The undebated issue of justice: silent discourses in Dutch flood risk management

Flood risk for all types of flooding is projected to increase based on climate change projections and increases in damage potential. These challenges are likely to aggravate issues of justice in flood risk management (henceforth FRM). Based on a discursive-institutionalist perspective, this paper explores justice in Dutch FRM: how do institutions allocate the responsibilities and costs for FRM for different types of flooding? What are the underlying conceptions of justice? What are the future challenges with regard to climate change? The research revealed that a dichotomy is visible in the Dutch approach to FRM: despite an abundance of rules, regulations and resources spent, flood risk or its management, are only marginally discussed in terms of justice. Despite that the current institutional arrangement has material outcomes that treat particular groups of citizens differently, depending on the type of flooding they are prone to, area they live in (unembanked/embanked) or category of user (e.g. household, industry, farmer). The paper argues that the debate on justice will (re)emerge, since the differences in distributional outcomes are likely to become increasingly uneven as a result of increasing flood risk. The Netherlands should be prepared for this debate by generating the relevant facts and figures. An inclusive debate on the distribution of burdens of FRM could contribute to more effective and legitimate FRM

Water sector reform in Italy and in the Netherlands: ambitious change with an uncertain outcome versus consensus-seeking moderate change

This article aims at analysing the commonalities and differences in recent water sector reforms in Italy and in the Netherlands. The reforms in both countries are characterized by similar goals of achieving greater transparency and efficiency, and comparable governance ideas regarding the establishment of integrated water companies. However, there appears to be a gap between the reforms as initially intended and the way in which they were realized. Although the reform idea of forming integrated water companies has been maintained in Italy, its realization has been postponed, whereas in the Netherlands this reform idea has been replaced by a bottom-up implementation approach, stimulating cooperation rather than integration projects within the water sector. An assessment of the accomplishment of the reform goals conducted in the Netherlands shows that greater transparency and efficiency have been realized to some extent, whereas in Italy any systematic information on this issue has been unavailable. Our analysis of the reasons for the gaps between the reforms as originally intended and the way in which they have been realized shows some similarities between the two countries in the sense of highly institutionalized practices. There are, however, also substantial differences between these two countries. In Italy, there are no networks of water organizations, which explains the lack of local and regional commitment to the centrally desired changes, resulting in their slow execution. In the Netherlands, these networks are powerful enablers with strong coalitions, which have resisted the compulsory implementation of radical changes