The Dutch dominant perspective on water: risks and opportunities involved.

To implement or continue water management strategies social support is needed. Social support highly depends on people's perspectives on water. However, these perspectives are not static and may change over time leading to changes in social support for strategies. Therefore, sustainable water management strategies should be robust. Robust strategies are able to cope with changing social and environmental developments. Lacking robustness runs the risk of losing social support, which may force policymakers into sudden or expensive measures. We use the Perspectives Method to analyze the present Dutch policy perspective and the dominant perspective on water among Dutch water professionals, by respectively studying the Dutch Delta report and questionnaire outputs and distinguishing between Hierarchical, Egalitarian, Individualistic and Fatalistic perspectives. A comparison between the policy and professional perspective shows similarities and differences. Topics regarding drought, water supply, and waters' relation to spatial planning need serious reconsideration to guarantee enough present and future social support to implement the measures suggested in the policy report.

The influence of scale preferences on the design of a water innovation: a case in Dutch river management.

The debate on scale use in river management focuses primarily on the (lack of) fit between the bio-geophysical and institutional systems. However, in this article we focus on the 'subjective' aspect of scale preferences in water governance. We apply an adapted version of the Integrated Scale Hierarchy for Rivers to determine the degree of fit between the scale preferences of the actors involved in a Dutch case study and the scale requirements of the innovative river management concept. This allows us to understand which riverine processes and characteristics are regarded as important by the different actors and to identify mismatches in scale perspectives as they manifest themselves in water management practice. We discover that inflexibility in scale use on the part of the involved actors places bounds on the design and quality of interventions and demonstrate that a more flexible use of scales in the design phase of a river management intervention has the potential to lead to more effective solutions.

On the nature based flood defence dilemma and its Resolution: A game theory based analysis.

Nature-based flood defence is an innovative design alternative for achieving protection against flooding. Despite significant advancements in science, models and concepts, routine implementation beyond pilot projects remains limited. To better understand why, we have looked into the complexities of nature-based flood defence implementation and its resolutions, modelling decision-making situations using game theory in three nature-based flood defence cases: The Markermeer Dikes, the Afsluitdijk Dam and the Sand Engine. We observe that nature-based flood defence games are of a multi-level and nested nature. While the decision of whether to employ a nature-based flood defence is seemingly made at the project level, this can only happen when it is coherent with the institutional context that is determined at the policy level. A social dilemma is apparent: while a multi-functional nature-based solution is attractive to a coalition of actors, it is not the most beneficial option for individual actors. Hence, they are faced with the dilemma of opting for their maximum benefit or opting for the greater societal benefit which is less favorable to them. This social dilemma can be tackled by making 'smart moves', as inspired by the Sand Engine case. The nested nature of the problem requires structural change in the institutional context to enable favourable conditions for nature-based flood defence implementations.