Coastal cliffs

Rates and processes of coastal cliff retreat. Natural and

human-induced hazard

By Stefano FURLANI, Sara BIOLCHI, Stefano DEVOTO

Global features of sea cliffs
The term coastal cliff, or sea cliffs, refers to a steeply sloping surface where elevated
land meets the shoreline (Hampton et al., 2004). Sea cliffs are a geomorphic feature
occurring along about 80 percent of the world’s shorelines (Emery & Kuhn, 1982).

Fig. 1: Distribution of sea cliffs around the world (from Emery & Kuhn, 1982).

Most cliffs are developed on coasts that are tectonically stable, while others can be
modified by tectonic uplift or subsidence (Bird, 2016). In these environments, cliffs
formed as a consequence of uplift along fault can also be the result of repeated
tectonic coseismic events (Bird, 2016). Usually, tectonic sea cliffs are the result of
differential erosion that removes soft rocks overlapping hard rocks along the fault
plane.
Sea cliff can be also originated as the outcome of volcanic eruption, such as the island
of Santorini, Ustica in the Tyrrenian Sea or Krakatau, in Indonesia.
Similar to virtually all world landforms, present-day coastal cliffs can be considered a
“work in progress,” continually acted upon by a broad assortment of offshore (marine
or lacustrine) and terrestrial processes that cause them to change form and location
through time. An important consequence is that coastal cliffs retreat (that is, move
landward), and the adjacent coastal land is permanently removed as they do so.
Retreat can be slow and persistent, but on many occasions it is rapid and episodic.
Coastal cliff is a general term that refers to steep slopes along the shorelines of both
the oceans (where they are commonly called sea cliffs) and lakes (where they are
commonly called “lake bluffs”). The term bluff also can refer to escarpments eroded
into unlithified material, such as glacial till, along the shore of either an ocean or a
lake. Often, the terms cliff and bluff are used interchangeably.
Coastal cliffs typically originate by marine or lacustrine erosional processes, in
particular when the sea level rise. However, some sea cliffs start as scarps of large
landslides or faults (e.g. Moore and others, 1989; Kershaw and Guo, 2001) or by
glacial erosion (Shipman, 2004). These types of features are recognized as coastal
cliffs, because they usually evolve similarly to other coastal cliffs, despite their origin
is different. The aforementioned definition of sea cliffs defines no bounds on the
materials, height, or the slope of the eroded surface, but the limits are defined by their
utility. Erosional processes can carve a cliff face into any geologic material, slowly
into hard rocks such as granite or basalts, rapidly into soft sedimentary rocks, such as
sandstones, soft limestones and even more rapidly into unlithified materials such as
glacial till (Sunamura, 1983). An empirical lower bound of bluff or cliff height is a
few meters, below which there are few hazard concerns, but above which the serious
engineering and land-use issues associated with coastal cliff retreat become
significant (Hampton et al., 2004). Some coastal cliffs are more than 100 m high.
Cliffs higher than 500 m are also called megacliffs (Bird, 2016). Typical inclination
of surfaces that are recognized as true coastal cliffs ranges from about 40° to 90°, but
it can be as low as 20° in soft sediment such as clay. In some places, overhanging
rock faces can exist.

Fig. 2: Distribution of rocky coasts along the Mediterranean and Black Sea coasts (from
Furlani et al., 2014).

Some types of marine cliffs are more characteristics of some parts of the world,
although it is difficult to classify them on the basis of climate, wave energy, etc
(Trenhaile, 1987).
Variations in local factors can produce greater differences in cliff profiles and
morphology within the same region. Anyway, some generalizations can be made
starting from differences in climate and waves (Davies, 1964, 1972). The profiles of
cliffs are generally the result of the interplay of:
• geology, lithology and integrity of the rock mass, bedding, dipping of rock
beds
• climate,
• wave regime, in particular the frequency of waves under storm conditions
• tides,
• vegetation
• nearshore water depth
• type and amount of beach material at their base
• topography of the cliff-top area and role of subaerial erosion
• changing in sea level

Some examples have been provided in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3: Classification of coastal cliffs (from Hill, 2004).

Classification of rocky coasts

Sunamura (1991) recognized three morphological types usually developing on the
rocky coasts, or Type-A platforms, Type-B platforms and plunging cliffs. Usually,
cliffs develop at the onshore limit of the shore platforms.

Shore platforms Type A (sloping shore platforms)

This type of platforms are gently sloping platforms without a significant topographic
break, extending from the base of a cliff to the nearshore sea floor below low tide
level (Fig. 3).

Shore platforms Type B (horizontal shore platforms)

This type of platforms are nearly horizontal platforms with a cliff developing at their
seaward edge. Bird (1976) subdivided the subhorizontal platforms type into high-tide
and low-tide shore platforms (Fig. 3).

Plunging cliffs
A cliff or steep sloping coast that descend vertically into the deep water without any
shore platform, rocky shore or beach at the sea level (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4: Classification of rocky coasts (from Sunamura, 1992).

 Fig. 5: Cliff and shore platform at Debeli Rtic/Punta Grossa (Slovenia).

Fig. 6: Plunging cliffs at Sistiana-Duino (Gulf of Trieste, Italy)

Cliff processes
Even if the main involving cliff retreat is wave erosion, other processes contribute to
the total amount of cliff recession (Bird, 2016). Subaerial processes, biological
weathering and other marine processes can significantly increase the recession rates.
Weathering processes is more active on the top of the cliffs, while erosion processes
dominate the cliff foot (Hill, 2004). Coastal landslides involve large masses of rocks,
earth or debris at the foot of a coastal slope. The instability of a cliff can be due to the
weight of a massive caprock and develops with an increase of shear stress or a
decrease in shear strength (Bird, 2016).
Coastal landslides (Fig. 7) can be divided in falls, slides, topples, spreads and flows
(Cruden and Varnes, 1996). Landslides are the rapid movement of cliff materials
downslope under the effect of gravity. It is not possible to predict the extent and the
time of coastal landslide events. Anyway, they have occurred frequently enough that
geologic analysis and informed land use can help to risk reduction and improved
response.
This rise in the sea level allows waves to erode beaches and flats at the base of coastal
bluffs, increasing the risk of coastal landslides. Erosion removes material from the
base of coastal cliffs and steepens their face. Sediments at the base of the cliffs
stabilize it, and when they are removed, the cliff is no longer in equilibrium.
Continued erosion or lubrication of the cliffs and bluffs by groundwater may
overcome this internal resistance, in particular in clay materials, and produce a
landslide. A landslide event restores the equilibrium of the system, and the slumped
materials at the foot of the cliff support a new cliff face with a gentler slope. Erosion
is a continuing process because the level of the sea is rising, and coastal waves and
currents immediately begin to remove the edges of the displaced sediment. At the end,
erosion destroys the equilibrium of the bluff and leads to another landslide, repeating
the cycle (Fig. 5).

Fig. 7: Classification of coastal landslides (from Devoto, 2013).

Cliffs and other landforms of rocky shores can be eroded by many different
interrelated processes, such as hydraulic action, corrosion, attrition, solution and
quarrying and cavitation (Hill, 2004).
Runoff processes also involve sea cliffs, since rain and melting can generate water
flowing down a cliff slope. On soft rock outcrops it washes away sediments producing
rills and gullies. The materials accumulated at the cliff foot are subsequently removed
by wave action and in some cases can protect the cliff from wave attack (Furlani et
al., 2011). In this case, rilling processes continue until when the cliff foot is cut back
by marine processes.
Sea spray can also generate runoff down the cliff. It contributes to weathering
promoting processes of wetting and drying, when crystals of salt pluck the rock
surface forming pits, honeycombs (Bird, 2016) and tafoni.
Winds blowing against a cliff can remove fine-grained particles from the slope,
scouring hollows and clefts, up to create small caves (Bird, 2016).
The water coming from rainfall or melting snow percolates into the rock mass through
fractures, joints and cavities. Groundwater seepage from a cliff face can wash out
finer particles leaving cracks and crevices up to create an apron at the cliff base.
Vertical ridges or speleothems can be formed because of local precipitation of
carbonates. The accumulation of groundwater in permeable rocks can increase the
instability of rock masses. The increase shear stress due to the additional loading of
groundwater can result in cliff collapse.
Soluble rocks, such as gypsum or limestone, can be weathered by producing coastal
karst landforms, particularly significant along the littoral zone and notably in the mid-
tidal zone (De Waele and Furlani, 2013).
The effects of thermal changes on the cliffs can lead to expansion and contraction of
the rock mass. These processes lead to flacking, fracturing, and spalling cliff faces,
mainly in correspondence of lines of weakness. Slumping can be a result of
modification in rock volume related to thermal changes, insomuch as rockfalls can
occur as a consequence of significant cold weather.
Wetting and drying result in disintegration of the rocks outcropping on the cliff face,
while drying processes of saline spray increase the plucking effects of salt
crystallization.
Biological weathering strongly affects coastal erosion. The growth of plants, mainly
through the shear strength produced by roots, on the cliffs can widen joints and
produce rock falls. In the mid-tidal zone, bioerosion is particularly effective because
of the erosion produced by algae, cyanobacteria, and animals.
Human impact is very significant in as much as it can modify, directly and indirectly,
sea cliffs and bluffs (Bird, 2016), such as quarrying sand and rocks, loading the cliff-
top with buildings, building roads or bridges, railways or removing and weakening
rock masses for fossils searching, etc.
 Fig. 8: Processes affecting cliff retreat and shore platforms lowering (from Furlani et al.,
2014).

Methods to study cliff retreat

A wide variety of methods for measuring the retreat of sea cliffs and bluffs have been
developed and used in the past. Some of the earliest documentation of cliff retreat
interested U.S. coasts, where field survey techniques were used since the late
nineteenth century, as cited by Andrews (1870), Chamberlain (1877), and Leverett
(1899). Field surveys of the cliffs along the northeastern U.S. Cape Cod coast were
also carried out in the late 1800’s by Marindin (1889).
The traditional methods of measuring cliff retreat, such as field surveying, profiling,
and standard aerial photographic techniques, have been supplemented, and in some
cases also replaced, with new approaches, such as digital photogrammetry, and
LiDAR (Light detection and ranging), satellite interferometry and GPS measures (Fig.
9).
Usually, the techniques applied to the measurement of sea cliff and bluff recession
have developed from methods developed to measure shoreline change along low-
lying coasts, where erosion or accretion is measured by comparison of the changes in
the horizontal position of a line on the beach, such as the wet/dry line (Dolan and
others, 1980; Anders and Byrnes, 1991, Furlani et al., 2011). Anyway, along rocky or
bluffed coasts, the coastline proxy is well defined by the geomorphological features of
a particular area rather than a linear datum. In regions of uplifted marine terraces, the
recession of the top edge of the cliff may best describe the long-term trends in
shoreline changes. Along very steep coastal slopes, the feature that best captures
coastline change may be the cliff foot, the first significant slope break, or some other
geomorphic feature specific to a particular geographic location. Moreover, the
identification of the best feature to measure can represent an additional problem
together with the description of its morphometric features, such as vegetation
obscuring the top edge of a cliff, rock or rubble obscuring the base of the cliff,
rounding effects of the cliff edge due to weathering or overwash processes, and the
discontinuity of distinct features (Hapke, 2004). In general, techniques developed for
shoreline change measurement on low-relief coasts may not be readily applicable
because of the complexities associated with identifying and measuring distinct
geomorphic features along cliffed coastlines.

Fig. 9: Example of GPS network installed for monitoring a landslide affecting coastal cliff
stability at Anchor Bay (Malta)

As suggested by Hapke (2004), in addition to errors due to measurement and

identification and ambiguities associated with accuracy in measuring long-term cliff
erosion, there are many problems related to interpretation of the data and
understanding data interpretation and how they can be applied for process studies and
community planning.
 Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of measurement methods used in sea cliff erosion
studies (from Hapke, 2004)

Rates of cliff retreat

Sunamura (1992) suggested that many factors are involved in wave erosion at the
base of a cliff. These factors can be summarized in assailing forces of waves and
resisting forces of the material forming the lower cliffs.
The resulting cliff retreat are summarized in the following tables for the
Mediterranean (Table 2) and the Black Sea (Table 3).
 Table 2. Rates of sea cliff retreat in the Mediterranean Sea (modified from Furlani et al. 2014)
A B C D E F
Location Lithology Erosion Interval Method Reference
rate (yr)
(m/yr)
Fluviatile
Catalunya Aerial analytical
Quaternary 0.2 / Montoya (2008)
(Spain) photogrammetry
deposits
Mallorca Fornos et al.
Calcarenite 0.74x10-3 235 k Field survey
(Balearic Is.) (2005)
Mallorca Balaguer et al.
Calcarenite 40 m3 1 Field survey
(Balearic Is.) (2002)
Mallorca 3 Balaguer et al.
Calcarenite 143 m 1 Field survey
(Balearic Is.) (2002)
Fluviatile –
Mallorca Eolianite 0.09- Aeria photos Balaguer et al.
46
(Balearic Is.) Quaternary 0.56 survey 2008
deposits
Cilento, Aerial analytical Budetta et al.
Flysch 0.5-0.8 30-45
Campania (Italy) photogrammetry (2000)
Mastronuzzi &
Apulia (Italy) Limestone 0.06-0.8 100 Field survey
Sansò (1998)
Murgia, Apulia 1997- Andriani &
Limestone 0.01-0.1 Field survey
(Italy) 2003 Walsh (2007)
Comparison of
Conglomerates,
Ortona-Vasto, aerial D’Alessandro et
sands and 0.3-0.9 109
Abruzzo (Italy) photographs and al. 2001
pelites
maps
Monte S. Bortolo Sandstone and 0.05- Archaeological Colantoni et al.
6k
(Pesaro), Italy marls 0.16 remains (2004)
Comparison of
0.01- 1999- Furlani et al.
Slovenian coast Flysch terrestrial
0.02 2010 (2011b)
photographs
Golik &
Goldsmith
North of Khan 1956- Aerial analytical
/ 0.41 (1984, 1985),
Yunis (Israel) 1984 photogrammetry
from Zviely &
Klein (2004)
Golik &
Goldsmith
North Gaza 1956- Aerial analytical
/ 0.3-0.9 (1984, 1985),
(Israel) 1984 photogrammetry
from Zviely &
Klein (2004)
Golik &
North of Goldsmith
1976- Aerial analytical
Ashkelon (Katza, / 1.07 (1984, 1985),
1984 photogrammetry
Israel) from Zviely &
Klein (2004)
Ron (1982),
0.11- 1945- Aerial analytical
Jaffa (Israel) / from Zviely &
0.25 1987 photogrammetry
Klein (2004)
 Greenstein
0.03- 1987- GPS (1997), from
Jaffa (Israel) /
0.29 1996 measurements Zviely & Klein
(2004)
Comparison of Nir(1992), from
1942-
Herzliya (Israel) / 0.2-0.4 aerial Zviely & Klein
1996
photographs (2004)
Ben-David
Comparison of
0.09- 1944- (2001), from
Apolonia (Israel) / aerial
0.36 2000 Zviely & Klein
photographs
(2004)
Ron (1982),
1945- Aerial analytical
Netanya (Israel) / 0.3-0.4 from Zviely &
1978 photogrammetry
Klein (2004)
Comparison of Ben-David
1962- aerial (1995), from
Netanya (Israel) / 0.5
1994 photographs and Zviely & Klein
maps (2004)
Comparison of
Shoshanat Nir (1992), from
0.05- 1939- aerial
Hamakim / Zviely & Klein
0.58 1991 photographs and
(Israel) (2004)
maps
Perath &
1992- Field Almagor (1996),
Neurim (Israel) / 0.8-3.2
1995 measurements from Zviely &
Klein (2004)
Tel-Aviv and Perath (1982),
Eolianite 0.15- Field
Beit-Yannay 1982 from Zviely &
(kurkars) 0.22 measurements
(Israel) Klein (2004)
Comparison of
Nir (1992), from
Beit-Yannay Eolianite 1939- aerial
0.15-0.3 Zviely & Klein
(Israel) (kurkars) 1991 photographs and
(2004)
maps
Michmoret and Schwartz (1997),
1991- Field
Givat Olga / 0.24 from Zviely &
1996 measurements
(Israel) Klein (2004)
Zviely & Klein
Comparison of
Beit-Yannay Eolianite 1918- (2004), from
0.2 aerial
(Israel) (kurkars) 2000 Zviely & Klein
photographs
(2004)

Table 3. Rates of sea cliff retreat in the Black Sea (modified from Furlani et al. 2014)
C D
A B E F
Erosion rate Interval
Location Lithology Method Reference
(m/yr) (yr)
Simeonova
Cape Sabla (Bulgaria) Limestone 0.01 / /
(1985)
 Limestone
with Simeonova
Cape Sabla (Bulgaria) 8 / /
underlying (1985)
clays
Limestone
Koštjak &
Tauk-Liman, Cape with
0.01 / Survey Avramova
Sabla (Bulgaria) underlying
(1977)
clays
Balčik-Varna Milev &
/ 1 / /
(Bulgaria) Cencov (1977)
Simeonova
Kavarna (Bulgaria) / 15 / /
(1976)
Crimean Peninsula
Limestones 0.3 / / Shuisky (1985)
(Russia)
Crimean Peninsula
Clays, silt 9 / / Shuisky (1985)
(Russia)
Sunamura 1992
Primorsko-Atchtarsk, (from
Clay 12 / /
Azov Sea Coast Zenkovich
(1967)
Sunamura1992
Surveys, (from
Black Sea Flysch 0.02-0.03 20 yr
photos Zenkovich
1965)
Sunamura 1992
(from
Black Sea Flysch, shale 0.01-0.02 / /
Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
(from
Black Sea Coquinite 0.002-0.005 / /
Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Crystallized (from
Black Sea 0.003 / /
limestone Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Massive (from
Black Sea 0.3-0.5 / /
limestone Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Limestone (from
Black Sea 2-3 / /
with loess Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Limestone (from
Black Sea 0.61 / /
with loess Zenkovich
(1965)
Quaternary Sunamura 1992
Black Sea 0.5-1.0 / /
loess (from
 Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Quaternary (from
Black Sea 12 / /
conglomerate Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Quaternary
(from
Black Sea brown loam 1 / /
Zenkovich
and clay
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Quaternary (from
Black Sea 2-3 / /
clay Zenkovich
(1965)
Sunamura 1992
Diluvial (from
Black Sea 0.11 / /
deposits Zenkovich
(1965)

Cliff geo-hazard
Sea cliffs can be very dangerous because of their morphological features, such as
steepness and height, and of the processes acting on the cliffs, such as rock falls and
landslides.
Rock falls are very common. They usually involve small volume of rock and are
associated to cracks generated by structural setting and/or enlarged by marine or
subaerial processes. They can be very dangerous because they can cause casualties.
Rock slides are characterized by the presence of a slip surface, which can be circular
or not. Rotational landslide usually involves large volumes of materials.
Rock spreads involve clayey terrains capped by resistant materials. They are extensive
and are characterized by slow speeds. They generate persistent cracks, which can
assist geomorphologists to identify them. Rock spreads can be coupled to other types
of landslides such as rock falls and block slides.
In coastal environments, flows are not common processes. They usually involve small
quantities of material and are associated to clayey terrains. Usually they are triggered
by intense rainfalls, therefore, they can be very dangerous for human artifacts or to
human activities, such as cliff paths, etc. Landslides can injure or kill people mainly
because of rock falls or slumpings.
Williams and Williams (1988) reported that the risk vary significantly both between
individuals and social groups. Coastal cliffs can be very attractive sites for suicides
(Birds, 2016). Considering the number of cliff footpaths, the number of people killed
or injured by falling from cliffs is fairly small. Accidents from cliff-top breakaways
are very rare, but trekkers should be aware of the hazard in particular conditions.
The impact of hammering and excavation of cliff faces by people searching for fossils
or minerals also injured unfortunate people.
Geologists, such as earth scientists, botanists, ecologists, etc, need to join training,
research and safety (Birds, 2016).
References
Bird, E., 2016. Coastal cliffs: Morphology and Management. Switzerland: Springer.
Cruden, D.M., Varnes, D.J., 1996. Landslide Types and Processes. In: Turner, A.K.,
Shuster, R.L. (Eds.), Landslides: Investigations and Mitigation, pp. 36-75. National
Research Council, Special Report 247.
De Waele, J., Furlani, S., 2013. Seawater and biokarst effects on coastal karst. In:
Shroeder, J.F. (Ed.), Treatise on Geomorphology, Vol. 6, pp. 341-350. Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
Devoto, S., 2013. Geomorphological map of the NW coast of the Island of Malta
(Mediterranean Sea). Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Modena and Reggio
Emilia.
Emery, K.O., Kuhn, G.G., 1982. Sea cliffs: their processes, profiles, and
classifications. Geological Society of American Bulletin 93, 644-654.
Furlani, S., Devoto, S., Biolchi, S., Cucchi, F., 2011. Factors triggering sea cliff
instability along the Slovenian coasts. In: Micallef, A. (Ed.), MCRR3-2010
Conference Proceedings, pp. 387-393. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue
61.
Hampton, M.A., Griggs, G.B., 2004. Formation, Evolution, and Stability of Coastal
Cliffs–Status and Trends. USGS Professional Paper 1693, 1-4.
Hapke, C.J., 2004. The Measurement and Interpretation of Coastal Cliff and Bluff
Retreat. USGS Professional Paper 1693, 39-50.
Hill, M., 2004. Coasts and Coastal Management. Hodder Murray.
Sunamura, T., 1992. Geomorphology of Rocky Coasts. Chichester: Wiley.
Trenhaile, A.S., 1987. The Geomorphology of Rock Coasts. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Williams, M.J., Williams, A.T., 1988. The perception of, and adjustment to, rockfall
hazards along the Glamorgan Heritage Coast, Wales. Ocean and Shoreline
Management 11, 319-338.