4. Research limitations and future opportunities

The primary data gathering portion of the study faced several challenges which limited the extent to which insight could be gathered from property owners and municipal officials. Response rates to the random mail out and social media contacts were very low, likely because many owners of properties selected for the random mail out may not have been present in the home. It is also crucial to note that before the study was complete, the ESD property owner’s association took legal action against the Municipality for the road closure. Although Blackburn News has since reported on the proceedings (Wills, 2021), the situation was not public knowledge during the research period. Regardless, it is likely that the legal case significantly contributed to the lack of response from property owners. As well, the research was carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic, at a period of time when there were multiple limitations mandated by the Province and the authors’ University restricting travel and face-to-face meetings. Accordingly, the authors were forced to reframe the study as a mainly literature-based study rather than a mainly primary data-driven study.

Future research should consider how to integrate property owner knowledge and experience into the development and implementation of proactive buyout programs, with special attention to contextspecific risk perceptions and existing Municipality-homeowner relationships. Additionally, future managed retreat research in Ontario must consider the role of Conservation Authorities, given that their primary mandate involves preventing and managing flooding (Conservation Authorities Act, 1990). To keep the scope of the paper manageable, the role of Conservation Authorities was deliberately excluded. This was, in part, because the authority to request provincial or federal funding and subsequently offer buyouts to property owners rests solely with the municipality. However, considering their extensive expertise and the resources available to some Conservation Authorities, they will be important stakeholders in managed retreat discussions.

Study participants identified several issues which affect not only the social license of a buyout program, but the need for such programs altogether. These issues are mostly policy-based questions which will require a more strategic and collaborative research approach than what was carried out for this study. Participant’s recommendations are summarized here:

I) More empirical research is needed to determine practical alternatives to managed retreat over a range of socioeconomic and environmental contexts.

Buyouts are not necessarily the best solution for every context. Buyouts are most effective in small geographic extents with a limited number of properties (Siders, 2019), despite being the current “go-to” solution (Young, 2018). Moreover, according to participants, there is relatively little empirical research on the implementation and outcomes of any managed retreat project. Without this research, the success of managed retreat strategies remains uncertain, which makes coastal adaptation more difficult to justify and implement. Having more empirical insight would better inform decision makers and allow them to select creative strategies which work best for their context.

II) Ontario’s provincial officials must seriously consider how to facilitate risk disclosure and potentially compensate owners for lost property value.

To be effective, managed retreat requires revisions in real-estate and land development policy. Currently, there is no requirement to disclose hazard risk in Ontario, and so property owners and real estate agents often do not disclose flood-risk when a home is for sale (Participant 2, 2021; Participant 4, 2021; Participant 6, 2021). Without this requirement, property sales create risk cycles through which hazardous properties pass from one owner to the next, where tragically, new owners often have little or no knowledge of the risk they purchase. Moreover, Participant 6 indicated that when at-risk homeowners sell their properties, education efforts to increase community awareness must start again with the new owners. Stopping these risk cycles requires stricter real estate legislation, under which homeowners and agents must disclose flood or erosion risk to future buyers. If such legislative changes are implemented, Provincial officials must also determine how best to compensate at-risk homeowners for the property value that will inevitably be lost when disclosing their property’s risk. Participant 5 noted anecdotally that in such situations a buyout may be more acceptable, but more research is needed. See Siders (2013a) for an example of full disclosure in real estate law.

III) Buyouts must occur in association with improved land-use and hazard management planning which accounts for climate change (Drejza et al., 2011; Siders, 2013b;

Koslov, 2016; Davies, 2020).

Koslov (2016: 362) notably writes, “retreat means restricting movement as much as facilitating it…” Although Ontario supposedly recognizes that avoiding hazardous areas should be the primary strategy for reducing risk, the Provincial Planning Policy currently does not appreciate the extent to which climate change is affecting, and in some cases exacerbating, coastal hazards (Ontario, 2020; Zuzek, 2020). Confirming this, Participants 2 (2021) and 4 (2021) noted that Ontario’s planning policies still allow development adjacent to hazardous areas without recognizing that these areas could become dangerous in the future.

Considering that Ontario currently lacks capacity to fund buyout programs (Zuzek, 2020), pre-emptively reducing risk by accounting for climate change, changing erosion rates, and future hazard risks will mitigate the need for buyouts or other managed retreat strategies in the future. Truly “avoiding” flood hazards therefore requires Provincial officials to consider how to better account for climate change and shifting hazards in our planning policies.