Résumé
Faced with the prospect of sea level rise due to climate change, and therefore of coastal flooding, new measures have been put forward to reduce the vulnerability of coastline territories and to maintain the ecosystems and recreational amenities that make these areas so attractive . The latest doctrine of state intervention advocates the relocation of property and activities most at risk. Despite these measures helping to prevent damages in the long term, they come up against considerable resistance from local residents, emotionally attached to their homes, and from local politicians because of opposition to relocation and its cost. This article suggests taking into account a whole range of views by combining them with the results of recent interwoven research projects. We focus upon: (i)the issue of territorial solidarity, by comparing willingness to pay for relocation among coastline residents and the hinterland population (the Béziers area SCOT (Territorial Coherence Scheme), part of the SOLTER project - 240 individuals in face-to-face interviews, (ii)choosing between a dyke and relocation (Alternalive project in the town of Hyères-les-Palmiers – 421 individuals, face-to-face interviews, (iii)ranking the conditions and characteristics of relocation policies in terms of fairness (SOLTER and ALTERNALIVE projects), (iv)the most favorable means of communicating about the implemention of relocations with the help of psychological expertise (PSYCOM-RELOC project at the Aigues Mortes gulf – 198 individuals, face-to-face interviews). The main questions of these studies were also used in an online survey targetting all of the coastline communities (731 individuals) so as to gather a representative sample of the opinions of an entire coastline territory. The results are meant to guide and strengthen the efficiency of communication and information campaigns upon which all early adaptation policies are based. However, the differences between types of resident, and most notably between those who are directly concerned by relocation or not, justifies resorting to “a veil of ignorance“ to better plan restructuring and territorial solidarity.