trend. Initially, the years with
anomalous or atypical data were selected and extracted from the data of
the average daily height level, since they are related to the El Ni~ no
climate phenomenon (Pabo �n, 2003a, 2003b; Rangel and Montealegre,
2003). Then, the monthly and annual averages of the filtered data were
calculated, to calculate the rate of the mean sea level, utilizing a linear
regression analysis (Centro de observaciones Geodesicas, 2008; Ojeda
et al., 2011).

3. Materials and methods 3.1.2. Mean tidal range

We followed the methodological procedures published for the
Atlantic coast of the United States by the United States Geological Ser­
vice (USGS) in Thieler and Hammar-Klose (1999) study. Similarly, the
studies advanced by Kunte et al. (2014), Sankari et al. (2015) and Pra­
manik et al. (2016), concerning the coastal vulnerability in different
areas of India, were also taken into account.
The variables used in Table 1 are divided into three categories. The
first is the physical and hydrodynamic type, which integrates the vari­
ables that contribute to the erosive or flood processes in the coastal zone;
these are changes at the sea level, the average range of tides, and the
significant height of the waves. The second is associated with the forms
and composition of the coast, that is, it is composed of geological or
morphological variables; they consist of the degree of resistance to
erosion, changes in the coastline, and sensitivity to flood processes,
The calculation of this variable was developed according to the
guidelines of the Institute of Marine Sciences of Virginia of the United
States (VIMS). The mean tidal range (MTR) is obtained from the dif­
ference of the average mean high water (MHW), a record of at least 19
years, with the average of the mean low water (MLW) with the same
number of registrations (Mawdsley et al., 2015; Roberts, 2008). The data
recorded of the hourly sea level of the tide gauge of Buenaventura was
provided by the UHSLC with RQD. As with the previous variable, the
data was filtered from anomalous and atypical data. Subsequently, the
minimum and maximum daily tide data were selected, employing a
spreadsheet, which was treated until the annual average for each one
was obtained, and thus, the MTR for the Buenaventura District was
calculated.

Table 1
Variables used in the elaboration of the coastal vulnerability index.
Variables Category Data Type Source of the Data Details about the Data Period

Rate of the Sea Level Rise Physical/ Conventional Tide gauge of Buenaventura, acquired from the Average daily level of sea height. 1953–2013
Hydrodynamics University of Hawaii Sea Level Centre (UHSLC)
Mean Tidal Range Conventional Tide gauge of Buenaventura, acquired from the Hourly level of sea height 1953–2013
University of Hawaii Sea Level Centre (UHSLC)
Significant Wave Height Spatial Aviso þ (Satellite Altimetry Data) Grided (1� � 1� regular grid) 2009–2018
multimission product
Shoreline Change Rate Geology/ Spatial Landsat 5 TM & Landsat 8 OLI (Path 10 – Row 57 USGS satellite images (30 m 1986 & 2015
Geomorphology & 58) resolution)
Geomorphology Spatial INGEOMINAS & INVEMAR Geomorphology of the Pacific region 1998
1:100,000
Regional Coastal Slope Spatial Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) & Digital elevation model (DEM – 30 m 2000
Global Multi-Resolution Topography synthesis resolution) & Bathymetry (60 m
(GMRT) resolution)
Land Use and Land Cover Socioeconomics Spatial Landsat 8 OLI (Path 10 – Row 57 & 58) USGS satellite images (30 m 2015
resolution)
Population, Coastal Conventional/ National Department of Statistics (DANE), Statistical Yearbook of Buenaventura 2013, 2015 &
Settlements and Spatial Institute of Marine and Coastal Research 2012–2013 and the layer of 2018
Economic Activities (INVEMAR) & City Hall of the District of corregimientos of the district
Buenaventura

3
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
3.1.3. Mean significant wave height
The significant height of the waves is a representation of the energy
of the waves that are related to the processes of movement and transport
of coastal sediments. This energy increases with the square of the height
of the wave; meaning, it is a function of the height of the waves. At this
point, the higher the wave, the greater the vulnerability and vice versa
(Beluru Jana and Hegde Vittal, 2016; Dwarakish et al., 2009; USGS,
2000). The relationship between the height of the waves and the energy
of the waves is calculated using Equation (1):
E ¼ ð1 = 8Þρgh2 (1)
where, E ¼ energy density (Joule/m2), h ¼ height of the wave (m),
ρ ¼ density of water (Kg/m3), g ¼ acceleration of gravity.
For the study area, we used the data of significant wave height from
the information system of the National Centre for Space Studies (CNES),
which collects information from some satellites such as CFOSat,
Sentinel-3B and 3 A, Jason 2 and 3, among others, through its platform
NOTICEþ (Satellite Altimetry Data) (CNES, 2018). The data was
selected from the tropical Pacific area, with a range of nine years in the
NetCDF format. The resolution of the data grid was 1� � 1� , which was
exported and setting up for the area of interest.
3.2. Geological variables
3.2.1. Shoreline change rate
Physically, the coastline represents the boundary between the oceans
and the emerged part of the continents. This presents changing char­
acteristics largely due to erosion, accretion, the different tidal processes,
the topography, and changes in the sea level, among others. These
changes may have a natural or anthropogenic origin (Pramanik et al.,
2016; Robertson, 2003). The importance of evaluating this coastal
parameter is fundamental for the planning of future coastal management
strategies, since some development processes of entire communities
have been carried out without considering the potential costs of pro­
tection or relocation, in relation to the SLR, storms, or floods (Thieler
and Hammar-Klose, 1999).
For the calculation of this variable, satellite images of the years 1986
Landsat 5 (TM) and 2015 Landsat 8 (OLI) were used, as shown in
Table 2. The selection of images was carried out according to two
important criteria, the level of the tide and the availability of images
with low cloudiness over the area of interest. It must be considered, that
the extraction of the precise position of the coastline in the satellite
image depends on the level of tidal height, at the moment of capture of
the scene, to achieve a comparison of changes in the littoral, according
to both images at similar tidal levels (Yu et al., 2011). This procedure is
facilitated by Equation (2), which has the following form:
hmax þ hmin hmax hmin πΔt
h¼ � cos (2)
2 2 ΔT
where, h ¼ height of the tide at the time of image acquisition,
hmax ¼ height level of high tide, hmin ¼ height level of low tide,
ΔT ¼ time interval between high and low tide, and Δt ¼ time interval
from the previous event, either high or low tide, and the image acqui­
sition time. The formula can be estimated using the negative symbol to
Table 2
Image date and tidal conditions during image acquisition.
Images Path-Row Date Acquired Acquisition Time
Landsat 5 TM Path 10–Row 57 23/03/1986 14:51
Path 10–Row 58 23/03/1986 14:51
Landsat 8 OLI Path 10–Row 57 11/06/2015 15:24
Path 10–Row 58 11/06/2015 15:24
4
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
correct the final value, if necessary (Gonçalves et al., 2015).
Subsequently, the necessary atmospheric, radiometric, and geo­
metric corrections were made in the images to obtain a product suitable
for the procedure (ChenthamilSelvan et al., 2014; El-Asmar and
Hereher, 2011; Go �mez et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2013; Nassar et al., 2018).
Then, Modification of normalized difference water index (MNDWI) was
applied to clearly differentiate the boundary between water and soil (Xu,
2006), where the necessary input is obtained to perform the digitaliza­
tion of the coastline, through the tool Digital Shoreline Analysis System
(DSAS) of the USGS (Thieler et al., 2017). Then, there is the statistical
parameter endpoint rate (EPR), which serves to determine and compare
the degree of recoil (erosion) or advance (accretion) of the coastline in
the years of study (Baral et al., 2018).
3.2.2. Geomorphology
The morphological configuration of the coastal littoral plays an
essential role in response to the effect of SLR on any coastal vulnerability
analysis. Mainly, because the coastal relief forms can have different
degrees of relative resistance to this increase since they depend as much
on their shape and structure as on their conformation (Thieler and
Hammar-Klose, 2000, 1999). In effect, this variable reveals the relative
erodability of the different types of coastal geoforms, for example,
beaches, cliffs, among others (L� opez Royo et al., 2016). Consequently,
the social structure of man takes advantage of these naturally created
spaces and benefits from his environmental offer, but he must confront
his possible threats (Florez, 2003; Robertson, 2003).
For the coast of Buenaventura, we used the geomorphology database
of governmental organisations that conducted studies on this subject.
The first was the cartography of the Colombian Institute of Geology and
Mining (INGEOMINAS) published in Gonzales et al. (1998), the second
was cartography and WMS database of the Marine and Coastal Research
Institute “Jos�e Benito Vives De Andr� eis” (INVEMAR) published in
Posada et al. (2009). These databases were geometrically corrected and
subjected to a digitization process.
3.2.3. Regional coastal slope
Slopes express changes or variations in the topographic level of a
zone. This variable is of high relevance in coastal vulnerability studies
since through it; it is feasible to determine how exposed a coastal area is
to a flood, as well as the possible speed with which the coastline can be
retracted. A consensus of the authors who have discussed the issue is
that the lower the degree of slope is the extension of the floodplain,
while the slopes with more inclination experience less flooding, and
therefore less erosive power (Islam et al., 2015; Pendleton et al., 2010).
For the Buenaventura District, we used the guidelines proposed by
Pendleton et al. (2010) and by Islam et al. (2016). The regional coastal
slope was calculated from a grid composed of topographic elevations
and bathymetric levels, evaluated in circular sections of a 1-km radius
on the coastline. We worked with data from two sources, the first, a
digital elevation model (DEM) of the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission
(SRTM) with a resolution of 30 m of pixel for the mainland and the
second, the levels of bathymetry for the submerged section with the data
coming from the Global Multi-Resolution Topography synthesis
(GMRT), with a resolution of 60 m of pixel. Finally, the average slopes of
each circular section were calculated with the zonal statistical tool
Tide Gauge Levels Estimate h(m)
Tide High Tide Low
Time - h (m) Time - h (m)
20:00–3.36 13:00–0.78 1.2
20:00–3.36 13:00–0.78 1.2
11:19–4.03 17:17–0.53 1.3
11:19–4.03 17:17–0.53 1.3
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

(Islam et al., 2016).
3.3. Socioeconomics variables
3.3.1. Land use and land cover
One of the most critical natural resources that has gained importance
in recent decades is the land. This incorporates the soil matrix, water
management and supporting the associated flora and fauna, making it
fundamental to terrestrial ecosystems (Dwarakish, 2008). Therefore, in
the context of the assessment of coastal vulnerability, the different ef­
fects of different scenarios against the SLR related to the use and
coverage of the territory should be considered. Hence, the possible so­
cioeconomic impacts can be measured through the monetary costs due
to the loss of coastal resources (LU/LC) due to flooding and its conse­
quences, such as setbacks or loss of beaches, among others (Faour et al.,
2013).
An LU/LC map was developed from a Landsat 8 OLI mosaic images
(Path 10 – Row 57 and 58). The satellite images were subjected to a
series of processes, such as atmospheric and geometric corrections
(ChenthamilSelvan et al., 2014; El-Asmar and Hereher, 2011; G� omez
et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2013; Nassar et al., 2018), necessary to obtain a
quality product to then carry out a supervised classification process of 6
classes of land use and coverage (Suhura et al., 2018). To evaluate the
coastal vulnerability for the LU/LC variable, due to its socioeconomic
importance, the classes were grouped into particular characteristics
according to the land use and land cover present for the purpose of
assigning a greater or lesser value that is shown in Table 3 (Mahapatra
et al., 2015, Mani Murali et al., 2013; Sankari et al., 2015; Suhura et al.,
2018).
3.3.2. Population, coastal settlements and economic activities
A significant factor in socioeconomic matters is the population, as it
dramatically influences the vulnerability of a region to coastal threats. It
can fulfil two roles; one is related to the negative pressure exerted by the
inhabitants on the coast, since areas with high population density and
much tourist movement rates frequently cause higher rates of erosion.
The other is related to the capacity and preparation of the communities
facing the different natural hazards, such as the SLR, and therefore, it is
essential to respond and act to reduce vulnerability (Behera et al., 2019;
Kunte et al., 2014).
For the use of this variable, we used part of the guidelines presented
by (Beluru Jana and Hegde Vittal, 2016; Kunte et al., 2014; Mani Murali
et al., 2013; Mussi et al., 2011), where the quantity of population was
used as a parameter for the evaluation of coastal vulnerability. For the
Buenaventura District, this variable was divided into two phases, in the
first phase, the database from the DANE and the Statistical Yearbook of
the Buenaventura district were crossed to obtain the population density
in the villages of the region. In the second phase, the platforms of Google
Earth and Bing maps were used, where the coastal settlements that were
less than 10 km from the coast were located, as well as information on
the economic activities associated with the populations, settled on the
coast of Buenaventura, were obtained from the INVEMAR of two local
studies published by the (INVEMAR, 2015; Ricaurte-Villota et al., 2018).
From there, each coastal settlement was assigned with a value for its
presence or absence of coastal activities, and later these allocations were
averaged.
3.4. Vulnerability ranges
For the most part, these variables, due to their dynamic nature,
require a large amount of information from different sources to be
processed and analysed later. The qualifications of the variables were
developed through an allocation of vulnerability ranges, as shown in
Table 3, in which the values were determined with an ordinal scale from
one to five, classified into five levels of vulnerability that included very
low, low, intermediate, high and very high, respectively (Ojeda et al.,
2009; Thieler and Hammar-Klose, 1999).
The vulnerability classification criteria for the rate of increase of the
mean sea level were taken from the global trend data of the relative sea
level of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
(NOAA, 2018). For the mean tidal range we used the study developed by
the USGS, published in (Thieler and Hammar-Klose, 1999), and for the
significant wave height, the data of the tropical Pacific in the informa­
tion published by the information system of the National Centre for
Space Studies (CNES), through its platform AVISOþ (CNES, 2018), was
obtained. For the variable of shoreline change rate, it was divided into
five classes, the first two corresponded to the accretion process with
positive values, the last three corresponded to the erosion process with
negative values, respectively. With respect to the variable geo­
morphology, because the particular morphological characteristics of the
Pacific area are specific, we made use of the Colombian bibliography
that will provide sufficient information to indicate the classification
criteria (Gonzales et al., 1998; IDEAM, 2000; Martinez Ardila et al.,
2003; Posada et al., 2009; Stronkhorst et al., 2018).
The regional coastal slope variable was classified according to the
total range of results through the natural breaks classification method
(Jenks). The variable LU/LC was classified according to the guidelines
presented in (Mahapatra et al., 2015; Mani Murali et al., 2013; Sankari
et al., 2015). The variable of the population, has two components; the
population density, which was classified using the Jenks method, and
the coastal settlements and economic activities, where their averaged
values are organised into five ranges, through the same process
(Table 3). To qualify the variable, the rating values of the relative
vulnerability range assigned to both components are averaged to obtain

Table 3
Relative vulnerability ranking assigned for all variables.
Variables Relative Vulnerability Rank

Very Low (1) Low (2) Moderate (3) High (4) Very High (5)

Rate of Sea Level Rise (mm/yr) <0 0 to 3 3 to 6 6 to 9 >9

Mean Tidal Range (m) >6 4 to 6 2 to 4 1 to 2 <1.0
Significant Wave Height (m) 0.38 to 0.75 0.76 to 1.49 1.50 to 2.24 2.25 to 2.99 3.0 to 3.74
Shoreline Change Rate (m/yr) 16.59 to 7.22 7.21 to 0.01 0.0 to 11.53 11.54 to 20.90 20.91 to
30.29
Geomorphology Marine Hills, mountains Hills, mountains and hills/ Mangrove plain/Urban Beaches/
terrace with and hills with cliffs Alluvial valley (marine Barrera Islands
cliff fluvial plain)
Regional Coastal Slope (%) 17.22 to 8 7.99 to 4.07 4.06 to 2.4 2.4 to 1.69 1.68 to 0.01
Land Use and Coverage – – Forests and general Mangrove forests/Flooded natural grassland- Urban/
vegetation coastal barriers/Forests and general vegetation Beaches
þ sensitive ecological regions
Population (habitant/km2), Coastal 2.82 to 5.61 5.62 to 13.07 13.08 to 35.46 35.47 to 74.14 74.15 to
Settlements, and Economic 12,305.97
Activities <0.27 0.27 to 0.29 0.30 to 0.43 0.44 to 0.57 0.58 to 1

5
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
the result of the variable.
3.5. Calculation of coastal vulnerability index (CVI)
The study area was divided into 276 sections, each 1 km long, along
the coast of the Buenaventura District. For each section and each vari­
able, the relative vulnerability was calculated according to Table 3. The
CVI is calculated for each of the sections using Equation (3). It is the
square root the product of the relative vulnerability ranking of the
variables, divided by the total number of variables (Gornitz, 1991).
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
a*b*c*d*e*f *g*h
CVI ¼
8
where, a ¼ rate of sea level rise, b ¼ mean tidal range, c ¼ significant
wave height, d ¼ shoreline change rate, e ¼ geomorphology, f ¼ regional
coastal slope, g ¼ land use and land cover, h ¼ population-coastal set­
tlements and economic activities.
Table 4 shows an example of the vulnerability values of each of the
variables and the CVI calculated. This table intended to shows the first
five of the 276 sections.
4. Results
4.1. Rate of sea level rise (SLR)
The results of the treatment of the data from the tide gauge of the
Buenaventura District study area shows that the relative sea level pre­
sents a tendency to gradually increase at a rate of 2.2 mm annually
(�0.83 mm/year), with a degree of confidence of 95%, between the
years 1953–2013. This is equivalent to an increase in the sea level of
approximately 0.13 m, in the study period of 60 years. Fig. 2 shows the
range of vulnerability in which the rate of increase of the mean sea level
was spatialised for the study area, which integrates all the coastal vil­
lages including the coastal urban zone (UZ), with a low score, according
to the classification of Table 3.
The results obtained from the relative SRL rate, for the study area,
are within the ranges reported by the Intergovernmental Panel for
Climate Change (IPCC), which shows that between 1901 and 2010 it was
likely that the global average rate of relative sea level will range from
1.5 to 1.9 mm annually, with an increase in the sea level between 0.17
and 0.21 m (Aquino da Silva et al., 2019; Church et al., 2013). Similarly,
it is confirmed from the studies carried out at the local level, where a SLR
rate was reported within a range of 1.2–2.0 mm annually, in 2003, and a
rate of 2.2 mm annually, in 2017 (Giraldo et al., 2017; Rangel and
Montealegre, 2003). However, another local study calculated the rate of
relative increase in sea level as being 5.3 mm yearly, from the period
1961 to 1990 (Pab� on, 2003b), making it higher than that of present
study results.
4.2. Mean tidal range
The results of the treatment of the data from the tide gauge of the
study area of the Buenaventura District show, an MHW of 3.67 m and an
MLW of 0.59 m, with which we obtained an MTR of 3.1 m. Fig. 3 shows
the range of vulnerability in which the MTR was spatialised, and this
was classified as moderate, according to the classification in Table 3, for
Table 4
Calculated CVI.
Sections a b c d e f
1 2 3 2 2 5
2 2 3 2 3 5
3 2 3 2 1 5
4 2 3 2 3 5
5 2 3 2 1 5
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
the study area that integrates all the coastal villages, including the
coastal UZ.
The values obtained for MHW, MLW, and MTR are related, and are in
line with what was reported in regional entities, in 2009, by the Ministry
of Environment and published by IDEAM in 2012 (Cadena, 2012; Min­
isterio De Ambiente Vivienda Y Desarrollo Territorial, 2009). In the area
of coastal vulnerability, higher MTR results in higher vulnerability
(Beluru Jana and Hegde Vittal, 2016; Di Paola et al., 2011; Diez et al.,
2007; E. Doukakis, 2005; Gornitz, 1991), On the other hand, for other
authors, coastal areas with low MTR values are more vulnerability
(Lo�pez Royo et al., 2016; Ojeda et al., 2009; Pendleton et al., 2005; Tano
et al., 2016).
(3)
4.3. Significant wave height
The treatment of spatial data from the AVISO þ platform for the
tropical Pacific area showed that the values of significant wave height
for the coastline of the Buenaventura District ranges between 1.11 m and
1.25 m, as shown in Fig. 4. The vulnerability range for the whole area
was classified as low, according to the global classification provided by
the total data set of the tropical Pacific, shown in Table 3, for all coastal
villages including the coastal UZ. The values obtained for the coast of the
Buenaventura District are related, and are within the range reported in
two local studies. In the first, the significant wave height is in the order
of approximately 1 m and in the second, it is in a range from 0.7 to 1.4 m
in height (Portilla-Yandún et al., 2013; Thomas et al., 2014).
4.4. Shoreline change rate
The estimates of the exchange rate of the coastal line obtained from
the statistical parameter of the endpoint rate (EPR), indicate that of the
total sections evaluated, 1.1% belongs to a very high vulnerability
range, 9.1% to high vulnerability, 61.6% to intermediate vulnerability,
24.6% to low vulnerability, and 3.6% to very low vulnerability. Ac­
cording to Fig. 5, the coastal villages that present significant erosion
rates correspond to villages III, IV, VI, of UZs VII, XIV, V, X, XI, and XVI.
However, intermediate coastal erosion occurs in all villages of the study
area. On the other hand, in a smaller proportion, the accretion rates
correspond to villages III, IV, and VI of UZs VII, V, X, XI, XVI, and XV.
The results of the zones of the littoral that present some degree of
erosion in the present work, mostly corresponding to the zones with the
presence of erosion in the study carried out by INVEMAR in 2009.
Additionally, the ranges of the EPR parameter found in this study, are
within the scope of erosion-accretion, published in a local survey in the
Buenaventura District by INVEMAR in 2016 (INVEMAR, 2016; Posada
et al., 2009).
4.5. Geomorphology
Of all the sections evaluated in the study area, 38.41% corresponds
to a very high vulnerability range, 27.9% to a high vulnerability range,
7.61% to a moderate vulnerability range, 19.20% to a low vulnerability
range, and 6.88% to a very low vulnerability range. In Fig. 6, it is
observed that in all the villages, including the UZ, there are geomor­
phological elements in the high and very high vulnerability ranges. On
the contrary, villages II, III, IV, and VI, were observed to have low and
very low vulnerability ranges. A particular aspect that can be observed is
the present trend from the UZ to south of the study area, in village XV, of
the majority presence of barrier islands in the area, contrasting with only
one, north of M� alaga bay, in village III. Another important aspect is the
g h CVI marked presence of cliffs on the coast of townships IV and VI, and in
5 5 2 27.39 parts of II and III. The results evaluated, for this variable of the study, are
4 4 2 26.83 related to the characteristics mentioned in the local studies carried out
5 5 2 19.36 by (Martinez et al., 2003; Robertson, 2003), with regards to the
3 4 3 28.46 geomorphological barrier islands and their relative vulnerability, be­
5 5 2 19.36
sides the alterations of different morphodynamic zones in the study site.
6
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 2. Rate of sea level rise.

7
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 3. Mean tidal range.

8
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 4. Significant wave height.

9
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 5. Shoreline change rate.

10
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 6. Geomorphology.

11
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
4.6. Regional coastal slope
Of the total sections evaluated in the study area, 25% are related to a
very high vulnerability range, 18.48% to a high vulnerability range,
30.07% to a moderate vulnerability range, 18.48% to a low vulnerability
range, and 7.97% to a very low vulnerability range. As highlighted in
Fig. 7, the villages that present mild slopes between 0.01 and 2.39% are,
III, UZs VII, XIV, V, X, XI, XVI, and XV. On the contrary, the villages that
present outstanding slopes from 4.07 to 17.22% are III, IV & VI, XI, and
XVI. Additionally, it stands that all the villages, including the UZs,
present slopes of average grade, ranging from 2.4 to 7.99%. The results
found in this variable have not been contrasted with other local studies
that report regional coastal slope ranges. However, the detailed bibli­
ography mentions the slope criteria according to what is found in these
results that relate to smooth bathymetric profiles, south of the UZ, and
considerable changes in relief in villages IV and VI, with some excep­
tions (Gonzales et al., 1998; Posada et al., 2009).
4.7. Land use and land cover
Of the total sections of the study area, 29.35% belong to a very high
vulnerability range, 58.70% to a high vulnerability range, and 11.96%
to a moderate vulnerability range. As shown in Fig. 8, the villages,
including UZ, presenting high and very high vulnerability ranges are III
and IV, in UZs VI, V, XI, XVI, and XV. On the other hand, the villages that
present sections of moderate vulnerability are IV and VI in UZs II and
XVI. The results obtained in this variable correspond with some of the
cases presented in a local study published in (OSSO and LA MINGA,
2000).
4.8. Population, coastal settlements and economic activities
Of the total number of sections evaluated in the study area, the high
and very high vulnerability ranges contribute to 3.99%, 3.62% for the
intermediate vulnerability range, 58.33% for the low vulnerability
range, and 34.06% for the very low vulnerability range. As shown in
Fig. 9, the villages that have a high, very high, and intermediate popu­
lation densities, including the UZ are, V, VII, VII, and XIV. Those with
low and very low population densities are II, III, IV and VI, X, XI, XII, XV,
XVI, respectively. Furthermore, the villages that have the highest
number of coastal settlements are IV, VI, XI, and XV with values of 13,
10, and 9, respectively. Those with the lowest number of coastal set­
tlements are III, V, XVI, X, and XII, with values of 6, 5, 4, 4 and 1,
respectively. It is highlighted that the villages with the most significant
number of economic activities, such as tourism, fishing, agriculture,
port, commerce, and industry, are located north of the District, including
the UZ; they are IV, VI, and III. To the south of the District economic
activities of sustenance – fishing and agriculture – can be fundamentally
observed; they are observed on a smaller scale in villages VII, XIV, V, X,
XI, XII, XVI, and XV.
4.9. Coastal vulnerability index (CVI)
For the Buenaventura District, the results indicate that the CVI varies
from 4.24 to 54.77, and this range is divided into the 20th, 40th, 60th,
and 80th percentiles, corresponding to values of 9.80, 16.43, 21.21,
26.83, respectively. Of the 276 sections evaluated along the coast,
19.57% (54 km) are in a very high vulnerability range, 19.93% (55 km)
in the high vulnerability range, 19.20% (53 km) in the moderate
vulnerability range, 21.01% (58 km) in the low vulnerability range, and
20.29% (56 km) in the very low vulnerability range. The zones that have
lower values of vulnerability, with some exceptions, as shown in Fig. 10,
are the Bahía M� alaga between the Southeast area of village III, and
almost a complete proportion of villages IV and VI. The Bay of Buena­
ventura is nuanced by the fact that the southern zone of village II has low
vulnerability values. On the contrary, villages VII, XIV, and V, included
12
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
the UZ of the island of Cascajal, were observed with very high, high, and
intermediate vulnerability values, respectively. This trend extends to the
south in villages XII and XVI, to where there is a presence of low and
intermediate values of vulnerability, respectively, and then continues in
village XV.
5. Discussion
The relative vulnerability of the Buenaventura District in the studied
sections generally present a differentiated behaviour in three zones,
where there is greater vulnerability in the northern zone – due to the
presence of lower resistance geomorphology – along with relatively
smooth slopes, significant erosion rates – and where the essential eco­
nomic activities of the region are situated. In the intermediate district,
which is located between Bahía Ma �laga and the Bay of Buenaventura,
due to its robust geomorphological characteristics – steep slopes,
considerable erosion, protected areas with high vegetation coverage,
and low population density – are conferred a lower degree of relative
vulnerability. On the other hand, the southern zone, including the UZ of
the District, presents a different behaviour, but primarily, a tending
towards high relative vulnerability, due to the interaction of the
geomorphological elements of lower resistance, smooth slopes, higher
population density, and economic activities.
A significant aspect is that the observed trend of the relative increase
in the mean sea level for the study area is already within the range of the
sea level rise projections, proposed by the IPCC for 2100, in the emission
scenarios. Of greenhouse gases, A1Bc and A1Tc are present at values of
2.1–6 mm annually and 1.7–4.7 mm annually, respectively (Lo �pez Royo
et al., 2016); it is particularly neuralgic, because if this trend continues,
it is likely that the adverse effects will intensify and have considerable
repercussions on the population. This is because, there are erosive
processes on the coast, which affect, and will continue to alter, the
different socio-economic and ecosystemic activities that take place at
the study site.
Some natural processes that produce changes in the coastal zone
(hydrodynamic pressures), their continuous transformations (morpho­
dynamic responses) together with direct human impacts on the coast
such as urbanization, population growth, sediment control structures,
modification of the fluvial regulation and others, are configured as the
main forces that shape coastal vulnerability. This vulnerability is
established from a spatial concept since it allows determining sites and
communities susceptible to coastal threats such as SLR, coastal storms,
among others, that affect physical and socioeconomic systems (Bev­
acqua et al., 2018; Sa �nchez-Arcilla et al., 2016).
Coastal communities are complex systems subject to various physical
and socioeconomic pressures that are increased by the interrelations
present in them. They are of interest for the management of territories in
terms of adaptation because when natural processes are threatening for
infrastructure or human activities, these become an environmental
problem. In this way, the determination of coastal vulnerability can be
considered as a fundamental tool for understanding the magnitude of
changes in the coast and the prevention of possible socioeconomic,
cultural and environmental impacts (Kantamaneni et al., 2019). In this
sense, taking into account coastal vulnerability for coastal planning is
essential, since it allows local governments to establish a basis for the
development of adequate plans and effective strategies for adapting to
changes, as well as an option for prevention against threats and prepare
for the mitigation of (Abdullah et al., 2019; Stafford and Renaud, 2019).
This is the first local study of coastal vulnerability of this type for the
Buenaventura District. Apart from establishing an initial diagnosis of
coastal sensitivity, it opens up a range of options to be evaluated against
the possible threats associated with climate change. One of the primary
reasons for advancing this type of work is the premise that the global
average level of the sea will continue to rise in the future, in response to
the global climate alterations, which will be seen in low-lying coastal
areas — reflected in phenomena such as increased erosion rates,
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 7. Regional coastal slope.

13
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 8. Land use and land cover.

14
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 9. Population, coastal settlements and economic activities.

15
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

Fig. 10. Coastal vulnerability index (CVI) of Buenaventura district.

16
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
increased flooding, brackish water intrusion into groundwater, as well
as a decrease in marshy and mangrove surface areas (Maulud et al.,
2018; Nicholls and Cazenave, 2010). Therefore, it is significant to
analyse the current conditions of vulnerability, depending on where the
coastline of the study is located. It is important to note that Colombia is
one of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean with a signifi­
cant coastal population, reported for the year 2000, and the Colombian
Pacific area, especially the Buenaventura District, highly contributes to
this statistic (Neumann et al., 2015).
It is emphasised that this study does not calculate the probability of
the occurrence of events within the classical analysis of risks in the face
of possible climatic phenomena, for example, floods, tidal waves, tsu­
namis, among others, or the spatialization of the areas specifically
affected by these phenomena. With this index, it is intended to assess the
respective sensitivity, the degree of exposure, and the ability to adapt to
a future increase in the relative mean sea level, using a conglomerate of
physical, geological and socioeconomic variables. Hence, the visual
representation of the results of the variables are associated with coastal
sections, each responding to particular characteristics of the said areas
(Ojeda et al., 2009). That is, each zone that has been evaluated, has a
specific relative vulnerability determined by various factors that
compose it, which, in turn, primarily depends on the availability of in­
formation (Brodie et al., 2015).
6. Conclusion
The eight variables of relative vulnerability used in this study and the
spatial analytical methods allowed for a clearer vision of the degree of
susceptibility, involving the socioeconomic and natural systems of the
Buenaventura District. The CVI for the District is a valuable input since it
helps make visible the coastal vulnerability. This is of vital importance
for the country in many aspects, since it contains the largest urban nu­
cleus population in the Colombian Pacific, apart from making a sub­
stantial economic contribution to the region, and the country, due to its
ports, tourists and biodiversity. It stands out that this index, due to its
flexibility, is applicable to sites with a limited amount of information or
resources. In this sense, the contribution in the qualitative matter could
be useful in the prioritisation of problems related to the relative increase
in the sea level in the area.
Through this study, stakeholders and decision-makers can learn
about the particular conditions of each coastal area evaluated and
formulate guidelines, policies, plans or projects that focus their efforts
on the most vulnerable sites, in favour of reducing risks and adapting
coastal communities to future changes. Furthermore, this index, due to
its versatile nature, can be applied later to be re-evaluated, considering
the new dynamics or changes of the variables present in the territory,
allowing for its comparison with this initial diagnosis. Moreover, even
this research can serve as a model for relevant regional and national
institutions and organisations, extended to other coastal regions.
As far as possible, the territorial entities should join efforts to install
and continuously monitor tide gauges in the coastal areas, in addition to
carrying out altimetric information surveys of better resolution for the
entire Pacific, in order to obtain key information to carry out local in­
vestigations with more precision to study the next changes in the face of
a SLR.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical statement
We are corresponding author of the paper titled “Evaluation of
Coastal Vulnerability for the District of Buenaventura, Colombia: A
Geospatial Approach”. We declare that all ethical practices have been
followed in relation to the development, writing, and publication of the
17
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
article.
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the national and foreign territorial entities, who,
with their data, work and efforts, allowed this investigation to be
concluded in the best way possible. These bodies are the USGS, CNES,
IDEAM, INVEMAR, DIMAR, the Secretariat of Tourism of Buenaventura,
and the Universidad Nacional de Colombia. We wish to acknowledge the
Universidad Nacional de Colombia for funding through HERMES 37712.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rsase.2019.100263.
References
Abdullah, A.Y.M., Masrur, A., Gani Adnan, M.S., Al Baky, M.A., Hassan, Q.K., Dewan, A.,
2019. Spatio-temporal patterns of land use/land cover change in the heterogeneous
coastal region of Bangladesh between 1990 and 2017. Remote Sens. 11. https://doi.
org/10.3390/rs11070790.
Aquino da Silva, A.G., Stattegger, K., Vital, H., Schwarzer, K., 2019. Coastline change and
offshore suspended sediment dynamics in a naturally developing delta (Parnaíba
Delta, NE Brazil). Mar. Geol. 410, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.20
18.12.013.
Baral, R., Pradhan, S., Samal, R.N., Mishra, S.K., 2018. Shoreline change analysis at
chilika lagoon coast, India using digital shoreline analysis system. J. Indian Soc.
Remote Sens. 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-018-0818-7.
Behera, R., Kar, A., Das, M.R., Panda, P.P., 2019. GIS-based vulnerability mapping of the
coastal stretch from Puri to Konark in Odisha using analytical hierarchy process. Nat.
Hazards. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-03566-0.
Beluru Jana, A., Hegde Vittal, A., 2016. GIS based approach for vulnerability assessment
of the Karnataka coast, India. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2016 https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/
5642523.
Bevacqua, A., Yu, D., Zhang, Y., 2018. Coastal vulnerability: evolving concepts in
understanding vulnerable people and places. Environ. Sci. Policy 82, 19–29. https
://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.01.006.
Brodie, K., Collier, Z.A., Rosati, J.D., Dunkin, L.M., Wamsley, T.V., Raff, D., 2015.
Guidance for developing coastal vulnerability metrics. J. Coast. Res. 316,
1521–1530. https://doi.org/10.2112/jcoastres-d-14-00015.1.
Cadena, M., 2012. Nivel del Mar Y R�egimen de Marea en LAS Estaciones Mareogr� aficas
de Colombia. IDEAM. Bogot� a DC.
Caldwell, P.C., Merrifield, M.A., Thompson, P.R., 2015. Sea Level Measured by Tide
Gauges from Global Oceans — the Joint Archive for Sea Level Holdings (NCEI
Accession 0019568). Version 5.5. NOAA National Centers for Environmental
Information, Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7289/V5V40S7W.
Centro de observaciones Geodesicas, 2008. Marea Observada en Alicante. Espa~ na,
Alicante.
ChenthamilSelvan, S., Kankara, R.S., Rajan, B., 2014. Assessment of shoreline changes
along Karnataka coast, India using GIS & Remote sensing techniques. Indian J. Geo-
Marine Sci. 43, 1286–1291.
Church, J.A., Clark, P.U., Cazenave, A., Gregory, J.M., Jevrejeva, S., Levermann, A.,
Merrifield, M.A., Milne, G.A., Nerem, R.S., Nunn, P.D., Payne, A.J., Pfeffer, W.T.,
Stammer, D., Unnikrishnan, A.S., 2013. sea level change. In: Stocker, T.F., Qin, D.,
Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S.K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., V.B., P.M.M.
(Eds.), Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working
Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York,
NY, USA, p. 1535. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001516.
CNES, 2018. MSWH/MWind: avisoþ [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.aviso.altim
etry.fr/en/data/products/windwave-products/mswhmwind.html. accessed 9.8.18.
Comte, A., Pendleton, L.H., Bailly, D., Quill�erou, E., 2018. Conceptual advances on global
scale assessments of vulnerability: informing investments for coastal populations at
risk of climate change. Mar. Policy 99, 391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2018.10.038.
DANE, 2005. Estimaci� on y Proyecci�on de poblaci�on nacional, departamental y municipal
por �area 2005-2020. Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia.
Di Paola, G., Iglesias, J., Rodríguez, G., Benassai, G., Aucelli, P., Pappone, G., 2011.
Estimating coastal vulnerability in a meso-tidal beach by means of quantitative and
semi-quantitative methodologies. J. Coast. Res. 61, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.2112/S
I61-001.1.
Diez, P.G., Perillo, G.M.E., Piccolo, M.C., 2007. Vulnerability to sea-level rise on the coast
of the buenos aires province. J. Coast. Res. 231, 119–126. https://doi.org/10.2112/
04-0205.1.
Doukakis, E., 2005. Coastal vulnerability and risk parameters. Water 3–7.
Dwarakish, G.S., 2008. Integrated coastal zone management plan for Udupi coast using
remote sensing, geographical information system and global position system.
J. Appl. Remote Sens. 2, 023515. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.2919101.
Dwarakish, G.S., Vinay, S.A., Natesan, U., Asano, T., Kakinuma, T., Venkataramana, K.,
Pai, B.J., Babita, M.K., 2009. Coastal vulnerability assessment of the future sea level
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263

rise in Udupi coastal zone of Karnataka state, west coast of India. Ocean Coast Martinez, J., Gonz� alez, J., Pilkey, O., William, N., 2003. Evoluci� on y consideraciones
Manag. 52, 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2009.07.007. geoambientales de las islas barrera en el Pacífico central de Colombia. In: El Mundo
El-Asmar, H.M., Hereher, M.E., 2011. Change detection of the coastal zone east of the Marino de Colombia: Investigaci� on y Desarrollo de Territorios Olvidados,
Nile Delta using remote sensing. Environ. Earth Sci. 62, 769–777. https://doi. pp. 97–109.
org/10.1007/s12665-010-0564-9. Martínez, A., García, H., Ramírez, C., Ramírez, D., 2013. HACIA UN DESARROLLO
Espinosa, L.F., 2010. Informe Nacional sobre el Estado del Ambiente Marino en los Países INTEGRAL DE LA CIUDAD DE BUENAVENTURA Y SU AREA � DE INFLUENCIA.
del Pacífico Sudeste. Caso Colombia. INVEMAR, INVEMAR, CPPS, Santa Marta. FEDESARROLLO-CERAC, Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia.
Faour, G., Fayad, A., Mhawej, M., 2013. GIS-based approach to the assessment of coastal Maulud, K.N.A., Mohd, F., Mohtar, W.H.M.W., Jaafar, O., Benson, Y.A., 2018. Impact of
vulnerability to sea level rise: case study on the eastern mediterranean. J. Surv. sea level rise on the coastal ecosystem. In: Science and Communication for
Mapp. Eng. 1, 41–48. Sustainability. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, pp. 173–185.
Florez, A., 2003. Elementos de Geomorfología litoral. In: El Mundo Marino de Colombia: Mawdsley, R.J., Haigh, I.D., Wells, N.C., 2015. Global secular changes in different tidal
Investigaci�on y Desarrollo de Territorios Olvidados. Universidad Nacional de high water, low water and range levels. Earth’s Futur 3, 66–81. https://doi.org/10
Colombia. Red de Estudios del Mundo Marino (REMAR). Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia, .1002/2014EF000282.Abstract.
pp. 95–96. Ministerio De Ambiente Vivienda Y Desarrollo Territorial, 2009. Resoluci� on número
Ghoussein, Y., Mhawej, M., Jaffal, A., Fadel, A., El Hourany, R., Faour, G., 2018. 1455 27 de Julio de 2009. Colombia.
Vulnerability assessment of the South-Lebanese coast: a GIS-based approach. Ocean Mussi, C.S., Sperb, R.M., Menezes, J.T. De, 2011. Coastal Sensibility and Risk Evaluation
Coast Manag. 158, 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.03.028. to Sea Level Rise : a Study Case in Santa Catarina Island. Brazil 1117–1128.
Giraldo, X.R., Fonseca, Andr� es, Zawady, Julio, Romero, D., Zamora, A.P., Salcedo, K., Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Fonseca, G.A.B. da, Kent, J., 2000.
Laserna, Mariana Rojas, Giovanni, Laura Camila, Pab� on Restrepo, Moreno Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853–858. https://doi.
Josefina, Cruz, S� anchez Cuervo Santiago, U., Magda, Constanza Buitrago Silvana, G. org/10.1038/35002501.
V., 2017. Plan de Gesti� on del Cambio Clim� atico Para LOS Puertos Marítimos de Nassar, K., Mahmod, W.E., Fath, H., Masria, A., Nadaoka, K., Negm, A., 2018. Shoreline
Colombia. MinAmbiente, Invemar. MinTransporte Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia. change detection using DSAS technique: case of North Sinai coast, Egypt. Mar.
G�omez, C., Wulder, M.A., Dawson, A.G., Green, D.R., 2014. Shoreline change and coastal Georesour. Geotechnol. 0, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2018.144891
vulnerability characterization with Landsat imagery: a case study in the Outer 2.
Hebrides. Scotland. Scottish Geogr. J. 130, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/1470 Neumann, B., Vafeidis, A.T., Zimmermann, J., Nicholls, R.J., 2015. Future coastal
2541.2014.923579. population growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding - a global
Gonzales, J.L., Marin, L.C., Matinez, J.O., Carvajal, J.H., 1998. Geomorfología y Aspectos assessment. PLoS One 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118571.
Erosivos del Litoral Pacifico Colombiano, first ed. Ingeominas. INGEOMINAS, Nicholls, R.J., Cazenave, A., 2010. Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones. Science
Bogot� a, Colombia. 80, 1517–1520, 328. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185782.
Gonçalves, G., Duro, N., Sousa, E., Figueiredo, I., 2015. Automatic extraction of tide- NOAA, 2018. sea level trends - tides & currents [WWW Document]. Sea Lev. Trends.
coordinated shoreline using open source software and Landsat imagery. Int. Arch. URL. https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/. accessed 9.2.18.
Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. - ISPRS Arch. 40, 953–957. https://doi.org Ojeda, J., Alvarez,
� J., Cajaraville, D., Fraile, P., 2009. El uso de las TIG para el c�alculo del
/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-7-W3-953-2015. indice de vulnerabilidad costera (CVI) ante una potential subida del nivel del mar en
Gornitz, V., 1991. Global coastal hazards from future sea level rise. Palaeogeogr. la costa andaluza (Espa~ na). GeoFocus 9, 83–100. ISSN 1578-5157 9, 83–101.
Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 89, 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-0182(91) Ojeda, J., Alvarez,
� J., Cajaraville, D., Fraile, P., Vallejo, I., M�arquez, J., 2011. An� alisis
90173-O. preliminar de la vulnerabilidad de la costa de Andalucía a la potential subida del
IDEAM, 2000. Unidades geomorfol� ogicas del territorio colombiano. SANTA FE DE nivel del mar asociada al cambio clim� atico. Junta de Andalucía, Andalucía, Espa~ na.
BOGOTA, � D. C. Ospina, J.A., 2017. Paisaje y territorio en la playa Juan de Dios, Bahía M� alaga, Pacífico
Iglesias, A., Simon, A., Fraile, P., Hodgson, N., 2010. Methods for Assessing Current and colombiano (2005-2016): una aproximaci� on desde la nueva geografía del turismo.
Future Coastal Vulnerability to Climate Change. Environment, Utrecht, Netherlands. Cuad. Geogr. Rev. Colomb. Geogr. 26, 31–52. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcdg.v2
INVEMAR, 2003. Programa Holand�es de Asistencia para estudios en Cambio Clim� atico: 6n2.59192.
Colombia. Definici� on de la vulnerabilidad de los sistemas biogeofísicos y Ozyurt,
€ G., Ergin, A., 2009. Application of sea level rise vulnerability assessment model
socioecon� omicos debido a un cambio en el nivel del mar en la Zona Costera to selected coastal areas of Turkey. J. Coast. Res. 56, 248–251.
Colombiana (Caribe, Insular y Pacífico), Investigaciones Marinas. Santa Marta, Ozyurt,
€ G., Ergin, A., Baykal, C., 2010. Coastal vulnerability assessment to sea level rise
Colombia. integrated with analytical hierarchy process. Coast. Eng. 1–8.
INVEMAR, CVC, 2015. Proyecto Determinaci� on DE Objetivos de calidad POR usos del Pab�
on, J.D., 2003. El aumento del nivel del mar en las costas y � area insular de Colombia.
Recurso Hídrico en la Bahía DE Buenaventura – Sector Cascajal, A Trav�es de la In: El Mundo Marino de Colombia: Investigaci� on y Desarrollo de Territorios
Modelaci� on de Coliformes Y DBO Para Definir Diferentes Escenarios DE Calidad del Olvidados. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Red de Estudios del Mundo Marino
Agua. Santa Marta, Colombia. (REMAR). Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia, pp. 75–82.
INVEMAR, 2016. Geoamenazas Y Evoluci� on Reciente de la Zona Costera del Pab�
on, J.D., 2003. Fen� omeno El Ni~ no: efectos e impactos en el Pacífico colombiano. In:
Departamento del Valle del Cauca – Fase II Informe. SANTA MARTA, COLOMBIA. El Mundo Marino de Colombia: Investigaci� on y Desarrollo de Territorios Olvidados.
IPCC, 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability - Contributions Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Red de Estudios del Mundo Marino (REMAR).
of the Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia, pp. 65–74.
Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.012. Pendleton, B.E.A., Thieler, E.R., Williams, S.J., Norton, G.A., Survey, U.S.G., Beavers, R.,
Islam, M.A., Hossain, M.S., Murshed, S., 2015. Assessment of coastal vulnerability due to 2005. Coastal Vulnerability Assessment of Gateway National Recreation Area
sea level change at bhola island, Bangladesh: using geospatial techniques. J. Indian (GATE) to Sea-Level Rise Open-File Report 2004-1257. U . S . Department of the
Soc. Remote Sens. 43, 625–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-014-0426-0. Interior, Virginia, USA. No. 2005–1058.
Islam, M.A., Mitra, D., Dewan, A., Akhter, S.H., 2016. Coastal multi-hazard vulnerability Pendleton, E.A., Barras, J.A., Williams, S.J., Twichell, D.C., 2010. Coastal Vulnerability
assessment along the Ganges deltaic coast of Bangladesh-A geospatial approach. Assessment of the Northern Gulf of Mexico to Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Change.
Ocean Coast Manag. 127, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.03.012. Portilla-Yandún, J., Caicedo-Laurido, A., Padilla-Hern� andez, R., 2013. Observations of
Kantamaneni, K., Phillips, M., Thomas, T., Jenkins, R., 2018. Assessing coastal directional wave spectra in the Colombian Pacific. Adv. USFQ 5, C5–C21.
vulnerability: development of a combined physical and economic index. Ocean Coast Posada, B., Henao, W., Guzm� an, G., 2009. Diagn� ostico de la erosi�
on y sedimentaci� on en
Manag. 158, 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.03.039. la zona costera del Pacífico colombiano. INVEMAR, vol. 17. Serie Publicaciones
Kantamaneni, K., Gallagher, A., Du, X., 2019. Assessing and mapping regional coastal Especiales No., Santa Marta.
vulnerability for port environments and coastal cities. J. Coast. Conserv. 23, 59–70. Pramanik, M.K., Biswas, S.S., Mondal, B., Pal, R., 2016. Coastal vulnerability assessment
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-018-0636-7. of the predicted sea level rise in the coastal zone of Krishna–Godavari delta region,
Kunte, P., Jauhari, N., Mehrotra, U., Kotha, M., Hursthouse, A.S., Gagnon, A.S., 2014. Andhra Pradesh, east coast of India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 18, 1635–1655. htt
Multi-hazards coastal vulnerability assessment of Goa, India, using geospatial ps://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-015-9708-0.
techniques. Ocean Coast Manag. 95, 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocec Rangel, E.S., Montealegre, J.E., 2003. An� alisis de las series del nivel del mar en el
oaman.2014.04.024. Pacífico Colombiano y su relaci� on con el cambio clim� atico. Meteorol. Colomb. 7,
Liu, Y., Huang, H., Qiu, Z., Fan, J., 2013. Detecting coastline change from satellite images 53–66.
based on beach slope estimation in a tidal flat. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 23, Ricaurte-Villota, C., Coca-Domínguez, O., Gonz� alez, M., Bejarano-Espinosa, M.,
165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2012.12.005. Morales, D., Correa-Rojas, C., Brice~ no-Zuluaga, F., Legarda, G.A., Ar- teaga, M.,
L�opez Royo, M., Ranasinghe, R., Jim�enez, J.A., 2016. A rapid, low-cost approach to 2018. Amenaza y vulnerabilidad por erosi� on costera en Colombia: enfoque regional
coastal vulnerability assessment at a national level. J. Coast. Res. 320, 932–945. para la gesti�
on del riesgo. INVEMAR, Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras
https://doi.org/10.2112/jcoastres-d-14-00217.1. “Jos�e Benito Vives De Andr�eis” –INVEMAR–.
Mahapatra, M., Ramakrishnan, R., Rajawat, A.S., 2015. Coastal vulnerability assessment Roberts, W.L., 2008. Coastal Resources and the Permit Process: Definitions and
using analytical hierarchical process for South Gujarat coast, India. Nat. Hazards 76, Jurisdictions. Virginia, USA.
139–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1491-y. Robertson, K., 2003. Gemorfología litoral y amenazas naturales en la costa Pacífica
Mani Murali, R., Ankita, M., Amrita, S., Vethamony, P., 2013. Coastal vulnerability colombiana. In: El Mundo Marino de Colombia: Investigaci� on y Desarrollo de
assessment of Puducherry coast, India, using the analytical hierarchical process. Nat. Territorios Olvidados. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Red de Estudios del
Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 13, 3291–3311. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-3291- Mundo Marino (REMAR). Bogot� a, D.C., Colombia, pp. 110–120.
2013. S�
anchez-Arcilla, A., García-Le� on, M., Gracia, V., Devoy, R., Stanica, A., Gault, J., 2016.
Martinez Ardila, N.J., Jaramillo Rodriguez, O., Robertson, K., 2003. Amenazas naturales Managing coastal environments under climate change: pathways to adaptation. Sci.
en el litoral Pacífico colombiano asociadas al ascenso del nivel del mar. Cuad. Geogr. Total Environ. 572, 1336–1352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.124.
7, 135–153.

18
B.E. Gallego Perez and J.J. Selvaraj
Sankari, T.S., Chandramouli, A.R., Gokul, K., Surya, S.S.M., Saravanavel, J., 2015.
Coastal vulnerability mapping using geospatial technologies in cuddalore-
pichavaram coastal tract, Tamil nadu, India. Aquat. Procedia 4, 412–418. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.055.
Stafford, S.L., Renaud, A.D., 2019. Developing a framework to identify local business and
government vulnerability to sea-level rise: a case study of coastal Virginia. Coast.
Manag. 47, 44–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2019.1526011.
Stronkhorst, J., Levering, A., Hendriksen, G., Rangel-Buitrago, N., Appelquist, L.R., 2018.
Regional coastal erosion assessment based on global open access data: a case study
for Colombia. J. Coast. Conserv. 22, 787–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-0
18-0609-x.
Suhura, S., Nithyapriya, B., Reddy, L.R., Philipose, N., Manisha, M., Dwarakish, G.S.,
2018. Coastal land use/land cover and shoreline studies for dakshina Kannada coast,
Karnataka, India. In: Yadav, S. (Ed.), Water Resources Management Select
Proceedings of ICWEES-2016. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, p. 352.
https://doi.org/10.1002/047147844X.wr241.
Szlafsztein, C., Sterr, H., 2007. A GIS-based vulnerability assessment of coastal natural
hazards, state of Par�a, Brazil. J. Coast. Conserv. 11, 53–66. https://doi.org/10.100
7/s11852-007-0003-6.
Tano, R.A., Aman, A., Kouadio, K.Y., Ali, K.E., Assamoi, P., 2016. Assessment of the
ivorian coastal vulnerability. J. Coast. Res. 32, 1495. https://doi.org/10.2112/jco
astres-d-15-00228.1.
Thieler, E.R., Hammar-Klose, E.S., 1999. National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to
Sea-Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Atlantic Coast. U.S. Geological
Survey. Massachusetts.
Thieler, E.R., Hammar-Klose, E.S., 2000. National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to
Sea-Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Pacific Coast, U.S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 00-178. Massachusetts.
19
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment 16 (2019) 100263
Thieler, E.R., Himmelstoss, E.A., Zichichi, J.L., Ergul, A., 2017. Digital Shoreline Analysis
System (DSAS) Version 4.0 — an ArcGIS Extension for Calculating Shoreline Change
(ver.4.4, July 2017). Report 2008-1278. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File.
Thomas, Y.F., Ricaurte-Villota, C., Coca-Domínguez, O., 2014. Atlas climatol� ogico del
oc�eano Pacífico colombiano y � areas adyacentes. Serie de Publicaciones Especiales
No. 31. INVEMAR, Santa Marta.
Tilley, A., Herr�on, P., Espinosa, S., Angarita, J.L., Box, S., 2018. Predicting vulnerability
to management changes in data-limited, small-scale fisheries. Mar. Policy 94, 39–45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.04.013.
Torresan, S., Critto, A., Dalla Valle, M., Harvey, N., Marcomini, A., 2008. Assessing
coastal vulnerability to climate change: comparing segmentation at global and
regional scales. Sustain. Sci. 3, 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-008-0045-1.
OSSO, UNIVALLE, LA MINGA, 2000. Evaluaci� on de Amenazas Naturales Y Bases Para la
Mitigaci�on de Riesgos en el Area
� Urbana de Buenaventura. Observatorio Sismol� ogico
Del suroccidente – OSSO. Universidad Del Valle, Fundaci� on La Minga, Santiago de
Cali.
USGS, 2000. National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-Level Rise: Preliminary
Results for the U.S. Atlantic Coast, USGS Open-File Report 99-593, vol. 78. Usgs.Gov,
p. 1997. Table of Contents. Pubs.
Vega, L., Cantillo, V., Arellana, J., 2019. Assessing the impact of major infrastructure
projects on port choice decision: the Colombian case. Transp. Res. Part A Policy
Pract. 120, 132–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.12.021.
Viloria, J., 2008. Economías del Pacífico del Pacífico colombiano. Banco de la Republica
de Colombia. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610211001360.
Xu, H., 2006. Modification of normalised difference water index (NDWI) to enhance open
water features in remotely sensed imagery. Int. J. Remote Sens. 27, 3025–3033. htt
ps://doi.org/10.1080/01431160600589179.
Yu, K., Hu, C., Muller-karger, F.E., 2011. Shoreline changes in west-central Florida
between 1987 and 2008. Int. J. Remote Sens. 32, 8299–8313. https://doi.org/10.10
80/01431161.2010.535045.