Developments in dutch coastline management: Conclusions from the second governmental coastal report

  • Ruig Joost H. M. de 
  • Hillen Roeland 
Reports

Abstract

In 1990 the Dutch government decided to stop any further long-term landward retreat of the coastline. This policy choice for a ‘dynamic preservation’ is primarily aimed at safety against flooding and at sustainable preservation of the values and interests concerning the dunes and beaches. Five years later, a first overview of the benefits and bottlenecks of the new coastal defence policy could be presented, which was published in the second governmental coastal report ‘Kustbalans 1995’ (coastal balance 1995). This consists of three elements: (1) evaluation of the implementation of ‘dynamic preservation’, (2) the consequences of several natural and anthropogenic developments in the coastal zone and (3) integrated coastal zone management. The present report describes experiences of Dutch coastline management and summarizes the main conclusions of the second governmental report.

The overall conclusion of the evaluation study is that the 1990 choice for ‘dynamic preservation’ was right. Sand supply is an effective method of coastline maintenance, which also serves functional uses in the beach and dune area. However, nearly a doubling of the supply volume is necessary to compensate for sand losses in the coastal zone. A more integrated management of the coastal zone is necessary to find an equilibrium between the interests of socio-economic development and the maintenance of a natural, dynamic system.

Keywords

Beach nourishment Coastal zone management Management policy Sand supply The Netherlands 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Anon. 1990. [A new coastal defence policy for The Netherlands.] Ministry of Transport & Public Works The Hague. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  2. Anon. 1991. [Regional extraction plan for the dutch part of the North Sea/Environmental Impact Statement.] Ministry of Transport and Public Works, North Sea Directorate, Rijswijk. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  3. Anon. 1992.Protection of the oceans, seas and coastal areas and the protection, use and development of their living resources. UNCED, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Agenda 21, Chapter 17, Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
  4. Anon. 1996. [Balancing the coast 1995.] Ministry of Transport & Public Works, The Hague. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  5. Aerts, J.C.J.H., de Boer, M.E. & Heil, G.W. 1997.[Impact of beach nourishment on sand drift in the foredune area.] Report RA/97-255, Resource Analysis, University of Utrecht and Rijkswaterstaat, Delft. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  6. Bijlsma, L., Hillen, R. & Misdorp, R. 1993.Changing coastal zones; chances for sustainable development. Proceedings Coastal Zone 1993, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  7. de Ruig, J.H.M. 1993.Seaward coastal defence: limitations and possibilities. In: Proceedings 4th EUCC Congress, Marathon.Google Scholar
  8. de Ruig, J.H.M. 1995. [The coast in perspective.] Report RIKZ/95-005, Rijkswaterstaat, National institute for coastal and marine management/RIKZ, The Hague. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  9. Doing, H. 1995. Landscape ecology of the Dutch coast.J. Coastal Conserv. 1: 145–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hallie, F.P. 1995. [Sand mining for the benefit of coastal nourishment. Report Rijkswaterstaat, North Sea Directorate, The Hague.] (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  11. Hillen, R. & de Haan, T. 1993. Development and implementation of the coastal defence policy for the Netherlands. In: Hillen, R. & Verhagen, H.J. (eds.)Coastlines of the southern North Sea, pp. 118–201. Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  12. Hillen, R. & Roelse, P. 1995. Dynamic preservation of the coastline in the Netherlands.J. Coastal Conserv. 1: 17–28.Google Scholar
  13. Janssen, M.P.J.M. & Salman, A.H.P.M. 1992. [Dunes in the wind.] Stichting Duinbehoud, Leiden. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  14. Misdorp, R. & Terwindt, J. 1994.Coastal zone management: experiences in The Netherlands. In: Proceedings CZM Conference. IOC/UNESCO, Karachi.Google Scholar
  15. van der Maarel, E. 1979. Environmental management of the coastal dunes in The Netherlands. In: Jefferies, R.L. & Davy, A.J. (eds.)Ecological processes in coastal environments, pp. 543–570. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. van der Wal, D., Peters, B.A.M., van der Putten, W.H. & van Tongeren, O.F.R. 1995. [Research on ecological effects of beach nourishment.] University of Amsterdam and Dutch Institute for Ecological Research, Heteren. (In Dutch.)Google Scholar
  17. van Heuvel, T. & Hillen, R. 1994. Coastline management with GIS in the Netherlands. In:EARSeL Workshop on remote sensing and GIS for coastal zone management, pp. 155–164. Delft.Google Scholar
  18. van Rijn, L.G., Reniers, A., Roelvink, J.A. & Ribberink, J.S. 1995. [Sand budget and coastline changes of the central coast of Holland between Den Helder and Hoek van Holland. period 1964–2040.] Delft Hydraulics, Report H2129.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© EUCC 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruig Joost H. M. de 
    • 1
  • Hillen Roeland 
    • 2
  1. 1.RijkswaterstaatNational Institute of Coastal and Marine ManagementEX The HagueThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Rijkswaterstaat, Head OfficeEX The HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations