Résumé
In the last decade and especially since storm Xynthia (2010) which caused 47 deaths and about € 1.5 billion damages, coastal adaptation to sea level rise has grown on the French political agenda. In addition to strengthening vigilance, alert and risk prevention measures, managed retreat is the subject of intense debates and several policy initiatives (Rocle and Salles, 2018). Based on a multi-level and interdisciplinary analysis of managed retreat incentives and controversies, the presentation will provide empirical insights on current politics and on the step-by-step politicization process surrounding managed retreat in France. Indeed, although no major operations have taken place so far, several actions are being carried out to engage local authorities in the implementation of managed retreat strategies. We will particularly focus on a policy experiment launched by the French Ministry for the Environment (2012-2016) in order to study legal, financial and sociopolitical feasibility of managed retreat in a few pilot areas. We will highlight the main lessons learned from this experiment and the way they are currently questioning the French institutional setting dealing with coastal risks management. The key conflicting points are related to the natural disaster insurance system (based on a national solidarity), land property rules, the so-called 'Littoral law', and the sharing of authority and responsibilities between state and local governments (Abel et al., 2011). However, little is known about residents' attitudes and preferences towards managed retreat measures and possible incentives. Thus, we will also present the results of an economic valuation that aimed at understanding the inhabitants' preferences for different relocation strategy attributes (Dachary-Bernard et al., 2019). The results are analyzed in terms of territorial solidarity, spatial heterogeneity and risk perception by comparing individual willingness to pay for relocation between the shoreline residents and the hinterland population.