Abstract
Despite several stimuli for change, flood risk management (FRM) in the Netherlands remains dominated by a probability‐reducing flood defence approach. The aim of this article is to analyse, empirically, the institutional forces for change and stability that explain particular institutional dynamics. The qualitative research revealed that even though a combination of forces for change (in the realm of discourses, actors, resources and rules) is present, their influence is partly neutralised by forces for stability. These forces for stability became incrementally and iteratively more and more institutionalised and mutually reinforced each other, thus stabilising the defence approach. As a consequence, FRM is path dependent, i.e. the development of alternative FRM approaches may be influenced by the dominant defence approach. Nevertheless, in this context, change processes of conversion and layering can be observed, which indicates that even a highly path dependent arrangement has the possibility to adapt to particular challenges.
Highlights
In terms of flooding, the Netherlands is one of the most flood-prone areas in Europe, due to its coastal location and the fact that it serves as a delta to four major river systems (De Bruijn and Klijn, 2009; Klijn et al, 2015)
Flood risk management (FRM) in the Netherlands is characterised by a defence approach to reduce the probability of flooding (Van de Ven, 2004; Van Heezik, 2006)
A number of trends emerged in recent years in Dutch flood risk management (FRM), which triggered incremental changes, for instance, adjustments of governance (Van Herk et al, 2012) or the integration of spatial planning and FRM (Hartmann and Driessen, 2013; Jong and Van Den Brink, 2013; Van Ruiten and Hartmann, 2016)
Summary
The Netherlands is one of the most flood-prone areas in Europe, due to its coastal location and the fact that it serves as a delta to four major river systems (De Bruijn and Klijn, 2009; Klijn et al, 2015). Flood risk management (FRM) in the Netherlands is characterised by a defence approach to reduce the probability of flooding (Van de Ven, 2004; Van Heezik, 2006). The frequency of major flooding is limited as embankments protect 55% of the country’s area Apart from embankments, societies would have various other strategies at their disposal to manage flood risk (see Table 1). 533; Warner et al, 2013; van Buuren et al, 2016) It appears that forces for change are counteracted by forces for stability, which contribute to the prevalence of the defence approach
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
