Advertisement

On the Flood Risk in the Netherlands

  • L.M. Bouwer
  • P. Vellinga
Part of the Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research book series (NTHR, volume 25)

Abstract

The Netherlands are protected from storm surges and river floods by the Deltaworks: a reinforcement of the primary flood defence system consisting of coastal dunes, dikes and storm-surge barriers. These were implemented in response to the dramatic flooding disaster in 1953. Over the last 50 years, billions of euros have been invested in this scheme creating a feeling of safety in society. However, in this paper we argue that the current sense of safety may be inappropriate. Scientific evidence is growing, which shows that the hydraulic baseline conditions like storm wave properties and maximum river discharges may be different and more severe than recently thought. Climate change and sea-level rise may aggravate this situation. Moreover, the number of people and the value of properties behind the dikes have increased significantly since the coastal protection schemes were designed. In the present situation the flood risk appears to be disproportionately large compared to other daily risks. We conclude that on the short term the existing coastal and river flood protection should be reinforced to accommodate the more extreme hydraulic conditions and protect these valuables. Alternatively, protection levels of different areas should be reconsidered and perhaps reduced. The latter would in fact mean retreat from particular areas

Keywords

climate change dikes flooding flood protection policies safety level storm surge The Netherlands 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ACW (2006) Veiligheid tegen overstromen. Advice AcW-2006/103, Adviescommissie Water, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  2. Asselman NEM, Jonkman SN (2003) Consequences of floods: the development of a method to estimate the loss of life, Delft Cluster Report DC1-233–237, DelftGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouwer LM, Vellinga P (2002) Changing climate and increasing costs – implications for liability and insurance. In: Beniston M (ed) Climatic change: implications for the hydrological cycle and for water management, Advances in global change research 10, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 429–444Google Scholar
  4. DWW (2002a) Hydraulische randvoorwaarden 2001 voor het toetsen van primaire waterkeringen, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, Delft (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  5. DWW (2002b) Consequenties nieuwe golfbelastingen voor de kust, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, Delft, report DWW-2002-130 (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  6. DWW (2003) De veiligheid van de primaire waterkeringen in Nederland – Resultaten van de eerste toetsronde van 1996–2001, Hoofdrapport, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, Delft (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  7. DWW (2006) Primaire waterkeringen getoetst: Landelijke Rapportage Toetsing 2006. Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, Delft (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  8. Floris (2005) Floris study interim report. Project Veiligheid Nederland in Kaart, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, DelftGoogle Scholar
  9. Goudriaan J et al (2003) Klimaatverandering in het Maasstroomgebied – een verkening van moge-lijkheden voor afvoerreductie, deelrapport van project In-tegrale Verkenning Maas, Rijkswaterstaat, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  10. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001 – the scientific basis. In: Houghton JT et al (eds) Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. MNP (2004) Dutch dikes and risk hikes: a thematic policy evaluation of risks of flooding in the Netherlands. Report 500799002, Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau, Bilthoven (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  12. Parry ML (ed) (2000) Assessment of potential effects and adaptations for climate change impacts in Europe. The Europe ACACIA project, Jackson Environment Institute, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, pp 320Google Scholar
  13. Renssen H, Beets CJ, Fichefet T, Goosse H, Kroon D (2004) Modeling the climate response to a massive methane release from gas hydrates, Paleoceanography 19: PA2010Google Scholar
  14. RIVM (2003a) Nuchter omgaan met risico’s, Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, Report 251701047/2003, Bilthoven (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  15. RIVM (2003b) Het plaatsgebonden risico in Nederland, Milieu- en Natuurcompendium, Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, Bilthoven, December 15, 2003, http://www.rivm.nl.Google Scholar
  16. RIKZ (2002) Duinveiligheid bij nieuwe inzichten belasting en sterkte, working document RIKZ/AB/2002.842x, Rijksinstituut voor Kust en Zee, Rijkswaterstaat, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  17. RIZA (2003) Hoeveel (hoog)water kan ons land binnenkomen via de Rijn bij Lobith, nu en in de toekomst, Rijksinstituut voor Integraal Zoetwaterbeheer en Afvalwaterbehandeling, Rijkswaterstaat, report 2003.015 (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  18. RVWS, VROM-R (2003) Verantwoorde risico’s, veilige ruimte, Raad voor Verkeer en Waterstaat en VROM-Raad, Advice 037, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  19. Stb (1996) Wet op de Waterkering, Staatsblad van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, No. 8 (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  20. Stocker TF, Schmittner A (1997) Influence of CO2 emission rates on the stability of the thermohaline circulation. Nature 388:862–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. TAW (2000) From probability of exceedance to probability of flooding, towards a new safety approach, Technische Adviescommissie voor de Waterkeringen, Dienst Weg- en Waterbouwkunde, Rijkswaterstaat, DelftGoogle Scholar
  22. Tielrooy F (ed) (2000) Waterbeleid voor de 21e eeuw, Commissie Waterbeheer 21e Eeuw, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  23. Tol RSJ, Langen A (2000) A concise history of Dutch river floods. Climatic Change 46:357–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Turkenburg WC (1974) Reactorveiligheid en risico-analyses. De Ingenieur (in Dutch) 86:189–192Google Scholar
  25. Van Dantzig D (1956) Economic decision problems for flood prevention, Econometrica 24:76–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Van den Brink HW, Können P, Opsteegh JD (2003) The reliability of extreme surge levels, estimated from observational records of order hundred years. Journal of Coastal Research 19:376–388Google Scholar
  27. Van de Ven GP (ed) (1996) Man-made lowlands, Matrijs, Utrecht, third editionGoogle Scholar
  28. Verbeek K (ed) (2003) De toestand van het klimaat in Nederland 2003, Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute, De Bilt (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  29. Vrijling JK, Van Hengel W, Houben RJ (1998) Acceptable risk as a basis for design. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 59:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. VROM (2001) Een wereld en een wil, werken aan duurzaamheid, Nationaal Milieubeleidsplan 4, Ministry of Spatial Planning, Housing and the Environment, Report 01.0433, The Hague (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  31. Wigley TML, Raper SCB (2001) Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming. Science 293:451–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • L.M. Bouwer
    • 1
  • P. Vellinga
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Environmental StudiesFaculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije Universiteit1081 HVThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Climate CenterVrije UniversiteitThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations