On the time lag between sea-level rise and basin infilling at tidal inlets

Journal Article (2025)
Author(s)

Roshanka Ranasinghe (IHE Delft Institute for Water Education, Deltares, University of Twente)

Zhengbing Wang (TU Delft - Coastal Engineering, Deltares)

Janaka Bamunawala (Tohoku University)

M.T. Duong (Deltares, University of Twente, IHE Delft Institute for Water Education)

Research Group
Coastal Engineering
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-86699-0
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Coastal Engineering
Issue number
1
Volume number
15
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Tidal inlets are a common feature along the world’s coastline. Inlet-adjacent coastlines have for millennia supported communities and livelihoods, and therefore, projected climate change driven variations in catchment-estuary-coast (CEC) system drivers (e.g., sea-level rise (SLR)) are likely to lead to substantial socio-economic impacts. One important SLR-driven process that affects inlet-adjacent shoreline change is basin-infilling (i.e., sediment import to the estuary from the coast to satisfy the SLR-driven increase of estuarine accommodation space). Due to the slow morphological response to hydrodynamic forcing, however, there is a time lag between basin infilling and SLR, which, in numerical models that simulate century-scale evolution of CEC systems, is represented by a basin infilling lag factor (M). To date, an indicative M value has only been derived for small tidal inlet systems (M ~0.5), and due to the lack of M estimates for larger systems, studies have been using M ~0.5 indiscriminately. Here, for the first time, we derive indicative M values for small, medium, and large tidal inlet systems (M ~0.5, ~0.25 and ~0.15 respectively) via analytical considerations. Subsequently, to investigate the consequences of using sub-optimal M values on twenty-first century projections of inlet-adjacent shoreline change, we apply a probabilistic, reduced complexity model (G-SMIC), under four IPCC AR6 climate scenarios, to three CEC systems representing small, medium and large systems. Results show that, in general, shoreline change projections are substantially lower(higher) when M values smaller(larger) than the indicative M for a given system are used. When smaller-than-optimal M values (0.25 and 0.15) are used for the small tidal inlet, both mid- and end-century shoreline retreats are under-estimated by 50–75% (across the four climate scenarios), relative to projections obtained with the optimal M value. For the medium-sized inlet, shoreline retreats for both future periods are over-estimated by ~100% with the larger-than-optimal M value of 0.5, while they are under-estimated by ~40–75% (across climate scenarios) with the smaller-than-optimal M value of 0.15. When the two higher-than-optimal M values (0.25 and 0.5) are used for the large tidal inlet system, shoreline retreat is over-estimated by ~ 65–240% (across climate scenarios) for both future periods. In terms of absolute values, these under/over-estimations increase in time and with the severity of emission scenario.