The Evolution of the Water Regime in the Netherlands

Kuks, Stefanus M.M.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-2484-9_4

Cited by 15 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Murray-Darling, Upper-Hunter Nationwide Canada De Loë, 2001; Nationwide Europe Buijse et al 2002;Groot et al 2008; Kuks and Bressers, 2004;Nijland and Cals, 2001;Ruchay, 1995;Staras, 2001 Danube, Elbe, Garonne, Rhine, Parrett, Seine International comparison Europe and North America Kundzewicz, 1999;Jungwirth et al 2002;Mitchell, 2005 Drau, Fraser, Kissimmee, Rhine International comparison France Buller, 1996;Pottier et al 2005 Nationwide Germany Binder, 2001Havinga and Smits, 2000;Krieger, 2008;Scholten et al 2003 Elbe, Rhine Nationwide Italy Passino, 2001 Po Netherlands Cals and Van Drimmelen, 2001;Cals et al 1998;Dijkman et al 1997;Groot and Lenders, 2006;Havinga and Smits, 2000; Heezik, van, 2006;Immink, 2005;Klijn and Duel, 2001;Kuks, 2002;Lenders, 2003;Meijerink and Wiering, 2009;Nienhuis, 2006;Nienhuis and Leuven, 2001;Schouten et al 2000;Stokkom et al 2005;Straatsma and De Nooij, 2008;Van der Werff, 2004;Wiering and Arts, 2006;Wiering and Driessen, 2001;Wiering and Immink, 2006;Witter et al 2006;Wolsink, 2006 Grevelingen, IJssel, Meuse, Rhine, Waal Nationwide Scandinavia Hildén, 2001;…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Making Space for the River: Governance Experiences with Multifunctional River Flood Management in the US and Europe

Warner¹

2012

wio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Making Space for the River: Governance Experiences with Multifunctional River Flood Management in the US and Europe

Warner¹

2012

wio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rijkswaterstaat uses a general budget assigned by the government (via taxes) (Huisman 2002). Water boards cannot rely on subsidies from the national budget to pursue their tasks-they need to refinance their activities; therefore, water boards can make use of their authority to collect their own taxes (Kuks 2002;Rijkswaterstaat 2012).…”

Section: Share Of Costs For Flood Protection Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This means that the options for private financial preventions are limited. Since 1995, it has been under consideration that the liability for flood damages be attributed to water boards and landowners (Kuks 2002). …”

Section: Liability For Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Justice and flood risk management: reflecting on different approaches to distribute and allocate flood risk management in Europe

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares the inherent notions of justice in four different approaches to flood risk management in Europe. As protection against flood risks becomes increasingly difficult, dilemmas of justice emerge: some benefits from flood protection measures whereas others loose. Decisions on whom to protect differentiate between upstream and downstream or left and right side of a river. This raises a central but barely discussed conflict: what (or rather who) should be protected against inundations? This question deals in essence with justice. Justice concerns questions over fairness in the allocation of resources, capital and wealth across different members of society. There are different and contradicting concepts of justice, which differ in interpretations of fair resource allocation and distributions. 'What's the right thing to protect' is thus a question of concepts of justice. This contribution is not an attempt to answer this fundamental question, but it offers a debate on how different concepts of justice provide different answers. These answers will then be related to flood risk management approaches in England, the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria.

show abstract

“…The Netherlands is well known for its long history of water policy. Over the years – indeed, centuries – a complex institutional structure has developed (for good overviews of the history of Dutch water policy and past and current institutional structure see Havekes et al ., ; Kuks, ). The institutional structure at the time of our research was the following (Havekes et al ., ; Kuks, ).…”

Section: Case Study: Public Participation In the European Water Framementioning

confidence: 99%

The Mechanics of Virtue: Lessons on Public Participation from Implementing the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands

Heijden

Heuvelhof

2012

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public participation is often presented as a virtue (a normative good), but the strategy comes with its own mechanical flaws. Policy debates and the literature have for a long time been dominated by this idea of public participation as a virtue, but recently the literature has become more critical, addressing the instrumental and substantive aspects of public participation. This article engages with and adds to the literature by presenting the use of public participation in implementing the European Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands. The study traces and discusses a number of mechanistic issues related to public participation. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

The Evolution of the Water Regime in the Netherlands

Cited by 15 publications

References 3 publications

Making Space for the River: Governance Experiences with Multifunctional River Flood Management in the US and Europe

Making Space for the River: Governance Experiences with Multifunctional River Flood Management in the US and Europe

Justice and flood risk management: reflecting on different approaches to distribute and allocate flood risk management in Europe

The Mechanics of Virtue: Lessons on Public Participation from Implementing the Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About