The fifth and final article in my coastal resilience series makes the case for what the profession needs to build interdisciplinary leadership rather than coordination, a long view on equity, and the kind of institution the field does not yet have.
The coast is not waiting for us to sort out our disciplinary boundaries, our funding silos, or our institutional jurisdictions. It is changing on its own timeline, indifferent to ours.

The fourth article in my five-part series on coastal resilience takes on the liminal condition of the coast as a design problem, why the threshold between land and sea is not a complication to be managed but the defining design condition.
It is also an argument for landscape architecture as the discipline most structurally suited to holding that complexity together.

Trust is not a precondition for coastal resilience work. It is infrastructure. The third article in my five-part series on coastal resilience takes on possibly the hardest conversation in the field: community engagement, co-design, and the contradiction at the center of American coastal practice.

The second article in my five-part series on coastal resilience makes the case for clearer-eyed thinking about where nature-based solutions work, where they don't, and what the limits reveal about our assumptions.

This is the first in a five part article series on coastal resilience at the intersection of design, science, and policy. "The regulatory terrain is part of the site” is the argument at the center of this article.