Don’t Shoot the Messenger–Reflections on streamlining and simplification of Environmental Assessment in the Netherlands

The Netherlands’ Environmental Assessment (EA) system has continuously been discussed with calls for streamlining and simplifying. This paper aims to provide an overview and to examine these discussions, including their more fundamental background. To this end, we discuss the origins of the Dutch EA-system, its practice, the critique, the regulator’s reaction by changing institutional arrangements, and the consequences. We conclude that politically, EA is blamed for cumbersome planning and decision-making, while professionals are more nuanced. We see a process of persistent cumbersome planning and decision-making about plans and projects in a country in which environment and nature are under pressure. This situation is resulting in impromptu ‘escape routes’ and evermore detailed EA-studies that are costly, time-consuming, lack quality, are contested, and often fail before court. This process is observed for a long time. Although most studies stressed that streamlining and simplifying will not help in accelerating the planning process, nevertheless regulatory changes aimed at this because of political pressure. Overall, as a consequence of the simplification of regulations and the reduction of safeguards, the advanced and comprehensive nature of the original Dutch EIA-system has been called into question. EA as a messenger intrinsically will always be subject to critique.</p

Functional-Spatial Sustainability Potentials of Integrated Infrastructure Planning

AbstractIn response to societal, political and financial-economic dynamics, a trend towards integration of road infrastructure planning and planning of other land use functions can be observed. Effects of this trend – which is especially visible in the Netherlands, but can also be recognized in other countries – are observable in spatial development plans, designs and projects, as well as the organizational sides of planning. In this paper we take a substantial perspective regarding these innovations; we make a distinction between broadening of the functional scope and the spatial scope of projects. Both deserve careful consideration in the optimization of synergy among planning sectors, which can be seen as a concrete reflection of often abstract sustainability principles. Traditional barriers between spatial policy sectors (‘silos’) have to be overcome in order to optimize this synergy, while traditional administrative boundaries often hamper the definition of optimal project areas needed for context-specific infrastructure development. This paper aims to analyse the broadening of these scopes from a theoretical and empirical perspective. In order to examine the relationship between planning scopes and sustainability of outcomes we propose an analytical framework based on a review of scientific literature and policy documents. After this we explore the position of these concepts within Dutch road infrastructure planning and build on the experiences gained through our involvement in the development of a planning instrument for sustainable integrated developments. The insights are used to draw conclusions about the relationship between the functional and spatial scope of infrastructure projects and their potential contribution to a more sustainable road infrastructure planning practice, in terms of synergy and spatial quality. Furthermore, possible consequences for the organizational side of infrastructure planning are discussed

Enhancing the Use of Flood Resilient Spatial Planning in Dutch Water Management:A Study of Barriers and Opportunities in Practice

Around the world, deltaic and coastal regions like the Netherlands are facing challenges from climate, change such as sea-level rise as well as more frequent and extreme natural events. Since 2009, the Dutch government has tried to mitigate flood vulnerability by deploying a balanced mix of flood protection measures, resilient spatial planning and crisis management (Multi-Layer Safety). However, recent evaluations have concluded that resilient spatial planning is (too) limitedly applied in practice. This article aims to understand the barriers and opportunities for resilient spatial planning in flood risk management by comparing two cases where resilient spatial planning was opted for: Dordrecht and the IJssel-Vecht Delta. The study suggests a large gap between the wide array of possible measures, and those that are actually realized in practice. Three physical-spatial barriers were identified: maximum flood depths, lack of space, and rigidity of the existing built environment. Additionally, institutional-organizational barriers were found, including: a false, low or non-existent safety perception or risk awareness, and therefore a lack of urgency to act; a lack of political and societal support; a suboptimal collaboration between stakeholders; ambiguity regarding responsibilities; finances and a cost-benefit imbalance; and a lack of human capital. Subsequently, the article explores possibilities to overcome these barriers. Overcoming these barriers can pave pathways for flood resilient spatial planning. The institutional-organizational barriers appear surmountable, whereas the physical-spatial barriers prove to be more problematic and form the most important restrictive factor for resilient spatial planning in flood risk management

Modifying social impact assessment to enhance the effectiveness of company social investment strategies in contributing to local community development

Good practice social impact assessment (SIA) should lead to improved local community development outcomes. However, the social benefits alleged to flow from projects are often not as evident to affected communities as the project's adverse impacts. Projects still give inadequate attention to social issues and fail to achieve social development outcomes. Using a prominent gas project in Russia, the Nord Stream 2 project, as an illustrative example, we explore the potential of environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) to enhance the effectiveness of project contributions to local community development. We analyse the main steps of the community development process for the Nord Stream 2 project, and consider how it benefitted from the SIA process. We also reflect on the potential further contribution of SIA to community development. Even though SIA and community development are interrelated, we conclude that SIA, as currently practiced, is constrained in its ability to contribute to community development outcomes. Adjustments to the SIA and corporate social investment frameworks are needed to make them more effective in achieving social development outcomes.</p

Stakeholder views about Land Use and Transport Integration in a rapidly-growing megacity:Social outcomes and integrated planning issues in Seoul

Land use and transport integration (LUTI) has been promoted around the world as essential for sustainable urbanization. Using Seoul as a case study, this paper critically examines if and how LUTI policy can bring positive social outcomes, including accessibility and quality of life, in rapidly-growing megacities. We explored stakeholder views about the experience of these outcomes in different localities, and about critical elements and processes needed to enhance social outcomes. Our research identified that facilitating compact urban form around transport nodes does not guarantee increased accessibility or livelihood opportunities. The outcomes are closely related to the quality of development around nodes, accessibility to public facilities, local mobility, and functionality of pedestrian paths. Ensuring sustainability of social outcomes from LUTI approach requires: balancing restrictions and incentives to control quality of development around nodes; creating cost-effective strategies to maintain local environmental quality; applying flexible rules to address varying priorities and opportunities in different localities; and multi-level planning that balances the responsibilities of metropolitan and local stakeholders to facilitate desired outcomes. We conclude that, in rapidly-growing cities, a flexible and holistic approach to integration should be applied to reflect diverse needs and local circumstances and to ensure fair benefits across the city

Wie zit aan het stuur? Sturingsscenario’s voor publieke mobiliteit en hubs in het landelijk gebied

Bereikbaarheid in landelijke gebieden is cruciaal voor maatschappelijke deelname en kansengelijkheid. In landelijke gebieden in Nederland ervaart 12% van de bevolking een laag niveau van bereikbaarheid, terwijl de auto dominant is geworden. Het leidt tot grotere afstanden tot dagelijkse activiteiten en benadeelt degenen die afhankelijk zijn van het openbaar vervoer. Dit dilemma raakt aan vragen over rechtvaardigheid, investeringen in openbaar vervoer, en de verdeling van de effecten van beleid.Het artikel haakt in op de opkomst van het concept 'publieke mobiliteit' waar een flexibelere inzet van publieke middelen om 'de juiste mobiliteit op de juiste plaats en tijd' te bieden centraal staat. Het ideaalbeeld is een collectief vervoerssysteem van geïntegreerde mobiliteitsdiensten dat de reiziger van A naar B brengt. De realisatie va publieke mobiliteit vraagt om samenwerking tussen publieke en private actoren op verschillende schaalniveaus om te komen tot een integraal mobiliteitssysteem. De sturing van dit systeem wordt echter gekenmerkt door institutionele fragmentatie.Om de beleidskeuzen voor de sturing van publieke mobiliteit in landelijke gebieden te verkennen hebben we vijf scenario’s ontwikkeld geformuleerd langs de dimensies schaal en verantwoordelijkheid. Elk scenario vertegenwoordigt een andere benadering van publieke mobiliteit: 1) Markt, Centraal; 2) Overheid, Centraal; 3) Markt, Decentraal; 4) Overheid, Decentraal; 5) Netwerk, Schaal overstijgend. De scenario’s richten zich op een tijdshorizon tot 2040 en leggen de focus op rurale mobiliteitshubs als fysieke schakels tussen collectief vervoer, vraagafhankelijk vervoer en deelmobiliteit.Tijdens de kampvuursessie gebruiken we de scenario's als denkoefening om beleidskeuzen voor de sturing van publieke mobiliteit te verkennen

Naar duurzaam en naadloos geïntegreerde eilandverbindingen.:Toekomstscenario’s voor de Waddeneilanden.

Natuur-beschadigende en kostbare baggeractiviteiten in de Waddenzee zijn momenteel noodzakelijk om de veerverbindingen tussen Holwerd en Ameland en Lauwersoog en Schiermonnikoog in stand te houden. Om deze redenen zijn voor de concessieperiode vanaf 2030 duurzaamheid en betrouwbaarheid op de lange termijn belangrijke elementen in de herziening van het vervoersconcept. Deelvervoer biedt kansen voor een duurzame en kostenefficiënte exploitatie van de veerdiensten. Dit vraagt echter om een zorgvuldige afweging van belangen van onder meer de rederij, bewoners, vervoerders, ondernemers, bezoekers en overheden. In dit onderzoek verkenden we het potentieel van delen in de keten van personen- en goederenvervoer naar Ameland en Schiermonnikoog. Eerst analyseerden we het vigerend beleid op verschillende schaalniveaus en de trends in het vervoer naar de Waddeneilanden. Daarnaast voerden we interviews uit met stakeholders (n=18). Op basis van deze analyse hebben we vier toekomstscenario’s geschetst met verschillende maten van delen en ketenintegratie: 1) Heft in eigen hand; 2) Samen eigen verantwoordelijkheid; 3) Samen zorgeloos op pad; en 4) Comfort op maat. Vervolgens hebben we in twee focusgroepen gereflecteerd op de betekenis van deze scenario’s in de praktijk. We concluderen dat deelconcepten kansrijk zijn voor het vervoer naar de Schiermonnikoog en Ameland, mits de rederij proactief maatschappelijke actoren betrekt, de veerdienst als integraal onderdeel van de keten wordt benaderd en de vloot wordt opgebouwd uit kleinere schepen