Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 981–995

Climate-proof planning for flood-prone areas: assessing the adaptive capacity of planning institutions in the Netherlands

  • Margo van den Brink
  • Sander Meijerink
  • Catrien Termeer
  • Joyeeta Gupta
Original Article

Abstract

It is generally acknowledged that adapting low-lying, flood-prone deltas to the projected impacts of climate change is of great importance. Deltas are densely populated and often subject to high risk. Climate-proof planning is, however, not only a new but also a highly complex task that poses problems for existing institutional and administrative structures, which are the product of times in which climate issues were of little importance. This paper assesses the capacity of the historically grown Dutch planning institutions to promote climate-proof planning for flood-prone areas. The Adaptive Capacity Wheel provides the methodological framework. The analysis focuses on two planning projects in the west of the Netherlands: the Zuidplas Polder project at the regional level and the Westergouwe project at the local level. It is shown that the planning institutions involved in these projects enable climate-proof planning, but to a limited extent. They face five institutional weaknesses that may cause risks on the long term. To climate-proof urban developments in flood-prone areas, it is necessary to break through the strong path–dependent development of planning institutions and to build in more flexibility in existing rules and procedures.

Keywords

Climate adaptation Spatial planning Institutions Adaptive capacity The Netherlands 

References

  1. Adger N (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16:268–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson M, Mol APJ (2002) The Netherlands in the UNFCCC process—leadership between ambition and reality. Int Environ Agreem 2(1):49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Argyris C, Schön DA (1978) Organizational learning. Addison Wesley, Reading, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. Armitage D (2005) Adaptive capacity and community-based natural resource management. Environ Manage 35(6):703–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Betsill M, Bulkeley H (2007) Looking back and thinking ahead: a decade of cities and climate change research. Local Environ 12(5):447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biermann F (2007) ‘Earth system governance’ as a crosscutting theme of global change research. Glob Environ Change 17(3–4):326–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biesbroek R, Swart RJ, van der Knaap WGM (2009) The mitigation-adaptation dichotomy and the role of spatial planning. Habitat Int 33:230–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Birkmann J, Garschagen M, Kraas F, Quang N (2010) Adaptive urban governance: new challenges for the second generation of urban adaptation strategies to climate change. Sustain Sci 5:185–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Botchway FN (2001) Good governance: the old, the new, the principle, and the elements. Fla J Int Law 13(2):159–210Google Scholar
  10. Brown HCP, Nkem JN, Sonwa DJ, Bele Y (2010) Institutional adaptive capacity and climate change response in the Congo Basin forests of Cameroon. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 15(3):263–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bulkeley H (2006) A changing climate for spatial planning. Plan Theory Pract 7(2):203–214Google Scholar
  12. Campbell H (2006) Interface—is the issue of climate change too big for spatial planning? Plan Theory Pract 7(2):201–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conant RC, Ashby WR (1970) Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system. Int J Syst Sci 1(2):89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corburn J (2009) Cities, climate change and urban heat island mitigation: localising environmental science. Urb Stud 46(2):413–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davoudi S, Crawford J, Mehmood A (eds) (2009) Planning for climate change: strategies for mitigation and adaptation for spatial planners. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Dewulf A, Craps M, Bouwen R, Taillieu T, Pahl-Wostl C (2005) Integrated management of natural resources: dealing with ambiguous issues, multiple actors and diverging frames. Water Sci Technol 52(6):115–124Google Scholar
  17. Dovers SR, Hezri AA (2010) Institutions and policy processes: the means to the ends of adaptation. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change 1(2):212–231Google Scholar
  18. Eriksen S, Lind J (2009) Adaptation as a political process: adjustment to drought and conflict in Keynia’s drylands. Environ Manage 43:817–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2003) Synthesis: building resilience and adaptive capacity in social–ecological systems. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social–ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, pp 252–387Google Scholar
  20. Gallopín GC (2006) Linkages between vulnerability, resilience and adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Change 16:293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glaas E, Jonsson A, Hjerpe M, Andersson-Skold Y (2010) Managing climate change vulnerabilities: formal institutions and knowledge use as determinants of adaptive capacity at the local level in Sweden. Local Environ 15(6):525–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goldfinch S, ‘t Hart P (2003) Leadership and institutional reform: engineering macroeconomic policy change in Australia. Governance 6(2):235–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gouda Gemeente (2005) Waterstad Westergouwe. Masterplan, GoudaGoogle Scholar
  24. Gupta J, Termeer C, Klostermann J, Meijerink S, van den Brink M, Jong P, Nooteboom S (2008) Institutions for climate change: a method to assess the inherent characteristics of institutions to enable the adaptive capacity of society. IC12 working document 2. Institute for Environmental Studies, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  25. Gupta J, Termeer C, Klostermann J, Meijerink S, van den Brink M, Jong P, Nooteboom S, Bergsma E (2010) The Adaptive Capacity Wheel: a method to assess the inherent characteristics of institutions to enable the adaptive capacity of society. Environ Sci Policy 13:459–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haddad B (2005) Ranking the adaptive capacity of nations to climate change when socio-political goals are explicit. Glob Environ Change 15:165–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holling CS (1986) The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change. In: Clark WC, Munn RE (eds) Sustainable development of the biosphere. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 292–317Google Scholar
  28. Huxham C, Vangen S (2005) Managing to collaborate. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report—an assessment of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Valencia, SpainGoogle Scholar
  30. Jager LA (2010) Naar een Klimaatwijzer: de spanningen bij het opnemen van klimaatbestendigheid in het ruimtelijke ordeningsinstrumentarium. Bachelor thesis Technische Planologie. University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  31. March JG, Olsen JP (1989) Rediscovering institutions: the organizational basis of politics. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. McGranahan G, Balk D, Anderson B (2007) The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environ Urb 19(1):17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meerhof R (2007) Politiek wil af van wijk in polder. De Volkskrant, 28 March 2007Google Scholar
  34. Meijerink SV, Dicke WM (2008) Shifts in the public-private divide in flood management. Int J Water Resour Dev 24(4):495–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nooteboom SG (2006) Adaptive networks. The governance for sustainable development. Eburon, DelftGoogle Scholar
  36. North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Orlikowski WJ (1996) Improvising organizational transformation over time: a situated change perspective. Inf Syst Res 7(1):63–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Paavola J (2008) Livelihoods, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change in Morogoro, Tanzania. Environ Sci Policy 11:642–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Paavola J, Adger WN (2006) Fair adaptation to climate change. Ecol Econ 56(4):594–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pahl-Wostl C, Craps M, Dewulf A, Mostert E, Tabara D, Taillieu T (2007) Social learning and water resources management. Ecol Soc 12(2):5Google Scholar
  41. Pelling M, High C (2005) Understanding adaptation: what can social capital offer assessments of adaptive capacity? Glob Environ Change 15:308–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Polsky C, Neff R, Yarnal B (2007) Building comparable global change vulnerability assessments: the vulnerability scoping diagram. Glob Environ Change 17:472–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reitsema ED (2010) Een klimaatbestendige ruimtelijke ordening: in hoeverre is de ruimtelijke ordeningssector in staat zich aan klimaatverandering aan te passen? Bachelor thesis Technische Planologie. University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  44. Rijksoverheid (2008) Ontwerp Beleidsnota Waterveiligheid. Staatsuitgeverij, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
  45. Schreuder A (2005) ‘Onbegrijpelijk dat ze daar bouwen.’ Nieuwbouw in diepe polder stuit op verontwaardiging om slechte voorbeeld. NRC Handelsblad, 17 februari 2005Google Scholar
  46. Scott WR (2008) Institutions and organisations: ideas and interests, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  47. Termeer CJAM (2009) Water professionals and public leadership. Irrigation Drain 58:S212–S216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. van den Brink M, Termeer C, Meijerink S (2010) Climate-proof spatial planning for flood prone areas: illustrated by the Zuidplaspolder and Westergouwe. IC12 Working Document 9, Report Number W-10/020. Institute for Environmental Studies, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  49. van den Brink M, Termeer C, Meijerink S (2011) Are Dutch water safety institutions prepared for climate change? J Water Clim Change 2(4):272–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. van der Brugge R, Rotmans J, Loorbach D (2005) The transition in Dutch water management. Reg Environ Change 5(4):164–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. van der Wal M (2010) Klimaatadaptatie in de regio: het adaptief vermogen van project Zuidplaspolder. Bachelor thesis Technische Planologie. University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  52. Verweij M, Thompson M (eds) (2006) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: governance, politics and plural perceptions. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  53. VROM (2001) Ruimte maken, ruimte delen. Vijfde Nota over de Ruimtelijke Ordening 2000/2020. Sdu, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
  54. VROM (2004) Nota ruimte: ruimte voor ontwikkeling. Sdu, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
  55. Wardekker JA, de Jong A, Knoop JM, van der Sluijs JP (2010) Operationalising a resilience approach to adapting an urban delta to uncertain climate changes. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77:987–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2001) Managing the unexpected: assuring high performance in an age of complexity. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  57. Werkgroep Wateropgave Westergouwe (2004) De waterstaatkundige inpasbaarheid van een woonwijk in Westergouwe. Bevindingen van de Werkgroep Wateropgave Westergouwe. GoudaGoogle Scholar
  58. Wheater H, Evans E (2009) Land use, water management and future flood risk. Land Use Policy 26S:S251–S264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wilson E (2006) Adapting to climate change at the local level: the spatial planning response. Local Environ 11(6):609–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wilson E, Piper J (2010) Spatial planning and climate change. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  61. Woltjer J, Al N (2007) Integrating water management and spatial planning: strategies based on the Dutch experience. J Am Plan Assoc 73(2):211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Xplorelab (2008) Klimaatadaptatie in de Zuidplas Polder. Eindrapport hotspot Zuidplas Polder, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
  63. Young OR (1991) Political leadership and regime formation: on the development of institutions in international society. Int Organ 45(3):281–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margo van den Brink
    • 1
  • Sander Meijerink
    • 2
  • Catrien Termeer
    • 3
  • Joyeeta Gupta
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Spatial Planning and EnvironmentUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Institute for Management ResearchRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Public Administration and Policy GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Institute for Environmental StudiesVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations