Developing collaborative capacity in pilot projects: Lessons from three Dutch flood risk management experiments

Popering-Verkerk, Jitske van; Buuren, Arwin van

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.141

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(68 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a similar vein, the living lab in Antwerp was discontinued after local elections in 2018. Being located outside regular organisational practices gives a project freedom (see Gothenburg), yet this position also runs the risk of remaining a "stand-alone," disconnected from these regular practices (van Popering-Verkerk & van Buuren, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diverging Ambitions and Instruments for Citizen Participation across Different Stages in Green Infrastructure Projects

Willems

Molenveld

Voorberg

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both theory and practice increasingly argue that creating green infrastructure in order to make cities climate-proof requires joint public service delivery across the green infrastructure’s lifecycle. Accordingly, citizen participation in each green infrastructure project stage is required, but the type of participation may differ. So far, limited research has been conducted to detangle how participation in green infrastructure projects is operationalised along the different project stages. This article, therefore, presents a comparative case study of nine European green infrastructure projects, in which we aim to determine: (1) how participatory ambitions may differ across green infrastructure project phases; and (2) which instruments are used to realise the participatory ambitions for each phase and whether these instruments differ across stages. The cases demonstrate different participation ambitions and means in the three project phases distinguished in this article (i.e., design, delivery, and maintenance). The design and maintenance stages resulted in high participation ambitions using organisational instruments (e.g., living labs, partnerships with community groups) and market-based instruments (e.g., open calls). In the delivery phase, participation ambitions decreased significantly in our cases, relying on legal instruments (e.g., statutory consultation) and communicative instruments (e.g., community events). Altogether, our exploratory study helps to define participation across the green infrastructure lifecycle: Early stages focus on creating shared commitment that legitimises the green infrastructure, while later stages are also driven by instrumental motives (lowering management costs). Although theory argues for profound participation in the delivery stage as well, our cases show the contrary. Future research can assess this discrepancy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diverging Ambitions and Instruments for Citizen Participation across Different Stages in Green Infrastructure Projects

Willems

Molenveld

Voorberg

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Van Buuren et al, 2015). Government facilitation is trial and error, and when some first steps are taken, for example in a pilot, positive feedback and increasing returns can pave the way for more facilitation (Baumgartner & Jones, 2001; Van Popering-Verkerk & Van Buuren, 2017).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding local energy initiatives for example, local authorities use a patched up strategy that is incidental and limited to ad hoc and episodic adaptations, thereby avoiding explicit struggles with the status quo (Warbroek & Hoppe, 2017). In the water sector, pilots, which are a form of patching up, are frequently used to introduce governance innovations (Van Popering-Verkerk & Van Buuren, 2017). In addition, institutional bricolage is used in this sector to safeguard traditional administrative values when new ways of working are introduced.…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Marker Wadden case, the mismatch between the external initiative and the bureaucratic organization was bypassed by explicitly setting up the project as a pilot, in relative isolation from the rest of the organization. Consequently, the people working on the project had greater discretion to deviate from the organization’s standards, resulting in a more invitational form of facilitation (Van Popering-Verkerk & Van Buuren, 2017). This is an example of patching up: only part of the bureaucratic organization changed its strategy, and this made it less threatening to the status quo (Genschel, 1997).…”

Section: Explanations For Public Authorities’ Strategy Changementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The U-Turn in Government Facilitation: How Dutch Water Authorities Facilitate Nongovernmental Initiatives

Grotenbreg

2019

Public Works Management & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public authorities in infrastructure, aiming to facilitate societal initiatives, explore new forms of collaboration with nongovernmental actors. A comparative case study of two Dutch initiatives is conducted: energy generation at a public dam and the realization of a nature reserve. It is analyzed how and why the authorities’ strategy regarding their nongovernmental partners changes over time. Authorities’ strategy change is modeled on two axes: governmental investments and governmental influence, and a differentiation is made between limited facilitation, invitational facilitation, partnering, and Design, Build, Finance, Maintain, and Operate. A U-turn-shaped pattern in authorities’ strategy is found: Authorities move from partnering to limited facilitation and subsequently revert to invitational facilitation. Institutional factors, process factors, and initiative characteristics are identified that explain the strategy changes. It is concluded that government facilitation is a dynamic, interactive process and that authorities adapt their strategy to the initiative at hand and are pragmatic in their approach.

show abstract

“…When applying these strategies, actors produce outcomes such as changes or new solutions, policies, or services [15] (p. 11). Working towards these changes/transformations in FRM is typically done in pilot projects which provide an opportunity for experimenting and learning [16,17]. Knowledge and experiences acquired from pilot projects are often valuable lessons for upscaling of pilot project results [16,18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive Capacities for Diversified Flood Risk Management Strategies: Learning from Pilot Projects

Cosoveanu

Buijs

Bakker

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diversification of flood risk management strategies (FRMS) in response to climate change relies on the adaptive capacities of institutions. Although adaptive capacities enable flexibility and adjustment, more empirical research is needed to better grasp the role of adaptive capacities to accommodate expected climate change effects. This paper presents an analytical framework based on the Adaptive Capacity Wheel (ACW) and Triple-loop Learning. The framework is applied to evaluate the adaptive capacities that were missing, employed, and developed throughout the ‘Alblasserwaard-Vijfheerenlanden’ (The Netherlands) and the ‘Wesermarsch’ (Germany) pilot projects. Evaluations were performed using questionnaires, interviews, and focus groups. From the 22 capacities of ACW, three capacities were identified important for diversifying the current FRMS; the capacity to develop a greater variety of solutions, continuous access to information about diversified FRMS, and collaborative leadership. Hardly any capacities related to ‘learning’ and ‘governance’ were mentioned by the stakeholders. From a further reflection on the data, we inferred that the pilot projects performed single-loop learning (incremental learning: ‘are we doing what we do right?’), rather than double-loop learning (reframing: ‘are we doing the right things?’). As the development of the framework is part of ongoing research, some directions for improvement are highlighted.

show abstract

Developing collaborative capacity in pilot projects: Lessons from three Dutch flood risk management experiments

Cited by 29 publications

References 34 publications

Diverging Ambitions and Instruments for Citizen Participation across Different Stages in Green Infrastructure Projects

Diverging Ambitions and Instruments for Citizen Participation across Different Stages in Green Infrastructure Projects

The U-Turn in Government Facilitation: How Dutch Water Authorities Facilitate Nongovernmental Initiatives

Adaptive Capacities for Diversified Flood Risk Management Strategies: Learning from Pilot Projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About