The Noordoostpolder: A Landscape Planning Perspective on the Preservation and Development of Twentieth-Century Polder Landscapes in the Netherlands
The Netherlands has a centuries-long tradition of reclaiming land. In the last century gaining land from water peaked with the IJsselmeerpolders, made possible by technical innovations. The Noordoostpolder (1937–1942), one of the IJsselmeerpolders, is a unique example of a fully designed agricultural landscape of the twentieth century. It is the first Dutch modern polder in which the layout was planned as an integral task, involving all its agricultural, urban, and landscape elements at once, while reflecting the state of the art in design, science, and engineering. Using the Noordoostpolder as an example, this chapter discusses the preservation and development of twentieth-century polders as cultural heritage landscapes. It elaborates a preservation-through-planning approach that takes spatial development with historical landscape structures as a basis. The chapter also briefly elaborates a critical way of understanding the coherence and variation of modern landscapes such as the Noordoostpolder, providing clues for spatial planning by systematically delineating and identifying spatial design principles.
KeywordsLand reclamation Protection through planning Landscape planning Industrial agricultural landscape Noordoostpolder Heritage landscape
Polders are a significant type of water landscape that humans have created in coastal and alluvial lowlands all over the world by reclaiming land from water. Here, water levels are artificially controlled for food production and everyday life. Interaction between humans and water has produced a rich variety of polder landscapes throughout the ages, in the Netherlands ranging from the tenth to the twenty-first century (Nijhuis 2016; Van der Ven 2004). Globally, polder landscapes are under threat due to climate and economic change: increasing flood risk due to sea-level rise, ongoing subsidence due to intense drainage, and rapid urbanization. These valuable cultural heritage landscapes must be safeguarded; knowledge development can provide clues for preserving and transforming them in ways which acknowledge and cultivate their local variation and regional coherence. Polder landscapes are not only important hydraulic phenomena but also spatial constructions and cultural expressions: The polder landscape as one can see and experience it is also a display of tacit knowledge—the kind of knowledge that is difficult to transfer to another person by means of writing it down or verbalizing it—and symbolic values related to land reclamation, water infrastructure, agricultural practice, and landscape planning and design.
The next section introduces the Noordoostpolder as the twentieth-century cultural heritage landscape. Then, the chapter elaborates on the protection-through-planning approach to the countryside in the Netherlands, and how this approach is implemented in the region. The section before the conclusion will briefly introduce an analytical framework to identify landscape design principles that can successfully facilitate new development and guide landscape change.
The Noordoostpolder as a Twentieth-Century Cultural Heritage Landscape
Reclaiming land is a centuries-old tradition in the Netherlands. In the last century it peaked in size with the IJsselmeerpolders, made possible by technical innovations. In the centuries before, land reclamation had often been a strategy by which landowners extended their holdings, an investment by rich merchants, or was a public undertaking. In the case of the IJsselmeerpolders, the Dutch government wanted to safeguard food provision for the nation by providing agricultural land; later, urban development became an important motive. The IJsselmeerpolders—Wieringermeerpolder (constructed 1927–1930), Noordoostpolder (1937–1942), Oostelijk Flevoland (1950–1957), and Zuidelijk Flevoland (1959–1968)—provide almost ten percent of the total arable land in the country today (1,045,000 ha).
Landscape planning began to play an increasingly important role in spatial design, as a counterpart to the urban planning of the polder addressing landscape as an important element in planning. Specifically, a landscape framework—based on soil, geography, and landscape history—made space for nature and recreation, enriching the network of roads and villages that urban planners laid over the polder land (as in the Wieringermeer).
Centrality plays a major role at every level in this polder. Emmeloord, with the polder tower (Netherland’s highest water tower) as its center, is the center of concentric rings: the ring of villages, a condensed outer ring, and the dike ring. The landscape planners conceived woods and grassland in ‘polder rooms’ for the edges of the polder; the heart of the polder has a high degree of landscape openness and is used for arable farming. The allocation of the land and the concentric structure of the road system and village pattern all support this articulation of the polder space into ‘rings.’ At a smaller scale, one finds the concentric structure in the spatial plan of the villages, and in the farmsteads, grouped around the intersection of a polder road and drainage ditch, at the corners of the parcels.
The ten villages in the polder are planned at regular intervals and circle around Emmeloord, the capital of the polder. Architects or consultants employed by the government designed most of the villages in the NOP, laying each out according to the principles of the Delft School, with tradition as the guide. The hierarchical spatial form of the villages, turned in on itself, was intended to serve as a counterpoise to the dislocations of urbanization and industrialization. In elaborating the plans, the designers experimented with architectonic concepts in the spirit of Camillo Sitte that were based on aesthetically pleasing historical examples.
As such the NOP reflects the state of the art in landscape and urban planning, architecture, agricultural and social science, and engineering in the second half of the twentieth century, at multiple spatial scales, from the region to the building. Therefore, the NOP can be regarded as a cultural heritage landscape.
Protecting Polder Landscapes Through Planning
A cultural landscape is defined as an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors (Council of Europe 2000). This definition stresses the dynamic character of landscapes. Polders change, as does every landscape with and without human interaction. Sometimes there are profound changes taking place, sometimes less radical changes. A landscape is a dynamic system that is continually transforming under the influence of natural processes and social requirements. Linking the past to the present, the landscape is a layered entity, a palimpsest where traces that time has covered can reinforce or contradict each other; it is a window into a range of histories, chronologies, events, and meanings connecting the traditional and the contemporary, the tangible and the intangible.
Managing and preserving heritage landscapes are very different from protecting a site or monument. The landscape is always open to significant change on a variety of timescales even without human intervention. Its perceptual aspects are just as dynamic as its physical ones: People change their view of the world and thus their landscape for several reasons. In other words, a cultural landscape cannot be preserved unchanged (Fairclough et al. 2008). Preservation of cultural landscapes should focus on the ‘management of change,’ aiming to create a future in which the past in one form or another plays an appropriate role (Fairchlough et al. 2008).
The landscape of the IJsselmeerpolders is subject to distinctive kinds of change. The NOP is now 75 years old, and most of its layout and buildings are still in place and recognizable. However, it is also a living landscape, where people live, work, and spend their leisure time. Protecting and developing this cultural landscape requires careful attention to this combination. Moreover, rapid urban development, function change, and climate change can level or standardize these rural landscapes, negating their characteristic spatial differences and risking the loss of cultural identity.
The legal instruments (such as the Dutch Monuments and Historic Buildings Act 1988/2012) that aim to preserve the state of monuments and sites do not apply to such living cultural landscapes that continuously change due to agrarian and other economic developments. In the Netherlands, where agricultural systems are the most intensive in Europe, the legal protection of cultural heritage landscapes is extremely problematic. In fact, the Netherlands is one of the few countries with hardly any protected cultural landscapes (UNEP-WCMC 2017). The Dutch government did recently ratify the European Landscape Convention (Council of Europe 2000), which promotes the protection, management, and planning of European landscapes and organizes European cooperation on landscape issues; this illustrates that cultural landscapes are high on the political agenda. And three cultural landscapes were designated as world heritage in recent decades: Schokland and Surroundings (1995), the Defense Line of Amsterdam (1996) and the Beemster Polder (1999) (World Heritage List 2017). However, these are weak forms of protection, since they have hardly any legal basis. More largely, political pressure from landowners, in particular farmers and their representatives, makes it almost impossible to protect landscape with legislation because it leaves little space for future development.
But that does not mean that cultural landscapes have no protection in the Netherlands. During the second half of the twentieth century, the protection of cultural landscapes became part of the political discussion that resulted in important spatial planning instruments embedded in the Dutch Spatial Planning Act. An important milestone in this respect was the 1977 policy document, Vision on Landscape Construction, that pleaded for the integral development of the landscape using its existing structure and its historical situation as a basis in order to ensure that development created a recognizable environment with its own identity. This was followed by the first national mapping of cultural values in the rural area by the national government (CRM 1979).
Another important document was the 1999 Belvedere Memorandum, a national policy document that examined the relationship between landscape history and spatial planning. It considered cultural historic values important to identity and a sense of purpose, a resource against globalization, a source of information and inspiration, and forms of aesthetic, ecological, and economic importance. Conservation through development is its motto. By seeking new uses for historical landscapes and buildings, cities and countries can save them; by using cultural heritage in a frugal and responsible manner, one could invest in developing and strengthening of identity, knowledge, comfort, the business climate, and the potential for tourism (Belvedere 1999). The document proposes that the interaction between cultural history and spatial planning, and the recognition of the difference in perspectives of stakeholders, can create the conditions for discovering a new balance between retaining cultural heritage and developing it (Belvedere 1999). This process of development can help renew citizens’ engagement with cultural heritage.
This type of policy document influenced Dutch planning, inviting professional groups, already directed toward the future, to look backward, and encouraging historians, who used to look only backward, to take stock of the future (Bosma 2010). The result was planning instruments that embraced the idea that historic valuable landscapes should be used in such way that preserves them and at the same time gives them a valuable use. But how are these principles put into practice?
Planning Instruments and the Noordoostpolder
Statutory spatial plans play an important role in land-use planning and management in the Netherlands. The Dutch Spatial Planning Act prescribes and regulates statutory spatial plans attending to cultural heritage (and other issues) at the level of the national government, the province, and the municipality (Needham 2007).
The Dutch government can set spatial policy in different ways, but works mainly through national structure plans for a policy sector or broad aspect of spatial policy, and through a Memorandum on Spatial Planning. In 2012, the National Policy Strategy for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning came into force. In this policy document, the NOP as a whole is among the thirty selected areas that jointly exhibit the social dynamics of the reconstruction of the Netherlands after World War II (in the period 1940–1965). The complementary National Policy Strategy for Heritage and Space explains the core qualities of these areas, describing the NOP as large-scale land reclamation with rationally distributed agricultural farmhouses and yards and a functional pattern of roads with associated planting. It also notes the ring of villages around the main core (Emmeloord) as an important characteristic. According to this plan, provinces and municipalities should model new development on these characteristics in their future planning.
Here, the Dutch government focuses on administrative agreements with provinces and municipalities on development-oriented protection zoning. It asks a province to make a Provincial Regional Plan or a Provincial Environmental Plan setting out the desired future development of the province. That plan is self-binding: It binds the province to act in accordance with its own plan and coordinates the actions of the province itself. Because the province is empowered to regulate the action of lower authorities, it can have great consequences for the involved municipalities: It can give or withhold approval to their new Municipal Zoning Plans. For the NOP as a whole, the Environmental Plan Flevoland 2006–2015 is still in effect, offering a policy framework for the municipalities to elaborate on. It puts forward ambitions for enhancing the vitality of the landscape (e.g., new functions), ensuring and improving the quality of the countryside (e.g., strengthening spatial structures), and handling existing situations and functions (e.g., facilitating development). The plan cites the World Heritage site, Schokland, and the villages Urk and Nagele as important basic features of the NOP that needs to be preserved, some historical objects (e.g., pumping stations, bridges), the main water courses, the inner ring road, and the open landscape in the center.
On the municipal level, the Municipal Structure Plan (which is not obligatory) sets out the desired future development of the municipality as a whole, including the framework for the zoning plan(s) and the plans for various sectors of the municipality (e.g., housing, transport, employment). The most important planning instrument is the Municipal Zoning Plan, which sets out the activities which may make take place on the land in a designated area, ‘in so far as this necessary for good ordering of land.’ This zoning plan is the basis on which a municipality can grant permits for development. It is the only operational plan. The zoning plan can be very general or very detailed and is legally binding. Municipalities are also obliged to make a land-use plan for the land outside the built-up areas, which is to say the rural areas. The ‘Rural Zoning Plan Noordoostpolder 2004’ is the most important plan for the landscape of the NOP. It is a generic planning framework for the protection and development of this rural area, focused on regulating the main land uses.
In the Netherlands, such statutory plans protect landscapes such as the NOP to some degree by indicating the landscape character and describing historical landscape structures. However, the plans remain descriptive, only identifying important characteristics in a very general way and providing hardly any clues for how developers or municipalities might make use of them in future plans. Though often perceived as restrictive, the plans do leave room for developers to interpret them—which often results in ‘misinterpretations’ and destruction of important landscape features, such as the characteristic structures and openness of polders (e.g., encroachment of typical open areas by new farm buildings).
A Critical Design Perspective for Development and Protection
In the NOP, development means adapting the polder to agricultural demands (e.g., extra and bigger farm buildings), to housing projects, and to energy transition away from fossil fuels (e.g., wind turbines, water storage). In order to accommodate such development within a cultural heritage landscape, and to facilitate change in an effective way, a design perspective is needed. Design is about changing situations into preferred ones and is future-oriented. Therefore, describing and indicating the landscape character, as the statutory plans do, is not sufficient. Planning instruments should also provide design knowledge to guide and direct landscape change in a responsible manner, while providing clues for spatial development in the form of design principles or—in this case ‘polder grammar.’ The polder grammar is the set of structural rules and principles that determines the characteristic composition of the landscape: the complexity of the pattern, the morphology, the visual qualities—and with that, the cultural identity of the polder. Knowledge of the polder grammar is the starting point for new changes in the landscape or adding a new design layer. It respectfully guides and directs landscape change.
The preservation and development of cultural heritage landscapes like the NOP is a public valuation of tangible (physical) and intangible (social and political) characteristics of the past and asserts a public interest in things traditionally regarded as private. In that respect, heritage landscapes are cultural resources that need to be handled with care. Modern cultural heritage landscapes such the NOP are preserved through governmental planning in the Netherlands, embracing the idea that historic landscape features should be used in such way that preserves them and at the same time gives them a valuable use. This process of protection through planning is more complex and contextual than legal protection. And it is part of a dynamic, political process instead of only belonging to the realm of experts (Renes 2004), which means that more people and organizations are involved. Preservation by planning thus depends on coalitions between partners.
Though the statutory plans in the Netherlands provide an important basis for preservation through planning, with generalized descriptions of important cultural–historical landscape characteristics, the process also calls for augmenting those statutes with design principles in order to make them effective tools for development. Particularly on the provincial and municipal levels, one can find promising developments in this direction, with planners implementing new analytical frameworks for understanding and management as vehicles for translating their ambitions into practical applications. Preservation through planning can build capacity, involve local stakeholders, and stir public debate about the significance of historical landscape features and how to use them in new ways.
This paper is based on an invited lecture presented at the ‘International symposium on conservation and utilization of modern industrial heritage; contemporary subjects in the Netherlands, Italy, China, Germany, Indonesia, and Japan.’ Tokyo, March 4, 2017, and March 5, 2017.
- Belvedere (1999) The Belvedere memorandum: a policy document examining the relationship between cultural history and spatial planning. Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague Google Scholar
- Bosma K (2010) Heritage policy in spatial planning. In: Bloemers T (ed) The cultural landscape & heritage paradox: protection and development of the Dutch archaeological-historical landscape and its European dimension. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, pp 641–651Google Scholar
- Bosma K, Andela G (1983) The landscape of the IJsselmeer polders. In: Bosma K et al (eds) Het Nieuwe Bouwen, Amsterdam 1920–1960. Delft University Press, Delft, pp 142–174Google Scholar
- Council of Europe (2000) European landscape convention. s.n., FlorenceGoogle Scholar
- CRM (1979) Natuurwaarden en cultuurwaarden in het landelijk gebied: Een inventarisatie. [Natural and cultural values of the countryside: an inventory]. Staatsuitgeverij, Den HaagGoogle Scholar
- De 8 en Opbouw (1952) Een plan voor het dorp Nagele [A plan for the village Nagele]. Forum 7(4/5):172–178Google Scholar
- Fairchlough G et al (2008) New heritage, an introductory essay—people, landscape and change. In: Fairclough G (ed) The heritage reader. Routledge, London, pp 297–312Google Scholar
- Feddes Y (ed) (2012) Landschapsvisie Noordoostpolder. Landschap van rust en regelmaat. s.n., UtrechtGoogle Scholar
- Geurts A (1997) De Groene IJsselmeerpolders. Inrichting van het landschap in Wieringermeer, Noordoostpolder, Oostelijk en Zuidelijk Flevoland [The green IJsselmeer polders. The design and construction of the landscape in Wieringermeer, Noordoostpolder, Oostelijk en Zuidelijk Flevoland]. Uitgeverij de twaalfde provincie, LelystadGoogle Scholar
- Head L (2000) Cultural landscapes and environmental change. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
- HIPO (1969) The record (or history) of the impoldering of the Hachirogata. Hachirogata Impoldering Project Office, Ogata Mura (in Japanese)Google Scholar
- Minderhout A, Granpré Molière M, Bijhouwer J et al (1955) De Noord-Oost Polder. Forum 10(1/2):1–52Google Scholar
- Needham B (2007) Dutch land use planning: planning and managing land use in the Netherlands, the principles and the practice. Sdu Uitgevers, The HagueGoogle Scholar
- Nijhuis S (2016) Polderscapes: the landscape architecture of the Dutch Lowlands. Fengjing Yuanlin (Landsc Archit) 8:38–57. https://doi.org/10.14085/j.fjyl.2016.08.0038.20
- RIJP (1986–1990) Wording en opbouw van de Noordoostpolder: Geschiedenis van de ontginning en eerste ontwikkeling (1940-ca. 1960) (4 dln.) [Planning and construction of the Noordoostpolder: history of the reclamation and first development] Rijksdienst voor de IJsselmeerpolders, LelystadGoogle Scholar
- Steenbergen C, Reh W, Nijhuis S, Pouderoijen M (2009) The Polder Atlas of the Netherlands. Pantheon of the Lowlands. THOTH Publishers, BussumGoogle Scholar
- UNEP-WCMC (2017) Protected area profile for Netherlands from the world database of protected areas. https://www.protectedplanet.net/country/NLD. Accessed 11 Jan 2017
- Van der Ven G (2004) Man-made lowlands. History of water management and land reclamation in the Netherlands. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
- Van der Wal C, Bruggenkamp JWC, Oterdoom D (1992) De ruimtelijke opbouw van de Noordoostpolder. De jongere bouwkunst en stedebouw in de Noordoostpolder in het kader van het Monumenten Inventarisatie Project (MIP) [The spatial construction of the Nooroostpolder]. Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, LelystadGoogle Scholar
- Van Woensel J (1999) Nieuwe dorpen op nieuw land. Inrichting van de dorpen in Wieringermeer, Noordoostpolder, Oostelijk en Zuidelijk Flevoland [New villages on new land. The design and construction of villages in Wieringermeer, Noordoostpolder, Oostelijk en Zuidelijk Flevoland]. Uitgeverij de twaalfde provincie, LelystadGoogle Scholar
- World Heritage List (2017) Unesco World Heritage List: Dutch properties inscribed on the World Heritage List. http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/nl. Accessed 11 Jan 2017
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this license to share adapted material derived from this chapter or parts of it.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.