Freude am Fluss

An innovative approach to river management

Freudeam

FlussAn

innovativeapproach

toriver

managem

ent

Preface Not many European projects have a more positive title thanFreude am Fluss (enjoying along the river). The title refers towhat always has been the mission of the project. Living close toriver doesn't only entail flood risks but deeply connects to qualityof life. In Freude am Fluss this idea is put to work in the designof river management that includes the local problematic aspectsof room for the river but also provide new opportunities foreconomic and social development. This expresses and supports theparadigm shift from "fighting the floods" to "living with water"and links up with new policies expressed in the Plan-Loire III inFrance, the Water Vision of the Netherlands and many localplanning processes in Germany.

In this project partners from universities have collaborated intensively withgovernment agencies. Many others have been involved too, however, out ofwhich some 17 municipalities in the three countries deserve special note.This became visible in the three mayor conferences and in practicalplanning work jointly with the municipalities.

Freude am Fluss has delivered abundant results which became visible, forinstance, in the final conference. The research programme Living with Wateris pleased to have co-sponsored this project.Follow-up projects are under preparation to integrate the Freude am Flussresults in sustainable river management in Western Europe. The main goalis to build the ecological and institutional resilience necessary to adapt toclimate change, without forgetting the quality of the living and workingenvironment and economic possibilities.

Carel Jan ReigersmanChairman, Living with Water programme

1

Colophon

This report presents the project retrospective of the European Interreg IIIB project Freude amFluss. In this project, partners from France, the Netherlands and Germany worked on thedevelopment of new strategy for river management. More information can be found on www.freudeamfluss.eu.

AddressFreude am FlussC/o Radboud University Nijmegen - Faculty of ScienceCentre for Sustainable Management of ResourcesP.O. Box 90106500 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Text: Bart Swanenvleugel (Play-Time)Images: Freude am Fluss partners, Bart SwanenvleugelDesign: Troost communicatie, Utrecht Printing: Drukkerij Libertas, Bunnik Publication date: October 2007ISBN: 9789081058643

2

Contents 1. Introduction 4Part I Freude am Fluss 62. Context of the project 72.1. A new river management concept 82.2. River management issues in Freude am Fluss 93. Lessons learned in Freude am Fluss 113.1. Physical aspects of river management 123.2. Management aspects 134. Towards a Floodplain Stewardship 174.1. Building blocks of a Floodplain Stewardship 184.2. Remaining questions 20Part II Components of Freude am Fluss 225. Sustainable floodplain management 235.1. An ecosystem-based approach towards floodplain management 245.2. Characteristics of natural and regulated rivers 245.3. Maintaining an equilibrium between natural processes and

human actions 266. Joint Planning 336.1. What is the Joint Planning Approach? 346.2. The Joint Planning Approach and Freude am Fluss 346.3. The Joint Planning Approach in practice 347. Spatial planning products 457.1. Spatial planning products in Freude am Fluss 467.2. The search process 467.3. Regional plans 487.4. Local plans 56Part III Appendices 66

3

1. Introduction All over Northwest Europe a shift in the focus of rivermanagement policy is taking place. Until recently rivers werestrongly regulated and wedged between ever-higher dikes. As aconsequence people experienced a greater safety, which caused theland behind the river embankments to become more heavily usedand populated, resulting in ever-greater flood damage risk. Inaddition high river discharges can be expected as a result ofclimate change, which makes these areas even more vulnerable.

Innovating river management policiesThe main idea behind new river management policies is that rivers should begiven back their areas of natural horizontal expansion during floods, i.e. widefloodplains and retention areas. ‘Room for the river’ is a common name of thisnew approach. The approach aims at creating more space for the river andlowering high water levels by for example deepening the forelands of the rivers,relocating dikes further inland, lowering of groynes in the rivers and enlargingof summer beds. Apart from improving safety, the measures can also be used toimprove the quality of the landscape of the river basin.

In practice, implementation of river management policies often meets withstrong opposition of local communities and local authorities. The underlyingproblem is that the basin-wide and long-term oriented interventions by rivermanagement policy makers do not coincide with the relatively localized andshort-term oriented way of thinking of local communities. This may give riseto the Not-In-My-Back-Yard (NIMBY) effect. Local opposition invariably leadsto delays in procedures and substantially higher operational costs,sometimes even to dramatic policy failures.

In the Freude am Fluss project, Dutch, French and German governmentauthorities, river managers, natural and social scientists shared experience,knowledge and ideas on how to innovate river management policies in sucha way that the NIMBY effect is avoided and local input is turned into apositive building block of river management policies. Sharing experience,knowledge and ideas was organized by means of transnational intervision

4

teams. For the whole duration of the project, on repeated occasions allproject partners gathered for progress review, with regard to nationalcircumstances and professional experience. Appendix A gives an overview ofthe project partners.

Policy innovation has been achieved by way of designing and trying out anew policy content and new policy styles that aim at turning NIMBY intoPIMBY (Please-In-My-Back-Yard). Typically in the Freude am Fluss approach,Room for the River measures are part of larger packages that are meant toalso enhance the many cultural and economic advantages and opportunities(‘Freude’) that the river offers. In this way communities and other localstakeholders become involved in a policy planning method that guarantees aplace for local voices.

In Freude am Fluss practical cases of Room for the River measures in TheNetherlands, France and Germany were analysed and the lessons learned weredrawn up. One component was to develop a sustainable approach forfloodplain management. In the Beuningen floodplain (The Netherlands) thisnew approach has actually been applied within the frame of Freude am Fluss.Another component was to develop a Joint Planning Approach that focuseson the involvement of various stakeholders and interests in the planningprocess of river management. The Freude am Fluss principles following fromthe lessons learned and these new approaches have been applied in realplanning processes, in France, Germany and The Netherlands. Freude amFluss supported their implementation in both regional and local spatialplans.

The project Freude am Fluss took place from January 2003 to October 2008and was funded by the Interreg IIIB North West Europe Programme. The fundco-finances projects that tackle common challenges through transnationalcooperation and thus contribute to a cohesive and sustainable territorialdevelopment of North West Europe. The objectives of Freude am Fluss complywith priority 3 of the programme: “Water resources and the prevention offlood damage.”

Purpose of this reportThis report gives an overall description of Freude am Fluss. It provides acompact overview of the core activities and results of the project. Detailedinformation on these activities and results is available in variouspublications that were realized during the project (Appendix B).

From the project components of Freude am Fluss lessons were learnedregarding various aspects of river management policies. Technical issues,management issues as well as communication issues came across whiletrying out and discussing policy innovations. This report provides a synthesisof these lessons learned for innovating river management policies.

How to read this documentPart I explores the challenges of innovative river management. It describesthe lessons learned in the various project components and concludes withreflections on a so called floodplain stewardship. In a floodplainstewardship public and private stakeholders integrate river management,safety management, nature management etc. in a way that synergies, trade-offs and (economic) benefits can be optimised in the floodplain of asubstantial part of the river.

Part II explains the components and deliverables of Freude am Fluss. Thedeliverables were the following:• the realization of 300 ha floodplain, following a sustainable approach;• delivering a methodology for a joint planning approach;• delivering two regional and three local spatial plans that are adapted

following the Freude am Fluss principles.Part II subsequently describes the conclusions and products of SustainableFloodplain Management (Chapter 5), Joint Planning Approach (Chapter 6)and the Spatial Planning Products (Chapter 7).

Finally, the appendices in Part III give background information of theproject.

5

Part I Freude am Fluss

Context of the project 2

River basins have been the scene of flood disasters since humansbegan to colonize the floodplains. Rivers are the hearts of a widevariety of functions like water system functions, nature, livingand working, economic activities, transport, tourism andrecreation. The rapid economic development in European countriesof the past decades often resulted in an increasing pressure onEuropean river systems. Due to urbanization and far reachinginterventions such as river regulation and land reclamation, floodrisks have increased enormously.

2.1. A new river management concept

Human interventions in rivers have not only resulted in an increased safetybehind the dikes. It also resulted in what is known as a “pseudo” feeling ofsafety of people living behind the dikes, and it has increased the costs offloods, because the economic value of land surrounding rivers hasincreased. And, with it the cost of floods. On top of this, flood risk isincreasing as a consequence of climate change. According to predictions byorganisations like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),climate change will cause the sea level to rise significantly this century.What is more, extreme weather patterns will occur more frequently, withpeak discharges and increased flood risks as the likely consequences.Therefore it is important to realize that the amplitude, frequency, durationand impact of floods depend on natural characteristics and on man-inducedchanges in the river basin.

Until recently, river management focused on heightening, widening andreinforcing dikes and weirs. This however doesn’t have a lowering effect onthe water level. Moreover this management strategy mainly focused on theprotection and facilitation of economic functions in the river basin. Economicinterests were driving river management. This lead to a neglect of other riverfunctions and the healthy functioning of the river system as a whole. Therefore, a new land use and water management strategy is needed that

gives space to the river and that is more sustainable. Instead of continuingto modify the natural river system we have to adapt our way of dealingwith the river. What is needed is a new balance between natural, social andeconomic interests of the river; economic, social and ecological benefitscan be generated in river basins. The new approach requires living withwater instead of fighting it. Water requires more space and needs to beretained longer in certain areas, which will affect land use in often highlypopulated areas. What is needed is a match between river safety, landscapequality and economic development by involving all stakeholders. This new river management concept includes two main pathways whichinteract with each other:

8

Case: the Waal (The Netherlands)

In the water system of the Waal in the Netherlands, andupstream in the Rhine, many efforts have been made tochange the river with the objective to enable specifichuman activities, like shipping and land use. It resultedin an increasing risk of flooding. In February 1995, thedanger was so pronounced, that in the Netherlands about200.000 people (and 700.000 pigs, 700.000 cows and amillion chickens) had to be evacuated. The high waterlevels were caused by the sum of, mostly small, manmade physical changes in the river system. Everywheresmall parts were taken from the original floodplain. Thisway, the space for the river’s discharge of flood water wasreduced considerably and lead to extremely high peaks inwater level. Comparable with the Mississippi floods of1993, the process was worsened by the removal of natureareas that originally absorbed rainfall like a sponge, theconstruction of drainage and the covering of the landwith hard materials, like roads and buildings.Source: Van Ast et al., 2007

• The development of technical innovations in a way that dynamicprocesses of the river can co-exist with land-use.

• Focus on socio-economic aspects of managing river basins. Instead oftop-down planning of national authorities, local creativity andentrepreneurship should be given space in order to realize tailor madesolutions for innovative land use.

The consequence of applying this new concept will be that the way that riverbasins are managed will go through an elementary transition. Rivers will nolonger be treated as only a threat, but they will be a source of opportunitiesfor new economic drivers such as ecotourism and new housing locations.

This new concept of river management raises new questions and challengesthat need to be dealt with. Freude am Fluss took up these challenges andsearched for new ways to implement river management with localcommunities. In the project, nature development in floodplains was studiedand implemented, land use opportunities were incorporated in regional andlocal spatial plans and participatory processes that involved water safety,nature development, economic and social interests were developed.

2.2. River management issues in Freude am Fluss

Freude am Fluss addressed various major issues of river management. Thesecan be distinguished in issues that focus on physical aspects of sustainableriver management, such as nature development techniques, and issues thatfocus on the management process, like the involvement of stakeholders inplanning and balancing the trade offs between interests. This chapter gives anoverview.

Physical issues

Safeguarding both safety and ecological valuesAs explained above, traditional water management resulted, besides positiveeffects on liveability, both in negative hydraulic effects and in various

other adverse effects, like the loss of habitats and biodiversity along riversin floodplains. Answers to these problems in regulated rivers are forexample creating more space for the river and retention volume on the onehand and active nature development on the other hand. However, naturerestoration can conflict with the river’s demand for space. Because naturalprocesses are not balanced in regulated rivers, nature restoration may havenegative effects on discharge capacity. For example in the Waal river (TheNetherlands) nature areas in the floodplain became more and more denselyforested due to the absence of erosion and rejuvenation processes. Itcaused an increasing area of soft wood and ongoing sedimentation,resulting in the river water to push up and the discharge capacity todecrease.

In practice safety management often prevails over ecological management.In order to undo the negative consequences of both river regulation andecological interventions, an integration of safety management andecological management is required. By doing so, both the ecological andsafety values could be safeguarded: through ecological enhancement riversbecome more resilient, more space will be available for floods and thusflood risks will decrease. Chapter 5 will explain this into more detail.

Room for the river versus spatial claims of other functionsCreating more space for rivers and enlarging the retention volume requirelarge areas of land along the river. Often the surroundings of a river aredensely populated and the land is or can be used for a variety of otherfunctions like agriculture, dwelling etc. The conflict between the spatialclaims of flood prevention and of these other functions cannot easily besolved, considering the increasing flood risks. Therefore an integratedapproach of river management and spatial management is required, usinginnovative techniques and optimisation of the various spatial claims.Functions in flood prone areas should be adapted to the risks involved, forexample by developing flood resistant buildings or growing crops adapted tofloods.

9

Management issues

National orientation versus local orientationBecause rivers stretch over large areas in a country – and often acrosscountry borders – they are managed with a national focus. The objective isto manage river basins as a whole. As a consequence flood and safetymanagement in essence have a national orientation too. The space alongrivers however is often used for human activities that are mainly of localimportance, like recreation, housing and agriculture. Spatial managementtherefore has a local (and regional) orientation. National and local interestsof river management do not always correspond. A consequence is thatnational measures may cause fear and resistance at local stakeholders.Freude am Fluss aimed at creating positive combinations of floodmanagement and objectives of local economic, social and culturaldevelopment.

Involving stakeholders and the public The European Water Framework Directive requires interaction withstakeholders and the public in water management. Interactive river basinmanagement is an important policy innovation that has major consequencesfor the practice of water managers. Freude am Fluss explored structuredmethods for involving stakeholders. In doing so it aimed at reducing fearsand resistance of stakeholders by involving them in the process.

Optimisation of the river systemInterventions of river management used to focus on finding an optimumsituation for a single sector (e.g. water quality management, navigation orfishing). This has lead to a sub-optimal situation of the river systems as awhole. As a consequence the awareness rose that the whole water systemincluding its ecosystem should be the focal point of management. Crossingsectoral borders and searching for optimised solutions for river managementwas the central theme of Freude am Fluss.

10

3Lessons learned in Freude am Fluss

Considering the issues that were addressed in chapter 2, Freudeam Fluss focused on the following activities:• Learning from practical cases of Room for the River measures

in The Netherlands, France and Germany.• Developing a sustainable floodplain management approach.• Developing a joint planning method.• Implementation of Freude am Fluss principles in regional

spatial plans.• Implementation of Freude am Fluss principles in local spatial

plans. From these activities high-quality results were delivered andmany lessons were learned. In this chapter the lessons learnedare summarized following the distinction between physical andmanagement aspects.

3.1. Physical aspects of river management

Multifunctional land use in floodplains becomes possible by usinginnovative techniquesFreude am Fluss aimed at combining the reduction of flood risks with animprovement of quality of life. This can be achieved by restoring thecontact between people and the river, by developing local functions, likeeconomic activities, housing, food production, recreation and tourism inconnection with the river, in addition to the usual river managementfunctions. A precondition is that the potential flood damage of the localland use will be low. Freude am Fluss provided various innovativetechniques for flood resistant land use. This varies from preventing flooddamage of existing urban land use (see case ‘preparations to flood risk’) toapplying experimental techniques for adapted building (see case ‘floatinghouses’).

Cyclic floodplain rejuvenation allows river dynamics and naturalprocesses in regulated riversCyclic floodplain rejuvenation is an approach in which creating space for

river dynamics and restoring important natural processes like sedimentationand vegetation succession can go hand in hand, while the main channelremains in a fixed river bed. The case “Cyclic floodplain rejuvenationEwijkse Plaat” summarizes the experiences with this approach during thepractical implementation in the Beuningen floodplain (The Netherlands),which was one of the deliverables of Freude am Fluss.

Although frequent morphologic changes take place in floodplains of naturalrivers, an equilibrium appears to exist over time, if considered over a largerriver stretch. For example, the proportions between ecotopes and landscapetypes in the Allier river (France) don’t change over time in a river stretch ofabout 5 km. Based on this experience, the implementation of cyclic

12

Case: preparations for flood risks

During the plan development in the Middle Loire, France(see chapter 7.3) many tools have been developed toprepare industries, agrarians, households etc. forpotential floods. For example a so-called Plan Familial deMise en Securité (PFMS) is an instruction for householdsliving in the floodplain. Following the instruction theycan identify the potential risk and damage of a flood andfind instruments and solutions to prepare themselves incase of flooding and reduce the potential damage.

Others tools are dedicated to industries and agrarians.For industrial buildings for example the location ofpower points will be important to prevent damage.Companies for example may reduce damage by changingthe way they put their goods in stock. Agriculturalbusiness might adapt their crops to flood risk. Thosetools help stakeholders to analyse the damage potentialand formulate solutions.

13

floodplain rejuvenation appears to require a river reach of some 20 km tobe effective. The scale that is needed by species and communities thoughdoes not necessarily correspond with this scale.Interventions like cyclic floodplain rejuvenation, that integrate safety andnature objectives are most effective in locations where naturalmorphological processes are strong or where the diversity in vegetation andsuccession is low. Starting from the correct scale, negative effects ondischarge capacity can often be compensated outside of the problematiclocation. The focus should therefore be shifted from conservation ofspecific species on a location to landscape diversity in a larger area.

Vegetation in the floodplain can be used as a management toolVegetation in floodplains has an impact on the discharge capacity of ariver. The impact of the hydraulic roughness of vegetation on dischargecharacteristics of the river in upstream and downstream areas are different.This hydraulic roughness can be used to ‘regulate’ the river; naturalvegetation in floodplains may be used as a management mechanism forflood prevention. Imitating natural conditions by for example regular smallflooding can create a floodplain in which vegetation and wildlife will betolerant to floods.

Tailor-made solutionsIn river management hydraulic demands and nature objectives are oftenpreconditions that must be respected. Defining the type of interventionthat should be applied in a specific case is mainly determined bylandscape-ecologic criteria, considering these preconditions. The optimalmeasures are tailor-made solutions that consider the local typology andpotential of a location.

3.2. Management aspects

Scale of managementFrom a hydrologic point of view, the spatial scale for effectiveimplementation of sustainable floodplain management is up to 20 km. In

order to find synergies between nature development, multifunctional landuse and safety objectives, various managers need to adapt their scale tothis. It requires for example operational river managers concerned withnavigation and safety to enlarge their focus for interventions fromfloodplain to river reach. Riverine ecologist however will probably need toscale down their focus, because their preferred scale of management isgenerally the complete drainage basin, which in general will be too largefor an effective integration of interests.

Case: Floating Houses

Floating houses can be regarded as an innovativeapproach in river management. They combine housingfunctions and flood protection in a way that urbandevelopment is still possible, but without the threat ofincreasing flood risk. During a flood the houses simplyfloat up and do not block the water flow. Hence theyhave no negative effects on the discharge capacity. Anddamage of the houses will be prevented because theyare built in a flood proof manner. Floating houses donot only offer all functions of "normal" houses butinstead they make optimal use of the qualities thewater provides. Floating houses can be installed infloodplains as well as in retention areas.In the project Gouden Ham in West Maas en Waal, TheNetherlands (see chapter 7.4) 50 semi-floating andfloating houses have been realized in the floodplain.Semi-floating houses are build on a concrete platform.With normal water levels they remain at land-level, incase of high water or flood they will float temporarily.Floating houses are on water level permanently and areconnected to the land by quays.

14

Case: Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation Ewijkse Plaat (The Netherlands)

A deliverable of Freude am Fluss was the implementationof Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation (CFR) in an area of300 ha in the Beuningen floodplain (Ewijkse Plaat, TheNetherlands). The concept was applied in this area inorder to solve downstream discharge problems. In Freudeam Fluss the following actions were implemented:• removal of vegetation;• designing three side channels;• joint visioning (see chapter 6)

For the Ewijkse Plaat a first design for CFR was made in2005. The objectives of the plan were to reduce thehydraulic roughness and improve the starting-point fornature development. The Ewijkse Plaat has partiallybeen levelled and lowered in 1988. This resulted insufficient discharge capacity for the river. Afterwardshowever forest started to grow in the area andsedimentation of the floodplain took place. As aconsequence the hydraulic roughness increased so muchthat a new hydraulic bottleneck appeared.

Certain characteristics of the concept of CFR can befound in the intervention in the Ewijkse Plaat. These arethe following:

1. Restoration of natural processes:• restoration of zones with sandy accretion near the

inlet of the channels;• incentive for bank development and stronger

sedimentation;

• space for erosion;• flowing water in the floodplain;• spontaneous development of vegetation on bare sand;• incentive for the development of soft wood;• natural grazing.

2. Increased variation of the landscape:The Ewijkse Plaat mainly consisted of young soft wood,grassy brushwood and dry grassland. After theintervention opportunities were created for streamingwater, low lying sandy soil and erosion walls. In additionit is expected that more sedimentation will take placearound the side channels.

3. Increased variation of succession stages:The existing forest will be maintained and gets thechance to develop to adult soft wood and ultimately tohardwood. The banks of the new channels provide newsoft wood the opportunity to sprout. In the higher partsof the area various succession stages can develop.

4. Adapting to existing values:Part of the soft wood that was present in the originalsituation will disappear, but a large part will bepreserved. The quantity of protected and threatenedspecies in the area is very limited. The effects on presentspecies of the digging are mitigated by the total designthat creates large new opportunities.

The hydraulic effectiveness of the intervention was assessedwith indicative calculations. It is expected that theintervention will have the same effect on the water level asdigging off the complete floodplain to the level of 1988.

15

Elaborate all costs and benefits of river managementManagement and maintenance of floodplains of course cost money. Ingeneral, these costs can easily be quantified. The benefits however often areless clear. General benefits like safety, health and welfare are visible but therelation between costs and benefits are not quantified. The beneficiaries arehouseholds and companies, while the costs are made by the government.And, it is often not clear which part of the benefits is generated due to rivermanagement. Therefore elaborating all the stakeholders with an economicinterest and all the cash flows will contribute to realizing a solid financingof river management and aiming at cost recovery of river managementservices.

Strive for cost recovery of river managementAs has been stated above, costs and benefits of river management aremostly not clearly related to each other. Payers (government and society atlarge) and beneficiaries (households and companies) are not the same. TheEU Water Framework Directive however states that member states “shalltake account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services”.Sustainable floodplain management offers the opportunity to recover (partof) the costs of water management services and make it a self sustainingprocess. For example:• commercial excavation of clay, sand, and gravel can go hand in hand

with nature restoration and safety objectives. Carefully plannedexcavation leaves room for the river and at the same time creates newopportunities for nature;

• wood from trimming trees and bushes can be used in biomass powerstations for the generation of ‘green’ energy.

• The additional values of new homes close to the river may be used tofinance nature restoration in the same area.

Increased complexity, more opportunitiesIntegrated and synergetic management of river and nature requires stronginterdisciplinary cooperation. This will bring forth an increased managerialcomplexity expressed in terms of time, communication requirements and

Build trust Trust is a key word in joint planning. In processes with a large number ofactors from different backgrounds, people don’t know each other and arenot used to each other. Therefore investing in the development of mutualtrust between participants is required. This is a time-consuming process,which might conflict with aspects of good governance and transparency.Building trust can be strengthened by starting cooperation with the moreunproblematic themes. Fast successes are needed for ongoing motivation ofthe involved actors. After a network becomes stable more difficult problemscan be tackled.

Agree upon (short term) landmarksRegional spatial development of floodplains can be time-consuming. Ingeneral however, politicians aim at fast results. Therefore it is important toagree upon landmarks within the term of office of politicians. This way along term project can deliver short term (intermediate) results.

finances. The increase in the number of actors may provide a new resourcebase to the involved parties and extend their power base. Previouslyunsolved problems can become amenable to solution by the linking ofmultiple, shared objectives and combining resources.

Participants in river managementLike the river managers, communities have their own ideas aboutmanagement and planning. A planning process in which citizens areinvolved will give the management more democratic legitimacy. In additionthe quality of decision making may be improved by the input from directstakeholders. At the start of a planning process a thorough analysis of thestakeholders and potential participant is required. In general stakeholdersare politicians, citizens, interest groups, companies and authorities. Itneeds to be clear who needs to be involved and when. It is important toinvolve potential financiers from an early stage.

Shared visionA shared vision on the problem and the and objectives are essential for aplanning process. This shared vision should be communicated with thepublic to raise awareness for local problems and objectives. For example inVal de Bréhémont, France (see chapter 6) a joint vision was developed that,apart from common objectives, addressed conflicts and synergies betweeninterests. These were discussed with the public in several meetings.

Rules of the gameIn a joint approach of river management and planning, the rules of thegame have to be clear from the start. There should be agreement onresponsibilities, communication and decision making rules. The“management of expectations” of the involved participants is important.That means that participants are aware of their role, influence and decisionpower in the process; they have to know in advance what they can expectfrom their input. If conflicts arise on difficult issues, it will be theresponsibility of the government to take the decision.

16

Towards a Floodplain Stewardship 4

Freude am Fluss initially focused on the “vertical” cooperationbetween government and citizens. Along the way, more attentionwas paid to including also the “horizontal” relationships at thegovernment level, e.g. between municipalities and riverauthorities. Experiences with this type of cooperation weregained in the sub-project WaalWeelde and gave rise to the idea ofa Floodplain Stewardship.

4.1. Building blocks of a Floodplain Stewardship

What is a Floodplain Stewardship?A Floodplain Stewardship is a cooperation of public stakeholders of variousgovernmental levels and possibly private stakeholders, with the objective ofsustainable realisation, maintenance and financing of floodplainmanagement. It provides a framework for cooperation that crossesmunicipal boundaries and boundaries between sectors, and is responsiblefor the integrated management of the floodplains of a demarcated riverstretch. In a Floodplain Stewardship it will be acknowledged that the river,its floodplain and its surroundings serve multiple functions. For a riversystem the functions can be described as follows:• Carrier functions. These refer to the river system as carrier of human

activities and waste. Examples are living, working and absorption ofemissions by water and air.

• Production functions. The river system functions as a producer andsupplier of water, oxygen, biomass and minerals.

• Regulatory functions. These functions contribute to the naturalequilibrium on earth by for example absorption of CO2, filtering ofpolluted air, cleaning of rain and waste water.

• Information functions. The river system is an information source ofwhich man can learn.

• Recuperation functions. The river system contributes to human well-being and health. Examples are experiencing tranquility, natural beautyand adventure.

In Freude am Fluss the elaboration of a Floodplain Stewardship was inspiredby the functioning of the Etablissement Public Loire (EP Loire) in France.The EP Loire is an organization that groups six regions, sixteendepartments, eighteen cities and 11 associations of smaller communities,with the objective of a coherent management of the Loire river basin. Inthe regional project WaalWeelde (see chapter 7.3) the development of aFloodplain Stewardship has been studied for a part of the Waal in TheNetherlands. A new project proposal “Applied Sustainable Use of RiverDeltas” proposes to elaborate further on this topic.

Strengths of a Floodplain Stewardship

Focus on multiple interestsNational river management often has a different focus than interests on theregional and local level, which come across in spatial management. Rivermanagement interventions however often have an impact on local interests.In a Floodplain Stewardship actors from either national, regional and locallevel participate on the basis of a joint vision on river management, spatialquality and economy.

Figure 1 gives an overview of actors with an economic interest in the areasurrounding the river as for example in WaalWeelde. The vision includesnational, regional as well as local interests. A Floodplain Stewardshipcreates a policy setting that links regional planning with (national) rivermanagement.

18

Figure 1 Actors with an economic interest in the research area[source Triple E, 2008]

Optimisation of spatial scaleFrom a hydrologic point of view a sustainable approach for floodplainmanagement that combines safety and nature interests requires a spatialscale up to 20 km to be effective. Integrated river basin management,balancing upstream and downstream interests, often even requires a largerscale. This means that for institutional coordination and cooperation ascale of 40 to 60 km is desirable. A FloodplainStewardship is an institutionalized organization for cooperation, that coversa demarcated part of a river. In WaalWeelde it covers a stretch of 60 kmand includes all relevant stakeholders and decision makers in that area.

Balancing costs and benefitsInvolvement, support and willingness to pay of local actors is crucial for anintegrated approach of river management, landscape and life quality andeconomy. These actors can be households, land owners, entrepreneurs,

government agencies etc. They will all have economic benefits related toriver and spatial management. These can be assessed from twoperspectives: those benefits that accrue to society as a whole (macro-economic drivers) and benefits that accrue to individual stakeholders(micro-economic drivers). The case WaalWeelde summarizes examples ofthese drivers. If the benefits are associated with real cash flows theybecome financial drivers. Examples of financial drivers are mineralextraction (clay mining, gravel and sand extraction), housing, recreationand tourism. A Floodplain Stewardship focuses on public and private, short-term and long-term and national and local objectives. Thus it provides abasis for balancing (financial) benefits and costs of river managementbetween stakeholders and as such it can initiate self-sustaining projects.

Tools for a Floodplain StewardshipBalancing benefits and costs in order to finance integrated rivermanagement of course requires a quantification of cash flows due to rivermanagement and calculation rules for costs and benefits. In Freude amFluss an interactive economic model was developed for the caseWaalWeelde, aiming at optimisation of interventions considering safety,ecology and economy interests. In the model various variables that have adirect influence on the balance of costs and benefits can be filled in.Present benefits can be used for financing the interventions that followfrom the integrated approach. In addition the model gives insight inpossibilities to develop commercial products that generate money forfinancing.

The model focuses on policy options and commercial products and theirconsequences for the safety objectives, determines who will bear the costsand receive the benefits (in real cash flows) and defines options forfinancing. It provides the user with a tool to make a design for the areainvolved which is immediately linked to the balance-sheet.

19

State/province Gas stations

wholesaletrade

Municipality Y

Sports andculture

Cateringindustry

Public transport

Water boards

Transportcompanies

Amusement parks

Retail trade

Maintenancecompanies

Entrepeneurs in the area

Manager/owners

Municipality X

Municipality Z

4.2. Remaining questions

The development of the Floodplain Stewardship is not finished yet. Anumber of essential questions still need to be answered. As has beenexplained above, the newly proposed project “Applied Sustainable Use ofRiver Deltas” intents to elaborate further on these questions. The questionsare the following:

• Which legal and institutional limits are at stake and how can they besolved?Current institutional frameworks are generally spoken not devised forprojects concerning the broadening of rivers or floodplains. This meansthat institutional limits can hinder the projects itself or the generationof resources for the projects. For example in The Netherlands, buildingin the floodplains is only allowed under strict conditions. This might bea problem if houses could create cash flows for creating more space forthe river. With respect to the planning of housing projects theallowance of floating houses is another issue that illustrates theinstitutional constraints. The government did not develop rules forhouses that float on rivers or lakes or which are flood resistant. Thismeans that builders are not interested to start with this innovative typeof building, since the outcome in terms of risks and benefits is notclear. In the Netherlands these problems are now acknowledged andworked on at the national level. Much can be learned from and withother countries too.

• What should be the competences and responsibilities of a FloodplainStewardship?In other words what is the sphere of activity of the FloodplainStewardship? It could be involved with design, spatial planning andmaintenance of the space along the river. On the other hand it wouldalso be possible to define its responsibilities more narrow. It could forexample function as a kind of park-keeper and only be involved withmaintenance.

20

Case: commercial products in Waalweelde [Source: Triple-E, 2008]

Commercial products are products whose benefits can beused for the realisation of interventions. In the dynamiceconomic model the following commercial products havebeen distinguished:• Housing.• Sand- and gravel extraction.• Biomass.• Retail.• Catering industry.• Ship-building and –reparation.• Forestry.• Agriculture.• Nursing and culture.• Inland navigation.• Fishery.• Recreational rental

In the dynamic model a set of calculation rules hasbeen defined for the commercial products with whichthe benefits can be quantified.

• What is the optimum institutional design for a Floodplain Stewardship?The success of an initiative aiming at innovative and integrated rivermanagement will be influenced by various institutional aspects. Itconcerns for example organization structure, rules, means and policyinstruments that are available for the organization.

• Can the model of collaboration and economic drivers be applied in othercontexts than WaalWeelde? In Freude am Fluss exchange of knowledge and experience concerningsustainable flood management took place between Dutch, German andFrench partners. The question is whether it is possible to develop asimilar model for the German and French cases, and how the Dutchexperience can be enriched with German and French examples. Probablyit is. This could be studied further in separate pilot studies. Theseshould also take on board practical issues such as data requirementsand data integration.

21

Part II Components of Freude am Fluss

Sustainable floodplain management 5

The component “floodplain management” in Freude am Flussaimed at an ecosystem based approach of land use and watermanagement. It addressed the dilemma between flood riskmanagement and nature restoration in floodplains. Freude amFluss studied and elaborated parallels between the dynamics ofnatural rivers (e.g. the Allier in France) and the management ofstrongly regulated rivers (E.g. Rest Rhine in Germany and Waal inThe Netherlands). In addition, this approach was implemented inpractice in 300 ha floodplain (Beuningen floodplain, TheNetherlands), a deliverable of Freude am Fluss.

5.1. An ecosystem-based approach towards floodplainmanagement

Multiple objectivesThe objectives of flood risk management are to optimise the dischargecapacity of the river, by increasing the retention capacity upstream and toprevent from unacceptable increases in water level downstream in the riverbasin. Nature management objectives relate to the protection or restorationof habitats and ecological diversity. Whereas these objectives are oftenconsidered conflicting, Freude am Fluss aims at integrating ecology withflood prevention oriented floodplain management.

The challenge of sustainable floodplain management is to integrate floodprevention and ecology in order to reach the objectives of both flood riskand nature management. This chapter explains this challenge, followingsome practical cases from the Freude am Fluss project.

5.2. Characteristics of natural and regulated rivers

Natural riversLong ago the riverine state included woodland, dunes and oxbows. Noconstraints were put on the river, and in the flood plains vegetation and

wildlife flourished. In times of high water the force of the water (or ice)effectively cleared barriers such as woodland and natural levees. And whennecessary, the river simply burst its banks and changed its course andcreated side channels. By and large this ensured its free flow. It alsorejuvenated the vegetation along the banks every so often.

Figure 2 Alliers (France)

An essential element of riverine nature is the influence of river dynamics onvegetation and animals. These geomorphologic dynamics cause variation inthe landscape with a large diversity in flora and fauna.

24

old channels pioneer

25

Case: the Allier (France)

At present, the Loire river basin is considered as one ofthe most (semi-) natural rivers in the Northwest ofEurope. Especially the Allier river is characterized by itsnatural processes and dynamics. Therefore it served as areference for integrated floodplain management.

Figure 3 shows the changing of the stream of the Allierbetween 1946 and 1992. Every high water makes theriverbed shift. In case of extreme floods, the mainchannel can be cut off and a new main channel willcome into being. As a consequence young successionstages will always be present in the area and thefloodplain will have a high biodiversity.

It appears that along the Allier the balance of ecotopesand landscape types doesn’t change over time, in a riverstretch of minimum 5 km. The variation of successionand rejuvenation creates a dynamic balance and it isassumed that this leads to a stable discharge capacity.The scale that is needed by species and communitiesdoes not necessarily correspond with this scale of 5 km.The spatial scale has consequences for the potentialcommunities and species in the area. In general a largerscale is favourable for ecological development.

Figure 3 A natural river is highly diverse in ecotopes because of constant disturbance of itslandscape.

Regulated riversNatural rivers like the Allier have become rare. Over the centuries, rivershave been subject to human interventions like building dikes, canalisationand exploitation of the floodplains as by example agricultural or industrialactivities. Nowadays many of our rivers are kept within narrow coursesdemarcated by groynes, dikes, and quays. This system of river managementcurbs the river’s power so as to allow human activities (habitation,agriculture) in areas that were originally subjected to seasonal flooding. Asa result an incision of the river bed has taken place over the years.

The hydraulic responses of the interventions in the river system are thefollowing:• more extreme high water peaks in wintertime due to the fact that

canalised brooks and tributaries speed up the drainage of water;• lower discharges in summertime.

In Freude am Fluss these regulation processes and their effects have beenstudied in the Rhine, upstream in the German Upper Rhine and Rest Rhein aswell as downstream in the Dutch river Waal.

5.3. Maintaining an equilibrium between naturalprocesses and human actions

As the cases above show, in regulated rivers hydromorphological dynamicsare restrained to a large extent. Characteristic processes in rivers, likerejuvenation, erosion processes, sedimentation, vegetation or dynamicground water levels, hardly occur. As a consequence discharge capacities andcapacities to slow down flood waves are reduced. Thus the resilience to dealwith high water levels and the retention capacity of an area are limited. Byintegrating ecological development and flood prevention, both theecological and safety values could be safeguarded. The challenge is thatthrough ecological enhancement rivers become more resilient, more spacewill be available for floods and thus that flood risks decrease.

26

Case: Upper Rhine

In the 19th century major engineering works werecarried out for the Upper Rhine, following the plansdesigned by Johan Tulla. This included the interruptionof meanders and the construction of dikes toconcentrate the many river branches and side channelsinto one main bed of the river. The objective was toenhance the liveability of the area: the interventionsprovided new opportunities for safe and healthy living,agriculture and forestry. In addition the transportfunction of the river was strengthened by therealization of additional groynes. In the 20th centuryFrance started to divert water from the Upper Rhine,following the Treaty of Versailles, for energy production.

Besides positive effects on liveability, the interventions inthe river system lead to various adverse effects. Becauseformer floodplains were cut off from the river, they losttheir specific habitat and specific species. Reducing thearea of floodplains by straightening and shortening of theriver resulted in increased flood discharges.

To reduce the increased flood risks it was decided todevelop a new river strategy, the Integrated RhineProgram (IRP). The central objective of the IRP is torestore flood protection levels. Earlier experiencesshowed that in order to reach the capacity needed, thetotal retention volume should be spread over a largerriver stretch. Therefore 13 retention areas have beenindicated of which 3 already have been realized. TheIRP tries to integrate these safety managementinterventions with ecological goals as much as possible.

The impact of river regulation and restraining dynamics therefore asks foran approach of ecological restoration in which the dynamics will be (partly)restored and in which related concepts of river ecology such as the dynamicinterplay between main channel, floodplain and tributaries will be applied.In Freude am Fluss the theoretical concepts of ecosystem-based FloodplainRejuvenation (CFR) have been studied and put into practice in the Waalriver.

The challenge of CFR is to use natural vegetation in floodplains as amanagement mechanism for flood prevention. Upstream as well asdownstream the impact of the hydraulic roughness of vegetation ondischarge characteristics of the river can be used to ‘regulate’ the river. Thisway, nature development will contribute to robust flood management.

Cyclic floodplain rejuvenation Along rivers protective measures for the population and commercialexcavation of clay, sand, and gravel can go hand in hand with naturerestoration. Carefully planned excavation leaves room for the river and atthe same time creates new opportunities for nature. Especially in lowlandareas however, dikes are so close to the river that any new natural levee orpatch of woodland would leave insufficient space for the river. In order toallow human activity, the river has been curbed in areas that were formerlysubject to seasonal flooding.

In the Netherlands we see a new development since 1989. In newly-creatednature zones along the rivers flora and fauna are given the chance toregenerate, and the river is allowed, at least to some extent, to show itsmight again. As a result natural riverbanks with lush vegetation haveformed, riverine forest clumps sprang up, and river dunes rose. However, atcertain points along the river, nature restoration can conflict with theriver’s demand for space. In times of floods a newly risen woodland canpush up the water level by a number of centimetres at bottlenecks in theriver. Large, freshly deposited banks of sand and gravel can also restrict theflow of water.

27

Case: Waal river

The Waal river (downstream river Rhine) is a stronglyregulated river. Dikes, weirs and groynes provide goodconditions for navigation, flood risk management andwater management. The areas along the river have beenturned into agricultural land. Due to these interventionsnatural erosion processes have been stopped and theoriginal floodplains have been cut off from the riveritself.

Since the 17th century the dikes were constantly raised.However, after the peak floods in 1993 and 1995 itbecame clear that the realisation of ever higher dikeswould not bring a sustainable solution to the highwater problem. Therefore a new approach wasintroduced, the so called Ruimte voor de rivier (spacefor the river) approach. In addition, during the last twodecades nature restoration projects have beenimplemented in the floodplains of the Dutch Rhinebranches.

Because of the absence of erosion and rejuvenationprocesses, nature areas became more and more denselyforested with less variety than in a natural situation.This lead to a larger area of soft wood and continuoussedimentation and thus elevating floodplains, which inturn cause the river water to push up and the dischargecapacity of the river to decrease. In order to preventfrom an increased flood risk by maintaining thedischarge capacity, the vegetation development must bemanaged permanently.

Canalised rivers are too weak to remove these obstructions. Therefore theriver can be lent a hand by human interventions. And to avoid seriousadverse effects, these interventions should comply with the naturaldynamics of the riverine state. Human intervention must not be random butgeared to the river’s natural behaviour and based on local erosion patterns.

In order to resolve the ´nature-safety dilemma’ in lowland rivers, theconcept of Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation (CFR) has been developed. CFRimitates the natural ecological and morphological functioning of the riverin order to enhance its robustness and resilience to flooding. It gives spaceto river dynamics and restores important natural processes likesedimentation and vegetation succession, while the main channel remainsin a fixed river bed. In short the benefits of CFR are:• More freedom for natural processes• No fixed, artificial state of the system• Resilience, less fragile nature• Higher diversity of succession stages• Adaptive management

What is Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation?Cyclic floodplain rejuvenation (CFR) refers to resetting ecotopes to theirpioneer stage, by riverine processes. The following processes can bedistinguished:• hydromorphological processes, caused by erosion and sedimentation;• eolic processes, caused by wind;• ecological processes, in general caused by animals or vegetation.

CFR originates from the understanding that morphological processescontinuously rework sediments in a river and provide the means of resettingvegetation to pioneer stages. Erosion and sedimentation processessimultaneously create the channels for water flow and the diversity ofsubstrate necessary for the establishment and growth of riverine andalluvial species. A natural river is characterised by a diversity of ecotopes,resulting in a mosaic landscape both longitudinally and in the cross-

section, with pioneer vegetation located close to the main channels andforests further away. In addition, grazing contributes to the mosaic patternof the landscape by maintaining certain areas as open grassland and to thestructure of the forests in others.

In nature areas these natural processes are set free in order to restore thenatural landscape and species. However setting free natural processes is notfully possible in regulated rivers where the management focuses mainly onsafety from flooding. In these rivers the main channel is fixed, erosion isundesired and sedimentation is limited. Succession will still be possible,but rejuvenation will not take place. Because succession and rejuvenationare not balanced, nature areas become more and more afforested, whichcauses to increase the hydraulic roughness. CFR specifically aims to imitatethe rejuvenation processes and thus ‘close’ the natural cycle. Since theseprocesses are ongoing, CFR is a management approach that needs to beimplemented adaptively over time.

28

Measures

conflictnatureand safety

time

design discharge

Deve

lopm

ent

hydr

aulic

rou

ghne

ss

init

ial

desi

gnro

om f

or n

atur

ede

velo

pmen

t

succe

ssion

Figure 4 Temporal scaling of CFR interventions

When CFR?In general, CFR will be a solution if the morphologic and ecologicsuccession in the floodplain causes unacceptable obstacles for otherfunctions of the river, like water discharge, transport, nature, etc. From thepoint of view from Freude am Fluss, which aims at an approach where floodprevention and nature are combined, CFR could be applied if the followingproblems are distinguished:1. the discharge capacity of the river is endangered.2. the ecological quality of an area is endangered due to lack of vital

processes and insufficient ecotope- and succession variety.

Where CFR?The location of the intervention is essential for the effect of cyclicfloodplain rejuvenation. However, solutions to the problems mentionedabove need not necessarily be taken at the spot where the problempresents itself. For CFR the search for solutions should have a wider scope.Negative effects on discharge capacity can often be compensated outside ofthe problematic location.

Typical CFR interventions include the excavation of secondary channels,lowering of a floodplain or the resetting of vegetation in combination withgrazing. These interventions should occur at locations where naturalmorphological processes are strong or where the diversity in vegetation andsuccession is low. CFR aims at combining nature development and floodmanagement, so interventions also have to be effective in hydraulic termsand ensure that the discharge capacity of the river meets (at least) thelegal requirements along the river. The choice of location is therefore atrade-off between these hydraulic, ecological and morphological criteria.

Implementation aspectsIn implementing CFR the following aspects have to be taken into account:• the integration of interests • the timing• the scale and level of management

The integration of interestsCFR requires thorough knowledge of the river system and it integratesnature-, spatial- and river management. It requires strong cooperationbetween these disciplines. In addition, a river and its floodplains areconnected to various economic drivers, like recreation, transport,agriculture, mineral extractions and housing. The importance of thesesocietal and economic interests is dynamic over time. In order to meet theobjectives of CFR and respect the societal context, there is a need to searchfor synergies between them. CFR provides the opportunity to integrateother interests. A decreasing importance of agricultural land use forexample may provide opportunities for larger nature areas. Otheropportunities for synergies are for example offered by the interventionsthemselves in a CFR approach: wood from trees and bushes can be used inbiomass power stations for the generation of ‘green’ energy; sand, gravel,and clay that will be available due to the excavation of side channels canalso be marketed.

The timingWith CFR a large variety in succession stages can be realized in regulatedrivers. The timing of interventions in ecotopes is very important, because

29

Figure 5 Succession periods

softwood levee / natural

marshlandforest

softwoodforest

hardwood

flood-plain20

15 65

65

150

180170

50

The type of intervention that should be applied in a specific case mainly isdetermined by landscape-ecological criteria. Hydraulic demands andsustainability demands are often prerequisites that must be respected. Foridentifying the optimal measures the following questions need to beanswered:1. Which measures are typical for the river stretch concerned?2. Which hydromorphologic processes can be reactivated?3. Which measure contributes to a larger and more characteristic diversity

in landscape?4. How can the measure contribute to a larger variety in succession

stages?5. How can cost recovery be achieved by an optimised match between the

measure and extraction of minerals or biomass?

After the choice for a type of measure, the measure needs to be designed.This requires knowledge of the processes, ecological development andhydraulic consequences. The design of an intervention has to meet variouscriteria, as summarized in Figure 6.

different ecotopes have different succession periods. CFR provides theopportunity to adapt intervention periods to natural succession periods.Also the time of year in which to carry out the necessary works has tocorrespond to cycles in nature.

The scale and level of managementOn the operational level, regulated rivers are subject to variousmanagement perspectives that consider different policy fields or interests:river management with all its different aspects, nature and environmentalmanagement, spatial management, landownership etc. Each of thesemanagement perspectives has its own scale, in space as well as in time. Inaddition the interests are managed on different levels, varying from(inter)national to local and even private.To be effective, the implementation of CFR requires a river reach of 5 to 20km. In general, the management perspectives concerning rivers focus on asmaller scale. For CFR most of them need to scale up. This requires forexample nature conservationists to accept reduced local control on specificspecies and to find typical floodplain dynamics and an increased degree ofvariability in return. Operational river managers concerned with navigationand safety too need to enlarge their focus for interventions from floodplainto river reach. Riverine ecologist however will need to scale down forfinding synergies between nature development and safety objectives.

Operational aspects of Cyclic Floodplain RejuvenationCyclic floodplain rejuvenation means the implementation of man-madeinterventions. But CFR should aim at the restoration or imitation of naturalprocesses as much as possible. Therefore natural processes present innatural rivers are a source of inspiration for the interventions to be taken.

The development of nature areas makes large scale interventions possible.In the following overview possible interventions for CFR are describedtogether with their source of inspiration. With this type of interventionsspace for the river will be created and water levels will be lowered; naturedevelopment and flood management will be combined.

30

Measure Source of inspiration/processDig side channel Oxbow lakes, development of islandsFloodplain lowering Silting up of the floodplain, development

of banks, inundationOpen up levees Development of river beach, sand

accretion and levees, bank erosionDig high water channel Development of erosion channel,

sedimentation of side channels and highwater channels

Remove vegetation Ice drift, beavers, peeling by largegrazing, herbivores, disease, trees beinguprooted by wind

Source: Peters et al., 2006

Figure 6 Design criteria for Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation

31

Landscape-ecologic design criteria• Utilization natural processes and local context• Soil type• Soil level• Land topography• Inflow direction and flow velocities• Slopes of channels• Availability of sediment• Water depth• Well• Conservation or strengthening of existing nature values

Societal and economic design criteria• Mineral extraction and soil quality• Historical, archaeological and cultural elements

Design CFR intervention

Hydraulic design criteria• Hydraulic effectiveness• Effects at river bifurcations• Effects downstream of a measure• Siltation of fairway• Stability of fairway• Stability of dams, structures and infrastructure• Sustainability of measure• Sufficient space to accomodate new developments• Future processes

32

Joint Planning 6

The Joint Planning Approach (JPA) is a planning method thatoffers a menu of principles and tools to assist communities andauthorities along rivers or other water related areas. It can beused to guide planning processes but also as a source ofinspiration and as an analytical tool to assess publicparticipation in various projects. It refers to the complete processfrom the stage of identifying a problem or opportunity, toachieving agreement about the measures to be taken. The JPA isdistinctive in the "joint" way of planning. Hence, it comprisesjoint problem analysis, mutual learning, shared visioning, jointinventory of options and so on.

6.1. What is the Joint Planning Approach?

The Joint Planning Approach aims at defining synergetic measures thatcreate room for both the river and local interests, like strengthening thelocal economy, nature and culture. The objective of the JPA is to achievethis by enlarging the transparency of decision making processes and thusimprove the quality of the decisions. The JPA strives for:• reducing fears and resistance of stakeholders by involving them in the

process;• introducing more democracy in projects.

However, applying the JPA doesn’t mean that conflicts of interests will beabandoned for ever in decision making processes. Conflicts will alwaysappear in a multiple-interest context. The JPA though, provides a structureto elaborate the steps in a process, build confidence between stakeholdersand adapt to the dynamics in the process.

6.2. The Joint Planning Approach and Freude am Fluss

In Freude am Fluss, the JPA was developed in a parallel and iterativeprocess with the development of spatial plans (see chapter 7) andsustainable floodplain management (see chapter 5). On the one hand,

principles from the theoretical approach were applied in practice duringplanning processes. On the other hand, feedback was generated from thesepractices for elaborating the JPA.

Within the Freude am Fluss project various steps of the JPA were applied inpractice in the spatial planning processes in Tiel (The Netherlands, chapter7.4), in the Beuningen floodplain (Waalzicht, The Netherlands, chapter 7.3)and in the JPA pilot in Val de Bréhémont (France). In addition variousother joint planning cases have been studied, which provided input for thedevelopment of the approach.

6.3. The Joint Planning Approach in practice

The Joint Planning Approach distinguishes seven steps (from 0 to 6).However, as practical experience showed, a JPA process doesn’t necessarilyfollow the sequence from 0 to 6. One step can already be started even if anearlier step hasn’t been finished yet or two steps can be followed at thesame time. The steps are:step 0 Preparations step 1 Mutual learningstep 2 Shared visioningstep 3 Rules and institutionsstep 4 Joint options explorationstep 5 Joint designstep 6 Towards implementation

In the following, the steps of the JPA will be explained following thepractical experiences, as far as experiences are available.

34

Case: Val de Bréhémont, France

In Freude am Fluss the Val de Bréhémont was chosen asa pilot area for implementing the JPA. The Val deBréhémont is part of the floodplain of the Middle Loire.It is an area with a high flood risk. The French Stateadministration therefore planned to restore andreorganize the flood protection measures that had to beimplemented on the short term. At the same time, localrepresentatives (politicians) were interested ininnovative approaches towards a combination of spatialdevelopment in flood prone areas. Because of thelimited scale of the area it was a good opportunity totest the JPA. Another reason was that an association ofinhabitants concerned with flood risk prevention wasalready active in Bréhémont.

The challenge of the process in Bréhémont was todevelop integrated solutions for flood prevention andspatial development in an innovative, participativemanner. Participants were:

- Public institutions:- local administration and mayors- state administration- EP Loire- Civil society:- Interest group of citizens- Parc Naturel Regional (PNR)- Chamber of Agriculture and Chamber of Commerce- Interest groups concerned with cultural heritage,

environment etc.

A strength of the process was that the state and localgovernment met each other. The state adapted itsprojects to the local scale in a territorial approach, localstakeholders learned that the state was interested intheir interests.

An experienced weakness of the process appeared to bethat it started from existing or desired projects from thevarious participants. As a result the discussions focussedon adapting the projects to each other but not onproposing common projects. Probably the results wouldhave been stronger it the process had started with acommon diagnosis of the opportunities in the floodprone area. However, some of these opportunities cameup during the process. For example growing traditionalcultures in the flood prone area, like hemp for textile.

The Bréhémont pilot learned that it is rather importantto make a critical selection of participants of theprocess, taking into account to what extent theyrepresent other stakeholders. In the Bréhémont processan interest group of citizens was involved. Theirlegitimacy however, sometimes was doubted by

35

>>>

some other stakeholders. Were they reallyrepresentative? This type of doubt could have beenprevented by organizing meetings with the generalpublic early in the process. Citizens can tell at thatmoment whether they want to participate themselves orwant to be represented by an interest group.

Another lesson was that clarity about financial aspectsis required. In the case of Bréhémont the financing ofhydraulic interventions is mainly covered by the state.For economic developments however, this is not alwaysclear.

Step 0 Preparations

Within the frame of the Plan Loire, the Valde Bréhémont appeared as a good locationfor a test to provide for a framework forsustainable development of the region incombination with flood prevention.

In an earlier stage studies had been issued about thehydraulic situation. The earlier research and negotiationresults formed the starting point of the joint planningprocess in Val de Bréhémont. In a first meeting thestakeholders involved and authorized in the planningprocess were invited. They presented to each other theirobjectives, their expectations of the process and theirknowledge and experiences from their earlier involvement.

In the village of Beuningen (TheNetherlands) citizens and experts of eightdifferent organizations gathered in foursessions to ‘dream' or vision about thefloodplain of Beuningen along the riverWaal. It was the purpose to construct adream image of this area, one that alsocould be realized in practice.

In the preparation phase of the visioning experiment(Waalzicht) a survey was completed by 1,000 citizens inthree villages in the region (Beuningen, Weurt andEwijk). The results presented the ideas of the citizensabout the area of the river floodplain. First an inventoryof the actual situation was made: what did the area look

36

>>>

like and who was involved? The chances and limitationsof the river area were presented, together with thepreconditions that needed to be met.

With organizations involved in the approach, theirexpectations and experiences with planning processeswere discussed individually. The citizens were invited asa group to get to know each other and discuss the goalsand expectations of the visioning sessions.

In the Region Starkenburg (Germany) apilot project was set up to initiate andpromote the involvement of all relevantactors and stakeholders in the developmentof a flood prevention strategy. In thepreparatory stage of the process all relevantactors and stakeholders were identified. In

addition an inventory was made of the planned andimplemented flood prevention measures. The analysis ofthe preparatory work resulted in an overview of thefollowing aspects:• aims of the actors in flood prevention• endangering potential/danger of flooding in the region• problems and conflicts in flood protection• call for action/ improvement opportunities• acting potential of the actors• implemented measures and projects in the region• possible topics of the pilot action• relevant and to be involved actors

37

The aim of the preparatory phase is to get acquainted with the localplanning situation and to discuss the objectives and rules of the planningprocess. It involves defining the starting point of the process and securingthe essential preconditions for the planning process. This means ensuringfinancial and logistical resources but also legitimacy, ensuring politicalsupport for a joint planning process and providing a link of the jointplanning process with the decision-makers.

Moreover, key-stakeholders need to be identified and a first strategy needsto be designed on who of them will be invited to participate in theplanning process. Therefore a thorough identification of all actual andpotential stakeholders is required. Out of this usually long list, a well-grounded and balanced selection has to be made of who will actuallyparticipate in the joint planning at which stage. Apart from citizens,politicians, civil servants and companies, potential financiers should beinvolved. From the start, the involved participants should agree uponresponsibilities and functions, communication and decision making rules.They have to know in advance what they can expect from their input to theprocess.

In the joint planning process, participants that don’t know each other andpolicy fields that are not used to cooperating with each other, cometogether. In order to reach good results it is required to invest in thedevelopment of mutual trust between the different participants. This is atime-consuming process, that will need attention during the whole processand which might conflict with other aspects of good governance andtransparency.

Step 1 Mutual Learning

In a second meeting in the Val deBréhémont the involved stakeholderspresented their projects in the region inlink with flood management as well as forthe spatial planning of the area. They couldalso highlight the main issues that were atstake in their opinion. With the

presentations the stakeholders’ knowledge and point ofview on river and floodplain management was reflected.

The focus of the first meeting of Waalzichtwas on ‘mutual learning’. Every citizenexplained in five minutes what isexperienced as attractive in the floodplainand shared his knowledge and informationwith the other participants. Experts (rivermanagers, nature managers, mining

companies) told about their work and the relevanttechnical and societal developments.

Although mutual learning takes place during the whole joint planningprocess, step 1 is specifically focused on mutual learning between all partiesinvolved. The aim is to start the planning process on an equal information-footing. The idea is that all parties have something to say to each otherabout the river and what it means to them. People are more willing to listenif they also get the opportunity to speak. The end result of step 1 is that allparties are well informed about each other's basic concerns, considerationsand interests. Mutual learning can be organized by combining traditionalsurveys, interviews, hearings or information campaigns. More dynamicoptions are to bring listening and speaking closer together, e.g. in informalworkshops, round table meetings or teaching-and-learning meetings.

38

As part of a survey of the vision onthe river of citizens the Centre forSustainable Management ofResources organized a writingcontest for the citizens of Nijmegen,The Netherlands. All the inhabitantsof Nijmegen were invited to express

their view of the river on paper. In total 181contributions were send in. A selection of thesecontributions was published in a booklet ‘De rivier& ik’ (the river and I) and on CD.

A shared visioning process aims at creating a common image of a futureriver landscape by all stakeholders. If this visioning is a success itgenerates a lot of ideas and commitment and provides a framework foraction. The objective of shared visioning is to form an ideal picture of whatthe river area could become and how it could be managed. From theviewpoint of the JPA visioning has to be a shared process because of thesupport of all the participants in an early stage of a planning process.Visioning creates the possibility to participate in the widest possible way,from river manager to farmer, from administrators, officials, entrepreneursto citizens.

The basis of a joint planning process is to achieve a common understandingof problems and objectives. One part of shared visioning should be theidentification of common interest and the development of common local orregional aims and objectives. The common vision must be communicatedwith the public to raise awareness for local problems and objectives.

Step 2 Shared visioning

After all participants in the Val deBréhémont process had presented their ownvision on the area in a map that reflectedtheir objectives, interests and projects, asynthesis of the various visions wasproduced. This joint vision was presentedin a map that gave insight in the

contradictions and synergies between the various visionsand identified where they could be complementary.

The second session of Waalzicht focussedon the personal dream images of theparticipants. The dream images wereconstructed by combining pictures of thefloodplain. Everybody explained his choiceto the other participants. These personalvisions gave insight in the values of thearea that are experienced by the people.

Next, based on the dream images, the participantsformed several groups and generated ideas for developingthe floodplain. Ideas varied from creating recreationalareas to nature reserves and from better accessibility forelderly people to measures for lower water levels. Theeffect of the ideas on the water level were calculated.Finally, with the aid of a landscape architect, theparticipants created a map in which the elaborated ideaswere visualized.

39

In step 3 (Rules and institutions) the aim is first to revisit and focus onthe ‘rules of the game' of the joint planning process. Do all participantshave veto rights, for instance? Are participating authorities free to separatetheir role in the planning process from their later responsibilities indecision-making? The rules in the planning process are essential fortransparency and commitments.

Step 3 Rules and institutions

After the shared visioning process in Valde Bréhémont, three workshops were held.One of these workshop dealt with politicaland governance issues. Responsibilities forimplementation and how to organize itwere discussed. It was decided that therewould be a leading local stakeholder for

developing a strategic framework for the development ofeconomic activities and local processes (theCommunauté de Communes du Pays d’Azay). In additionEP Loire was identified as stakeholder who would takethe lead in the prevention of vulnerability for floodsand the implementation of legislation. It would alsohelp the Communauté de Communes du Pays d’Azay inits tasks.

Furthermore, in a meeting was defined how institutionalstakeholders would contribute to the plans, eithertechnically or financially.

In the joint planning process for theWaalfront in Tiel citizens, localrepresentatives and civil servants wereinvolved in the process from the start.Stakeholders that could in the end investin the implementation however (likecompanies), were not present from the

start. As a consequence the costs of the plans had notbeen completely covered in the end.

40

The second focus of step 3 is on new rules and institutions that might beneeded to implement the ideas identified in the joint vision. This isimportant because river planning has a natural tendency to focus onphysical issues - housing, natural areas, dike relocation, safe spots foremergency evacuation, and so on. But physical issues need institutions andfinancial mechanisms to become real. Are these already in place in thearea? Or should new ones be designed? If so, options for such mechanismsand institutions should become part of step 4.

Step 4 Joint options exploration

Two workshops in Val de Bréhémontfocused on joint options exploration. Afirst workshop was about hydraulic issues.This was the most successful workshop.During the workshop various hydraulicoptions were discussed, resulting in thecreation of different flood prevention

strategies. The strength of the workshop was that stateand local water managers met and could discusshydraulic options. In addition a new hydraulic modelwas tested in Bréhémont, with which the effects of thestrategies could be calculated. The workshop wasrounded up with agreement on possible measures.

The second workshop focussed on economicdevelopment. Due to only little attendance of theworkshop no real results were reached.

In the joint planning process for theWaalfront in Tiel the elaboration of theshared visions into a masterplan was doneby the local government, without directinvolvement of citizens. During theprocess however, some citizens organizedtheir own committee. Because the

committee was an institution with strong involvementin the process, it had thorough knowledge of theproject, a good relation with other participants of theprocess and good access to publicity, the local authoritydecided to invite the committee to participate in thedevelopment of the Masterplan.

41

In the pilot project Shared Responsibilityfor Flood Prevention in the RegionStarkenburg a project structure andactivity plan was defined in interactionwith the participants. They agreed uponrules for communication and decisionmaking and on each others responsibilities

and functions in the process. The involvement ofdecision makers and the legitimacy of the involvedpersons appeared to be important for the success of theprocess.

In ‘Joint options exploration’ the term ‘options’ refers to all physical andsocial aspects that, usually in combination, might contribute to reachingthe plan objectives. They come in many types, e.g. for ecologicaldevelopment, new room-for-river drainage or retention options, recreationaloptions, flood proof housing, flood safety regulations, economic rules andso on. The step ‘ Joint options exploration’ should result in a ‘long list' ofoptions, without bothering much as yet about selection and combination.Only obviously impossible ideas may be vetoed in this stage.

Step 5, Joint Design, aims at making one or more ‘grouped selections' ofthe physical and social options that have been explored in step 4. Theoptions have to be grouped in a way that together they contribute as muchas possible to realizing the joint vision. Formal objectives such as floodsafety, biodiversity, cultural value and economic feasibility should beconnected to these ‘grouped selections' (designs) and not to the separateoptions of the previous step.

Step 5 is also the place for formal plan evaluations, if desired. Step 5 mayresult in several plan variants, differentiated by various accents onobjectives (e.g. more flood safety or more biodiversity value), but a unifiedsolution will usually improve the political position of the end result. If step5 fails, obviously a conflict situation rather than a design situation is atstake, and the joint planning process should either be stopped or restartedfrom a different basis. An example of this was found in a case in theNetherlands were an agricultural interest group decided to resign from theprocess because the joint design appeared to be different from theirpreferred design. This shows a weakness of the JPA: participants can stoptheir support for the process at any time and frustrate the mutualconfidence that has grown.

In Freude am Fluss no concrete practical examples of this step wereexercised so far. In the case Val de Bréhémont however, important elementsof the various meetings were integrated in a text proposal for a commonstrategy. The participants agreed on this text. Two main actions are goingto be rapidly implemented: implementation of the Plans Communaux deSauvegarde and the implementation of flood vulnerability reductioninitiatives towards local economic activities.

Step 5 Joint design

In the Val de Bréhémont, two meetingswere required to agree on a Strategy for asustainable development and floodmanagement in the municipalities of theLoire and Vieux-Cher valley. Between themeetings, participants were asked toclarify choices and priorities through a

written questionnaire. Final agreement was reachedduring the last meeting.

42

Moreover it was learned that during thetime that passed while preparing theimplementation - and no visibledevelopments took place - it was essentialto continue communication with theparticipants and stakeholders.

Step 6, ‘ towards implementation’, focuses on how to bring the end resultinto political decision-making and implementation. Possibly, the plan canalready be inserted into a political process. Or possibly the plan should befirst communicated to the wider public and some kind of consultation roundstarted. It should be assessed too, whether the planning group shouldcontinue to exist, possibly in a new form. Or possibly, one organisation mayadopt the plan.

In step 6 it is important to start to work on ‘fast successes’ andunproblematic issues. They are needed for motivation of the involvedactors. After a network becomes stable, more difficult problems can betackled. If conflicts arise on difficult issues, it will be the responsibility ofthe government to take the decision.

43

Step 6 Towards implementation

In the Waalfront process in Tiel a start has been madewith the realization of those components of theMasterplan, that can easily be realized, because of theirlow cost or the fact that they are not controversial.

44

Spatial planning products 7

7.1. Spatial planning products in Freude am Fluss

ObjectivesThe objective of Freude am Fluss was to contribute to the advantages andquality of life along rivers through policy innovation. Traditional rivermanagement mainly focuses on reducing flood risks, which often hasnegative consequences for biodiversity and the landscape quality of theriver surroundings. Therefore Freude am Fluss developed strategies forspatial development, alternative approaches of land use and innovativeplanning methods, aiming at flood prevention.

These policy innovations were put into practice with the implementation ina number of spatial planning products that integrate flood safety withenhancement of life quality aspects of the river. A number of regional andmunicipal planning processes were selected that received support from theFreude am Fluss consortium during the process. In turn, the lessons learnedduring the development of the spatial planning products served as input forthe development of the Joint Planning Approach (see chapter 6).

Selection of spatial planning productsThe selected spatial planning products had to integrate flood safety withlife quality aspects. And, they had to be realized within the project periodof Freude am Fluss. Therefore the choice for the spatial planning productswas based on the following selection criteria:

1. the plan leaves more room for the river or reduces flood damage;2. the plan makes better use of the landscape quality of the river and new

market mechanisms;3. public participation and co-production are part of the planning process

(joint planning);4. the authority involved confirmed the intention for realizing the spatial

planning product ultimately in October 2008.

7.2. The search process

The search for, and development of, spatial planning products in Freude amFluss took place in intensive interaction between the various partners. Theprocess started with a large number of project ideas in France, Germany andThe Netherlands. Following the criteria mentioned above, the project ideaswere presented and discussed during three Mayors Conferences. In additionsome of them were discussed during intervision meetings in which variousexperts took part. The result of the conferences and intervision meetingswas that project ideas were reconsidered, adjusted or rejected.

The overview on the right reflects the search process during the projectperiod from 2003 to 2008.

The search process described above resulted in the following spatial plansthat were developed in Freude am Fluss. The sections 7.3 and 7.4 willdescribe the plans in more detail.

Regional plans

Province of Gelderland (The Netherlands): “WaalWeelde” The regional plan WaalWeelde (WaalWealth) is aimed at improving a 60 kmsection of the River Waal (lower Rhine) between Nijmegen and Zaltbommel.The plan provides for more room for river and sand excavation, incombination with better landscape quality.

Etablissement Public Loire (France): Plan Loire III – Middle LoireThe regional plan Plan Loire III focuses on the entire Loire river basin andcovers more than 240 communities. The objectives of the plan are to reducethe flood vulnerability of the riparian communities by leaving more roomfor river, to achieve greater landscape quality and biodiversity, to improvethe water quality and to provide for sufficient water resources and dealingwith droughts.

46

47

Figure 7 Time line of search processspatial planning products

Mayor Conferences

Other conferences

Intervision

Nijmegen (Nl)25-26 May

Orléans (F)22-23 Sept.

Karlsruhe (G)19-20 June

Mexico City16-22 March

Nevers (F)22-23 Nov.

Tours (F)9-11 Oct.

Nijmegen (NL) 22 Oct.

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

ObjectivesPresentation of FaFThematic discussionsKnowledge exchangeIdentify possible candidates forspatial plans

CasesPresentation > 10 regional andlocal flood management cases

ThemesPublic participationManagement of multiple interestsin floodplainsFlood awarenessEconomic activities in floodplainsLandscape values

ObjectivesPresentation of local and regionalflood management casesKnowledge exchange

CasesPresentation > 10 regional andlocal flood management casesSelection 5 local plans

ThemesPublic participationSpatial planningLocal economyNature development

Retention areasRecreation

ObjectivesPresentation of local andregional flood managementcasesSelection of suitable plans

ObjectivesKnowledge exchange

ObjectivesPresentation at WWF, 2006

ObjectivesPresentation final results

Switzerland7-10 May

Middle Loire (F)18-22 Oct.

Rest Rhine/Karlsruhe (G)26-28 April

Tiel and Venlo (Nl)10-12 May

ObjectivesImprovement of regional floodmanagement strategyAssesment of measuresPreselection of municipal plans

CasesPresentation > 30 regional andlocal flood management cases

ObjectivesPresentation regional floodmanagement planImprove municipal plans inview of selection by FaF

CasesRest RhineNeuenburg and RheingaertenLand use plan Karlsruhe

ObjectivesKnowledge exchangeDiscuss and enrich selectedmunicipal plans

CasesWaalfront TielFloating Houses MaasbommelMaas Corridors VenloMaaswerken

ObjectivesKnowledge exchangeInspect and discuss Floodprotection measuresInspect and discuss FloodplainmanagementPresentation case Rheingaerten

CasesLaufen an der Birs,Flood 2007Bern Flood 2005River widenings at Emme andThur

Municipal Plans

Neuenburg am Rhein (Germany): “Rheingärten Neuenburg”The objective of the municipal plan Rheingärten Neuenburg is that the cityof Neuenburg wants to “turn to the river again”. This means that the floodsafety objectives of the Integriertes Rheinprogramm (Integrated RhineProgram, IRP) will be combined with the objective to strengthen therelation between the city and the river and to stimulate tourism and leisurenear the river.

Local spatial development plan Tiel (The Netherlands)The focus of the spatial development plan Tiel is a combination of floodprotection, urban and landscape quality and economic development on thewaterfront. In addition the plan provides a basis for cost recovery andfinancing options like mineral extraction and real estate development.

Local spatial development plan West Maas en Waal (The Netherlands)The municipality of West Maas en Waal reviews its spatial zonation plan inorder to realize a more flood accommodating land use. The new plan willgive space to innovative projects in the floodplain, like floating and semi-floating structures.

Spatial plans Agglomération Nevers (France)Within the Agglomération de Nevers, the communities of Sermoise sur Loireand Fourchambault will create more room for the river Loire, in combinationwith a better spatial quality.

7.3. Regional plans

Waalweelde, The Netherlands

ChallengesThe Waal is the broadest river with the most busy navigation of WesternEurope. After several periods of high water levels and imminent floods in

1993 and 1995 the river dikes were reinforced by the national government.These measures however will not suffice to protect the river surroundings in thelong run. Heightening and broadening dikes cannot be applied for ever and itdoesn’t lower the water levels. River discharge and water levels will on thecontrary increase as a consequence of among others climate change. To preventfloods the river needs more space. Moreover, regional and local authorities notonly want more space for the river but also more quality. Safety, landscape,nature, economic activity and recreation have to go hand in hand.

The objective of WaalWeelde is to develop a plan in two years time, thatcreates a safer and more beautiful Waal and that gives an incentive forregional economic development. WaalWeelde involves all the stakeholders inthe area to design the floodplains of the Waal along 60 km’s of river. Thestakeholders are citizens and interest groups, civil servants, politicians,companies and governments. By creating an inspiring working- andcommunication climate for the stakeholders, spatial cooperation isencouraged, crossing sectoral and municipal borders.

WaalWeelde tries to develop solutions that are affordable and cost-effective.The result of the project needs to be an investment program forimplementation, formulated in one or more Business Cases. After Freude amFluss, the project will continue. The province of Gelderland has adopted itby taking a directing role for further development.

48

Figure 8 Project area WaalWeelde

BackgroundAs described above, the river management of the Waal aims at creatingspace for the river in order to reduce flood risks. National policy as formallyexpressed in the Planologische Kernbeslissing Ruimte voor de Rivier (PKBRoom for the River) phrases this new policy. For the next decennia thenational government agency Rijkswaterstaat has proposed interventions inrivers like lowering of floodplains, removal of obstacles like former brickfactory sites, digging of side-channels and high water channels and movingdikes backwards. The lowering of groynes has been planned in the PKBRoom for the River. This is an effective measure from a safety perspective,but it doesn’t add landscape quality to the area.

In a reaction to the plans of the PKB Room for the River, regional and localgovernments, companies, citizens and NGO’s took the initiative to articulatethe quality aspect in the management of the Waal. This resulted in theproject WaalWeelde, that aims at making a match between river safety,landscape and life quality and economic growth. It wants to strengthen theRoom for the River concept with the concept of living with water. Figure 10shows the focus of the project WaalWeelde.

The project area (see Figure 8) of WaalWeelde was for practical reasonsdivided into three clusters that are responsible for their own interactivedesign of the sub-area. In each cluster sub-projects have been developedfollowing an interactive and integrated approach. In WaalWeelde the wishesand ideas of people in the project area have been used for the developmentof integrated solutions. These were assessed considering legal demands fora.o. water quality, flood prevention, spatial planning, nature and landscape.

For the assessment the so called ‘knowledge engine’ played an importantrole. The knowledge engine is a group of experts on technical and legalissues that are assigned by various partners. In addition they deliveredinformation about innovative developments and techniques that could beused for the design of interventions. An example of an innovativetechnique is building floating houses outside the dikes (see chapter 3.1).

The planning processWaalWeelde started as a bottom-up process, involving stakeholders indesigning measures. People were involved through an interactive websiteand participating in public meetings. The process was supported byprofessional facilitators and experts with specific knowledge on variousthemes. In the meetings the input for projects was assessed with the so-called ‘digital design table’, which made it possible to speed up theiterative process.

WaalWeelde developed a plan for the complete river stretch of 60 km.Therefore the developments of the three clusters were coordinatedperiodically. All the projects, their mutual relations and effects on riverdynamics were visualized in an overview map.

The bottom-up process delivered a large number of initiatives. After twoyears however it appeared that an administrative framework was neededthat underlines the urgency and importance of the WaalWeelde initiatives.In addition there was a demand for stronger administrative legitimacy in

49

WaalWeelde facilitates:

• Cluster meetings• Public meetings• WaalWeeldewiki• Aldermen meetings

IdeasInitiativesProjects

• Companies• Interest groups/ citizens• Politicians• Civil servants

WaalWeelde supports and studies:

• Knowledge engine• Research

• River discharge• Spatial quality• Regional economic development• Regional cooperation

Figure 9 Process design WaalWeelde [source: provincie Gelderland, 2008]

50

Case: Digital Design Table

An important success factor during the interactiveprocess of WaalWeelde was the availability of the DigitalDesign Table. Thanks to the use of this assessment toolnon-experts like citizens and local politicians were ableto develop integrated solutions for the area and analyseand test their consequences. With the tool it hasbecome possible to make hydrological analyses in tensof minutes, while before this took weeks.

The Digital Design Table supports iterative planningprocesses. While using the Digital Design Table thespatial complexity and differences in interests are

acknowledged. Characteristic of iterative planning are:• Stakeholders make an inventory of options and

search together for integrated solutions.• The organizers use maps and drawings to combine

various knowledge and give insight in the spatialconsequences of certain choices.

• The organizers and stakeholders determine priorities,preferences and strategies.

The Digital Design Table that has been used in designsessions of WaalWeelde provided direct insight inhydrological, spatial and ecological consequences ofideas and plans. At the same time the assessmentresults are available in manageable and comparableformats and can easily be reproduced.

Users of the Digital Design Table can ‘draw’ a proposedintervention in the landscape in a 3-D model of thescenery. For example, forest can be removed andreplaced by a side-channel. The intervention can bespecified by adding more precise characteristics. Then,the effects on the water levels in the whole river stretchwill be calculated. The calculation results are visualizedin a map.

order to improve the decision power. The bottom-up approach needed aparallel top-down approach in order to come to concrete results. Theprovince of Gelderland took a directing role in the process in order topropose a vision and an implementation programme for the project area.These again will be discussed and adapted in interactive sessions with thevarious stakeholders.

Lessons learned

Participation• WaalWeelde was initiated by an independent party, the Radboud

University Nijmegen, that had no direct interest in the area. Due to thisindependence of the initiator participation to the process was ‘safe’which stimulated many stakeholders decided to participate. However,after the first one and a half year of brainstorming and innovativeaction it appeared that governmental embedding of the project wasrequired in order to realize real implementation.

• It appeared to be important to involve politicians, citizens and interestgroups, companies and civil servants as early as possible in the process.This will increase the commitment and improve the problem- andsolution analyses. However, particularly involving citizens andcompanies in an early stage appears to be difficult and needs specialattention.

• The municipalities in WaalWeelde were not used to cooperation crossingthe municipal borders. As a consequence getting acquainted with eachother and building trust takes time.

• In bottom-up processes the management of expectations of theparticipants is a crucial element of gaining trust. People lose their trustin a process if the directing (government) party doesn’t fulfil theirexpectations, whether or not they are correct.

• Stakeholders like politicians and citizens are generally not familiar withhydrology, which discourages them to participate in the process. Theuse of decision support tools and clear ‘rules of the game’ willcontribute to taking away their restraint. A very useful decision supporttool appears to be the Digital Design Table (see above). Additionally,support from experts is necessary to deliver specific knowledge in aneasily accessible way in order to create an equal information-footing ofthe participants.

Integrated approach• The need for interventions in the river system are of social interest.

Stakeholders and participants of an interactive process not necessarilyregard it as their own interest. In an interactive and integratedapproach it is necessary to let the participants get acquainted withtheir own responsibility in river safety by providing them with adevelopment prospect. In other words, it needs to be clear what’s in itfor them. A focus on multiple interests increases the chance of successof and the public support for a project because unpopular (socialinterest) projects can be combined with projects that generate directlyvisible benefits for the local communities.

• Because various stakeholders participated, each with their ownperspectives, plan development took place with a focus from differentangles. This resulted in an increased quality of the plan, because thecapacity and creativity of local actors was utilized. And, it resulted inan integrated plan that served various interests, like spatial quality,hydrology, nature objectives, environmental objectives, navigation andeconomic development.

Time• Regional spatial development processes like WaalWeelde are time

consuming, especially if a large number of stakeholders is involved.People need time to get used to each other and get used to get used toinnovative approaches. Politicians however, strive for quick results, at

51

52

Case: Beuningen

After the start of WaalWeelde the municipality ofBeuningen decided to develop a renovation plan for theBeuningen floodplain. The objectives were to increasethe spatial quality, widen the river and give anincentive to recreation in the area. For this floodplainvarious plans had already been developed in the past,but because of the complexity of the area they hadnever been implemented in full. The area namely

contained a dumping ground for fly ash and one fordomestic waste and a large business park. The presenceof these three functions caused the implementation ofthe plans to be too expensive.

WaalWeelde provided themunicipality the opportunity torealize the since long present desireto renovate the floodplain throughcooperation. The municipalityaccepted the InspiratieAtlasWaalWeelde as staring point andwith the help of the independentfacilitators of WaalWeelde itmotivated the surroundingmunicipalities to support and co-develop their plans.

Together with land owners,companies, regional and nationalgovernment, surrounding localgovernments and otherstakeholders, the municipalitydeveloped a design for renovationof the floodplain. The participantsagreed on the design.

Birds eye impression of the end result of the Beuningen floodplain

least within their term of service. By formulating periodic landmarks, along term project can deliver interim results, within the terms ofservice.

Finances• An important success factor for a regional spatial development project

is that it generates its own financial resources and that principles ofcost recovery and equalization are applied.

Plan Loire III – Middle Loire, France

ChallengeThe Loire river is considered to be one of the most natural rivers of northwestern Europe because it is hardly regulated. Nevertheless various humaninterventions took place in the river basin. For example, during the secondhalf of the twentieth century gravel extraction led to an incision of theriver-bed up to 2 meters. As a result the Loire floodplains between dikes,downstream from Nevers, are flooded less frequently, which in turn causesan increase in the growth of shrubs and forest. To maintain an optimaldischarge capacity during floods, the vegetation needs to be managed.Therefore the Plan Loire Grandeur Nature proposes a strategy to serve bothnature restoration objectives and flood risk management objectives.

BackgroundThe Loire River is the longest river in France, with a length of 1020 km. Theriver basin drains an area of 117,000 km2. The Loire river basin is fullysituated in France. Freude am Fluss focused on the Middle Loire, the areabetween Nevers and Angers, with its 300,000 inhabitants and numerouseconomic activities inside the flood prone area.

Nowadays natural processes like erosion and sedimentation are still activein the Loire, resulting in a mobile river bed and the development of islandsand side channels. Because of its natural character, a considerable numberof areas in the Loire basin have been defined as NATURA 2000 sites.

Besides the presence of these natural dynamics, the river has beenregulated slightly. On various locations old groynes for navigation builtduring the 19th century, weirs on behalf of power plants, remains of pastgravel extraction and local fixations of the river-bed are present.

The original Plan Grandeur Nature Loire (Plan Loire, 1994 - 1999) concerneda new management approach for the Loire, that combined floodmanagement and nature and environmental management. It aimed at:• the safety of people;• the rise of the water level during low discharges;• the protection of the environment.

53

Figure 10 Middle Loire, France

During this Plan a large multidisciplinary study of theMiddle Loire has been carried out to assess the flood risksand the potential damage. On the basis of this expertise astrategy was elaborated to reduce risk by implementingvarious measures. In a next stage the Plan Loire II wasformulated. This was a strategy to reduce flood riskfollowing the principles Prediction, Prevention andProtection. The plan aimed at a combination of improvedflood risk management, water quantity and quality andenvironmental management. The Plan Loire II wasimplemented between 2000 and 2006.

The Plan Loire III is a follow-up of the strategy of the PlanLoire II for the years 2007 - 2013. It aims atimplementation of the actions of the former plans. Theobjectives are:• To decrease the flood vulnerability of the communities

along the river Loire.• To improve the water quality.• To provide for sufficient water resources and dealing

with droughts.• To safeguard the biodiversity in the Loire basin.

A flood risk management plan for the Middle Loire

For the Middle Loire a regional flood risk management plan is integrated inthe Plan Loire. The Middle Loire is the river stretch between Nevers andAngers. The regional plan applies the Freude am Fluss principles ofgenerating room for the river by changes in land use via local initiatives,new market mechanisms and technical innovations. Communication withstakeholders is an important pillar of the plan.

The strategy for flood management for the Middle Loire does not only focuson traditional technical measures like the construction of reservoirs and

dike reinforcement. It also takes into consideration options to reduce thevulnerability to flooding of property, awareness raising and improving thequalities of the river, including river nature, landscape values and culturaland historical values. The ambitions of the third stage of the strategy forthe Loire (Plan Loire III) are the following:• Sustainable development of the valleys along the Loire and its

tributaries, taking into account the risks of inundation and drought andpreventing their negative effects.

• Create a natural, cultural and tourist heritage and a landscape quality ofthe Loire and its tributaries as an incentive for developing theattractiveness, the competitiveness and solidarity of the Loire area forits inhabitants.

54

• Make the Loire basin a European reference for the sustainablemanagement of a large river and its basin, from source to mouth.

To realize the ambitions mentioned above, the Plan Loire III has set thefollowing objectives for the period 2007-2013:• Sustainable life in the valleys of the Loire and its main tributaries that

are liable to flooding.• Conservation of the social interests involved with water as a resource,

nature areas and indigenous species.• Emphasise the natural, cultural, tourist and landscape heritage quality

of the Loire and its tributaries, aiming at sustainable development.• Develop and spread general, basic and operational knowledge of the

river and its ecosystem.

These objectives were strived for through a parallel top-down and bottom-up approach in which aspects like consultation, participation andcommunication played an important role. The starting point of the strategyis the awareness of the fact that full flood safety is not achievable, inother words the strategy starts off with a degree of risk-acceptance.

The planning processThe development of the Plan Loire III started in 2006. It started off with aconsultation of all the stakeholders in the Loire basin: local and regionalrepresentatives, NGO’s, citizens and technical experts from variousorganizations. External experts from the Freude am Fluss partners wereassociated in the consultation too. The consultation resulted in a definitionof the third stage of the flood management strategy for the Loire. Based onthis, the national government, Agence de l’eau Loire-BretagneEtablissement Public Loire and regional authorities signed a contract for themanagement of the Loire basin in the period 2007-2013.

The planning processes of the Plan Loire I and II were mainly top-downorganized. For Plan Loire III a bottom-up approach has been chosen byinvolving local stakeholders like politicians, citizens and interest groups

and technical experts. The objective is that during the implementationstage of the Plan Loire III this bottom-up approach will be extended, basedon the lessons learned during the pilot in Val de Bréhémont (see chapter6.3).

Lessons learned

Legal issues• Within Natura 2000 areas and nature reserves generally permission is

required to remove vegetation, even if it contributes to naturerehabilitation objectives.

• In the Loire strategy norms for safety levels have been absent untilnow. Defined safety levels however, will provide a clear basis for thediscussion about and definition of necessary interventions. Adisadvantage of clear safety levels on the other hand, might be thatinhabitants feel less responsible because they have “respected” thenorms.

Participation• Make a shift from information to participation in decision making

processes. Ask people how they review a certain problem and let themdefine solutions, instead of presenting possible solutions to them fromthe start.

• Special attention is needed for involving all citizens. It’s important toguarantee that participating interest groups do represent the opinion ofall (groups) of citizens.

• A difficulty in the planning process appeared to be the time span inwhich it is taking place. Between the results of the initial study of PlanLoire I and concrete actions in a certain area lie years. As a result aflaw in the process is keeping people (project members andstakeholders) enthusiastic for and involved in the process.

Risk awareness• In the 20th century no high river flows occurred in the Loire basin. This

55

led to a false sense of security, less awareness of the flooding threatand less attention for maintenance of the infrastructure. It also led to asubstantial development of houses and enterprises in the valleys.

• Spatial planning instruments can be used as a tool for informationsupply and awareness building on behalf of citizens.

Cost-effectiveness of interventions• Solutions derived from a system oriented approach seem to be more

cost-effective than solutions derived from a local perspective.• Apparently certain solutions and measures have not been implemented

during stage I and II of the Plan Loire because of objections of aminority of stakeholders. In order to realize cost-effective interventionshowever it is required that all alternatives will be included from thestart of the decision making process. Decisions with unpleasant effectsfor certain stakeholders may be combined with benefits.

• A Cost Benefit Analysis on a river basin scale, including direct andindirect damage costs, will provide a useful basis for decisions aboutinterventions.

• For a sustainable flood management awareness is required about thepossible economic drivers that may underpin the plans.

7.4. Local plans

Neuenburg am Rhein, Germany

ChallengeIn the twentieth century the city of Neuenburg am Rhein was cut of fromthe river. This was caused by the incision of the river Rhine after the Tullacorrection and the realization of roads between city and river and urbandevelopment in the former floodplain. Within the Interated RhineProgramme (IRP) retention areas will be realized in the former floodplaindirectly in the boundary of Neuenburg am Rhein. This provided theopportunity for the city to broaden the river and to connect the town andthe river again, which gives the opportunity to stimulate tourism and

leisure in the river area. This resulted in the plan Rheingärten Neuenburg(Rhinegardens). The major challenges of the plan are the following:• Bundling nature conservation and recreation along the river.• Bundling compensation measures for the IRP retention areas directly inthe boundary of Neuenburg am Rhein.

BackgroundThe city of Neuenburg am Rhein is situated in the south-west of Germany,in the state Baden-Württemberg, at the border to France and nearSwitzerland. The city is located on the eastern bank of the river Rhine (theso-called Rest-Rhine), which lies 10 meters below the former floodplainbecause of the incision of the river Rhine caused by the Tulla Correction(1815-1875). Until the Tulla correction the river ran close to the city andbrought prosperity as well as serious flood danger. After the Tullacorrection, the river remained important for navigation, local economy andrecreation. However, after the opening of the Grand Canal d’ Alsace in 1959it lost most of these functions.

Within the IRP is planned and partially approved to create the retention areWeil/Breisach by lowering an 43 kilometre long area along the river to adepth up to 10 meters. Deepening will take place by gravel extraction, withthe aim to develop a regularly flooded floodplain landscape. Of thisretention area 150 ha lie within the municipality of Neuenburg am Rhein.The implementation of the retention area requires compensation measuresfor the impacts on nature and landscape. The main focus of thecompensation measures is the strengthening of natural development of thevegetation and of recreation along the Rhine shores.

The plan Rheingärten Neuenburg

The project Rheingärten Neuenburg has been started within the scope ofcompensation measures for the impacts on nature and landscape. Originallythe land use plan for the area of the Rheingärten included a vastdevelopment of industrial and commercial activities. The need for

56

compensation for the IRPinterventions provided theopportunity to combine therealization of a retentionarea with spatial andrecreational development.The objective of theplanning of theRheingärten was to developan area that will function as a natural, regional cultural and tourist centre.

The Rheingärten are part of a comprehensive development area west of thehighway which should be developed as attractive site for local recreation,

leisure, culture and commercialism. Further more this area is a significantstepping stone for a functional connection between the city and the riverRhine. In addition to the Rheingärten, the masterplan ‘Neuenburg turns thecity to the Rhine 2025’ consists of a number of modules to be realizedalong the river Rhine, such as lowering of the riverbanks, rehabilitation ofthe old harbour, adventure playground, a visitor centre for the IntegratedRhine Programme of the state of Baden-Wurttemberg, Rhine terraces with arestaurant, walkways, parking facilities, and many more.

The planning processOriginally the city council chose to develop the area near the river in atraditional way, with industry and construction works. The idea of turningthe city towards the Rhine again, by focussing on leisure and tourism in

57

Case: Eine Stadt geht zum Rhein

For the local plan in Neuenburg am Rhein a brochurewas produced and was distributed to all households. Itshows the goals and activities of Freude am Fluss as wellas the planned measures. It also epxlains the history ofthe city in connection with the river Rhine and thecities own plans which fit perfectly with the goals ofthe Freude am Fluss project. Among other water relatedactivities like canoeing and rowing a new attraction canbe found along the shores of the Rest Rhine: Gold! Thiscan be extracted within pans in gold wash course. Thereis strong cooperation between the city of Neuenburg amRhein and the neighbouring French communities whichare linked within other European projects. HenceNeuenburg am Rhein is a place where Europe is growingtogether and it shows that a river is no longer a borderbut a link between countries.

Tiel, The Netherlands

ChallengeThe town of Tiel is located near the river Waal, which runs south of thetown. The town however is oriented to the north, “with its back to theriver”. The floodplains between town and the river Waal are being used asparking and as space for public events. The local government decided toreconnect the town and the river Waal and to make better use of thepotential of the beautiful location by the river. This resulted in the projectWaalfront.

The project Waalfront aims at the following:• Improve the appearance of the town by the river Waal by improving the

spatial quality.• Strengthen the relation between Tiel and the river Waal by turning Tiel

towards the river. • Strengthen the position of the town centre by the river Waal by

improving the local and regional attraction through adding functionsand activities to the present services.

BackgroundIn the past the municipality of Tiel and its inhabitants developed severalvisions on the quay of the Waal already. However, the 1993 and 1995 highwaters resulted in a set of flood prevention measures and a prohibition ofall building activities in the floodplain. In 2004 however, an interactiveprocess started with the inhabitants of Tiel, in order to define the joint

the area, at first was received sceptically. The city council was notconvinced that it would strengthen the local economy. However, after looking at examples elsewhere in Europe (within Freude amFluss, see figure 6) where the ideas of combining floodplain management withother functions had been or were being applied, the attitute towards a newapproach changed. Exchanging ideas with other Mayors was a trigger too.

In the plan development the responsible governments were involved(municipality, Landkreis and State) together with private actors andpotential investors. The citizens were informed about the plans, but theydid not contribute to the development of the plans. In general, the planswere welcomed positively by the citizens.

Lessons learned• Thrust between participants is a precondition for a project. Due to

participating Freude am Fluss mutual thrust was created.• At the start of the planning process it is important to formulate a clear

vision and objectives.• It is important to involve the right people on the right moment. • Freude am Fluss partner ILN was involved in the planning process as an

independent actor. As a consequence it was able to moderateconflicting interests between State and municipality.i^

58

ambitions concerning the area. Tiel decided to use the potential of it’slocation and involve its citizens in an early stage. The process resulted inthe formulation and assessment of a number of development scenarios. Thescenarios include a variety of developments, from conservation of riverlandscapes to investing in the quality of public space. In the mean timeTiel was designated by the national government as a location whereexperiments with adapted building are allowed (EMAB).

In order to realize the desired improvement of the spatial quality togetherwith improved river safety, a Masterplan Waalfront has been developed. TheMasterplan aims at a balance between ‘red’, ‘blue’ and ‘green’ functions inthe area. The objective of the Masterplan is to increase the regionalimportance of Tiel. It defines per sub-area and per sub-project the startingpoints for development and provides a basis for assessing the coherencebetween them. The Masterplan therefore is a framework that explicitlyinvites private actors to develop projects and initiatives.

In addition the Masterplan functions as local spatial vision (structuurvisie)for this part of the city of Tiel. It describes the connection betweenindividual projects and forms a spatial framework for these projects. TheMasterplan contains the information that is needed for decisions in theWaalfront area with an integrated focus.

The planning processIn developing the Masterplan stakeholders like citizens and companies haveactively been involved. The plan was not developed in a top-down mannerbut truly developed in a bottom-up. This means that the citizens were andstill are taking part in developing ideas for the development of their city.Their interests and ambitions have been integrated in the plan followingthe steps that have been distinguished in the Joint Planning Approach (seechapter 6). Some examples in chapter 6 explain the planning process ofWaalfront in more detail.

Lessons learned• The costs and time-investment of applying a joint planning approach

appeared to be easily recovered due to less protests and procedures ofobjection in a later stage. A bottom-up approach as applied for theWaalfront will however never be able to take away all objections and tosatisfy everybody’s interest for 100 percent.

• It is essential to involve potential investors from the start of the process.This reassures that the plans will be really implemented in the end.

West Maas en Waal, The Netherlands

ChallengeThe local government and local entrepreneurs of the town of West Maas enWaal (The Netherlands) want to create recreational and tourist facilities inthe winter bed of the river. These activities need to be flood proof, createadditional space for the river and improve the natural and spatial quality ofthe area.

BackgroundDue to safety standards and the space for the river policy, it was notallowed to build in the floodplain at West Maas en Waal. The nationalgovernment however, allowed 15 locations along the river to implementexperiments with adapted building (EMAB). Adapted building means thatthe dynamics of the river are taken into account and that flood safety isguaranteed for the users of the buildings. The area “Gouden Ham” in WestMaas en Waal is one of the experimental locations.

The planning processThe municipality of West Maas en Waal asked the Freude am Fluss project tosupport them in developing the Gouden Ham area. Conform the Freude amFluss approach a multi-stakeholder working group was established in whichlocal entrepreneurs, the municipality and the responsible nationalauthorities were represented. The chair of this working group was deliveredby the Freude am Fluss consortium (Prof. Toine Smits, Radboud University

59

60

Figure 11 West Maas en Waal - De Gouden Ham

Nijmegen). The solutions had to integrate safety, nature, economy,recreation and ecotourism. It strived for innovation and for cost recovery ofthe development.The strength of the working group was that the participants learned abouteach others perspectives and interests and that knowledge institutesprovided the discussions with facts and figures (hydromorphodynamicresponses of the river; communication and public participation processes).Starting from there they searched for common objectives. The process withthe working group resulted in a large number of feasible plans in the area,that aim at a social-economic and spatial incentive for the area. Figure 11gives an overview of the project area.

Lessons learned• Legal restrictions focus on what is not allowed. This makes it difficult

to discuss opportunities. The fact that an experiment was allowed atWest Maas en Waal gave space to discuss opportunities.

• It is important to involve responsible authorities, entrepreneurs, thepublic and knowledge institutes as early as possible in the developmentprocess.

• In West Maas and Waal was learned that (small) municipalities are notused to multi-stakeholder approaches from the start of a project. As aconsequence applying such approaches will need a large timeinvestment.

• Participation of independent knowledge institutes like universities,delivering knowledge and experience to the process, facilitates aconstructive and fruitful debate.

• Generating own financial means and aiming for cost recovery make iteasier for the national government to support the project.

• For a successful territorial approach in (small) municipalities, a goodnetwork on regional and national level is essential.

Agglomération de Nevers, France

ChallengeThe Agglomération de Nevers consists of 10 communities with 73,000inhabitants in total. It is situated along the river Loire and Allier andcomprises an area of 180 km2. The rivers Loire and Allier offer a lot of“Freude” aspects. Both are important bird resting areas with natural fluvialdynamics and a large diversity (beavers, see swallows etc.). There are manyrecreation possibilities (canoeing, cycling and fishing) and culturalmanifestations. In the past however, there have been numerous floods, thelast occurring in 2003. It affected 1500 ha of land and 10,000 in¬habitantswere without drinking water for several days.

The first reaction of the government and the local communities was toreinforce the existing network of dikes. National policy is to move newurbanization away from flood prone areas. The challenge of local andregional government is to control the urbanization of the areas most atrisk, while allowing the urban and economic development of areas alreadyurbanized or the areas at least risk, especially by reducing theirvulnerability with regard to floods. Therefore the regional authoritiesdecided first to study the long term hydraulic situation, flood risks of thecity and options for safety measures. Based on the results of the study, thechallenge in the Agglomération de Nevers is to improve the dischargecapacity of the rivers, minimize the risk and improve the living quality ofthe area at the same time.

Two adapted local development plansIn 2006 the Communauté d’Agglomération de Nevers launched a study withthe objective to reduce flood risks in the region. Parallel to this study,enabling socio-economic development in flood prone areas, taking intoaccount flood risk and sustainability, were studied.

Since the beginning of the century, the communes of the Agglomération deNevers all have a Flood Risk Prevention Plan (PPRi). These plans do not

61

allow urbanization in the flood prone areas which are most at risk. Theplans prevent risks to increase, but they don’t provide a solution for areasthat have already been urbanized. Moreover, they don’t support the desireddevelopments. The national government is responsible for formulating thePPRi’s. Communes have the responsibility to formulate local developmentplans , that integrate the regulatory zoning of the PPRi’s.

The Communauté d’Agglomération de Nevers made a review of thepossibilities for spatial planning, taking full advantage of the opportunitiesof flood prone areas, without increasing the risks. For the implementationof the results in local development plans, three sites were selected: 1)Nevers, 2) Sermoise sur Loire and 3) Fourchambault. The latter two planswere developed within the frame of Freude am Fluss. The first, Nevers, isbeing prepared at the time and will be finished in 2010. Originally, thecommunes of Sermoise sur Loire and Fourchambault mainly focused on

flood risk and complying with the PPR regulation. Withrevising their local plans, the communes want to createmore room for river in combination with greater landscapequality.

A large part of the territory of the commune of Sermoisesur Loire consists of flood prone areas. Participating Freudeam Fluss resulted in an adapted local plan, which wasdifferent from the original decision of the municipality. Theoriginal plans contained roads in the floodplain forfacilitating economic activities. From the integratedapproach became clear that these would increase floodrisks. Therefore in the adapted plan developments wereplanned in other locations.

The commune of Fourchambault wanted to change theindustrial face of the river banks into green spaces bysupporting the relocation of companies. An important shareof the industry had already been closed and the

environmental quality of the area already flourished. The original localdevelopment plan aimed at realizing housing along the river bank, groupedin low density. Due to participating Freude am Fluss a more ambitiousprogram was formulated, in which giving back space to the river and urbandevelopment were combined. Indeed several areas for building were definedin the floodplain, but with higher densities and more flood adapted thanoriginally foreseen. Creating space for the river reduces risks and allows theattractiveness of the river landscape to increase. This offers newopportunities for investors for future developments.

The planning processThe planning processes in the Agglomération de Nevers took place in apartnership between the state administration, local government andregional partners (EPL and Agence de l’eau). For each community meetingswere organized, involving local politicians and interest groups of citizens.

62

These meetings were the start of the communication process, that will becontinued in the future.

A first step in the process was to explore various technical and institutionalquestions, following expert analyses. The results of the expert analyses werediscussed with the local partners in both Sermoise sur Loire andFourchambault. Therefore a series of workshops was organized in the twocommunes. The first two workshops focused on leveling the knowledge baseof the participants. They addressed the institutional framework of Frenchflood risk management, possible technical solutions and practices of livingwith floods. Next, the major issues with regard to flood risk and economicand urban development were discussed between (local) politicians, citizens,technical experts and architects. This resulted in the definition of a numberprojects and the conditions for their implementation.

As a result of involving the local stakeholders in the planning process, theybecame more sensitive for the problems of floods. Of course politicians wereaware of flood risk in advance, but the exchange of knowledge lead to abetter understanding and an improved consciousness about the issue.

Lessons learned• The Loire and its floodplain offer opportunities for (urban)

development. It should no longer be solely looked upon as a waterchannel. It appears to be possible to develop new projects in the floodprone areas of the Loire that are both of strategic importance for theconurbation and in the same time non-vulnerable to floods.

• Open discussions between water managers and decision makers aboutflood risks and possible measures creates an open mind for both ofthem to combine flood prevention with local development ambitions.Decision makers get amenable for the consequences of flood risk andthe opportunities for spatial planning.

• The structure that is provided by the Joint Planning Approach is a goodstarting point to involve citizens in flood management. By confrontingdifferent points of view it will become possible to formulate a commonproblem definition. Participation in integrated planning is important,but it will be the politicians that have to decide.

63

References Publications

Agence de l’eau Loire-Bretagne, Evaluation du Plan Loire, 20 April 2005.Ast van, J., J.J. Bouma and Kirsten Schuyt, Economic drivers of ‘Room forthe River’., Erasmus University, 2007.Braakhekke, W. (ed.), Inspiratie Atlas WaalWeelde, InnovatieNetwerk andWINN, 2006.Bruin de D., D. Hamhuis, L. Nieuwenhuijzen, W. Overmars, D. Sijmons en F.Vera, Plan Ooievaar, De toekomst van het rivierengebied, Stichting GelderseMilieufederatie, Rijkswaterstaat, Ministerie van LNV, 1987.Cohrs, D. and L. Herlitzius, Pilotproject of Region Starkenburg – SharedResponsibility for Flood Prevention, Techische Universität Darmstadt,December 2006.Dijkman, J. and R. Maaten, Flood Management for the Middle Loire; anoutsiders’ perspective, WL|Delft Hydraulics, April 2006.Document stratégique interrégional pour la poursuite du plan Loire grandeurnature sur la période 2007-2013, 1 October 2006.EP Loire, Plan Loire Grandeur Nature - Une ambition commune, un faisceaud’actions convergentes, 2007.EP Loire, Risques et loisirs au bord des grands fleuves d’Europe, 2005EU, A framework for the Community action in the field of water policy (EUWater Framework Directive), Directive 2000/60/EC, 2000.EU, Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks (EU FloodDirective), Directive 2007/60/EC, 2007.Gemeente Tiel, Burgerparticipatie in Tiel – De Tielse Methode 2000 – 2004>Een uniek experiment, December 2005.Gemeente Tiel, Burgerparticipatie in Tiel – Het Stadspanel 2003 – 2005>Adviezen van burgers, March 2006.Gemeente Tiel, Burgerparticipatie in Tiel – De Stadsvisie 2000 - 2002>Toekomst van Tiel, September 2006.Gemeente Tiel, Burgerparticipatie in Tiel – Het Waalfront 2004 – 2006>Dromen van de Waaloever, March 2007.Intervision Team Floodplain Management, Nature rehabilitation and floodrisk management in river Loire and Allier, October 10-15, 2004.

64

Kater, E., B. Peters and G.J. Geerling, Cyclisch beheer in uiterwaarden –Inrichtingsschetsen van demonstratieprojecten, Radboud UniversityNijmegen, 2005.Ledoux Consultants a.o., The conurbation of Nevers – Val Ligérien sustainabledevelopment study; study on taking the flood risk into account, summaryreport, April 2008.Okra Landschapsarchitecten, SAB Arnhem and Gemeente Tiel, Waalfront Tiel– Masterplan, August 2006.Peters, B., E. Kater and G. Geerling, Cyclisch beheer in uiterwaarden,Staatsbosbeheer, ARK, Rijkswaterstaat and Radboud University, April 2006.Provincie Gelderland, Projectplan WaalWeelde – Ruimtelijke kwaliteit,economische groei en veiligheid door samenwerking, 2008.Mannaerts, J., Beuningse Uiterwaard – rivierkundige toets 2003,Rijkswaterstaat Directie Oost Nederland, 9 augustus 2004Schuster, Letter concerning the cooperation between the city of Neuenburgalong the river Rhine within the Frame of the INTERREG IIIB NEW-Project“Freude am Fluss” (FaF), 6 October 2006.Smits AJM, Havinga H, Marteijn ECL, New concepts in river and watermanagement in the Rhine river basin: how to live with the unexpected? In:A.J.M. Smits, P.H. Nienhuis & R.S.E.W. Leuven (Eds.) New approaches toriver management, Leiden, 2000.Swanenvleugel, B. and A. Laninga, Flood awareness and prevention policy inborder areas –results of a European network on flood management, June2007.Triple E, Waterrijk aan de oever 1, June 2008.Triple E, Waterrijk aan de oever –2, July 2008.Vreugdenhil, H.S.I. , Policy networks in Dutch Floodplain Management – Acase study of the floodplains of Beuningen, December 2005.Vreugdenhil, H.S.I., Introducing ecosystem-based concepts in rivermanagement: The introduction of Ecological Floods within the IntegratedRhine Program, TU Delft, May 2007.Vreugdenhil, H.S.I., J. Slinger and E. Kater, Adapting scale use for successfulimplementation of Cyclic Floodplain Rejuvenation in the Netherlands, 2007Warner, J. and M. Winnubst, Learning and fighting: joint planning for river

management interventions reconsidered, April 2008.Willems, D. and T. Smits, Projectanalyse WaalWeelde – De rol vanRijkswaterstaat in participatieprojecten en toepassingsmogelijkheden binnende RWS organisatie, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, 2008.

Websites

www.agglo-nevers.frwww.cyclischbeheer.nlwww.eptb-loire.frwww.freudeamfluss.euwww.jointplanning.euwww.neuenburg.dewww.plan-loire.frwww.tiel.nlwww.waalweelde.nlwww.westmaasenwaal.nl

Refrences to other publications that were consulted and that were publishedwithin the frame of Freude am Fluss are summarized in Appendix B.

65

Part III Appendices

66

4 Technische Universität DarmstadtInstitut WAR, Fachgebiet Umwelt- und RaumplanungPetersenstrasse 13, 64387 Darmstadt, GermanyT +49 (0) 6151 163148F +49 (0) 6151 163739

5 Delphiro B.V.Rotterdamseweg 183C, 2629 HC, Delft, TheNetherlandsT +31(0)152682606F +31(0)152682616

6 Erasmus University RotterdamErasmus Centre for Sustainability and Management(ESM)P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, TheNetherlandsT +31 (0) 10 4082000F +31 (0) 10 4089104

7 Habiforum Postbus 420, 2800 AK Gouda, The NetherlandsT +31 (0) 182 540655F +31 (0) 182 540656

8 Agence de l'Eau Loire-BretagneB.P. 6339, 45063 Orléans cedex 02, FranceT +33 (0) 2 38 51 73 73F +33 (0) 2 38 51 74 74

67

Lead Partner

1 Radboud University Nijmegen - Faculty of ScienceCentre for Sustainable Management of ResourcesToernooiveld 16525 ED NijmegenP.O. Box 90106500 GL NijmegenThe NetherlandsT +31 (0) 24 3652432F +31 (0) 24 3652430

Partners

2 Etablissement Public Loire3 avenue Claude Guillemin, BP 6125, 45061Orléans cedex 2, FranceT +33 (0) 2 38 64 38 38F +33 (0) 2 38 64 35 35

3 Ministry of Transport, Public Works andWater Management, Directorate-General ofPublic Works and Water Management, EastNetherlands DivisionP.O. Box 9070, 6800 ED Arnhem, The NetherlandsT +31 (0) 26 3688805F +31 (0) 26 3688734

Appendix A Overview of project partners

68

13 Communauté d'Agglomération de Nevers(ADN)124 route de Marzy, BP 41, 58027 Nevers cedex,FranceT +33 (0) 3 86 61 81 60F +33 (0) 3 86 61 81 99

14 University Francois-Rabelais ToursUMR CNRS 6173 CITERES –VST, 3, rue desTanneurs, BP 4103, 37041 Tours Cedex 1, FranceT +33(0) 02 47 36 14 68F +33(0) 02 47 36 14 51

9 Institut für Landschaftsökologie undNaturschutz (ILN) BühlSandbachstraße 2, 77815 Bühl, GermanyT +49 (0) 7223 9486/16F +49 (0) 7223 9486/86

10 Region StarkenburgRegionalbüro Starkenburg bei der Institut WARvon der Technische Universität Darmstadt Petersenstrasse 13, D-64287 Darmstadt, GermanyT +49 (0) 6151 164650F +49 (0) 6151 167048

11 Deltares (previously WL|Delft Hydraulics)P.O. Box 177, 2600 MH, Delft, The NetherlandsT +31(0)152858824F +31(0)152858582

12 Directorate-General of Public Works andWater Management, Waterdienst (previouslyRoad and HydraulicEngineering Division)P.O. Box 17, 8200 AA Lelystad, The NetherlandsT +31 (0) 320 298411

Financial sponsors

The Freude am Fluss project is financially supported by the EuropeanUnion (Interreg IIIB North West Europe Programme). The other financialsponsors are:

Living with Water ProgrammeP.O. Box 420, 2800 AK, Gouda, The Netherlands.

Innovation Network Rural Areas and Agricultural SystemsP.O. Box 19197, 3501 DD, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food quality of the Netherlands P.O. Box 20401, 2500 EK, Den Haag, The Netherlands

Ministry of Spatial Planning, Housing and the Environment of theNetherlandsP.O. Box 20951, 2500 EZ, Den Haag, The Netherlands

Province of Gelderland, The NetherlandsP.O. Box 9090, 6800 GX Arnhem, The Netherlands

69

70

During Freude am Fluss the following written publications were produced (compilation).

Theme title year Avaiable throughFloodplain Cyclisch beheer in uiterwaarden: Natuur en veiligheid in de praktijk 2006 Radboud University Nijmegenmanagement Development and application of a GIS-based landscape ecological assessment method for cyclic floodplain rejuvenation measures:

case Ewijkse plaat 2006Cyclisch beheer Ewijkse plaat: Effect op natuurwaarden – Natuurbeschermingswet 2007 Radboud University NijmegenOriënterend bodemonderzoek Ewijkse Plaat te Ewijk 2007 Radboud University NijmegenGrondstromenplan Ewijkse Plaat 2007 Radboud University NijmegenCompensatie maatregelen Beuningse Uiterwaarden: Symbiose tussen veiligheid en natuur 2007 Radboud University NijmegenInnovatieve technieken: Symbiose tussen veiligheid en natuur 2007 Radboud University NijmegenNatuurtoets Ewijkse Plaat: Ten behoeve van vergunningsaanvraag Flora en Faunawet 2007 Radboud University NijmegenHandbuch Flussverbreiterung und Morphodynamik - Mögliche Entwicklungen und Managementstrategien am Beispiel des Restrheins zwischen Basel und Breisach - 2008 ILNHandbuch Flussverbreiterung und Biodiversität - Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten und Managementstrategien am Beispiel der Trockenaue zwischen Basel und Breisach 2008 ILNChanging rivers: Analysing fluvial landscape dynamics using remote sensing 2008 Radboud University Nijmegen

Joint Planning Rivier en mens: Inventarisatie van poëzie en volksverhalen over rivieren en een analyse van rivierengedichten 2004 Radboud University NijmegenL’élaboration et la mise en oeuvre du «Programme Comoy» (1867) sur la Loire moyenne: analyse du jeu d’acteurs et principaux enseignements 2005 University of ToursLage bomen vangen veel water: Een studie naar de beelden van riviernatuur en visies op uiterwaarden beheer onder bewoners van Beuningen 2005 Radboud University NijmegenThe Integrated Rhine Programma (IRP) in Baden-Wurttemberg: Successes and failures of the past 2006 ILNThe Integrated Rhine Programma (IRP) in Baden-Wurttemberg: Competing utilization types, parallel running projects and concepts for the planning area of the IRP 2006 ILNThe Integrated Rhine Programma (IRP) in Baden-Wurttemberg: Recommendations for a Joint Planning method 2006 ILNRiver Perception and Change: Inhabitants’ perception of a floodplain and future building plans 2006 Radboud University NijmegenWaalzicht: de droom van Beuningen - Brochure 2006 Radboud University NijmegenShared Responsibility for Flood Prevention: Pilotproject of Region Starkenburg 2006 University of DarmstadtEconomic Drivers of ‘Room for the River’ 2007 Erasmus University RotterdamCommunication strategies in planning processes in the Netherlands Successes and failures in planning processes in the Netherlands 2007 Radboud University NijmegenDe rivier & ik : De mooiste gedichten, verhalen en liedjes van een schrijfwedstrijd in het Rijk van Nijmegen 2007 Radboud University NijmegenLa politique de protection contre les inondations dans le bassin de la Loire du 19ème siècle à nos jours : quels enseignements tirer du passé pour mettre en oeuvre une nouvelle politique ? 2007 University of Tours

Appendix B Overview of Freude am Fluss publications

Theme title year Avaiable throughMeanings and measures; A comparison on ‘Visions of the River’ and perceptions on flood protection management in France, Germany and the Netherlands 2008 Radboud University NijmegenStratégie et plan d’action opérationnel pour le développement durable et la gestion du risque d’inondation des communes riveraines des vals de Loire et du Vieux-Cher - Résultats de la démarche de concertation mise en oeuvre sur le val de Bréhémont au cours de l’année 2007 2008 EP LoireWhat lessons can we learn from the past? – Retrospective analysis of decision making processes in the field of flood management on the Loire river 2008 University of Tours Aide à la mise en oeuvre locale d’une stratégie globale de prévention des risques d’inondation 2008 EP LoireIedereen heeft zijn rivier: Analyse van de schrijfwedstrijd ‘De rivier en ik” 2008 Radboud University Nijmegen

Spatial planning De l’incrédulité à l’engagement Individuel : Facteurs explicatifs de l’incrédulité face aux risques d’inondation et outils à élaborer pour amener riverains et décideurs à adopter un comportement responsible à la hauteur du risqué d’inondation 2005 Agence de L’ eau Loire- BretagneIntervision meeting Middle Loire October 18-22, 2004 2005 EP Loire“Flood retention & spatial planning” along the Rest Rhine and in Karlsruhe Intervision team Floodplain Management 2006 ILNFlood Management for the Middle Loire; an outsiders’ perspective 2006 EP LoireEtude prealable a la reduction de la vulnerabilite des reseaux liee aux inondations en loire moyenne: resultats, bilan et perspectives 2006 EP LoireTussenrapportage Waal Weelde 2008Tussenrapportage Waal Weelde 2006-2007 2007 Radboud University NijmegenMachbarkeitsstudie zur Anbindung des „Knielinger Sees“ an die Überflutungen des Rheins 2007 ILNAssessment of the morphodynamic situation in the Rhine near Neuenburg 2007 ILNVisit of French and German delegations to Tiel and Venlo, the ‘Maas Corridors’ and the ‘Grensmaas-project’ in the Netherlands 2007 ILNVoorbij de risiconorm: Nieuwe relaties tussen ruimte, water en risico 2007 WaterdienstRetour d’expérience sur les opérations de réduction de la vulnérabilité de l’habitat aux risques naturels : Présentation des études de cas 2008 EP LoireUrban development in riverbeds: An international comparison 2008 University of Tours and

Radboud University NijmegenEtude de développement durable du Val Ligérien. Etude de prise en compte du risque inondation 2008 Agglomération de NeversOptions for reconnection in the surroundings of Karlsruhe under consideration of Natura 2000 restrictions 2008 ILNEMAB, Boven Water! De vijftien projecten twee jaar later 2008 Radboud University NijmegenNeuenburg am Rhein „Eine Stadt geht zum Rhein“ – Brochure 2008 ILN

Communication 4th World Water Forum March 16th - 22nd 2006, Mexico-city Mexico: Opportunities of flood risks - Social, economical, spatial Risks and leisureAlong major European rivers: report of the international conference Orléans 22 & 23 September 2005 2005 EP LoireLiving Rivers: Trends and Challenges in Science and Management (Hydrobiologia) 2006 Radboud University Nijmegenand communication aspects (Session FT 5.01) 2006 Radboud University NijmegenEuropean Solidarity Week for Water October 18th and 19th 2005, Strasbourg France; Flood protection and risk management 2006 Radboud University NijmegenYesterday, the 1856 flood…Today and tomorrow, How to prepare for such a vast event?; Proceedings Symposium 23rd & 24th November 2006 2006 Agglomération de NeversMayor Conference „Flood protection and Recreation along big European Rivers“ 19. & 20. 06. 2006 Karlsruhe: Proceedings 2006 ILNShannon River Basin District Excursion Course organisation manual 2008 – 2009 2007 Radboud University Nijmegen

71

72

Appendix C Interviews

Preparing this final report of Freude am Fluss a number of persons involved with the project were interviewed. The following overview summarizes the interviewees and the main topic(s) of the

interviews.

Name Organization Topic Date

Mr. J. Armbruster ILN • Spatial planning Neuenburg am Rhein 9 April 2008

Mr. P. Blancher Asconit consultants • Plan Loire

• JPA Val de Bréhémont 10 April 2008

Mr. J.C. Boyer Communauté d’Agglomération de Nevers • Spatial planning Agglomération de Nevers 27 August 2008

Mr. H. Couprie Communauté d’Agglomération de Nevers • Spatial planning Agglomération de Nevers 27 August 2008

Mrs. M. Fournier University Francois-Rabelais Tours • JPA Val de Bréhémont 26 August 2008

Mr. J.N. Gautier Agence de l'Eau Loire-Bretagne • Plan Loire 27 August 2008

Mr. E. Kater Radboud University Nijmegen • Cyclic floodplain rejuvenation 25 March 2008

Mr. P. Philippe EP Loire • Plan Loire 10 April 2008

Mr. A.J.M. Smits Radboud University Nijmegen • Spatial planning West Maas en Waal, WaalWeelde 9 June 2008

Mr. V. Spaeth ILN • Spatial planning Neuenburg am Rhein 9 April 2008

Mr. J. Spits Radboud University Nijmegen • Overall project process 25 March 2008

Mr. J. Warner Radboud University Nijmegen • JPA 20 March 2008