Speaker
Description
Flood risk management (FRM) in the Netherlands is historically rooted in a protectionist discourse, driven by large-scale interventions in the 20th century to mitigate fluvial and coastal flood risks (Kaufmann et al., 2018). However, the growing impacts of climate change, such as extreme weather events and rising sea levels, have intensified calls for more adaptive policies. These policies are intended to balance collective solidarity with a larger emphasis on individual preparedness, partially in response to the rising costs of recovery after pluvial floods. This study explores how Dutch residents perceive justice within FRM, using pluvial flooding as a case study.
Justice, as a normative and multifaceted concept, has increasingly been recognized as a critical consideration in spatial planning, both in academia (Moroni, 2020) and in practice (Voorontwerp Nota Ruimte, 2024). A growing body of research suggests that while differing interpretations of justice are not inherently problematic, acknowledging and explicitly addressing these differences is very important (Weghorst et al., 2024; Wijsman & Berbés-Blázquez, 2022). This study investigates how residents of flood-prone areas conceptualize and prioritize justice in decisions about flood preparedness. We analyze the narratives that underlie residents’ perceptions through interviews and compare them to institutional justice discourses.
Our findings reveal dominant narratives emphasizing government responsibility, shaped by residents’ perceived safety from floods due to large-scale flood infrastructure projects. These narratives contribute to a "silent" justice discourse (Kaufmann et al., 2018), where implicit expectations overshadow explicit debates, particularly concerning pluvial flooding. Although pluvial flooding is increasingly seen as a significant threat, residents show a limited sense of urgency for taking personal adaptive measures.
By comparing these insights with justice markers identified in the literature, we uncover key parallels and divergences, particularly regarding how justice is operationalized in societal and planning contexts. These findings highlight the challenges of transitioning from persistent protectionist paradigms to more adaptive approaches.
This study emphasizes the importance of justice-informed strategies in addressing evolving climate challenges. By focusing on the perspectives of residents, it provides a richer understanding of justice in FRM and offers actionable insights for policymakers. Furthermore, it extends existing research by examining whether justice discourses on pluvial flooding remain underdeveloped and how implicit assumptions about government responsibility influence adaptive capacities.
References
Kaufmann, M., Priest, S. J., & Leroy, P. (2018). The undebated issue of justice: Silent discourses in Dutch flood risk management. Regional Environmental Change, 18(2), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1086-0
Moroni, S. (2020). The just city. Three background issues: Institutional justice and spatial justice, social justice and distributive justice, concept of justice and conceptions of justice. Planning Theory, 19(3), 251–267. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095219877670
Voorontwerp Nota Ruimte. (2024). https://open.overheid.nl/documenten/15f91cbd-8b38-47e7-a036-5f8f4310e886/file
Weghorst, M., Buitelaar, E., & Pelzer, P. (2024). A dynamic justice framework for analyzing conceptions of justice: The case of urban development projects. Planning Theory, 14730952241280523. https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952241280523
Wijsman, K., & Berbés-Blázquez, M. (2022). What do we mean by justice in sustainability pathways? Commitments, dilemmas, and translations from theory to practice in nature-based solutions. Environmental Science and Policy, 136, 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.06.018
| Keywords | Justice perceptions; Narrative analysis; Flood Risk Management |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
