Hydraulic engineering in the social-ecological delta: understanding the interplay between social, ecological, and technological systems in the Dutch delta by means of &amp;#8220;delta trajectories.&amp;#8221;

Staveren, Martijn F. van; Tatenhove, J.P.M. van

doi:10.5751/es-08168-210108

Cited by 97 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, if subsidence continues, sediment is excluded, and sea-level rise also intensifies, the delta will lose elevation and be ever-reliant on engineered adaptations (e.g. dykes) once they have been initiated (van Staveren and van Tatenhove, 2016). This encourages continued upgrade of the engineering systems.…”

Section: Impacts Of the Engineered Adaptation On The Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Technological advances are expensive to implement and it is economically more efficient to continue along the line of the existing pathway (e.g. heightening or reinforcing current structures) as opposed to introducing a completely new strategy, which may also be faced with opposition from communities, for example (van Staveren and van Tatenhove, 2016).…”

Section: Impacts Of the Engineered Adaptation On The Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is noteworthy that the concept of coevolution is not explicitly considered within these examples, but is implied. For example, van Staveren and van Tatenhove (2016) discuss the interplay between nature and engineering technology in the Dutch delta system. Van Koningsveld et al (2008) also describes how the Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt delta has developed over many centuries due to technological developments of the engineered interventions implemented to tackle a variety of hazards, such as flooding.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evolving deltas: Coevolution with engineered interventions

Welch

Nicholls

Lázár

2017

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deltaic environments are often densely populated with high socio-economic values, and thus are hotspots of climatic, environmental and anthropogenic change. Large scale engineered structures, such as dike systems, have played an important role in shaping both environmental and socio-economic conditions in deltas, with such interventions more likely where there is a high population and a wealthy economy. Engineered interventions interact with the morphological evolution of the delta, reducing or removing sedimentation and accelerating subsidence, increasing the consequences of flooding and necessitating further adaptation. They also encourage further development, reinforcing this feedback. Thus, in these cases, the deltaic landscape and associated livelihoods can be considered to be the result of a coevolution process between natural delta processes and human engineered interventions. This paper explores this hypothesis. It analyses the history of large scale engineering interventions and their implications in five representative, large, populated deltas across the globe (Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna, Yangtze, Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt, Mekong and Nile). The results demonstrate coevolution has occurred and indicate that the response type and the management approach of these engineered structures have significant implications for future delta development. To understand and manage unintended consequences and the development of lock-in trajectories in deltas, a systematic understanding of delta development, including these coevolution processes is essential.

show abstract

Section: Impacts Of the Engineered Adaptation On The Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Impacts Of the Engineered Adaptation On The Deltamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolving deltas: Coevolution with engineered interventions

Welch

Nicholls

Lázár

2017

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Anderies et al (2004), the concepts of resilience and robustness are roughly the same if the output being assessed is the continued functioning of a system. The term robustness is considered more appropriate for systems that contain engineering components, such as the flood risk system (Carpenter et al 2001, Van Staveren andVan Tatenhove 2016). Furthermore, the framing of robustness as a system's absorptive capacity makes it possible to use resilience in its original, narrow meaning (Holling 1996) for flood risk management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient flood risk strategies: institutional preconditions for implementation

Gersonius¹,

Buuren²,

Zethof³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. There is a growing recognition of resilience enhancement as an additional objective for adaptation. This will typically involve enhancing the preparedness and capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change. Within flood risk practice, resilient strategies focus on reducing impacts from flooding through better prevention and preparedness. Such strategies will not only reduce existing risk levels, but could also make the social-ecological system more robust for extreme flood events. This is because they seek to prevent those impacts on the system from which recovery is extremely difficult without outside help. Besides that, resilient strategies increase the prospect for the realization of cobenefits, particularly when measures are selected within the spatial domain. Implementing resilient strategies, however, faces many difficulties, particularly in countries like the Netherlands and Poland where prevalent governance arrangements are aimed to facilitate resistant strategies, focusing exclusively on flood protection. We analyzed these implementation difficulties for the Island of Dordrecht, which is a front-runner case of resilient flood risk governance in the Netherlands. A theoretical framework based on relevant issues regarding governance arrangements was used to reflect on the identified gaps and barriers. Although all issues played a role in the case study, there seem to be no generic institutional design parameters that have to be applied for implementing resilient strategies. Even in the current institutional regime, it is possible to find ways of implementing a resilient strategy. The more general institutional precondition has to do with the political willingness to allow for collaboration and experimentation and to enable a more flexible use of current principles and rules.

show abstract

“…This approach identifies historical patterns in the co-evolution of river dynamics, settlement patterns and technological choices (Di Baldassarre et al, 2013a, 2014a) (see also similar work by Staveren and Tatenhove, 2016, Staveren et al, 2017a, 2017b. The second approach focusses on the development and use of a generic conceptual model of 15 human-nature interactions in a floodplain which is subsequently expressed in terms of differential equations (e.g.…”

Section: Socio-hydrological Spaces Definedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-hydrological spaces in the Jamuna River floodplain in Bangladesh

Ferdous¹,

Wesselink²,

Brandimarte³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper, we propose a concept that captures the different socio-hydrological patterns that result from different societal choices on how to deal with rivers, floods and erosion: 'socio-hydrological spaces'. Socio-hydrology aims to understand the dynamics and co-evolution of coupled human-water systems. Our proposed concept will help to understand the detailed human-water interactions in a specific location. This paper uses a socio-hydrological approach to describe human-flood interactions in the Jamuna floodplain, Bangladesh. In this vast space (a braided river bed of 6-16 km) the 15 differences between land and water are temporary and shifting. To illustrate how the concept can be used, we first classified and identified socio-hydrological spaces and then validated through the analysis of primary data (household surveys and focus group discussions) and secondary data (statistics, maps etc.) that were collected in 2015 and 2016. The principal set of primary data consists of approx. 900 questionnaires on several themes: flooding, riverbank erosion, social processes of the study area. The concept of SHS draws attention to how historical patterns in the co-evolution of social behaviour, natural 20 processes and technological adoptions give rise to different landscapes, different style of living, and different ways of organizing livelihoods. However, we contend that this concept could be used in other places and for other socio-hydrological systems than floodplains.

show abstract

Hydraulic engineering in the social-ecological delta: understanding the interplay between social, ecological, and technological systems in the Dutch delta by means of “delta trajectories.”

Cited by 97 publications

References 68 publications

Evolving deltas: Coevolution with engineered interventions

Evolving deltas: Coevolution with engineered interventions

Resilient flood risk strategies: institutional preconditions for implementation

Socio-hydrological spaces in the Jamuna River floodplain in Bangladesh

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About