The Coastal Barrier Resources Act: Has It Discouraged Coastal Development?

Despite an effort by Congress to design a market-based public policy to limit development on certain coastal barriers and protect the federal treasury from paying for recovery from expensive natural disasters, growth continued on these shifting sands. In enacting the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, federal policymakers may have overlooked the key role of state and local governments, as well as the role of local developers, landowners, and realtors in shaping development on coastal barriers. By itself, the act will not prevent development. In fact, it appears that development in areas designated under the act will occur if (1) development pressure is strong enough to overcome the disincentives posed by the act, and (2) state and local governments facilitate development. For example, a local government may substitute its own subsidies for those withdrawn by the federal government. Nothing in the act prevents this from occurring. This article examines the key forces affecting development in areas designated under the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) and seeks to explain why development has occurred in some designated areas, despite the withdrawal of federal subsidies. Using case studies of selected coastal barriers designated by the act, as well as surveys of state coastal managers and key informants, the research shows that the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, by itself, will not prevent development from occurring in the designated coastal areas.