Search

In delta areas, flood protection structures and large-scale land reclamation are preferential water management strategies to cultivate soft delta soils. Over the past decades, river embankments, upstream dams, land reclamation, and groundwater use have intensified, and increasingly contribute to subsidence. In addition, the influence of institutions implementing these strategies has strengthened as they have acquired technical skills, knowledge, and vast financial resources. Sinking deltas are therefore trapped in a dual lock-in as dominating technology and institutions act as constraints to moving into a more long-term sustainable direction. Nine factors for the lock-in are introduced and illustrated for delta regions in Asia, Europe, and the US. To gain a better understanding of what researchers and practitioners can do to address the dual lock-in, a practical case is presented of Gouda, a Dutch subsiding city in search of more sustainable strategies and institutions. The paper ends with three steps to change the configuration of a dual lock-in: (1) getting to know the lock-in; (2) temporarily bypassing it; and (3) constituting a new, more sustainable lock-in. These steps should be further investigated in action-oriented research programmes with local experts, and targeted to policy processes and human behaviour in the sinking deltas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dutch flood management policy was for a long time dominated by a protection-oriented approach. However, in the last 10 years a more risk-oriented approach has gained ground, denoted by the introduction of the concept of multilayered safety in 2009 in the National Water Plan. Since then, the dominant policy coalition focusing on resistance has found itself competing with a growing community that emphasizes the importance of resilience. In this paper we analyze the process of policy learning in Dutch flood risk management toward a more resilient paradigm, and the resulting outcomes in terms of regime change and stability. To understand the actual degree of change we unpack the mechanisms of path dependency characterizing the current flood policy regime and how they influence the impact of policy learning in terms of regime change. We conclude that specific mechanisms of path dependency, for example, the existing power asymmetries between competing coalitions and the intricate complexity of flood policies, prevent institutional change, but cannot prevent ideas about resilience slowly gaining more impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The management of environmental pollution has changed considerably since the growth of environmental awareness in the late 1960s. The general increased environmental concern and involvement of stakeholders in today's environmental issues may enhance the need to consider risk in a much broader social context rather than just as an estimate of ecological hazard. Risk perception and the constructs and images of risks held by stakeholders and society are important items to address in the management of environmental projects, including the management of contaminated sediments. Here we present a retrospective case study that evaluates factors affecting stakeholder risk perception of contaminated sediment disposal that occurred during a remediation project in Oslo harbor, Norway. The choice to dispose dredged contaminated sediments in a confined aquatic disposal (CAD) site rather than at a land disposal site has received a lot of societal attention, attracted large media coverage, and caused many public discussions. A mixed method approach is used to investigate how risk perceptive affective factors (PAF), socio-demographic aspects, and participatory aspects have influenced the various stakeholders' preferences for the two different disposal options. Risk perceptive factors such as transparency in the decision making process and controllability of the disposal options have been identified as important for risk perception. The results of the study also support the view that there is no sharp distinction in risk perception between experts and other parties and emphasizes the importance of addressing risk perceptive affective factors in similar environmental decision-making processes. Indeed, PAFs such as transparency, openness, and information are fundamental to address in sensitive environmental decisions, such as sediment disposal alternatives, in order to progress to more technical questions such as the controllability and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are many normative answers on the question how to realize climate adaptation, ranging from pleas for the government to play a decisive role, to calls for refraining from action and relying upon spontaneous adaptation of both government and non-governmental actors. In this article, we present a Q methodological study, aimed at investigating the governance preferences among non-governmental actors in the Netherlands and the "narratives" they use to motivate these preferences. Our empirical results underline the fact that the question "how to organize adaptation", is a controversial one. The results resemble the various positions in the current academic debate about the governance of adaptation, and add important insights and nuances to it. Many respondents feel that the current climate adaptation policy is too non-committal. The dominant viewpoint underscores a need for more rules and norms and the possibility to sanction organizations that do not adapt. Minority viewpoints show an urge to stimulate and support self-organization of partners, as well as a need for more action. However, financial and regulatory preconditions are needed to stimulate actors in order to see to the necessary investments. Policy-makers have to invest in mixing their policy instruments. Clearly, most nongovernmental actors are in favor of the government setting a framework with rules and norms for climate adaption. However, the viewpoints show that this is not sufficient. The government should facilitate networks, joint efforts and create the financial and regulatory preconditions to remove current barriers blocking adaptation measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims at describing, analyzing and evaluating the relation between management styles and process dynamics of a complex planning process confronted with unexpected dynamics. The development of an aquatic disposal site for dredged contaminated sediments in Oslo was managed by a project management style focused on timely and cost-effective implementation. Coupling the remediation project with another infrastructural project and the actual construction of the site led to unexpected dynamics in terms of resistance and controversy. Project management had difficulties in adjusting its style accordingly, resulting in even more delay and resistance. Managing complex planning projects requires a style suitable to the characteristics of the project and the capability of adjusting it to changing circumstances. The paper concludes with some explanations why it is difficult to change management styles in complex planning and implementation processes and complexity-embracing approaches to deal with this. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Adaptation to climate change is a rapidly emerging policy domain. Over the last decade we have witnessed many attempts to enhance the climate robustness of agriculture, urban development, water systems, and nature to an increase in flood and drought risks due to a higher variability in rainfall patterns and sea level rise. In the vulnerable Dutch delta, regional authorities have developed adaptation measures that deal with flood risk, the availability of fresh water, subsidence, and salt water intrusion. In view of all the uncertainties that surround climate change, scientists emphasize that it should be possible to make changes when conditions change or insights evolve. The concept of adaptive governance has been introduced to facilitate the process of climate adaptation. Adaptive governance requires the availability of governance arrangements that facilitate adaptiveness by being flexible to enable adjustment. Although flexible arrangements for adaptation to climate change make sense from an adaptive governance perspective, from a more bureaucratic, political, and legal perspective, there might be good reasons to make arrangements as solid and robust as possible. In this article we answer the question to what extent the arrangements used to implement various adaptation measures are really adaptive and what mechanisms play a role in obstructing the accomplishment of adaptive arrangements. By analyzing and comparing nine adaptation cases, dealing with different climate issues, and the arrangements used to implement them from both a governance and a legal perspective, we are able to get more detailed insight into the main characteristics of the selected arrangements, their degree of adaptiveness, and the main hampering mechanisms for the creation or functioning of adaptive arrangements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]