Making Room for the River

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings: In this study we analyze plan integration for flood resilience in the city of Nijmegen, the site of the largest Room for the River project in The Netherlands. Little is known about the degree to which local and regional plans are coordinated with the national Room for the River program or about the cumulative influence of plans on flood vulnerability. To effectively investigate these issues, we use and build upon the Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard (PIRS) concept and method, which analyzes the consistency and effects of networks of plans on community vulnerability. We expand the scope to include plans from multiple administrative scales and the focus to include environmental vulnerability. Using a three-phase evaluation process, we demonstrate that Room for the River policies are well integrated in Nijmegen’s network of plans, particularly with respect to flood safety and natural protection. However, we also find that policies at different administrative scales lack consistency in some places, some socially vulnerable neighborhoods receive comparatively little policy attention, and local plans often prioritize development over flood resilience, though higher tier plans sometimes make up for these policy gaps. Flood resilience is still finding its way in the Dutch planning system.

Takeaway for practice: The PIRS offers planning practitioners a method to assess how networks of plans influence community vulnerability and, as demonstrated in this analysis, to determine the degree to which plans at multiple administrative scales target the most physically, socially, and environmentally vulnerable geographic areas. It can be used to support the ambitious goals of a program like Room for the River and align them with local development priorities.

Keywords:

• flood resilience
• hazard vulnerability
• land use planning
• plan integration

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Matthijs Lenis, Maarten van Ginkel, Mustafa Sorkhabi, and Mathieu Schouten for their invaluable assistance. Matthew Malecha also offered great critiques and suggestions on early drafts.

RESEARCH SUPPORT

This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), Award Number 1545837. The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the NSF.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Supplemental data for this article can be found on the publisher’s website.

Notes

Notes

1 For this study, we had access to the raw material of the country reports that were the basis of the overall 2017 ESPON publication Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe.

2 Mercuriuspark Redevelopment Plan is the only local land use plan to receive a negative score (−4.00) in the embanked portion, a result of an ambitious push for redevelopment of the area without much explicit consideration of offsetting this with flood resilience policies.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Siyu Yu

SIYU YU, AICP ([email protected]) is an assistant professor in the Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning at Texas A&M University.

A. D. Brand

A. D. BRAND ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher at Delft University of Technology.

Philip Berke

PHILIP BERKE ([email protected]) is a research professor in the Department of City and Regional Planning at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.