Presentation Sheffield, April 1st 2011

W A T E R W O R K SS o c i a l S c i e n c e R e s e a r c h

W A T E R W O R K S @ P L A N E T . N L

Drs. G.C. (Trudes) HeemsDrs. B.L.M. (Baukje) Kothuis

Why we need interpretive research in managing Dutch water safety vulnerabilities

Presentation Sheffield, April 1th 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

How does our research on ‘water safety as a social construct’ impact water governance? [1]

Our analysis of policy advice creates a helpful overview of dominant discourses (used since 1953 in the debate on water safety in the Netherlands) for experts, policymakers and practitioners. Actors become more aware of what the debate is about and how meaning is given to the sensitizing concepts.

Presentation Sheffield, April 1th 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

How does our research on ‘water safety as a social construct’ impact water governance? [2]

Our research creates insight for experts, policymakers and practitioners in problems related to the perception gap between government and society. A discourse analysis of two public campaigns and three public participation projects shows why a loss of trust and indignation were the results of public participation and communication.

Presentation Sheffield, April 1st 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

What is communicated in public campaigns at the beginning of the 21st century?

• The Netherlands Lives with Water

* Think Ahead

Presentation Sheffield, April 1st 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

What do water safety projects that involve public participation show concerning risk aware behaviour of the public?

• The case of the strengthening the Hondsbossche & Pettemer Seawall (as part of the ‘Weak Links’ - Zwakke Schakels / ‘Coast on Strength’ - Kust op Kracht projects)

• The case of de-poldering the Noordwaard(as part of the ‘Space for the River’ - Ruimte voor de Rivier projects)

• The case of the national flood disaster exercise Waterproef(as part of the risk and crisis communication projects Taskforce Management Flood Disasters/TMO and Think Ahead/ Denk Vooruit)

Presentation Sheffield, April 1st 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

Conclusion:

Unintended side-effects of participation and communication based on discourses of risk control. The safety-myth of guaranteed dry feet needs to be deconstructed to manage the perception gap between government and society.

Presentation Sheffield, April 1th 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

How does our research on ‘water safety as a social construct’ impact water governance? [3]

We create a first outlook for experts, policy makers and practitioners by introducing an alternative discourse, based on vulnerability instead of risk control.

Presentation Sheffield, April 1th 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

What impact would interpretive research have on water governance were it acted upon?

It could help experts, policymakers and practitioners to realise their goal to create a society-wide care for water safety.

Problems we experienced

Becoming more or less a threat depending on our involvement: Who are you, where are you from, what do you want, etc. ?

Presentation Sheffield, April 1th 2011

W A T E R W O R K S

What do we need to make interpretive research more effective?

• Is it reality? The fragile balance between science and practice.

• How to fit in? Managing expectations from both sides.

• Scientist and/or advisor? About the general and the specific.

• Do actors recognize the stories told and in the same time experience them as a new way of thinking? Strong analysis as core business.