Increasing the Adaptive Capacity in Unembanked Neighborhoods? An Exploration into Stakeholder Support for Adaptive Measures in Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Cities in deltas are vulnerable to climate change, especially their unembanked neighborhoods that are not protected by dikes. Rising sea levels and extreme water levels in the rivers can lead to the flooding of these urban areas. The Netherlands has a long history in water management. However, building dikes and the elevation of land are traditionally treated as rather stand-alone measures. Attention is rarely paid to the surrounding area, let alone to the complex context of cities and certainly not to disadvantaged neighborhoods. Yet, inner-city area redevelopment may provide opportunities to integrate flood management in these planning processes. In order to investigate the support of stakeholders for risk-reducing adaptive measures and more resilient measures, we did research in an unembanked inner-city area in the city of Rotterdam (The Netherlands), in which we conducted in-depth interviews with the central stakeholders. The main conclusion is that the most important barriers for integrating climate adaptation measures into that neighborhood are the fragmentation of water-safety policy (e.g. elevation of rebuilding locations) and the hierarchical governance arrangement in water management. This type of fragmentation led on its turn to fragmentation with other policy goals for the neighborhood. It also led to fragmentation between different areas in the same neighborhood that received political attention and those that are excluded from water-safety policy. This questions the approach in terms of social justice. An important side effect is that this governance arrangement also restricted innovation towards climate adaptation. Therefore, integrating water-safety policies in urban planning (in its capacity as a more integrative and comprehensive spatial approach) should be considered the best option to increase the adaptive capacity in delta cities. Not only can the negative effects in terms of policy fragmentation be dealt with effectively, but also spatial fragmentation can be tackled.

Capacity Building for the Integration of Climate Adaptation into Urban Planning Processes: The Dutch Experience

The institutions of the Dutch (urban) planning system face four challenging characteristics of climate adaptation measures. These measures are uncertain in their effects, in competition with other interests, multifaceted, and inherently complex. Capacity building is a key issue for the implementation of climate adaptation measures in urban planning processes, which aim to achieve Climate-Proof Cities (CPC). For successful capacity building, it is important to define the relevant stakeholders and tailor the adaptation strategies first to (the position of) these stakeholders and next to the specific urban conditions and issues. In addition, scientific insights and tools can be of assistance, and the use of climate maps can help to create a common language. Such common understanding of climate problems can lead to “goal entwinement” between actors, which can support the implementation of climate adaptation strategies in urban planning. Awareness, recognition and urgency are the most important components of this common understanding, which may differ for each stage in every urban planning process. In order to overcome the pragmatism that rules in day-to-day urban planning processes, multi-level arrangements between different tiers of government must be employed to improve the penetration of climate adaptation measures. After all, it still remains a soft interest in a hard process.

Fighting the Ignorance: Public Authorities’ and Land Users’ Responses to Land Subsidence in Indonesia

Land subsidence can have a considerable impact on the socio-economic viability of areas. In urban areas, land subsidence tends to damage buildings and infrastructures gradually, while in rural peat land it slowly destroys vegetation. The damages will worsen since climate change has further implications for the areas affected by land subsidence. In Indonesia, the response to land subsidence varies in different areas in terms of awareness, urgency and action on the part of both public authorities and land users. This paper systematically investigates these varied responses in urban and rural peat land areas. Interviews with experts and surveys of 330 land users in selected sub-districts were conducted and further supplemented by focus group discussions. We found that both the public authorities as well as the land users’ responses were considered as of limited value to contest land subsidence. We suggest that the endorsement of land users’ response into governmental policies would make a significant difference in improving land subsidence management.

Living in a Bottomless Pit: Households’ Responses to Land Subsidence, an Example from Indonesia

Land subsidence has severe physical and economic implications for both areas and people. Numerous scholars have shown that land subsidence has had massive impacts at global, national and regional levels, and that the impacts were usually responded to by the government. However, little attention has been paid to what land subsidence means to people’s daily lives and how much it costs them. To fill that gap, this article draws on empirical research carried out in three areas in Indonesia to provide a better understanding of what land subsidence means to households, and how they respond to the consequences and how much it costs them to do so. An analysis of a survey of 330 households shows that they have been suffering from various severities of impacts of land subsidence for an extended period. Whereas some of the households respond to the impacts by making small preparations or adapting to the damages, others can do nothing due to a lack of money and their continuously declining earning capacity. Thus, the affected households are effectively throwing money into a bottomless pit. We argue that these households must escape the vicious circle caused by land subsidence by increasing their income capacity or even abandoning the affected areas.

For the Greater Good?—A Critical Reflection on Assessing Indirect Economic Effects Caused by Large Transport Projects

Investing in large transport projects affects the (potential) economic development of metropolitan areas. Yet, very little critical research has been performed to understand how to assess these effects. The relationship between infrastructure investments and regional economic development is complex and indirect, and many theoretical and methodological difficulties remain. On the one hand, the assumption that investing in infrastructure is important to sustain economic growth is sometimes doubted. On the other hand, it is argued that investments in infrastructure enhance the accessibility of urban regions and that in the slipstream of such investments, social problems in urban regions can be tackled as well. Despite these contrasting views, there is at least a consensus that transport infrastructure development depends on economic development and vice versa. Yet, in many cases, the method of assessing economic impacts highly affects the results. Therefore, this paper focuses on a critical reflection of methods for estimating economic effects of infrastructure investments. A critical evaluation is made based on Indonesian and Japanese cases. After conducting in-depth desk research on both cases, we found that the broader effects on affected group of people tend to be overlooked due to the problems of time and space dimensions, the chain reaction of effects, and inappropriate data practices. The assessment on the appraisal processes tends to overlook the broader economic implication due to narrow focus and the concept of efficiency of economic theory.