Many prograded barriers and some dunefields in theworld have been termed 'beach ridge' plains, but the actual genesis of the 'ridges' is often unknown. Use of the terms, berms, beach ridges and foredunes is also confusing in the literature because their definitions are highly variable and are commonly used interchangeably. Thus, the formation and definition of sand berms, beach ridges and foredunes is briefly reviewed. Beach ridges are re-defined as entirely wave formed deposits which are most commonly formed during high wave conditions and/or elevated water levels (e.g. storm surges). Foredunes are formed by aeolian sand deposition in vegetation on the backshore. Some dunefields in Brazil have been called beach ridge plains when they are, in fact, foredune plains, transgressive dunefields, or complex barriers (i.e. barriers comprising two types of dunes). The Holocene barrier extending from Torres to Tramandaí in southern Brazil has been regarded as a beach ridge plain. The landforms of this Holocene barrier comprise wide, relatively linear, widely spaced (400-600m), shore parallel ridges on the landward half, and more closely spaced (80-400m), lobate and crescentic, discrete ridges on the seaward half. Low, rolling dunefields, sand sheets, nebkha fields and deflation plains occur between the ridges. The barrier is re-interpreted as a prograded, transgressive dunefield barrier.

The paper is motivated by a present lack of clear model performance guidelines for shelf sea and estuarine modellers seeking to demonstrate to clients and end users that a model is fit for purpose. It addresses the common problems associated with data availability, errors, and uncertainty and examines the model build process, including calibration and validation. It also looks at common assumptions, data input requirements, and statistical analyses that can be applied to assess the performance of models of estuaries and shelf seas. Specifically, it takes account of inherent modelling uncertainties and defines metrics of performance based on practical experience. It is intended as a reference point both for numerical modellers and for specialists tasked with interpreting the accuracy and validity of results from hydrodynamic, wave, and sediment models.

Urbanisation has been a main cause of land use land cover (LULC) change worldwide, often with irreparable consequences to the provision of ecosystem services. Despite an increase in quantitative assessments of ecosystem service values (ESV) related to LULC changes, data are scarce for ecotones, such as the agreste in northeast Brazil (a transitional area between the Atlantic Forest and the Caatinga biomes). The benefit transfer method was used to quantify changes in ESV between 1989, 2007 and 2014 due to urbanisation in the microwatershed Riacho das Piabas (3660 ha) in the agreste of Paraíba. Remote sensing techniques and a geographic information system were used to quantify LULC changes. Loss of arboreal vegetation (covering 46% of the study area in 1989 and 5% in 2014) was the key factor driving the 73.2% decline in the total ESV (from US$ 13.7 million to US$ 3.7 million in 2017 values). LULC changes resulted in losses of 89% in the estimated value of eight ecosystem services, including climate regulation, water flow regulation, moderation of disturbance, nutrient cycling and biological control, which are critical locally when considering the regional trend towards aridification and the existing pressures on water resources. Ecosystem functions loss and climate change impacts may lead to a shift in ecotone boundaries favouring the semiarid Caatinga vegetation. These results urge the implementation of ecosystem-based spatial planning, focusing on urban green infrastructure and restoration of natural habitats and their connectivity, to prevent further ecosystem service losses. Local estimates of ESV required to inform the suggested policy actions are identified.

Robust data are the base of effective gender diversity policy. Evidence shows that gender inequality is still pervasive in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Coastal geoscience and engineering (CGE) encompasses professionals working on coastal processes, integrating expertise across physics, geomorphology, engineering, planning and management. The article presents novel results of gender inequality and experiences of gender bias in CGE, and proposes practical steps to address it. It analyses the gender representation in 9 societies, 25 journals, and 10 conferences in CGE and establishes that women represent 30% of the international CGE community, yet there is under-representation in prestige roles such as journal editorial board members (15% women) and conference organisers (18% women). The data show that female underrepresentation is less prominent when the path to prestige roles is clearly outlined and candidates can self-nominate or volunteer instead of the traditional invitation-only pathway. By analysing the views of 314 survey respondents (34% male, 65% female, and 1% ‘‘other’’), we show that 81% perceive the lack of female role models as a key hurdle for gender equity, and a significantly larger proportion of females (47%) felt held back in their careers due to their gender in comparison with males (9%). The lack of women in prestige roles and senior positions contributes to 81% of survey respondents perceiving the lack of female role models in CGE as a key hurdle for gender equality. While it is clear that having more women as role models is important, this is not enough to effect change. Here seven practical steps towards achieving gender equity in CGE are presented: (1) Advocate for more women in prestige roles; (2) Promote high-achieving females; (3) Create awareness of gender bias; (4) Speak up; (5) Get better support for return to work; (6) Redefine success; and, (7) Encourage more women to enter the discipline at a young age. Some of these steps can be successfully implemented immediately (steps 1–4), while others need institutional engagement and represent major societal overhauls. In any case, these seven practical steps require actions that can start immediately.

An index of vulnerability to coastal change, integrating indices of social vulnerability and exposure to coastal hazards, was created for East Africa to identify ‘areas of priority concern’ for risk reduction. Currently, 22% of East Africa’s coastline and 3.5 million people are at higher levels of exposure to coastal hazards, which would increase, respectively, to 39% and 6.9 million people if mangroves, coral reefs and seagrasses are lost. Madagascar and Mozambique show the largest proportion of the coastline at higher exposure, while Kenya and Tanzania benefit the most from natural coastal protection. Coral reefs protect 2.5 million people from higher exposure, mostly in Mombasa, Zanzibar and Dar es Salaam. Considering Mozambique, Kenya and Tanzania, the latter is the least, and the former is the most vulnerable. Under current conditions, 17 (out of 86) coastal districts are considered ‘areas of priority concern’; four of these are critically exposed as over 90% of their shoreline length are at higher exposure (Zavala, Inharrime, Manhiça and Mandlakaze, all in southern Mozambique). These locations are of critical concern for any present or future coastal development due to the high level of exposure posed to both vulnerable people and investments. Habitat loss would increase the number of ‘priority concern’ districts to 24; some would show great increase in the population exposed (e.g. Pemba and Mossuril in Mozambique). Applying this knowledge to identify where ecosystem-based management should be prioritised to promote social and environmental resilience is timely and urgent in East Africa.