Understanding flood governance in the Dutch‐Flemish Scheldt Estuary: An evolutionary governance perspective
Vitale, C.; Crabbé, A.; Meijerink, S.; Fletcher, C.; Nijamdeen, M.; Wiering, M. (2025). Understanding flood governance in the Dutch‐Flemish Scheldt Estuary: An evolutionary governance perspective. Ocean and Society 2: 10330. https://dx.doi.org/10.17645/oas.10330
In: Ocean and Society. Cogitatio Press: Lisbon. ISSN 2976-0925, more
|   |
| Author keywords |
evolutionary governance theory; flood risk governance; nature conservation; Scheldt estuary; Sea Scheldt; Western Scheldt |
| Authors | | Top |
- Vitale, C.
- Crabbé, A., more
- Meijerink, S., more
|
- Fletcher, C.
- Nijamdeen, M.
- Wiering, M.
|
|
| Abstract |
This article presents a comparative account of the evolution of flood governance in the Dutch (Western Scheldt) and Flemish (Sea Scheldt) regions of the Scheldt estuary through the lens of evolutionary governance theory. Evolutionary governance theory is based on three assumptions: governance is continuously evolving, change is contingent, and discourses are drivers of change. Employing a comparative research design and secondary data analysis, this study examines how institutional, material, and discursive factors, goals, path dependencies, and interdependencies have shaped flood risk governance and influenced the integration of nature conservation goals alongside traditional flood safety objectives. While dike reinforcement prioritizes flood safety, integrated strategies—such as transitional polders and dike setbacks—aim to balance flood protection with ecological restoration. This is particularly pertinent in the Scheldt estuary, where ecological degradation has raised concerns regarding the long‐term loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. A significant challenge in transforming the governance of the estuary is anticipating long‐term risks while pursuing ecological and flood safety objectives. Through a longitudinal cross‐case comparison, this study identifies barriers to the adoption of nature‐based solutions in flood risk management. The findings emphasize the need for a more integrated approach that aligns flood safety and nature conservation development policies for resilient and long‐term climate solutions. |
|
