TY - JOUR
T1 - Diversification of flood risk management in the Netherlands
T2 - Implications for boundary judgement practices
AU - Vinke-de Kruijf, Joanne
AU - Groefsema, Lisette
AU - Snel, Karin A.W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Flood Risk Management published by Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Financial transaction number:
2500151680
PY - 2024/9/5
Y1 - 2024/9/5
N2 - Climate change urges water managers in low-lying deltas to diversify their flood risk management (FRM) strategies. To reduce residual risks, they increasingly need to incorporate spatial and other measures. This has implications for the boundary judgements made by water authorities, that is, the implicit and explicit decisions about who and what is relevant to include and consider. To understand these implications, we assess the boundary judgements made by a Dutch regional water authority in two diversification-oriented frontrunner projects. We distinguish between three categories of judgements: (1) substantive: the scale, domains, time horizon and solutions that are considered; (2) participation: who is involved, to what extent and when; and (3) planning and decision: the flexibility of responsibilities, financing, planning and decision-making. Our results show that, in both projects, most of the boundary judgements became wider over time as a result of pressure from or interactions with actors from outside the water sector. Hence, despite its ambition to diversify flood risk strategies, the water authority continued to draw boundaries that were too tight to allow for meaningful collaboration with actors outside the water sector. Considering the importance of reconfiguring practices in transforming FRM, we recommend more engaged research into practices.
AB - Climate change urges water managers in low-lying deltas to diversify their flood risk management (FRM) strategies. To reduce residual risks, they increasingly need to incorporate spatial and other measures. This has implications for the boundary judgements made by water authorities, that is, the implicit and explicit decisions about who and what is relevant to include and consider. To understand these implications, we assess the boundary judgements made by a Dutch regional water authority in two diversification-oriented frontrunner projects. We distinguish between three categories of judgements: (1) substantive: the scale, domains, time horizon and solutions that are considered; (2) participation: who is involved, to what extent and when; and (3) planning and decision: the flexibility of responsibilities, financing, planning and decision-making. Our results show that, in both projects, most of the boundary judgements became wider over time as a result of pressure from or interactions with actors from outside the water sector. Hence, despite its ambition to diversify flood risk strategies, the water authority continued to draw boundaries that were too tight to allow for meaningful collaboration with actors outside the water sector. Considering the importance of reconfiguring practices in transforming FRM, we recommend more engaged research into practices.
KW - boundary judgements
KW - diversification
KW - flood risk management
KW - practices
KW - water authorities
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85203044568&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jfr3.13028
DO - 10.1111/jfr3.13028
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85203044568
SN - 1753-318X
VL - 18
JO - Journal of flood risk management
JF - Journal of flood risk management
IS - 1
M1 - e13028
ER -