Interim Revision of the National Water Plan 2009-2015

Home , Amer (river), IJsselmeer, Meuse

INTERIM REVISION OF THE NATIONAL WATER PLAN for embedding national policy arising from the proposals for Delta Decisions and preferential strategies as included in the Delta Programme 2015

Key to Map Spatial planning/www.ruimtelijkeplannen.nl waterveiligheid flood risk management zoetwater freshwater waterkwaliteit water quality hoofdwatersysteem main water system Rijn-Maasdelta Rhine-Meuse Delta ZW Delta Southwest Delta rivieren rivers IJsselmeergebied IJssel Lake area Nederlands deel van de Dutch part of the North Sea Noordzee coast kust sandy system zandig systeem zone for sand extraction zandwinzone Wadden region Waddengebied spatial adaptation ruimtelijke adaptatie

Introduction—4

1 Flood risk management—9

2 Freshwater—22

3 Spatial adaptation—28

4 IJsselmeer region—32

Policy choices—32

Substantiation Winter water level—32

Implementation—33

Spatial aspects—36

5 Rhine-Meuse delta—37 A. RHINE ESTUARY-DRECHTSTEDEN—38 B. RIVERS—43 C. SOUTHWEST DELTA—48

6 Sandy system—52 A. COAST—55 B. WADDEN REGION—57

7 Financing—59

Introduction

For a low-lying delta such as the Netherlands, it is essential to continue working on flood risk management and sustainable freshwater supplies. We have more people and greater economic value to protect than we did sixty years ago. The climate is also changing, with sea levels rising and the ground subsiding. Rainfall is more frequent and heavier and there is a greater likelihood of very dry periods and salinisation. The Cabinet believes it is important to keep the Netherlands safe, liveable and economically attractive. To help ensure this, the central government, provinces, water boards, municipalities and social organisations have spent the last few years working on the flood risk management and freshwater supply challenges in the Delta Programme. The result: a proposal for Delta Decisions and area-based strategies in the Delta Programme 20151.

The reason underlying the Delta Programme is the recommendation from the Delta Committee headed by Prof. C. Veerman (2008). The Cabinet finds that, using major interventions to climate-proof the Netherlands for the future, the ‘Veerman recommendation’ has been cut back to pragmatic solutions. The current water system in the Netherlands by and large still suffices for the time being (until 2050). However, we do stand to gain from making the current system more flexible and robust, which will make it more resistant to extremes. In addition, the Cabinet also opts for a fundamentally different flood risk management policy, doing away with the current system of standards, which dates back to the 1960s. Moreover, the Cabinet will change its freshwater policy, as there will be a growing shortage of freshwater supplies in the future and it is advisable for the government to indicate how much freshwater is available so that users can revise their investments accordingly. The Cabinet is also seeking to organise the Netherlands in a more water-robust and climate-proof fashion; this will contribute to a healthy living environment and is key to an attractive investment climate.

Water and other spatial interests have a significant impact on each other. First of all, there may be smart combinations in which spatial organisation can play an important role in solving the water challenges. Secondly, the water challenges for flood risk management and freshwater supplies must consider spatial interests from early on, both when establishing and when implementing the challenges. This applies in any event to urban areas and developed river dykes, such as in Rhine Estuary- Drechtsteden. There are also areas where there are opportunities to link in with nature ambitions, such as along the sandy coast and in the IJsselmeer region. There are opportunities in the area around the major rivers for a comprehensive approach to promising locations for river widening.

The Cabinet will continue its adaptive approach to the Delta Programme. By knowing what is needed in the long run and considering the various delta scenarios, we can do what is necessary in the short term while leaving the options for the longer term open. The Cabinet favours flexible solutions that can be adapted to new insights in the longer term, preferring solutions that accommodate natural processes and building with nature wherever possible. The Cabinet also encourages innovation aimed at, for example, maintaining and capitalising on our international standing as water experts.

1 House of Representatives, session year 2014-2015 4

This interim revision embeds national policy and the required actions on a national level that follow from the proposal for Delta Decisions and preferential strategies in the Delta Programme 2015 into the National Water Plan (NWP). As such, the plan provides the basis for elaborating and implementing this national policy. An environmental impact statement (plan-EIS) has been drafted for this revision, which includes an appropriate assessment. This statement indicates that the draft plan comprises a large number of process-related policy choices, which must be specified in more detail to gain insight into the environmental effects. The statement also finds that the environmental impact of the more framework-setting policy choices is mostly moderate and generally positive. The appropriate assessment shows that the policy choices can be implemented within the preconditions of the Nature Conservation Act. The ambition is to fully integrate the revision of the NWP into the second NWP (December 2015).

The Draft Plan for the Interim Revision and the plan-EIS were available for inspection from 17 September 2014 to 28 October 2014. 44 points of view were submitted. The points of view submitted were addressed in a Report of Answers, stating whether the points of view were grounds for any amendments to the plan. The plan was updated and edited in a number of respects; these amendments have also been included in the Report of Answers. The Committee for the Environmental Impact Statement has issued advice on the plan- EIS. The Committee’s advice states that the EIS contains essential information to be able to take a decision on the interim revision, with the environmental interests being fully taken into account. The Committee recommends that the Synthesis Document on the Safety sub-programme should be regarded as a part of the EIS. As the EIS contains all essential information, this recommendation is not adopted. The Synthesis Report on the Safety subprogramme is regarded as a key building block for substantiating the choices in the Delta Programme with regard to the new standards and it is available as an appendix to the Delta Programme 2015. The other points of the Committee’s advice have been taken into account or will be considered in the follow-up process.

The interim revision was drawn up by the Minister for Infrastructure and the Environment and the State Secretary for Economic Affairs. Details regarding flood risk management policy have been coordinated with the Ministry of Security and Justice. The interim revision dovetails with other national policy documents, such as the Framework Vision on Infrastructure and Space2, the Vision on Cultural Heritage and Space3 and the Climate Agenda4. The NWP is binding upon the central government; the Cabinet asks other government authorities to convert elements of the Delta Programme 2015 that are relevant for them into their own policy plans, as was agreed in the Administrative Agreement on the Delta Programme.

National Water Plan 2009-20155 The Water Act lays down that the central government will revise the National Water Plan (NWP) once every six years. The first water plan, the NWP 2009-2015 contains the broad outlines for national water policy and the related aspects of spatial policy. Based on the Spatial Planning Act (abbreviated as Wro in Dutch), the NWP is also a ‘framework vision’ where spatial aspects are concerned. As such, the instruments

2 House of Representatives, session year 2011-2012, 32 660, no. 51 3 House of Representatives, session year 2010-2011, 32 156, no. 29 4 House of Representatives, session year 2013-2014, 32 813, no. 70 5 House of Representatives, session year 2009-2010, 31 710, no. 12 5 available under the Spatial Planning Act can also be used for policy implementation. This plan outlines the spatial aspects in separate sub-sections in each section. Progress of the policy objectives and actions from NWP 2009-2015 is reported to the House of Representatives every year in ‘Water Mapped Out’. In the NWP 2009-2015, which was published on 22 December 2009, the Cabinet announced that it would introduce new standards based on flood probability and aim for ‘multi-layer safety’. The Cabinet also announced a decree on freshwater supplies and that it intends to make water policy more spatial and spatial policy ‘wetter’. The adaptive approach already announced in the NWP has been elaborated and applied in more detail in the Delta Programme. The same applies to encouraging designers’ efforts in looking for comprehensive solutions for the water challenges.

Map 1: Flood risk management and freshwater challenges

Key to map 1

Opgaven Challenges

Waterveiligheid Flood risk management waterkering op orde brengen, grote repair flood defence system, major tasking opgave repair flood defence system waterkering op orde brengen flood defence system management onderhoud waterkering preserve sandy coastal system in stand houden zandig kustsysteem storm surge barrier maintenance tasking onderhoudsopgave stormvloedkering maintain water discharge into Wadden Sea waterafvoer naar Waddenzee handhaven limit the consequences of flooding gevolgen beperken bij overstroming establish climate-proof or water-robust design klimaatbestendig en waterrobuust inrichten Freshwater freshwater issues Zoetwater no freshwater supply and falling groundwater levels knelpunten zoetwater geen aanvoer zoetwater en uitzakkende limited freshwater supply and falling groundwater grondwaterstanden levels beperkte aanvoer zoetwater en uitzakkende grondwaterstanden salinisation of intake points verzilting inlaatpunten excessive demand on IJssellake water buffer waterbuffer IJsselmeer overvraagd river water levels too low (summer) te lage waterstanden rivieren (zomer) salinisation and no freshwater supply verzilting en geen aanvoer zoetwater Climate-proof city Klimaatbestendige stad limit the consequences of droughts, gevolgen beperken bij droogte, heat and heavy precipitation hitte en hevige neerslag Causes Oorzaken 0.35-0.85 m rise in sea level stijging zeespiegel 0,35-0,85 m soil subsidence bodemdaling salt wedge zouttong coastal sedimentation and erosion sedimentatie en erosie kust river sedimentation and erosion sedimentatie en erosie rivieren HW = increased peak river discharge HW = hogere piekafvoer rivier Rhine: 16,000—18,000 m3/s Rijn: 16.000—18.000 m3/s Meuse: 3,800—4,600 m3/s Maas: 3.800 — 4.600m3/s LW = decreased low river discharge LW = lagere dalafvoer rivier Rhine: 1,000—600 m3/s Rijn: 1.000- 600m3/s Meuse: 20—10 m3/s Maas: 20—10m3/s longer periods of heat/drought, langere perioden van hitte/droogte, weather and more extreme precipitation weer en extremere neerslag Subsoil Ondergrond freshwater zoetwater salt water/brackish water zout water/ brak water area outside the dykes buitendijks gebied dunes duinen border grens

1 Flood risk management

Policy choices  The Cabinet has opted for a fundamentally different flood risk management policy and will prepare a new bill with new standards to that end. The standards will be different in terms of form (from overtopping probability to flood probability) and height.  In this way, the Cabinet seeks to achieve the following goals:  Everyone in the Netherlands living behind a primary flood defence system will have a minimum tolerable risk level of 10-5 a year.  More protection will be offered in locations with:  potentially large groups of victims;  and/or major economic damage;  and/or serious damage as a result of the failure of vital and vulnerable infrastructure of national importance.  The protection level and the related standards for the flood defence system have been determined on the basis of the risk-based approach, by looking at probability and consequences. The height laid down in the standard is determined by the probability of a flood and the consequences of a possible flood. The greater the probability or consequences, the stricter the standard will be.  The standards are determined for individual dyke stretches in such a manner that the objectives mentioned above are achieved.  The protection level as proposed by the Delta Programme Commissioner is expressed in standard specifications. These are categorised into six classes with a flood probability of 1 in 300 to 1 in 100,000 a year (see map 3).  These standard specifications are the basis for the statutory standards to be laid down.  These standards will be laid down in an amendment to the Water Act. The revised version is scheduled to take effect as of 1 January 2017, as is a new, related set of statutory assessment tools.  The aim is for all new standards to be met everywhere by 2050.  The next national assessment of primary flood defence systems (from 2017 onwards) will be based on the new flood risk management policy and a related, updated set of assessment tools.  In accordance with the Water Act, the States General receive a report on the effectiveness and effects of the new flood risk management standards every 12 years.  As part of this, an assessment is made every twelve years as to whether the standards need to be adjusted if the underlying assumptions have changed materially.  The central government has concluded agreements with the water boards on the costs associated with these new standards (see section 7).  Prevention remains paramount to achieve the protection level, be it by means of dykes, dunes, storm surge barriers or river-widening measures. In specific situations, where dyke improvement is very expensive or has a far-reaching impact on the community, smart combinations with spatial organisation and/or disaster management can be made to achieve the same level of protection.  When applying a smart combination, the Cabinet will see to it that customised agreements are made about the tasks, responsibilities and financing on a case-by- case basis. The starting point for financing is that the resources made available are balanced by the savings on the Flood Protection budget achieved because fewer measures are affected that qualify for a subsidy from that budget.

 Together with the water boards, provinces and security regions, the central government will ensure that disaster management is effective and that the public and companies know what to do should there still be risk of a flood after all.  The Cabinet believes that management and maintenance of flood defence systems and coastline management by water managers must be continued.  Where possible, the Cabinet promotes integrated implementation, taking into account area-based development and a timely approach to the safety risk.  Prior to the statutory embedding of the standards, for projects that are launched as part of the new Flood Protection Programme, the water boards will take into account the new standard specifications by using the 2014 design tools that are based on the new standard specifications.

Substantiation A new policy - why? Since the flood disaster in 1953, the Netherlands has set stringent requirements for flood protection in the form of statutory standards for primary flood defence systems. These standards were set by the first Delta Commission based on an analysis of the interests behind the flood defence systems that need to be protected. Major investments have since been made in the flood defence systems to ensure greater protection of the populace and the economy against flooding. In recent decades, the number of people and the economic value behind the flood defence systems have increased significantly. Moreover, the flood risk will increase in the long run due to soil subsidence and climate change; sea levels are rising, our rivers must handle higher (peak) discharges and there is a greater probability of extremely wet periods. New knowledge and insights help to calculate the probability and consequences of a flood more effectively. Computer simulations and flood scenarios help visualise the surface area of the flooded areas, the water depths and the rate at which the water rises. This shows that the social and economic consequences of a flood largely depend on the point at which a flood defence system is breached. We now also have a better understanding of the strength of flood defence systems and how that strength can be affected. Piping, for instance, which is a failure mechanism where seepage flows under the flood defence system, taking sand with it, reduces the stability of the system. This has prompted new policy to shift towards a risk-based approach, which considers both the probability and the consequences of a flood.

New objectives of the new policy The Cabinet not only changes to a different form of standard, as described above, but also to a new standardised height. The protection of people and economic value is central to new flood risk management policy. This has been translated into the following two objectives: 1. Everyone in the Netherlands behind a primary flood defence system will have a tolerable risk level of at least 10-5 a year by 2050 (i.e. the probability of dying as a result of a flood is no higher than 1 in 100,000 a year at individual level). 2. More protection is provided in locations with potentially large groups of victims and/or serious economic damage and/or serious damage as a result of the failure of vital and vulnerable infrastructure of national importance. The requirements for flood defence systems are based on these targets. New flood risk management policy will ensure that everyone in the Netherlands living behind a primary flood defence system will have a certain basic level of protection. After all, every human life has the same value. The minimum tolerable risk level offered seeks to limit the individual risk of dying as a result of a flood; the annual risk of dying may be no greater than 1 in 100,000 a year (10-5). As in current policy, the standard determined also includes an assessment of the percentage of people that can be evacuated in time 10 as a preventive measure. This percentage is a conservative estimate. 6 The second objective, offering more protection in locations where a flood may cause large groups of victims and a lot of economic damage, results in even more stringent requirements for the primary flood defence systems in addition to the basic protection level and, consequently, in additional investments in those areas. Data from the social cost- benefit analysis (SCBA) was used to determine this additional protection against major economic damage.7 Another aim is to protect vital and vulnerable infrastructure. which is usually done by taking local measures. If any major damage of national importance should occur, this will influence the standard, as is the case with the gas roundabout in Groningen or the Borssele nuclear power plant. For a limited number of stretches, these measures are not sufficient to remove the risk of large groups of victims. These stretches require additional protection beyond the basic protection level or the SCBA. These stretches are known as the hotspots; they are subject to a stricter standard in order to reduce the risk of large groups of victims. This new approach to flood risk management reduces the risk of more than 100 fatalities by a factor of 20, while the risk of more than 1,000 fatalities is reduced by a factor of 50. The aim is for all flood defence systems to meet the new standards by 2050, as also outlined in the National Water Plan (2009-2015). Map 2 illustrates this. The map shows that once the new flood risk management policy has been implemented, the differences in safety in the Netherlands will be smaller. The new flood risk management policy not only provides more safety in the future, it is also more efficient, as it enables more targeted investments in flood risk management.

From dyke ring to dyke stretch The flood risk management policy under the National Water Plan 2009-2015 is still based on a standard for each dyke ring, assuming that the dyke ring acts as a sort of bathtub and that, in the event of a dyke breach, the entire area will be flooded in the same manner. As we now know, this is often not the case. By considering the probability and consequences of a flood, a clear link can be established between the standards for the flood defence system and the consequences of a flood, as such consequences depend on the location of the dyke breach. It is for that reason that the new system is based on a standard for each dyke stretch. That way, it is easier to establish a link between the requirements for a dyke stretch and the consequences of a flood for people and economic value than for an entire dyke ring. This means that different standards will apply to different stretches. The classification into the different stretches was based on the differences in flood risk in a certain area. Determining the probability of a flood was based on the magnitude of the consequences, the area flooded during a breach, and the length of the dyke stretch. The greater the consequences, the stricter the protection level and, consequently, the standard.

6The Security Regions have indicated that they view the evacuation fractions resulting from the calculation rules as an assumption for the number of people that may have to be evacuated. 7 House of Representatives, session year 2011-2012, annex to Parliamentary Document 31710, no. 22. 11

Individual risk Annual probability of an individual dying as a result of a flood

Reference situation 2020 Situation by 2050 after situation after completion implementation of of ongoing programmes new approach

Economic risk Annual risk of damage per hectare (euro)

Reference situation 2020 Reference situation by 2050 situation after completion after implementation of of ongoing programmes new approach

Map 2: Yield of new approach to flood risk management

Key to map 2 kleiner dan 10-4 less than 10-4 tussen 1O-4 en 10-3 between 10-4 and 10-3 groter dan 10-4 greater than 10-4 potentieel overstroombaar gebied potential floodable area zoetwater freshwater zout water / brak water salt water/brackish water minder dan € 100 less than €100 meer dan € 10.000 greater than €10,000 tussen € 100 en € 1.000 between €100 and €1,000 tussen € 1.000 en € 10.000 between €1,000 and €10,000 potentieel overstroombaar gebied potential floodable area zoet water fresh water zout water / brak water salt water/brackish water

New standards The two objectives are used as the basis to derive the new standards per dyke stretch for the primary flood defence systems. These are expressed in terms of the probability of a flood; the probability that a flood defence system or part thereof fails, resulting in a flood. The new standards cannot be compared to the old ones, which were based on the probability of water overflowing the flood defence system (probability of overtopping). Map 3 presents the standard specifications per dyke stretch as established as part of the Delta Programme. Appendix 1 includes a table with the standard specification per dyke stretch and a number of maps roughly indicating the locations of all dyke stretches. These standard specifications are the basis of preparations for the new flood risk management standards.

Additional analyses have been made in areas where the consequences of a breach of a regional barrier could influence the standard height of the primary flood defence. Where necessary, a stricter standard has been inferred for the primary flood defence to prevent new standards for primary flood defence systems necessitating the imposition of additional requirements on elements further down the line. This is set out in the Synthesis Document on Safety, which is available as an appendix to the Delta Programme 2015.

Map 3: standard specifications for each dyke stretch

Key to map 3

Dijktrajecten Dyke stretches Normspecificaties per dijktraject Table with standard specifications per dyke stretch dijktrajectnummer dyke stretch number trajectgrens trajectory border nog geen norm bepaald still no standard

In some areas, the current protection level is already sufficient. In those areas, the dykes must be maintained properly to keep them in their current physical condition, so that these areas remain safe. Primary flood defence systems do not yet meet the new standards must be improved. In most cases, this will be done by investing in the flood defence systems themselves or by creating more room for the river. The Delta Plan on Flood Risk Management (with the Flood Protection Programme as the key element) programmes measures that ensure that the stretches with the highest risks are addressed first. The Cabinet is also seeking to ensure that all primary flood defence systems meet the new standards by 2050. If required by the protection level, delta dykes may provide a solution.8

Smart combinations Prevention (layer 1) is the first priority: the required protection level is achieved by limiting the probability of a flood using robust flood defence systems or river-widening measures. The Cabinet wants to broaden the flood risk management approach spatially and, as such, allow smart combinations of measures in all three layers (i.e. prevention, spatial organisation and disaster management) to achieve the protection level in certain cases. A smart combination adds a concrete dimension to the concept of multi- layer safety. In smart combinations, measures from layer 2 or layer 3 replace part of layer 1. As such, this goes beyond the additional measures to the safety level guaranteed by layer 1. A combination with spatial organisation, such as an embankment to mitigate the consequences or heightening a certain area, and/or additional disaster management, such as creating refuges, may be an attractive option for specific situations in which the cost of a preventive approach would be very high or where other social probabilities or risks require different solutions. This offers the possibility of achieving the desired protection level in a different way than is currently the case, which may save costs or be more in keeping with the desired spatial quality in the area. However, one precondition, for this is that the required level of protection is achieved and guaranteed. To safeguard the protection level in such situations, tailored agreements are made on tasks and responsibilities, safeguarding and funding on a case-by-case basis. As the protection level is achieved with this combination of measures, instead of just with measures in layer 1, it requires the Minister’s approval.

Effective disaster management and creating ‘water awareness’ Given that disasters can never be entirely prevented, preparations must be made for situations in which things go wrong despite all the measures taken. If a flood threat- ens, everyone must act quickly and effectively to limit the number of victims and the scope of damage. This goes for government authorities, citizens and businesses alike. Thorough preparations and providing proper information are vital in this respect. The Cabinet wants to ensure that disaster management remains effective. Moreover, the Cabinet wants to improve uniform information provision during (threatening) floods, to

8 For a comprehensive review of the Delta Dykes, see the Delta Programme 2014 ‘Working on the Delta’, Sept. 2013. 15 improve collaboration between the central government, water boards, security regions, Rijkswaterstaat and vital partners, and to encourage joint (water) exercises. The central government also aims to improve the ability to cope and water awareness of the people and businesses of the Netherlands in the event of a flood by making information on the consequences of a flood and the potential actions that can be taken more accessible. Not only should this information be available, it must be actively promoted. The OECD has found in its report that water management is of national importance to the Netherlands, but that the Dutch are not always aware of this, particularly because the country is already effectively protected against floods.9 The OECD notes a lack of water awareness. People are not always aware of everything that needs to be done to keep the country dry and liveable, nor are they aware of the flood risk. They also know very little about evacuation options. The OECD states that this may negatively impact the required support when making the necessary investments.10

Implementation Embedding new standards in legislation The Delta Programme 2015 includes proposals for standards (in the form of standard specifications) for primary flood defence systems. These standard specifications, divided into different categories, are the basis for the preparations for the new statutory flood risk management standards. The forecast of the increase in value and number of people and the water levels extends to 2050, with a look ahead to 2070. The coming period will be used to review how the standard numbers must be embedded in legislation and how the standard is to be applied in the set of assessment and design tools that is to be developed. The starting point for embedding the standards in legislation is that the protection level on which the standard for a dyke stretch is based remains unchanged. The aim is to have the new standards legally effective by 2017, so that the fourth assessment can be carried out on the basis of the new standards. This requires an amendment to the Water Act. Agreements on how the new standards will be financed will be included. Simultaneously, work will be carried out on the implementation legislation required to be able to assess the new standards.

Category B- and C-dykes For a limited number of dyke stretches, no standard specification has been established yet. Category C-dykes are a case in point. Category C-dykes form a second line of defence, providing indirect protection from the sea, the major lakes or the major rivers, but they are generally not immediately adjacent to these large bodies of water. Examples are flood defence systems along the North Sea Canal and the dammed up delta waterways. In the new flood risk management approach, a number of these flood defence systems will retain their function as primary flood defence systems, but other category C-dykes may not. After consulting the provinces and the water boards in good time about embedding the new flood risk management policy into legislation, the Cabinet will decide for each category C-dyke whether it will retain its function and what the legal and financial implications will be. Category B-dykes, together with the category A-dykes behind them, protect the hinterland. Category B-dykes include storm surge barriers and closure dams. If category B- dykes fail to function or to function properly, this will not immediately result in a flood. That is why in relation to category B-dykes the term failure probability requirements is

9‘Water Governance in the Netherlands: Fit for the future?’, drafted by the OECD. 10 Letter from the Minister for Infrastructure and the Environment to the House of Representa- tives, 17 March 2014, ‘Policy reaction to OECD report on Dutch water policy’. 16 used rather than flood probability. As a basis for these requirements for category B- dykes, the failure probability of the category B-dyke and the strength of the category A-dykes behind it are considered in conjunction to ascertain whether the flood probability requirement for the category A-dykes is met. Depending on the water system in the hinterland, the failure probability requirements are determined in two ways. For smaller water systems such as the North Sea Canal: by looking at the consequences of failure in terms of damage and victims. For large water systems such as the IJsselmeer lake: by looking at the consequences of failure for the water levels in the water system in the hinterland. In both approaches, a lower and an upper limit have been set. These have been set in such a way that, within these limits, the standard specifications for the category A-dykes in the hinterland are no longer affected. Rijkswaterstaat is working out a more refined elaboration is as well as developing the new statutory assessment tools.

Assessment and design tools It is essential that when the new standards take effect, a set of assessment tools be available as well. In accordance with the Water Act, this will be done by ministerial decree. In order to be able to start with the fourth round of assessments of primary flood defence systems in 2017, a new set of assessment tools must be developed that will consider new policy and new technical insights (e.g. concerning piping). A lot of work is already being done on the development of these tools, in collaboration with water boards and knowledge institutes. In doing so, the new standards will have to be reflected in the method of assessing a dyke stretch. The set of assessment tools will be delivered in two phases. In the first phase (2017- 2019), the tools can be used to carry out the first tests and determine which dyke stretches will definitely meet the new requirements and which will not. There will also be stretches that require further assessment. In the second phase, starting in 2019, the tools will also allow a look ahead to the outcomes of the next assessment rounds. The Cabinet is also seeking to ensure that all primary flood defence systems meet the new standards by 2050. That does not mean, however, that all flood defence systems assessed during the round from 2017 to 2023 will be declared unfit if, at the time of assessment, they are not strong enough to meet the 2050 requirement. The three assessment rounds taking place before 2050 will be used to gradually grow towards the new standard. In each assessment round, the latest technical insights and developments in climate, water levels and economy will be used to verify the assumptions made for 2050. The new assessment tools will be set up in such a way that the outcome of the assessment not only indicates whether or not a dyke stretch meets the standard for 2050, but also offers a look ahead to the expected outcome in a future assessment round. That will show which dyke stretches have to be tackled now and which will cease to meet the standards in the long run. As such, the outcome of the assessment that is to start in 2017 can be used for the programming of urgent measures, but also of measures that need to be taken in the longer term. More insight into what has to be done now, what has to be done soon, and what can wait will make it possible to identify the dyke stretches where space and water challenges can be combined. Especially for challenges that needs to be done in due course, this presents an opportunity for smart combinations of flood risk management and spatial interventions.

To allow future-proof design, a new set of design tools is also being developed. These tools will be made available by the minister and are recommended for designing. An initial version of the new set of design tools is already available for use in carrying out explorations and plan elaborations for dyke stretches that need work in the coming period. This first version will be extended and improved in the period after 2017. 17

With these new assessment and design tools, the central government wants to encourage the inclusion of the contribution of forelands (e.g. elevated (dock) sites or overgrown flood plains) towards flood risk management in the assessment of flood risk management. If flood defence managers take forelands into consideration more often and agree on their management, the need for dyke improvement may be limited.

Programming flood risk management measures The assessment results are the starting point for drawing up the programme. In the new Flood Protection Programme (abbreviated as HWBP in Dutch), flood defence systems can be registered at any time. Given the fact that the resources that are available (on an annual basis) are limited, an order of priority will have to be determined for the implementation of the HWBP measures. In accordance with the current HWBP method, the Cabinet will programme new HWBP measures based on the principle that the measures that are most urgent from the point of view of flood risk management are implemented first wherever possible. The new HWBP has been set up as a ‘rolling’ programme. This means that it will be updated every year. This way, the new results from the assessment can be used to reconsider the order of the measures based on priority, enhancing the efficiency of the programme. Based on the programme, water managers are drafting an exploration outlining the alternatives and indicating their preferences. Based on the MIRT system, this exploration pays explicit attention to the possibilities for linking in with the ambitions of other government authorities and parties. There are three phases to every measure: the exploration phase, the plan elaboration phase and the realisation phase. In the exploration phase, possible alternatives are examined and promising possible solution strategies selected. The managers detail these promising possible solution strategies - in consultation with provinces and municipalities - and deliver a preferred alternative. In the exploration phase, they take into account the preferential strategy for the long term by highlighting interconnectivity with other measures in the area in question, with the new standards for flood defence systems and with the area vision in conjunction with other spatial developments. This is the basis for considerations relating to the preferred alternative.

HWBP programming clarifies programming for the long term, leaving sufficient time to anticipate. A basic principle is that, with a view to urgency, this should not result in unwanted delays and that the additional costs of supplementary challenges must be covered by the stakeholder in question. In accordance with MIRT rules, explorations should only be initiated if there is a prospect of (co-)financing.

For flood risk management challenges resulting from the statutory review, a selection will be made (‘demarcation’) - on the basis of preferential strategies and the urgency of the planned dyke improvements - of stretches where wide-ranging, combined solutions such as river widening are planned. For stretches where river widening may take place and where there may also be an urgent need for dyke improvement, there should soon be certainty about the effect and the magnitude of the river widening, the safeguarding and financing, and the consequences for and design of the dyke improvements to be carried out. When feasible preferred alternatives to spatial measures are not available in time, dyke improvement will be an appropriate solution.

The selection (‘demarcation’) of stretches where wide-ranging, combined solutions are anticipated, such as river widening, and stretches of ‘regular’ dyke improvements with linkage opportunities is made by the regional steering committee of the central government, province, municipalities and water boards in the area in question. This 18 steering committee also helps to steer wide-ranging, combined projects where space and safety meet and to identify and seize opportunities to link in with regular dyke improvements Where necessary, the HWBP steering group and regional steering groups will consult one another on wide-ranging projects and on linkage opportunities. Steering activities based on the programming of the regular dyke improvements in the Flood Protection Programme are carried out by the HWBP steering group in which the central government and water boards are represented and which prioritises projects on the basis of urgency. All administrative lines come together in the Delta Programme steering group.

Ongoing programmes Ongoing programmes (Room for the River, HWBP2 and Meuse Projects) will be ener- getically continued. For projects that are launched as part of the new Flood Protection Programme, the water boards will take the new standard specifications into account by using the 2014 design tools that are based on the new standard specifications The insights gleaned from the new standards will be used in prioritising the current challenges.

Smart combinations A smart combination is regional customised work. as in each situation there may be various parties involved that have an interest in a smart combination. The central government may facilitate this by offering tools such as the ‘multi-layer safety tool’, which highlights the contributions that the various measures make to limiting the flood risk. In the coming period, this tool will be further reviewed and honed and supplemented as necessary. Together with the HWBP programme office, an exploration will be made to determine how the tools can be provided and embedded in the method of programming and exploring. The parties involved will reach agreements on such things as management, maintenance, monitoring, financing and the assessment of the measures.

Following on from previous multi-layer safety pilot projects, the possibility of smart combinations is currently being studied in more detail in three areas, namely Dordrecht, the IJssel-Vecht Delta and Marken. These MIRT studies are designed to make the area itself safe and to provide insight into opportunities for multi-layer safety in other areas. This concerns studies into spatial measures and the interaction between government authorities, decision-making and embedding legislation in local, regional and national flood risk management policy. The first results will be shared in the BO MIRT in the autumn of 2014.

Effective disaster management and creating ‘water awareness’ In all cases, it is essential that disaster management, of which preventive evacuation is part, is well organised. To ensure this, the security regions - in consultation with the Ministry of Security and Justice, the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, the Delta Programme Commissioner and the water boards - have drawn up an ambition statement, which will be put into practice in the coming years. It follows from this that the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment and the Ministry of Security and Justice, the security regions, the water managers and the network managers will step up the collaboration in the preparation and the response phases. The security regions embed this intensified collaboration in the risk profiles, policy plans and crisis plans that they adopt every four years. On behalf of the Cabinet, the Minister for Security and Justice intends to reach further agreements with all security regions on embedding this in legislation in the form of shared objectives’. The Veiligheidsberaad (i.e. the executive board of the security regions) has agreed to specify this in more detail in a 19 road map. This includes working on improving the way in which information is provided at crisis organisations during flood situations, improving the collaboration (the security regions are seeking to conclude agreements with all water managers in 2014) and the development of joint water exercises. It also involves working on increasing the coping capacity of the populace in the face of a flood. This is done by increasing water awareness among individuals and companies, clarifying action strategies in the case of preventive evacuation (out of the area), evacuation within the area under threat (dry refuges) or vertical (upwards) evacuation. This will be elaborated in the Evacuation in case of Major Floods Module (Module Evac- uatie bij Grootschalige Overstromingen or MEGO). This is done in various ways, including collecting, structuring and editing basic information on floods and making it accessible on a platform for various applications and users. The information will become available at postcode level. Under the European Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks, this year the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, together with all those involved, is already providing the public with a great deal of information on flood risks via www.risicokaart.nl. Together with the partners to the Administrative Agreement on Water, the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment is also developing a new public communication approach. This new approach will be tailored to the immediate living environment of people, at postcode level. This approach is designed to enhance the involvement and coping capacity of Dutch people. As from September 2014, public communication will be supported by an online platform at postcode levelwww.onswater.nl. which will offer information at postcode level as well as a concrete action strategy. The partners are working together to show what kinds of measures are necessary to protect the Netherlands against floods.

Spatial aspects Like the current approach, the new flood risk management approach will have spatial consequences in the coming decades. Measures on the flood defence systems may have a great impact on the physical living environment. The standards will be complemented by a corresponding new set of assessment and design tools. Based on this, four assessment rounds will be launched in 2017 and then the exact spatial local or regional implications will become clear. Two different situations may occur, namely that a flood defence system meets the standard or it does not. If a flood defence system meets the standard, no additional spatial measures will be required. If a flood defence system does not meet the standard, this will have implications for the design of the flood defence system which must ensure sufficient strength and height, depending on the nature and magnitude of the system’s shortcomings. In each case, an assessment will be made to determine whether a more traditional or a more innovative dyke improvement is required and feasible. Apart from adjusting the primary flood defence, in specific cases it is also possible to opt for a smart combination of different measures: dyke improvement, spatial organisation and disaster management. This means that in addition to a preventive measure, spatial measures - such as a knoll or the set-up of shelters - may be taken to reach the required protection level. Another option is to implement river-widening measures. All types of flood risk management, both preventive and spatial measures, may come linked with co-financed ambitions of decentralised governments. This may be conducive to spatial quality and the preservation of cultural history and may help generate support. The spatial consequences are expected to be the most far-reaching in the area around the major rivers in the coming decades, because the flood risk management challenges will be the most substantial there. In other areas, part of the flood defence systems will have to be tackled to meet the statutory standards, as is currently the case. Along 20 the coast, it will be particularly important to ensure proper maintenance of the coastal foundation zone and the flood defence systems. The incorporation and utilisation of linkage opportunities requires close coordination between flood defence system managers, municipalities and provinces.

2 Freshwater

Policy choices  Freshwater is vital to our economy and society. The Cabinet wants to anticipate future developments by formulating new freshwater policy consisting of freshwater objectives, structuring choices and the introduction of the new supply levels tool, which will lead to a clear division of responsibilities. The Cabinet will also invest in a corresponding (adaptive) implementation programme.  The freshwater policy focuses on five national freshwater objectives:  to preserve and promote a healthy and balanced water system;  to protect crucial designated uses;  to use the available water effectively and economically;  to promote the competitive position of the Netherlands in terms of its water- related economy;  to develop hydraulic knowledge and expertise and innovations for the freshwater objectives.  The Cabinet opts for a number of structuring choices as the basis for the freshwater policy:  A sufficient amount of freshwater is a shared responsibility, requiring step-by- step and interconnected efforts in the main water system, the regional water system and among users;  the existing (main) water system will be protected and reinforced as a buffer and supply route for freshwater by a number of targeted investments;  to limit the demand for freshwater and reduce vulnerability to drought and salinisation, the regions and users will use freshwater more effectively and economically;  in consultation with the users, the government authorities involved will specify the availability and (where relevant) the quality of freshwater in the form of supply levels. This will be done for normal and dry conditions, in addition to the list of priorities;  government authorities and users will take the necessary measures based on a mutual commitment according to interest and optimal (cost) effectiveness of the total package for each region.

Substantiation With a production value of approximately €193 billion (direct production), the water- dependent sectors account for about 16% of the Dutch economy. Even the current supply of freshwater does not always meet demand. Water shortages are expected to be more frequent in the future as a result of climate change, salinisation and socio- economic developments.

Robust freshwater supplies require an interconnected approach, with measures in the main water system and in the regional water system and among users (e.g. agriculture, industry, nature, shipping and drinking water). The Cabinet’s short-term goal is to make the system more robust (i.e. less vulnerable) by addressing bottlenecks and capitalising on opportunities which the location in the delta offers us. The current level of freshwater supplies will remain the same where possible or can even improve locally by investing in no-regret measures to protect crucial functions or promote the competitive position of the freshwater-related economy. The rate of climate change will determine the investments required in the medium and the long term. 22

In the past century, the Netherlands has built a solid foundation for freshwater supplies, comprising the Haringvliet sluices, a strategic freshwater buffer in the IJsselmeer lake and weirs in the Neder-Rijn and the Meuse for distributing the river water. This will continue to be the basis for freshwater supplies in the long term. Studies conducted as part of the Delta Programme have shown that no major interventions in infrastructure will be necessary at least until 2050. In areas supplied by the main water system, the Cabinet seeks to safeguard the water supply and to combat salinisation. In areas without such supply, the system will change from one focused on discharge to one that is also focused on conservation. At an international level, the Cabinet is committed to reaching agreements to protect the Rhine and Meuse as freshwater supply routes and safeguarding freshwater supplies in the Netherlands. The central government will see to it that freshwater issues continue to be put on the agendas of international river committees. In the short term, this involves sharing information and creating support in the other countries within the catchment areas for joint explorations of any international contributions to solving the freshwater problem. As part of this process, attention will be paid to combining water challenges, given that water quantity, temperature and quality need to be addressed.

In the short and the long term, water supply shortages may occur more frequently and affect more areas, even if the buffer function and supply route of freshwater is improved, especially in areas where no water is supplied. The Cabinet wants to initiate a transition aimed at more economical and efficient water consumption. This will provide the basis for a sustainable development of the system and being prepared for possibly increasing climate change. Supply levels give users insight into the risk of water shortages and an action strategy.

Supply levels and national rules The new ‘supply level’ tool shows the availability of freshwater and the probability of water shortages in a certain area, under both normal and dry circumstances. The availability - expressed in a bandwidth - relates to surface water and groundwater and to the quantity and, where relevant, the quality of the water. The supply level is established by reaching agreements about the efforts to be made by the government authorities and the various users, bearing in mind the current supply level, any optimisations in the freshwater supply and buffering, more economical use, and spatial developments. The supply level tool clarifies what can be expected of the government with regard to freshwater and what the probability of a water shortage (residual risk) is for the users. This creates transparency, predictability and an action strategy for freshwater users. Users will be emphatically involved in the area process at an early stage, in a manner appropriate to their roles and responsibilities. For drinking water, the government authorities’ public tasks and obligation to safeguard the public drinking supply in the long term should be taken into account. With regard to nature, European and national policy oblige the government to preserve or realise nature objectives in protected areas (including Natura 2000 and the Water Framework Directive). Supply levels are laid down for the main water system and the regional water systems. The list of priorities, which shows which functions are given priority in the case of a water shortage, will be included in the agreements on supply levels. This will not change the list of priorities itself, which will remain effective in accordance with the adopted policy as embedded under the Water Act. The supply level is a performance obligation and is set for a period of 18 years, with an option to revise it after each 6-year plan period. As the supply level and process are new, it will take space and time to acquire 23 knowledge and experience around the supply level and to share it with each other. For this reason, the supply level will be started and evaluated for an initial group of areas in 2018. The starting point is that supply levels will have been agreed and laid down for all areas by 2021.

Implementation supply level The supply levels tool is new and will be introduced in phases. There are three steps to the approach: 1) providing insight into the availability of water and the probability of water shortages, now and in the future, 2) a dialogue about this information between government authorities and users 3) optimising efforts where relevant and laying down agreements. When elaborating the supply level, the following rules apply, with room for customisation:  The central government will take the initiative to arrive at supply levels for the main water system, in consultation with other government authorities and users of the main water system.  the provinces will take the initiative to start up the process of establishing supply levels for regional water systems;  Depending on the challenges and the local context, the province, the water board or, in some cases, the municipality leads the process for the area-based supply levels. It makes sense here to link the challenges for urban areas to challenges for climate-proof cities in terms of drought and heat stress (see Delta Decision on Spatial Adaptation);  The proposal for the Delta Decision on Freshwater and the preferential strategy for freshwater for each sub-region as included in the Delta Programme 2015, with the choices and measures noted therein, form the basis for detailing the supply levels.  the government authorities will make the supply levels transparent to users;  the government authorities will lay down the efforts required for the agreed supply levels in existing tools, such as water plans, water agreements, decisions on water levels or groundwater levels, disaster plans and agreements with major users.  In international consultations, the central government will endeavour to secure sufficient freshwater supplies to the Netherlands;  The users will take part in the (regional and national) dialogue on the current and future availability of freshwater and will endeavour to use water more efficiently and economically and to introduce innovations to this end.

The supply levels may materialise differently for each region. The nature and scale of the information and the agreements may vary, depending on the characteristics of the area, urgency of the (drought) problems and the type of water consumption. In collaboration with the other partners in the Delta Programme and in conjunction with the other aspects of water management and the EU directives, the central government will elaborate on the profit principle and the cause principle. Agreements on the further improvement of supply levels will be part of that. In 2018, the supply levels will be ready for the first group of areas; they will be described in the Delta Programme 2019. Based on that, an interim evaluation will be made in 2018, addressing the supply level tool, the process, the rules, the tools available to safeguard agreements and the level of ambition. measures In the short term, a number of targeted (no-regret) investments will be made in the water system to make the freshwater supply and buffers more robust (see map 4). In the IJsselmeer region, for example, the freshwater buffer will be increased in the summer using a new, flexible form of water level management; the freshwater supply 24 to the western Netherlands can be made more stable by gradually expanding the existing small-scale emergency supplies, with a more easterly supply. In the area around the major rivers, a practical test with erosion control dams constructed parallel to the river flow is being carried out, partly in anticipation of low water levels in the rivers. In areas that do not receive water from the main water system - the elevated sandy soils and parts of the Southwest Delta - investments in good conservation and better utilisation will be helpful. An interconnected set of climate adaptation pilot projects will be launched, which will contribute to innovation and knowledge development with a view to climate adaptation. They will be carried out in specific regions, but the results can also be used elsewhere and thus contribute to national freshwater challenges. preferential strategy for elevated sandy soils Elevated sandy soils are found in the north, the east and the south of the Netherlands. The elevated sandy soils have already had issues with drying out for decades. If the climate changes rapidly, water shortages will increase, groundwater levels will fall and stream valleys may run dry, which will harm agriculture, the urban area and nature. Water quality may deteriorate as well. The main feature of preferential strategy for freshwater is:  Water conservation (saving and retention): Freshwater supplies in the elevated sandy soils can be increased by prolonging the retention of water in the soil and surface water. A large-scale supply of water from the main water system to these areas will not be introduced. In the short term, users will be encouraged to use water more economically and to innovate.  Limited additional supply: Areas that already receive water from the main water system will shortly receive a limited additional supply, which will be done by optimising the existing supply and increasing the capacity of the Noordervaart canal. In the medium and the long term, the option of a limited additional water supply from the main water system will be left open in a number of cases.  Accept water shortages and adapt: If climate change persists, longer periods of drought will be unavoidable in the medium and the long term. Users will then ei- ther have to introduce changes and innovations or accept damage resulting from water shortages.

To allow freshwater measures to be prioritised and programmed concordantly for the Delta Plan on Freshwater (i.e. the implementation programme for freshwater), the Freshwater steering committee will take on the national coordination. By means of co- financing, the central government will contribute to a number of regional measures from the joint Delta Plan. Innovations in the area of freshwater will be addressed in the Water and Climate Knowledge Innovation Programme. spatial aspects The new freshwater policy will have spatial consequences in the coming decades. Where possible, freshwater measures will be implemented in an integral fashion, taking area development into account. The spatial consequences of freshwater measures in the IJsselmeer region and the Rhine-Meuse delta will be explained in the relevant sections. The supply level tool will reinforce the relationship between the availability of freshwater and spatial planning. A better understanding of the availability of freshwater and the probability of water shortages in a certain area, under normal and dry circumstances, means transparency, predictability and an action strategy for freshwater users. Spatial developments in the area will also be taken into account 25 when reaching agreements on the work to be done on supply level by the government authorities and the various users, Conversely, the supply level may also serve as an instrument that guides the spatial organisation.

Map 4 Preferential Strategy for Freshwater

Key to map 4

Zoetwatermaatregelen Freshwater measures korte termijn short term efficiënt en zuinig watergebruik efficient and economical water consumption structurele zoetwatervoorraad IJsselmeer en permanent freshwater buffer IJsselmeer and Markermeer 20 cm Markermeer lakes 20 cm (inclusief robuuste inrichting, waaronder (including robust design, with shore faces) vooroevers) smart water management slim watermanagement (Hollandsche IJssel, Amsterdam-Rijnkanaal, (Hollandsche lJssel, Amsterdam-Rijnkanaal, Noordzeekanaal and weirs at Driel, Noordzeekanaal en stuwen Driel, Amerongen and Hagestein) Amerongen en Hagestein) practical test with erosion control dams praktijkproef langsdammen constructed parallel to the river flow uitbreiden alternatieve aanvoerroutes 15 m3/s expand alternative supply routes to 15 m3/sec bypass Irenesluizen ten behoeve van bypass Irene locks for small-scale water supply kleinschalige wateraanvoer optimaliseren beheer Bernisse-Brielse Meer optimise management of Bernisse-Brielse Meer (onder andere gebruik inlaat Spijkenisse) lake (including use of intake at Spijkenisse) optimaliseren beheer Volkerak-Zoommeer optimise management of Volkerak-Zoommeer verbeteren zoet-zoutscheiding sluizen improve freshwater/saltwater separation at locks vergroten capaciteit Noordervaart van 4 naar 5 increase Noordervaart capacity from 4 to 5 m3/s m3/s middellange termijn (mogelijkheden) medium term (opportunities) efficiënt en zuinig watergebruik efficient and economical water consumption structurele zoetwatervoorraad IJsselmeer en increase permanent freshwater buffer Markermeer verder vergroten (maximaal 40-50 IJsselmeer lake and Markermeer lake cm) further (max. 40-50 cm) water-saving waterbesparende maatregelen schutten Maas measures during lockage in Meuse transport van water van Waal naar Maas transport water from Waal to Meuse opschaling langsdammen scaling up erosion control dams constructed parallel to the river flow uitbreiden alternatieve aanvoerroutes 24 m3/s, expand alternative supply routes to 24 m3/sec, eventueel permanent oostelijke aanvoer possibly with permanent supply from the east vergroten buffer/kleinschalige alternatieve increase Bernisse-Brielse Meer lake aanvoer Bernisse-Brielse Meer buffer/small-scale alternative supply alternatieve robuuste zoetwateraanvoer alternative robust freshwater supply in voorzieningengebied Volkerak-Zoommeer Volkerak-Zoommeer lake supply area vergroten capaciteit Noordervaart van 5 naar increase Noordervaart capacity from 5 to 6 6m3/s m3/s aansluiten gebied Liemers connect with Liemers area lange termijn (mogelijkheden) long term (opportunities) efficiënt en zuinig watergebruik, efficient and economical water consumption, watertekorten accepteren accept water shortages structurele zoetwatervoorraad IJsselmeer further increase permanent freshwater buffer verder vergroten in IJsselmeer lake aanpassen afvoerverdeling laagwater adjust discharge distribution during low water vervangen Maeslantkering na 2070 (mogelijk replace Maeslantkering storm surge barrier zoutwerende werking) after 2070 (may help prevent saltwater intrusion) uitbreiden alternatieve aanvoerroutes >24 extend alternative supply routes to 24 m3/sec, m3/s, eventueel permanent oostelijke aanvoer possibly permanent eastern supply (grootschalige) alternatieve aanvoer Bernisse- (large-scale) alternative supply Bernisse- Brielse Meer Brielse Meer lake Zoetwaterregio’s Fresh water regions regio West-Nederland Western Netherlands region regio IJsselmeergebied IJsselmeer region regio Hoge Zandgronden Elevated Sandy Soils region regio Rivieren River region regio Zuidwestelijke Delta Southwest Delta region regio Waddengebied Wadden area region Ondergrond Subsoil Zoetwater freshwater zout water/ brak water salt water/brackish water buitendijks gebied area outside the dykes

3 Spatial adaptation

Policy choices:  The central government, provinces, municipalities and water boards have a shared ambition that in 2050 the spatial organisation of the Netherlands is as climate- proof and water-robust as possible, eliminating any incidental flood-related risks of damage and victims to the extent that this is reasonably feasible.  These parties agree that by 2020 at the latest, a climate-proof and water-robust organisation is part and parcel of the policy and actions of these parties, which they can achieve by analysing the water-robustness and climate-proofness of their own planning area in their regional and local zoning considerations (‘knowing’), translating the results of this analysis into a supported ambition and an adaptation strategy with concrete objectives (‘wanting’) and safeguarding the policy-based and legal effects of this ambition before implementation (‘working’). As a result, water-robust and climate-proof operations will be part of the central government’s new framework visions. This will be embedded in the preservation of the MIRT sustainability and in the Environmental Vision.  The central government will ensure that the Water Review is kept as a statutory process tool, which will be used early on in the spatial process. The Water Review process tool helps to ensure that climate-proof and water-robust organisation are considered in good time in spatial developments.  The government authorities will draw up the Guide to Spatial Adaptation together and make an Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation available as tools to help realise the ambition. The central government is a partner in the Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation.  The central government will ensure that national vital and vulnerable functions will be more flood-proof by 2050 at the latest and that policy and/or legislation on this will have been adopted in 2020 or earlier if possible.

Substantiation In an administrative agreement, the central government and other government authorities have endorsed the ambition that the Netherlands will be a climate-proof and water-robust country in 2050.

New developments, redevelopment, management and maintenance will entail as little incidental risk of damage or victims caused by heat stress, pluvial flooding, drought and floods as is reasonably possible. In this way, a future tightening of flood risk management standards can be prevented or at least delayed.

Knowing, wanting, working The central government, provinces and municipalities will work with the water boards to realise the ambition. To this end, they will complete three steps, together with social organisations and market parties if necessary, based on the following generic principles: 1. ‘knowing’: analysis of the water-robustness and climate-proofness of the area (covered by the plan) and the functions. To the extent that the required data is available, this analysis is carried out within the bandwidth of the Delta Scenarios, using the most recent data sets on which they are based, with 2030 and 2050 as reference years. The government authorities will select an appropriate scale for this analysis.

2. ‘wanting’: translation of the threats and opportunities found in the analysis into a supported ambition and adaptation strategy. The government authorities will for- mulate concrete objectives for this. They will establish a relationship between the adaptation strategies at a regional and a local level, and safeguard the link with the proposals for the Delta Decision on Flood Risk Management and the Delta Decision on Freshwater of the Delta Programme. 3. ‘working’: policy-related and legal impact of ambition. Each government authority indicates how the ambition impacts its own policy (for the entire physical domain), spatial plans and regulations, business cases, implementation, management and ‘major’ maintenance. When completing these steps and assessments, the existing division of responsibilities and room for assessment of the parties will remain unchanged.

Guide to Spatial Adaptation Within the Delta Programme, the Guide to Spatial Adaptation has been drawn up together with the Knowledge for Climate Programme. Government authorities, market parties and social organisations can use this to complete the steps of knowing, wanting and working, also for areas outside the dykes. The guide is available on www.ruimtelijkeadaptatie.nl. The central government is responsible for the management and maintenance of this guide.

Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation The government authorities encourage weighing water-robustness and climate- proofness using a joint Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation. In this way, they put the ambition for spatial adaptation in the region on the agenda, at both an administrative and an official level. Moreover, the incentives programme enables government authorities to share knowledge and experiences in the area of climate- proof and water-robust organisation. In 2014, the central government will set up a digital knowledge portal for this, together with the Knowledge for Climate Programme. The central government is a partner in the Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation.

Water Review The proposal is to retain the Water Review as a statutory process tool that is used early on in the spatial process. The Water Review process tool helps to ensure that climate-proof and water-robust organisation are considered in good time in spatial developments. The Water Review will be included in a decree yet to be prepared under the future Environment and Planning Act. The government authorities have agreed to conduct the Water Review with regard to all relevant plans, including framework visions, involving the water managers as early as possible. The Guide for Spatial Adaptation supports the Water Review process.

Vital and vulnerable functions Various vital and vulnerable functions require that special attention be paid to the consequences of floods. These are functions that are crucial for disaster management in case of floods or functions that, in the case of a flood, can cause serious damage to the populace, the environment or the economy. National vital and vulnerable functions that could result in supraregional damage in the case of a flood concern power supply (i.e. electricity, gas, oil), telecommunications and ICT (i.e. public grid and emergency communication, wastewater chain, drinking water supply, health care (including hospitals), pumping stations and discharge facilities, haulage, chemical companies and laboratories using pathogenic substances.

By 2050 at the latest, these national vital and vulnerable functions will be more flood- proof. The central government will ensure this by completing the three steps referred to below:  ‘knowing’: by 2015 at the latest, the responsible ministries, together with the sectors, will accurately map out the vulnerability and interdependence (within and between the various functions). Based on this analysis, they will lay down the ambitions for each function, including concrete steps and a timeline for achieving the ambition. The ministries are responsible for the implementation of these agreements, with the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment playing a coordinating role.  ‘wanting’: by 2020, the responsible ministries will have prepared the policy and su- pervision to achieve the agreed ambitions, safeguarded in agreements with sectors or in laws where necessary.  ‘working’: by 2050 or any earlier if possible, the sectors will take measures, by, for example, taking flood risks into account in their investment decisions. Every year, progress is reported on to the House of Representatives as part of the annual Delta Programme.

The Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation supports this process by sharing knowledge on floods and experiences with making vital and vulnerable functions water- robust. The central government will also coordinate this approach with the manner in which regional and local governments make their vital and vulnerable functions water- robust and with the interdepartmental Rethink Vital programme (coordinated by the Ministry of Security and Justice). The Netherlands will use the results of this programme for the National Adaptation Strategy that is being drawn up as an elaboration of the European Climate Adaptation Strategy.

Implementation The central government fully considers flood risk management and climate-proofness in spatial developments, redevelopment and investments in the management and maintenance in areas inside and outside the dykes for which it is responsible.

The central government has made the decision on climate-proof or water-robust organisation by completing the ‘knowing’, ‘wanting’ and ‘working’ steps based on a number of generic principles. They will in any event do this when the central government establishes a framework vision for its entire territory, or sooner if the central government believes this is necessary.

The central government will ensure that the Water Review is kept as a statutory process tool, which will be used early on in the spatial process. The Water Review will be included in a decree yet to be prepared under the future Environment and Planning Act. The central government, provinces and municipalities will use the Water Review in close collaboration with the water boards in the preparation of all spatial plans, including framework visions.

Together, the government authorities will make all supporting tools available, such as the Guide to Spatial Adaptation and the Incentives Programme for Spatial Adaptation, which runs from 2015 until the end of 2017. The government authorities are jointly responsible for the management and maintenance of the incentives programme; the central government is responsible for the management and maintenance of the Guide to Spatial Adaptation and contributes to the management and maintenance of the Knowledge Portal.

The central government will ensure that the national vital and vulnerable functions will be more flood-proof by 2050 at the latest and will adopt policy and, if necessary, legislation by 2020 at the latest. The ministries are responsible for the implementation of these agreements, with the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment playing a coordinating role. The Delta Programme 2015 contains an appendix with an overview of the current statuses of all vital and vulnerable functions in the case of a flood and official interdepartmental agreements on the approach.

Before 2050, the sectors will take the measures required to make these functions more flood-proof. The central government will coordinate the national approach with the way in which decentralised governments make their vital and vulnerable functions more water-robust, using information available from these governments. For each function, the central government and the decentralised governments will agree on the distinction between the responsibilities. The central government will use the results from this programme for the National Adaptation Strategy and ensure interconnectivity with the Rethink Vital programme.

Every year, the Delta Programme charts the extent to which the climate-proof and water-robust spatial organisation of the built-up area and the vital and vulnerable sectors are part of the activities of the parties. In 2017, progress will be evaluated, also with regard to the question of whether additional tools are needed to realise the ambition. Together with the umbrella organisations, central government will design and implement the monitoring programme and evaluation, ensuring coordination with other measurement occasions, such as the benchmarks in the water chain.

Spatial aspects The policy choice to always connect water and space to each other is important for a climate-proof and water-robust organisation of the Netherlands. To ensure that the Netherlands continues to be liveable in the future, the consequences of floods and extreme weather conditions will be taken into account in spatial decisions from now on.

4 IJsselmeer region

Policy choices  The Cabinet has decided not to allow the average winter water level in the IJsselmeer lake to adapt to the rise in sea levels until 2050. The water discharge to the Wad- den Sea will be safeguarded by a combination of pumping and discharging by gravity.  Allowing the winter water level to adapt to the rise in sea levels to a limited extent after 2050 will be left open as an option, because this may be cost-effective.  The current policy, which allows for a necessary rise in the average winter water level of 1 m over this century, will be replaced by a new policy that allows for a maximum rise in the winter water level of 30 cm after 2050. The average winter water level for the other lakes in the IJsselmeer region will remain the same after 2050.  Dyke improvements will be the first option when it comes to meeting the new standards for flood risk management in the IJsselmeer region. In Marken and the IJssel- Vecht delta, options for achieving the required tolerable risk level by means of spatial solutions are being explored.  The Cabinet has decided to enhance the strategic freshwater function of the IJssel- meer lake by gradually introducing flexible water level management in the IJssel- meer lake, the Markermeer-IJmeer lake and the interconnected Zuidelijke Randme- ren lakes (i.e. Gooimeer, Eemmeer and Nijkerkernauw lakes). The first step in flexible water level management will lead to a freshwater buffer of 400 million m3 in the spring and in the summer season, which is expected to suffice until 2050. The Cabinet intends to implement the measures in the main water system in conjunction with measures in the regional systems and among the users.

Substantiation Winter water level A comprehensive cost-benefit analysis shows that allowing the IJsselmeer lake winter water level to adapt fully to the rise in the sea level is substantially more expensive than maintaining the level using pumps. The key factor here is the extra dyke improvement challenges that arises if the IJsselmeer lake water level were to adapt to the rise in the sea level. Moreover, the rise in the water level appears to have many unwanted consequences for the area. For this reason, it has been decided to manage the water level through a combination of discharge by gravity and pumping according to the principle of: discharge by gravity if possible, pump if necessary. Allowing the winter water level of the IJsselmeer lake to adapt to the rise in the sea level to a limited extent after 2050, to be able to use the combination of discharge by gravity and pumping for a longer period of time, may be cost-effective and is an option that should be left open from the perspective of adaptivity.

More flexible water level management The fixed target level of the IJsselmeer lake and the Markermeer-IJmeer lake and the Zuidelijke Randmeren lakes (IJmeer, Gooimeer, Eemmeer and Nijkerkernauw lakes) will be replaced by a bandwidth within which the water level is allowed to fluctuate, allowing the water level management to respond to meteorological conditions and the demand for freshwater. The first step has been elaborated as follows: in the early spring, the water level will be increased to -10 cm NAP (Amsterdam Ordnance Datum), which will make a freshwater buffer of 400 million m3 of water available (i.e. an extra layer of water between -10 and -30 cm NAP). The increase in the water level in the

32 early spring will be deferred if high water is forecast, which may be caused in part by situations of pluvial flooding in the area itself or by high water upstream along the rivers. After the increase in the water level in the spring, the level will then be allowed to drop gradually in the spring and in the summer, so that sufficient freshwater will be available during drought, when the water demand exceeds the water supply. In the autumn, the water level will then return to the average winter water level (i.e. -25 cm NAP). The increase in the water level in the early spring and decrease in the summer water level will also benefit nature.

Map 5: Water level management in the IJsselmeer region in winter and in summer

Key to map 5

Peilbeheer winter Water level management winter Tot 2050 geen peilverhoging, na 2050 No level increase until 2050, after 2050 eventueel beperkt meestijgen met zeespiegel possibly allow to adapt to rise in sea level Voor en na 2050 geen peilverhoging restricted Combinatie van spuien en pompen No level increase before and after 2050 Combination of discharging and pumping Peibeheer zomer Vanaf 2020 eerste stap flexibel peilbeheer, na Water level management summer 2050 eventueel vervolgstappen From 2020 first step flexible water level Geen verandering management, possibly follow-up after 2050 No change

Implementation Water discharge To safeguard flood risk management in the IJsselmeer region, the central government has opted for the combination of discharge by gravity and pumping. The required pumping capacity will gradually increase by installing new pumps in the discharge complex of Den Oever in the IJsselmeer Closure Dam (completed by 2021 at the latest). The pumps will be used as cost-effectively as possible. The more flexible water level management will be laid down in a new water level ordinance that will be established in consultation with the water managers involved and other stakeholders. After the pumps have been put into operation, the new water level management will be constantly monitored and evaluation as part of the water level management.

Depending on the climate scenario, the sea level will rise no more than 50 cm after 2050 until 2100, or for a longer period far beyond 2100. At present, it is impossible to rule out that a combination of pumping and allowing the water level to adapt to the rise in sea levels is more cost-effective than stepping up pumping to accommodate this rise in sea levels. As such, the option of allowing the winter water level of the IJssel- meer lake to adapt to the rise in the sea level within a bandwidth of 10-30 cm will be left open. This means that the current policy, which allows for a rise in the winter water level of 1 m over the 21st century, will be replaced by a new policy that allows for a maximum rise in the winter water level of the IJsselmeer lake of 30 cm after 2050. For the connected lakes, the average winter water level will be preserved after 2050 as well. The responsibility for the risks of pluvial flooding in areas outside the dykes will rest with the initiators.

A comprehensive study that is scheduled to start in 2015 should shed more light on the exact cost-effectiveness of a limited rise in the winter water level of the IJsselmeer lake after 2050. The knowledge developed with regard to dyke strength and techniques to improve dykes will be taken into account when considering costs and benefits. In addition, it is important to gain knowledge of the effectiveness of water level management based on the hybrid ‘form of discharge’ of discharge by gravity and pumping. This hybrid ‘form of discharge’ will be evaluated to determine what will actually be the best option after 2050. The comprehensive study should also address the use of any pumps in the dyke between the Markermeer lake and the IJsselmeer lake, interconnectivity with regional water management, strategic storage in Markermeer lake and interconnectivity with the North Sea Canal. The Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environ- ment will take the initiative for this study, the results of which will become available in 2018.

The water level in the Markermeer-IJmeer lake and the water level in the Zuidelijke Randmeren lakes will remain linked to the water level in the IJsselmeer lake. Any unlinking, as stated in the National Water Plan 2009-2015, will not be necessary until 2050, because the winter water level of the IJsselmeer lake will not adapt to the rise in the sea level. The unlinking will remain effective even if the winter water level of the IJsselmeer lake is allowed to adapt to the rise in the sea level after 2050 to a limited extent: the winter water level of the Markermeer-IJmeer lake and of the Zuidelijke Randmeren lakes will then not rise accordingly. The design criteria for dykes will be adjusted to the new standards (see section on flood risk management) and will have to allow for any limited rise in the winter water level after 2050.

Flood risk management New standards will be set for the dykes in the IJsselmeer region. The desired tolerable risk level will first be safeguarded by ensuring that the dykes are and will remain strong enough. In addition, the options of safeguarding flood risk management by combining modifications to flood defence systems, a water-robust spatial organisation and proper disaster management will be explored. In this context, MIRT studies are currently ongoing for Marken and the IJssel-Vecht delta, in which the central government and the region are working together on the elaboration.

Freshwater supplies The first step towards flexible water level management will increase the freshwater buffer to 400 million m3 (which will make available an extra layer of water of 20 cm in the IJsselmeer lake and the Markermeer-IJmeer lake and the connected Zuidelijke Randmeren lakes). To make flexible water level management possible, it is expected that measures will have to be taken to mitigate bank erosion in the nature zones 34 outside the dykes. In addition, the need for local sand replenishments and minor adjustments to fish passes will be examined for a number of recreational beaches. In the coming years, the Cabinet will study what opportunities to link in with other designated uses of the area will arise.

The new water level ordinance is expected to be ready for public participation and decision-making in 2017. In consultation with the regional water managers, Rijkswaterstaat will lay down the criteria determining the operational management of the flexible level in the main water system in management protocols. Operationalising the flexible water level management in the main water system calls for elaboration in conjunction with the regional water systems, balancing the interests of all parties involved. Changes in water level management are clearly recorded and communicated in good time. Flexible water level management can probably be introduced in 2021 at the latest.

If necessary, the limits of flexible water level management will be gradually extended in the longer term, seeking out interconnectivity with measures in the regional system and among the users at all times. The Cabinet has decided on an upper limit for the increase in water level of up to 30 cm compared to the current summer target water level (-20 cm NAP). Further flexibilisation calls for new water level management and extra (mitigating) measures. Improving dykes using forelands (also known as ‘flexible bank organisation’) may provide an important impetus in this respect to make the system more robust.

The table below summarises the adaptive course of the new seasonal water level management in the IJsselmeer region.

Table 1 Summary of the adaptive course of the new, seasonal water level management in the IJsselmeer region

Season Until 2050 (W/W+ scenario) After 2050 (W/W+ scenario) * IJsselmeer lake (including Ketelmeer, Zwarte Meer and Vossemeer lakes) Winter average winter water level -25 NAP average winter water level -25 NAP (but (equal to current multi-year possibly higher in connection with the average winter water level) option of allowing the level to rise 10-30 cm with the sea level) Spring bandwidth for flexible summer Bandwidth for flexible water level until water level management of 20 cm management may increase to a autumn (level fluctuates between -10 and - maximum of 50 cm (+10 cm to -40 cm 30 cm NAP) NAP). accordingly, upper limit for spring/summer water level 30 cm above current summer target level (-20 cm NAP) Markermeer lake, IJmeer, Gooimeer, Eemmeer and Nijkerkernauw lakes Winter average winter water level -25 NAP average winter water level -25 NAP (ordinance to unlink will take effect if winter water level of IJsselmeer lake is allowed to adapt to the rise in sea level) Spring Bandwidth for flexible summer bandwidth for flexible water level until water level management of 20 cm management may increase to a autumn (level fluctuates between -10 and - maximum of 50 cm (+10 cm to -40 cm 30 cm NAP) NAP) 35

Veluwerandmeren lakes Winter average winter water level -25 NAP average winter water level -25 NAP (ordinance to unlink will take effect if winter water level of IJsselmeer lake is allowed to adapt to the rise in sea level) Spring summer water level -5 cm NAP (no summer water level -5 cm NAP (no until flexibilisation of summer water flexibilisation of summer water level in autumn level in the Veluwerandmeren the Veluwerandmeren lakes) lakes)

* Given that this is an adaptive course, it is not possible to indicate exactly when the option of allowing the winter water level to adapt to the rise in the sea level to a limited extent should be considered, nor when a follow-up step in increasing the available freshwater buffer may be necessary.

Spatial aspects According to the current study, the first step in flexibilising the water level management will have no far-reaching consequences for the organisation of the area. Nor are any significant effects on the ecology of the IJsselmeer region expected, provided that any deviations from the development of the water level as anticipated in the new water level ordinance do not occur more frequently than once every 10 years. The increase in water level in the early spring is even beneficial to the ecology, including vegetation (reeds), spawning fish and foraging birds. A number of fish passes may not function as well as a result of a higher water level and may therefore require adjustments. Bank erosion may become more prevalent in the areas outside the dykes along the Frisian coast. This will be mitigated using sand replenishments, for example. In addition, recreational beaches will receive local sand replenishments. The planned increase in water level in the early spring may cause local pluvial flooding in areas outside the dykes, for example at a number of campsites around the Markermeer lake, due to adverse weather conditions. If the winter water level were allowed to adapt to the rise in the sea level to a limited extent in the future, this would have spatial consequences for the area around the IJsselmeer lake. The same applies to any further flexibilisation of the water level management after 2050 for the purpose of increasing the freshwater buffer. The central government seeks to preserve the current values and functionality (i.e. economy, nature, recreation, flood risk management) of the IJsselmeer region, but local effects cannot be ruled out. The initiators themselves remain responsible for any damage in areas outside the dykes.

5 Rhine-Meuse delta

Policy choices  As a precaution, the Cabinet allows for an increase in the maximum discharge for the Rhine up to 17,000 m³/s in 2050 and 18,000 m³/s in 2100. The maximum discharge of the Meuse will be 4,200 m³/s in 2050 and 4,600 m³/s in 2100.  The Cabinet will in any event maintain the distribution across the Rhine distributaries, as laid down in policy, until 2050.  The Rhine-Meuse delta will continue to be protected in the future by a closable, entirely open storm surge barrier in the Nieuwe Waterweg.  In those parts of the Rhine-Meuse delta where the water level is chiefly determined by the sea water level, the Cabinet will safeguard flood risk management mainly by means of dyke improvements in conjunction with the storm surge barriers.  In the river-dominated part of the Rhine-Meuse delta, future increases in the water level will be prevented as much as possible by means of river widening. Dykes will be improved where necessary.  In the transitional area between the sea-dominated area and the river-dominated area, a combination of both approaches will be used.  For the flood risk management challenges around the Hollands Diep, Haringvliet and the Merwedes, the Cabinet has opted for dyke improvement instead of peak water storage in the Grevelingen lake.  For freshwater supplies in the western and south-western Netherlands in the short and the medium term, the Cabinet has opted for optimising the current freshwater supplies and alternative supply routes. These measures form a whole with the measures in the regional water system and among users.

Substantiation According to the latest insights used in the Delta Programme, the maximum discharges mentioned in the National Water Plan still appear to be realistic as a starting point for the long term. The studies carried out into the discharge distribution across the Rhine distributaries do not yet give reason to change the discharge distribution. In the coming years, further studies will have to be carried out to be able to determine by 2017 at the latest whether the option of changing the discharge distribution after 2050 should be left open to relieve the Lek even more in case of discharges of 8,000 m³/s to 16,000 m³/s and a different discharge distribution across the Rhine distributaries in case of discharges of over 16,000 m³/s. This study will look more closely into the negative effects on other river distributaries in case of extra relief of the Neder-Rijn- Lek and highlight the benefits for the Neder-Rijn-Lek. The Delta Programme has looked into whether system interventions such as a ring of flood defence systems around the Drechtsteden or closing the Nieuwe Waterweg are necessary to better protect parts of the Rhine-Meuse delta against floods. These interventions did not appear to be necessary or advisable. It follows from the government framework vision on the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes that dyke improvement is the most cost-effective option for the flood risk management challenges around the Hollands Diep, Haringvliet and the Merwedes. The option of peak water storage in the Grevelingen lake does not have to be left open in addition to the occa- sional peak water storage in the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake, as provided for in Room for the River. In the future, system changes such as peak water storage may once again be worth considering. Optimisation of freshwater systems and investing in alternative supply routes have proved more cost effective in the short and the medium term than countering salinisa- 37 tion via the Nieuwe Waterweg by technical means. After elaborating the measures and making a closer system analysis of freshwater supplies in the Rhine-Meuse estuary, the Cabinet will take a decision on the current policy to counter salt intrusion via the Nieu- we Waterweg. This will be done in conjunction with clarifying the freshwater supply levels.

The area-based elaboration of the central government’s policy for the Rhine-Meuse will take the form of strategies for a) Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden, b) the area around the major rivers and c) the Southwest Delta.

A. RHINE ESTUARY-DRECHTSTEDEN Policy choices  Protection by means of an optimal combination of primary flood defence systems, storm surge barriers and river widening will continue to form the basis for flood risk management in the future;  in Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden, the Cabinet and regional governments are looking for opportunities to create more synergy between water policy and other spatial interests, such as an attractive business climate;  the aim for freshwater supplies to the western Netherlands is to expand alternative supply routes from the Lek or Amsterdam-Rhine Canal (so-called Small-Scale Wa- ter Supply Route) in phases;  the strategic freshwater supply route via Biesbosch/Hollands Diep/Haringvliet will continue to be used for freshwater supplies to the Southwest Delta and industry in the Port of Rotterdam;  freshwater supplies to the Bernisse-Brielse Meer lake will be gradually optimised.

Substantiation flood risk management The presence of the closable, fully open Maeslantkering, Hartelkering and Hollandsche IJssel storm surge barriers will continue to form an important precondition for flood risk management extending as far as Dordrecht. The prevention of floods will continue to form the basis for flood risk management in this region. The use of flood risk management measures in spatial organisation, such as flood-proof construction, has not proved promising enough to arrive at smart combinations’ in a large part of this region. This is due to the fact that these areas lie so low that they are submerged rapidly and deeply in the case of a flood. For the Eiland van Dordrecht, however, there are opportunities to solve part of the flood risk management challenges by means of a smart combination of dyke improvement, spatial organisation and disaster management. In the western part of Rhine Estuary- Drechtsteden, horizontal evacuation is not very effective because there is not much time during a storm surge. This does not apply to the eastern part, where the central government expects better opportunities for evacuation.

The Europoortkering storm surge barrier has been constructed in such a way that the water can drain away to the Botlek area via the higher area between the Maeslantkering and Hartelkering storm surge barriers. During extremely high water levels, this may cause victims and damage to vital and vulnerable functions, such as the A15 motorway, the railway track and the Leidingenstraat pipeline route from and to the Maasvlakte. This calls for further studies. Various places in Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden feature forelands that contribute to the strength of the dykes. The central government will revise the assessment and design tools so that the contribution that forelands make to flood risk management is taken into account in the evaluation of flood risk management. The new assessment tools will

38 be based on the current position of the soil, including the forelands and other elements that influence waves and water levels.

A large section of the dykes in the Krimpenerwaard and Alblasserwaard- Vijfheerenlanden are affected by soil subsidence, as a result of which these dykes require more frequent maintenance. A large part of the flood risk management challenges of Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden concerns these easterly areas. This has far- reaching effects on the structures located on a large part of these dykes. It is advisable to examine whether dyke improvements could be more cost-effective here and whether support can be increased with better coordination of the planning and implementation of dyke improvement and other spatial developments. The urban dykes in the metropolitan area of Rotterdam, the Drechtsteden and Gorinchem can be improved by means of further integration of dyke improvements with urban development around the dyke. freshwater Improving the Small-Scale Water Supply (abbreviated as KWA in Dutch) Route is a robust solution that can easily be divided into phases. The estimated costs of the first phase are lower than those of repairing the stepped river bed, which counters salinisation via the Nieuwe Waterweg. The improved KWA is also more effective. The use of bubble plumes to counter salinisation via the Nieuwe Waterweg has proved less effective. The option for a future expansion towards a more permanent supply from the east will be left open. For the Brielse Meer lake, expansion of the number of alternative supply options is also be the most cost-effective. Together with measures taken by water boards and water users, an efficient set of measures will be formed that will keep freshwater supplies at the required level in the short and the long term.

Implementation flood risk management Together with the municipalities in Alblasserwaard-Vijfheerenlanden, the Rivierenland water board and the central government, the province of Zuid-Holland will launch the MIRT study on Alblasserwaard. The purpose of this study is to better harmonise the choice of location, organisation and planning for development and dyke improvement in the eastern part of Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden. This applies to urban river dykes as well as less developed river dykes. Moreover, in the Krimpenerwaard pilot, the Schie- land higher water board will review what such harmonisation requires in terms of flexi- bility of investments budgets and planning frameworks. The central government is collaborating on this given its responsibility for national budgets and frameworks, such as the Flood Protection Programme.

The central government will study ways to improve the operation of the Maeslantkering storm surge barrier (until its replacement after 2070). This concerns opportunities to reduce the failure probability and the desirability and feasibility of allowing the Maeslantkering storm surge barrier to operate partially in the exceptional situation that it cannot be used in full.

The Schieland and Krimpenerwaard higher water board, the province of Zuid-Holland, the central government and the municipalities will investigate the best possible combination of reducing the failure probability of the Hollandsche IJsselkering storm surge barrier, dykes and forelands for the purpose of flood risk management along the Hol- landsche IJssel.

Together with the central government and the region, water boards will ascertain how the existing set of spatial and legal tools can be used in the Rhine Estuary- Drechtsteden region to safeguard the protective function of high forelands and whether any additional tools may be required.

The central government, the Port of Rotterdam Authority and the city of Rotterdam will elaborate measures to ensure that overtopping of the Europoortkering storm surge barrier does not present a flood risk to the Botlek . This is part of the MIRT study on the Adaptation Strategy for Flood Risk Management in Areas outside the Dykes conducted by the city of Rotterdam in conjunction with regional government authorities and businesses in this region.

For the Spui, Oude Maas, Noord and Dordtse Kil, the central government and Hollandse Delta water board plan to launch a study into more efficient and more effective measures to counter the soil erosion and bank erosion that adversely affect the stability of the dykes.

For the Eiland van Dordrecht, the central government is participating in an MIRT Study being carried out by decentralised governments into the feasibility of multi-layer safety. Multi-layer safety may provide additional safety there in situations where prevention does not suffice and complex dyke improvement in the built-up Voorstraat in Dor- drecht can be deferred. freshwater The water boards of the Western Netherlands freshwater region will prepare measures together with the central government to expand the KWA as an alternative supply route for the freshwater intake at Gouda.

The robustness of the freshwater supply from the Brielsemeer lake will be improved by reinstating the intake from the Oude Maas at Spijkenisse during ebb and low tide in order to take in water there.

Rijkswaterstaat and the water boards will roll out actions to optimise management during low tide.

The central government will also carry out a system study into freshwater supplies in the Rhine-Meuse estuary, and identify what effect the planned freshwater measures and potential spatial developments such as salt in the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake will have on the main water system.

Spatial aspects The space in Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden is used intensively for a variety of purposes. As such, the elaboration of challenges and solutions calls for a helicopter view of the various forms of land use. This occurs at the level of detail of sub-regions. The current and planned elaborations are indicated on the map. The dyke improvement challenges along the Hollandse IJssel, in the Krimpenerwaard and Alblasserwaard-Vijfherenlanden will be substantial. The aim is to strike a good balance between choice of location, organisation and planning of dyke improvements and the (valuable cultural-historical) development on and around the dykes. The urban dykes require a further integration of dyke improvement with the urban development around the dyke. In Dordrecht, there are opportunities to resolve part of the flood risk management challenges by means of a smart combination of dyke improvement, spatial design and disaster management. For spatial developments in areas outside the 40 dykes, the starting point is the water levels associated with a closable open system with a storm surge barrier and the current discharges. The central government will facilitate the use of forelands for flood risk management purposes. In those parts where the influence of the sea plays a key role, dyke improvement will be carried out. In the river-dominated area and the transitional area, a combination of river-widening measures and dyke improvements will be implemented.

The elaboration of measures to expand the KWA and optimise the Brielse Meer lake will take other spatial interests in the area, such as nature, into account to the extent that this is feasible.

Map 6: Involvement of the central government in the preferential strategy for Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden .

Key to map 6

Waterveiligheid (Bij in het grijs weergegeven Flood risk management (At in grey information is informatie is het Rijk niet betrokken.) the central government not involved) 1. Preventie als basis voor waterveiligheid 1. Prevention as the basis for flood risk instandhouden kust door suppleties management maintaining coast by means of replenishments

2. Steeds een optimale combinatie van 2. Always an optimal combination of preventieve maatregelen preventive measures Op lange termijn stormvloedkering vervangen replace storm surge barrier in long term dijken — meewegen voorlanden bij toetsing en dykes – also consider forelands in assessing ontwerp dijken and designing dykes voor 2050: rivierverruiming —Merwedes: before 2050: river widening – Merwedes optimale combinatie rivierverruiming en optimal combination of river widening and dyke dijkversterking improvement na 2050: rivierverruiming—Merwedes: after 2050: river widening – Merwedes optimal optimale combinatie rivierverruiming en combination of river widening and dyke dijkversterking improvement

3. Veiligheid én ruimtelijke ontwikkeling 3. Safety and spatial development sterke urbane dijken strong urban dykes robuuste zeeklei-eilanden robust marine-clay islands toekomstbestendige rivierdijken future-proof river dykes

4. Buitendijkse risico’s beperken met 4. Limit risks in areas outside dykes with regionaal maatwerk customised regional measures MIRT-study Adaptation strategy Flood risk MIRT-onderzoek Adapatatiestrategie management in areas outside dykes, starting Waterveiligheid Buitendijks, starten met: with:  historisch havengebied Dordrecht  historical Dordrecht dock area  Noordereiland Rotterdam  Noordereiland Rotterdam  Merwe-Vierhavens Rotterdam  Rotterdam Merwe-Vierhavens  Botlek Rotterdam  Rotterdam Botlek

5. Meerlaagsveiligheid 5. Multi-layer safety Dordrecht (MIRT) Dordrecht (MIRT) bescherming vitale en kwetsbare objecten: protection of vital and vulnerable objects: elektriciteitsnetwerk electricity grid

6. Kennis en onderzoek 6. Knowledge and research pilot Krimpenerwaard Krimpenerwaard pilot gebiedsproces Hollandsche IJssel Hollandsche IJssel area process MIRT-onderzoek Alblasserwaard MIRT-study Alblasserwaard pilot Building with Nature Lek Building with Nature pilot at Lek verkenning rivier als getijdenpark exploration of river as tidal park preventie en bestrijding van erosie erosion prevention and control partieel functioneren van Maeslantkering partial functioning of Maeslantkering storm surge barrier

Ondergrond Subsoil zoetwater freshwater zout water / brak water salt water/brackish water overstroombaar gebied floodable area leidingen van elektriciteitsnetwerk electricity grid stedelijk gebied urban area havengebied dock area primaire kering buiten plangebied primary flood defence outside area covered by the plan rijksweg motorway gebieden die bij overstroming zeer snel en diep areas that are submerged very rapidly and onder water komen te staan deeply in the case of a flood zeegebied sea area overgangsgebied transitional area rivierengebied area around the major rivers

B. RIVERS Policy choices  The flood risk management policy in the area around the major rivers is based on two cornerstones: river widening and dyke improvement.  To leave room for future measures, the reserved zones in the Spatial Planning (Gen- eral Rules) Decree will be adjusted to the latest insights gained in the Delta Pro- gramme.  The Cabinet highlights the importance of the energetic and adaptive approach to dykes covered in the Flood Protection Programme.  The Cabinet will earmark €200 million until 2028 to be able to capitalise on opportunities for river widening.  The Cabinet has found that the category C-dykes along the canalised Hollandse IJssel ultimately do not need to be primary flood defence systems if the dyke stretches along the Neder-Rijn and the Lek are improved in accordance with the proposed new standard.  For freshwater supplies, the Cabinet has opted for optimisations to be able to better manage and utilise the water in the rivers, for example at the weirs at Driel, Amer- ongen and Hagestein. The option of transporting water from the Waal to the Meuse in the medium term will be left open.

Substantiation Substantial risks in the area around the major rivers Analyses of the flood risks for the Netherlands as a whole have shown that approx. 75% of these risks in the Netherlands affect the area around the major rivers. Accordingly, the new standardisation will have a major impact on this area. The Cabinet is also taking higher peak discharges in the future into account. As a precaution, room should be left along the dykes and rivers to be able to discharge 18,000 m³/s via the Rhine distributaries and 4,600 m³/s via the Meuse in 2100. For the period until 2050, the Cabinet takes into account that the discharge may rise to 17,000 m³/s for the Rhine distributaries and to 4,200 m³/s for the Meuse.

Two courses of prevention Flood risk management in the area around the major rivers is based on two cornerstones: dyke improvement and river widening. This approach continues to build on the successful implementation of the Room for the River programme and the dyke improvements already effected, plus the preferential strategy in the Delta Programme 2015. Ongoing work on flood risk management in the area around the major rivers will remain essential. Part of the flood risk management challenges can be resolved with dyke improvements alone. This is the case in places where dykes are not strong enough according to the current standards or will not be strong enough according to the new standards. Piping is a current issue. The Flood Protection Programme includes the development of innovative methods for curbing the piping issue and limiting the impact and cost of measures. Dyke improvements are also necessary in places where soil subsidence or a rise in sea levels is expected in the future.

Another part of the flood risk management challenges in the area around the major rivers can be resolved by means of both dyke improvement and river widening. This challenges arises from higher river discharges as a result of climate change and the new standards. River widening helps to prevent water levels rising if the river discharge increases. As a result, the increase in dyke height can be limited, dykes will last longer and flood risks will be minimised. It will also create opportunities for spatial developments, such as 43 nature and recreation. River widening is generally more expensive than dyke improvement, but it has additional benefits and makes the system more robust.

Map 7: Preferential strategy for flood risk management area around the major rivers

Key to map 7

Waterveiligheid Flood risk management Dijkversterking Dyke improvement grote dijkversterking substantial dyke improvement dijkversterking dyke improvement mogelijk in combinatie met grote possibly in combination with substantial increase dijkverhoging in dyke height dijkverhoging increase in dyke height overig: other: status C-kering aanpassen change C-dyke status dijkteruglegging afhankelijk van uitkomst dyke realignment depending on outcome of nader onderzoek systeemwerking Maas further research into Meuse transmission effects

Rivierverruiming River widening >40cm waterstandsverlaging >40 cm water level reduction 30-40cm waterstandsverlaging 30-40 cm water level reduction 20-30cm waterstandsverlaging 20-30 cm water level reduction 10-20cm waterstandsverlaging 10-20 cm water level reduction 0-10cm waterstandsverlaging 0-10 cm water level reduction

Ruimtelijke reservering Spatial reservation handhaven maintain laten vervallen abandon nieuwe reservering new reservation mogelijk toe te voegen afhankelijk van possibly to be added, depending on the study studie-opdracht objective

Overig Other rivierbed river bed overige dijken en C-keringen other dykes and C-dykes status rivierbed afhankelijk van nader status of river bed depending on further study onderzoek systeemwerking into transmission effects

Ondergrond Subsoil zoetwater freshwater zout water / brak water salt water/brackish water overstroombaar gebied floodable area stedelijk gebied urban area rijksweg motorway grens boundary

Map 7 shows where dyke improvement is expected to be necessary as well as what decrease in water level can be achieved by means of river widening.

The Third Assessment round (2011) revealed that category C-dykes along the canalised Hollandse IJssel would not be strong and high enough to hold back water that would flow into the area in the case of a dyke breach along the Neder-Rijn and Lek. Regional parties have examined how this problem can be solved and will come up with an alternative solution to improve parts of the dykes along the Neder-Rijn and Lek, instead of improving the category C-dykes. This solution will reduce the risks in a larg- er area; it will also have less of a spatial impact and not cost as much. The Cabinet supports the solution and concludes that, as a result, category C-dykes can ultimately cease to serve as a primary flood defence system. This also presents opportunities for development along the canalised Hollandse IJssel, for example for building, because the water manager can limit the size of the protection zones along the storm surge barriers.

Limiting consequences or disaster management Flood prevention will remain the basis for flood risk management in the area around the major rivers. Locally, opportunities may arise to reduce risks by limiting the 45 consequences of a flood or by improving disaster management. These opportunities are presenting themselves in the IJssel-Vecht delta. Here, the central government is participating in the MIRT Study that is being carried out by the province of Overijssel.

Long term The Cabinet does not want to take measures now that will not be necessary until 2050. Any measures that will be taken in the coming decades should, however, not impede interventions that may be required after 2050. To allow river-widening measures to be taken in the future as well, it is essential to reserve space along the rivers. In certain areas, new large-scale and capital-intensive developments will have to be coordinated with potential future river measures. Current use by companies and residents can continue. The central government is working with provinces and municipalities to decide how new developments can be coordinated with future flood risk management measures. The central government will amend the Spatial Planning (General Rules) Decree. (See under ‘spatial aspects’ below.) If the elaboration of the preferential strategy for the Meuse leads to a proposal to change the reservations, the Cabinet will consider whether the Barro should be amended accordingly.

Implementation Flood risk management For each distributary, the decentralised government authorities will elaborate the strategy of a solid combination of river widening and dyke improvement, as outlined in the Delta Programme 2015. The central government will participate in this elaboration. The proposal for the preferential strategies will act as the strategic guide for this elaboration. When finalising measures and, hence, the choice between dyke improvement and river widening, the target contribution, costs, linkage opportunities, other benefits and support should be considered. The Cabinet believes that the additional cost of the solid combination of river widening and dyke improvement, as proposed in the preferential strategies in the Delta Programme 2015, should be balanced by the benefits and the propensity of other parties to invest. Urgent dyke stretches that failed the inspection during the Third Assessment have already been included in the Flood Protection Programme. The Cabinet highlights the importance of the energetic and adaptive approach to dykes that have been included in the Flood Protection Programme. Energetic, because the stability quickly needs to be improved in urgent locations, and adaptive, because the approach to those dykes needs to be tailored to the second cornerstone of the flood risk management policy, i.e. river widening. Based on the regular process of testing against standards, prioritising and programming measures in the Flood Protection Programme, the Cabinet will decide, in consultation with the flood defence managers and other government authorities and organisations involved, which (additional) interventions and measures are required in the area around the major rivers. When it comes to dyke improvement and river- widening measures, the measures that are the most urgent from the perspective of flood risk management will have to be implemented first if possible. The Cabinet would welcome a proposal to start MIRT explorations of river-widening measures, based on the proposal for the preferential strategies. The Cabinet will earmark €200 million until 2028 to be able to capitalise on opportunities for river widening. The conditions for launching exploration are that a decision has been made at the level of the entire area around the major rivers, that prioritisation has taken place in conjunction with the Flood Protection Programme and that the contribution to the safety and effectiveness of the measure or measures proposed has been demonstrated. Moreover, there should 46 be co-financing or the prospect of co-financing for the entire project.

An exploration of measures with a lifecycle approach should determine the economically optimal lifespan of measures and examine alternatives aimed at partial improvement. In this way, it will continue to be possible to respond flexibly to future developments and retain opportunities for comprehensive spatial measures, allowing the Cabinet to fulfil its adaptive delta management approach.

The approach that still applies to the Limburgse Maasvallei is that all dyke rings must be floodable in the event of a normative discharge. When working towards the new standards, that approach will be abandoned, on condition that compensating measures be implemented. The review, prioritisation and design of improvements will ultimately span the entire Meuse in accordance with the national elaboration of the standard specifications. Flood risk management projects that are already being prepared and carried out in the Maasvallei will be carried out fully in accordance with the current arrangements.

The water boards and the initiators of spatial plans in the private sector (e.g. mining) will both have opportunities to create work from work. If there are any obstacles to capitalising on these opportunities, the Cabinet wants to ascertain whether these can be resolved. In drawing up guides to designing flood defence systems, the Cabinet will take the possibilities for river widening into account.

Freshwater In the medium term, significant water shortages may arise in the Meuse. The option of transporting water from the Waal to the Meuse - via the Meuse-Waalkanaal canal, for example - will be kept open as a potential solution. In the short term, the central government will conduct a study into the desirability of this measure, its consequences and its cost-effectiveness compared to alternative measures.

Spatial aspects As the Cabinet is allowing for the possibility of higher river discharges in the future, it is taking the precaution of reserving space to be able to take measures in the future. The Barro will be changed in accordance with the new insights gained in the Delta Programme. The spatial reservations at Zutphen and Noorddiep can be cancelled, as there are alternatives to be able to ensure future safety. The reservation for the Reevediep (i.e. the Kampen bypass) can be abandoned, as an implementation decision has already been taken on this measure under the Room for the River programme, and this has been incorporated into the zoning plan. The spatial reservation for the dyke relocation at Heesselt can also be abandoned, as an alternative has been created for this measure, namely the construction of a channel at Varik Heesselt. To prevent any impediments to the potential construction of a channel at Varik Heesselt, a spatial reservation there will be added to the Barro.

In 2015, studies will be conducted for a number of areas that may lead to additional reservations. These studies will concern the dyke realignment at Werkendam, the dyke realignment at Ooij and retention at the ENCI quarry in the municipality of Maastricht

To be able to realise the river widening ambition, measures will also have to be taken in areas outside the dykes. The Major Rivers Policy and the current provisions on the major rivers in the Barro are designed to ensure that there will be room for these measures.

The flood risk management challenges relating to dykes is substantial in the area around the major rivers. This may prompt flood defence managers to extend the protection zones. In the vicinity of flood defence systems that will cease to be part of the primary system after the legislative amendment, the protection zones may be reduced in size, creating more development opportunities for building, for example. These are site-specific decisions that the respective flood defence managers can make.

C. SOUTHWEST DELTA11 Policy choices  The current system of dykes and flood defence systems will continue to form the basis for future flood risk management in the Southwest Delta.  Peak water storage in the Grevelingen lake is not necessary to improve flood risk management in the Rhine-Meuse delta.  The Cabinet is studying the desirability and feasibility of restoring a limited tidal system in the Grevelingen lake and salt water in the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake in the government framework vision on the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes. This central government framework vision is expected to be adopted in 2015.  The strategic freshwater supply route via Biesbosch/Hollands Diep/Haringvliet will be preserved for the water supply of the Southwest Delta (regardless of whether there is a freshwater or saltwater Volkerak-Zoommeer lake).  For the Oosterschelde and the Westerschelde, the central government has decided to optimise the current flood risk management strategy.  The Cabinet has opted for the principle of ‘soft where possible, hard where necessary’ to maintain the strength of the coastal flood defence systems.

Substantiation The Delta Works have significantly improved flood risk management in the Southwest Delta. The flip side of this is that the tidal movement and natural freshwater-salt water transitions have largely disappeared, as a result of which the quality of the water and nature have deteriorated. This also inhibits the economic development of the area in the sense that the potential for recreation and tourism (e.g. of the shellfish sector) and of innovation such as the generation of renewable energy from the tidal movement are not exploited enough. The central challenges for the Southwest Delta is to restore a stable balance between safety, the economy and ecology. A comprehensive development approach - with a better connection being established between water and spatial planning - is paramount.

Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer In 2013, the central government started drawing up a government framework vision for the development of the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes. The document considers the desirability and feasibility of peak water storage in the Grevelingen lake (to improve flood risk management in the Rhine-Meuse delta) and of restoring a limited tidal system in the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes (to improve the quality of water and nature and exploit economic potentials more fully). As a result of this measure, the freshwater Volkerak-Zoommeer lake would become salt again. In that case, alternative freshwater supplies would be required for the current freshwater function of the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake. Under the auspices of the provinces involved, the Area Development Programme was launched in 2013. The programme is investigating the propensity of partners in the region to invest with a view to the comprehensive development of the Grevelingen and

11 This also includes the Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, which, officially speaking, are not part of the Rhine-Meuse delta. 48

Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes. Part of this programme is elaborating the (innovative) financial arrangements for projects capitalising on the ambition to restore a limited tidal system in the Grevelingen lake via a culvert (with tidal power plant) in the Brouwersdam and salt water in the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake.

Oosterschelde and Westerschelde For the Oosterschelde, the central government has decided to optimise the current flood risk management strategy of improving and managing dykes (innovatively), while systematically tackling sand demand and adjusting the management of the Oosterscheldekering storm surge barrier. These three ‘controls’ (flood defence system, dykes and sand) link the assurance of flood risk management to an optimal use of space, nature and economy. The Oesterdam safety buffer and restoration of the tidal movement in the Rammegors are just two examples of such projects. For the Westerschelde, the central government has also decided to optimise the current flood risk management strategy of improving and managing dykes (innovatively), while continuing to optimise the current dredging and depositing strategy to allow the shoals and shore faces of the dykes to adapt to the rise in sea level, and to stop sand extraction. This strategy is also helping to improve the quality of nature.

Implementation Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer The region and central government will jointly consider financing options for meaningful statements in the central government’s framework vision on the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes about restoring a limited tidal system in the Grevelingen and Volkerak-Zoommeer lakes. The central government and the region agree that peak water storage in the Grevelingen lake is not a cost-effective solution to improve flood risk management in the Rhine-Meuse delta. The conclusion, therefore, is that there is no need to keep this option open. In the future, system changes such as peak water storage may once again be worth considering.

Oosterschelde and Westerschelde In 2007, an MIRT exploration was launched to tackle the sand demand in the Oosterschelde; this study included pilot tests. In accordance with this exploration, the sand demand had best be addressed by replenishing sand in intertidal zones. In the short term, dealing with the Roggenplaat sand demand is the most urgent issue. Erosion is rapidly reducing the surface area and height of this shoal, jeopardising functions in the areas of nature, recreation and landscape. An administrative agreement has been made that the province of Zeeland (leader), Natuurmonumenten, Oosterschelde National Park and the central government will jointly detail a financing proposal for dealing with the Roggenplaat. The result of this has been discussed in the 2014 Zeeland MIRT Consultation. This has led to an agreement in principle to carry out the required sand replenishments on Roggenplaat in the period 2017-2018. According to the MIRT exploration, the other locations will not be dealt with until 2025. This will be included in the broader MIRT Study, which will be carried out in 2015 and 2016, with a view to optimising the current flood risk management strategy.

Together with the Flemish Region, an ‘Agenda for the Future’ has been prepared for the Schelde estuary, of which the Westerschelde is part. This agenda will initially focus on the development of a joint knowledge and research programme, geared to the main objective of the Flemish-Dutch partnership: to create a lasting balance between the interests of a safe, natural and accessible Schelde estuary. One of the challenges here is how to mitigate the tidal range, which has increased as a result of human 49 interventions, such as impoldering, sand extraction and channel widening, and which may jeopardise safety and the natural quality of the Schelde estuary in the long term. The research programme will address issues such as the effectiveness of large-scale sediment management in the estuary area (e.g. by creating or expanding shoals), including the option of pilot projects, in terms of mitigating the tidal range in the Schelde estuary.

Coast and Voordelta The sand replenishment programme will be continued. Comprehensive visions are being drawn up for the mouths of the Westerschelde and the Oosterschelde. These visions will also consider the potential of pilot projects to gain more knowledge of sand replenishments, such as the Oosterschelde sand extraction mill innovation project, the Veersedam reorganisation and nature recovery, channel margin replenishments near Southwest Walcheren. If necessary, the sand replenishments will be adjusted after 2020 to allow the sandy system to adapt to the rise in sea level. Using other sources of funding, sand replenishments may also contribute to other goals, such as nature and economic use. For the Southwest Delta, the research and monitoring programme for the decision on the sandy system will focus on analysing sediment in the basins, at the island heads and channels. This programme is to be launched by the central government and the water boards in 2015. After 2020, a large-scale pilot project is planned aimed at controlling channels encroaching on the coast.

Freshwater In the areas of the Southwest Delta that depend on the supply of freshwater from the main water system, the region and the central government are pursuing a strategy of more robust systems. The Bernisse - Brielse Meer lake system will be optimised by better freshwater management. To this end, the Spijkenisse intake sluice will also be used at times when intake at the Bernisse is not possible because of salinisation. The availability of freshwatermay improve in terms of quality and delivery reliability if areas which currently supply their freshwater from the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake switch to supplying freshwater from theHaringvliet - Hollands Diep via the Roode Vaart. As such, this package of freshwater measures will not only succeed if the Volkerak-Zoommeer were to become a saltwater lake again, but will also improve the robustness and efficiency of the main and regional freshwater systems if it were to remain a freshwater lake forever. For areas that are not supplied from the main water system (Zeeuws-Vlaanderen, Walcheren, Noord- and Zuid-Beveland and Schouwen-Duiveland), the region has opted for innovation. aimed at using freshwater and rainwater more economically and efficiently (i.e. ‘Southwest Delta’ Experimental Garden). This is to be achieved by various means, such as a more efficient use of excess precipitation by storing it in the soil, making freshwater lenses more solid and robust, and conducting further studies into the possibilities for reusing freshwater (including effluent).

Spatial aspects The current system of dykes, flood defence systems and sand replenishments will continue to form the basis for flood risk management in the Southwest Delta. In various places in the Southwest Delta, the new standard specifications for the flood defence systems will lead to dyke improvements, with the current dams and flood defence systems remaining in place so as to safeguard flood risk management. There will, however, be room for customised work to promote estuary dynamics. In all areas, the concept of innovative dykes presents opportunities, under the motto of ‘do more with dykes’. All dyke improvements in the flood protection programme are being reviewed 50 to ascertain whether there are opportunities for innovative dykes with a versatile use of space, for example for nature, recreation and living, and what technical, financial and administrative agreements are required to capitalise on these opportunities. For the Brouwersdam, for example, an assessment will be made to determine whether a type of culvert to restore the tides could be combined with a tidal power plant for the generation of renewable energy. As regards any sand replenishments in the Ooster- schelde, efforts will be made not only to preserve nature, but also to enhance the scenic and recreation value and long-term flood risk management. As regards the Schelde estuary, mitigating the tidal range for the purpose of enhancing flood risk management includes the challenging task of working simultaneously on nature, landscape and recreation and on improving access to the sea ports.

6 Sandy system

Policy choices  The Cabinet once again acknowledges the decision to use sand replenishments to prevent (the coast of) the Netherlands from shrinking (preservation of land area) as well as presenting a stable basis for the flood risk management of the South- west Delta, the Dutch coast and the Wadden region.  The Cabinet has not opted to expand the coast substantially, as suggested by the Veerman Commission.  Flood risk management of the sandy system will continue according to the principle of ‘soft where possible, hard where necessary’.  The Cabinet aims to achieve a lasting balance in the coastal foundation zone, with the volume of sand replenishments being adjusted to the rise in sea level.  More work will be done in the Coastal Genesis 2 research and monitoring programme to gain a better understanding of how the sandy system behaves. Until 2020, this programme will include small-scale pilot projects and the replenishment volume of 12 million m³ per year is maintained. Large-scale pilot projects are planned for the period after 2020.  In around 2020, the knowledge gained from the Coastal Genesis 2 programme will be pooled and a decision taken with respect to expanding the replenishment programme and/or carrying out two large-scale pilot projects to achieve a balance in the coastal foundation zone.

Substantiation The safety aspect of the flood defence system in the sandy system is different from that of river dykes. The coast is now safe, partly because the weak links have been fixed. However, the coast is subject to ongoing erosion caused by the rise in sea level. Without any intervention, the Netherlands would shrink 1 m a year along the entire coastline. As such, preservation of land area is paramount in relation to the coast. Sand replenishments ensure this. This includes the dynamic preservation of the coastline in the short term and keeping the coastal foundation zone in balance in the long term. This will also ensure a stable basis for the flood defence system, which is important to keep the Netherlands safe in the long term. The National Water Plan 2009 - 2015 assumed that the coastal foundation zone would grow entirely in line with the rise in sea levels. To achieve this, the replenishment volume would have to be increased from 12 million m³ a year to 20 million m³ a year. Although the replenishment volume will have to be increased ultimately, the growth of the coastal foundation zone does not have to be entirely commensurate with the rise in sea levels.

In the current situation, the coastal foundation zone is not in balance, which is due to the processes taking place in the sandy system. The Wadden Sea is extracting sand from the coastal foundation zone, causing ongoing erosion in the outer delta north of the Wadden Sea. The Voordelta of the Southwest Delta is also affected by erosion, albeit to a lesser extent. Both areas have channels that are moving and getting (too) close to the flood defence system. Map 8 illustrates approximately where these processes are taking place. There is not enough expertise available yet to determine whether and how this erosion should be countered and how this can help to achieve a lasting balance. For this reason, the Cabinet has decided to increase the monitoring and research programme, the emphasis of which will be on the Wadden system and the Southwest Delta, particularly the effect of the tidal inlet systems and outer deltas

52 and channels that are getting increasingly closer to coast and threaten to undermine the flood defence systems (‘channels that encroach on the coast’). An additional aim is to develop sustainable, cost-effective and innovative replenishment techniques, supplementary to common techniques. The monitoring and research programme will include small-scale pilot projects. The knowledge gained in the programme will be pooled around 2020. At that time, a decision will be taken as to whether and where large-scale or pilot projects will be carried out and whether the replenishment volume needs to be adjusted systematically. In subsequent decades, the replenishment volume and distribution will be adjusted periodically in line with the actual rise in sea levels and insights into the behaviour of the sandy system. There is enough sand in the North Sea to keep the coast safe, also in the very long term, i.e. the coming centuries. Good sand extraction sites relatively close to the coast are essential to keep sand replenishments affordable. That is why sand extraction in the zone between the twelve-mile limit and continuous isobath at NAP -20 metres is a priority, It has been decided to extract a 10-metre layer of sand (previously a 2-metre layer) where possible. This will ensure that the area has enough sand to meet the demand for sand in the coming century, even if the demand for sand increases rapidly as a consequence of policy choices and an accelerated rise in sea levels. Effective management of the sand supply in relation to other uses and nature is, however, essential. To be able to deal efficiently with the sand supply and facilitate other activities, such as energy supply, a better control of the location and period of sand extraction and other activities is essential. This will be further detailed in the second National Water Plan (see section: North Sea policy document).

Map 8: Processes in the sandy system

Key to map 8 structurele kusterosie in relatie met permanent coastal erosion in relation with basic basiskustlijn (incl. segmenten) coastline (incl. segments) ‘opdringende geulen’ channels that encroach on the coast buitendelta’s veranderen van vorm en nemen outer deltas change form and decrease in af in volume volume sedimenttekort in de bekkens sediment shortage in the open basins bekken – niet zanddelend open basin - non-sand-sharing bekken – zanddelend open basin - sand-sharing zandtekort kustfundament coastal foundation zone sand shortage harde zeewering hard sea wall zoet water freshwater zout water salt water

Implementation

In 2015, the central government will launch a monitoring and research programme, in conjunction with a number of small-scale pilot projects, for the sandy system.

The area-based elaboration of the policy choices regarding the sandy system will be formulated as strategies for a) the coast and b) the Wadden region (see section 5).

A. COAST Policy choices  In line with the above policy choices, the Cabinet has opted for maintaining the strength of the coastal flood defence system according to the principle of ‘soft where possible, hard where necessary’.  The consequences of the new standardisation system and preservation of the flood defence system will be translated into criteria for the management of dunes and other parts of the coastal flood defence system; this will involve redimensioning reservation zones  The Cabinet wants to contribute to the regional preference for multiple use of the flood defence systems and to experiment with agreements on adaptation concepts for areas around the flood defence systems while preserving safety. The coastal policy will be revised to create more room for these processes.  In the coming period, an attempt will be made to ascertain how more social goals can be served with the amount of sand available. In this context, the possibilities of a further flexibilisation of the coastline preservation will be reviewed. In certain places, this will be done to a lesser extent, in order to give nature free rein. In other places, this will be done to a greater extent, where this benefits recreational beaches or other purposes.

Substantiation The policy choices for the sandy system are the foundation for the stability of the coastal subsoil. This stability is necessary for the purpose of long-term safety and, consequently, spatial developments in the light of a coast that is attractive from both an economic and a scenic perspective. These developments are closely related to safety, because coastal towns in particular want to grow as close to the sea as possible, which is where the flood defence system is located. As such, multipurpose use of the flood defence system is important. The strategy for an attractive coast (gold rim of the Netherlands) is to step up collaboration between government authorities. The responsibilities for spatial development and flood risk management will continue to lie where they lie now, i.e. with the province and the municipalities and with the central government and the water boards respectively. In addition to the sand strategy, the National Coastal Vision describes the shared vision of the government authorities on the spatial development of the coast. For the benefit of municipalities, provinces and developers, the Cabinet has opted to clarify, where possible, together with the water boards, how the flood defence system is to be improved in the future: landward, seaward or upward, using sand or a dyke. Where advisable and possible, an adaptation concept will be selected that addresses spatial development in a way that allows for future flood risk management measures. This will prevent disinvestment and facilitate the incorporation of flood risk management measures. The figure opposite shows various adaptation concepts for the seaside resorts.

The Cabinet wants to experiment with this set-up and decide in around 2020 to what extent and in which cases this is to be made a standard procedure. To facilitate decisions on the multiple use of the area around the flood defence systems, the central government will revise the Coastal Policy. To ensure a realistic claim on space for the flood defence systems, the central government is asking the flood defence managers to revise the reservation zones for 200 years of rising sea levels on the basis of the new standards.

Implementation To allow sand replenishments to serve more social goals, the central government will periodically make a broader inventory of sites where added value can be created, as well as holding the standard annual consultation. This may be added value in terms of both safety and spatial quality. For the purpose of a multiple use of the flood defence system, the central government and water boards are developing a guide for flood defence managers together to be able to assess the effects of non-water retaining structures in dunes. The joint government authorities are developing a guide for adaptation concepts. The central government will participate as a partner in the consultation of government authorities to supervise the implementation of the jointly formulated implementation agenda of the National Coastal Vision and the Decision on Sand. The central government will revise the Coastal Policy in early 2015. The central government is asking the flood defence managers to revise the reservation zones for 200 years of rising sea levels.

Spatial aspects The central government will facilitate the multiple use of the area around the flood

56 defence systems, by amending the Coastal Policy for example. The flood defence managers can revise the reservation zones. In addition to the sand strategy, the National Coastal Vision describes the shared vision of the government authorities on the spatial development of the coast. The decision to opt for land area preservation means that the area and the designated uses in the coastal zone will be preserved.

B. WADDEN REGION12 Policy choices  In line with the above policy choices, the Cabinet has opted for maintaining the strength of the coastal flood defence system of the Wadden islands according to the principle of ‘soft where possible, hard where necessary’.  For the Wadden Sea side of the islands and for the mainland coast, the existing strategy of dyke improvements will be continued and an innovative, comprehensive approach will be pursued.  Apart from focusing mainly on the coastal foundation zone, the research and monitoring programme for the sandy system will devote specific attention to the Eems-Dollard estuary.

Substantiation To safeguard safety in the Wadden region in the coming decades, the existing strategies, such as dyke improvements and sand replenishments, will be used. These strategies have proved to be effective for some time to come, meaning that there is no need for any major changes. The flood defence systems on the North Sea side of the Wadden islands are generally soft. That on the Wadden Sea side is generally hard. In the transitional zones, opportunities to soften the hard coast are being explored. To be able to take effective measures in this valuable and vulnerable area, it is imperative to understand the relationships between the various elements of the system, in which the tidal inlet systems play an important role. As such, the decision on the sandy system is of great importance for the Wadden region. Apart from providing the information required to maintain the Coastal Foundation Zone, pilot projects and monitoring will also demonstrate whether enough sand flows naturally to the Wadden Sea to be able to maintain the shoals and salt marshes. Morphological changes in the Dollard and the Eems estuary in particular are very complicated and are not yet properly understood. They are partly caused by human activities - such as channel maintenance and deepening - and partly by natural processes. A study by Rijkswaterstaat (2013) has concluded that this area also requires more monitoring to gain a better understanding of the autonomous morphological developments and the effects of interventions. By keeping the dykes strong and high enough, the statutory flood risk management standards for the hard coast of Wadden region will continue to be met in the future. A General Exploration Programme (abbreviated as POV in Dutch and part of the Flood Protection Programme) will look at how dyke improvement can be linked to expansion of the salt marsh area and will consider other dyke concepts such as that of the ‘green dyke’. In this way, the approach to flood risk management challenges is linked to ambitions for nature, recreation and the economy, and the question of whether the hard coast can be softened is examined. Also, in the case of the hard coast, not enough is known about the Wadden region as a system and, in addition to the research programme for the Decision on Sand, a long-term knowledge and monitoring programme is required to be able to come up with effective measures.

12 The Wadden Region, subsumed under the section on the sandy system, has a sandy coast (i.e. soft) and a non-sandy (i.e. hard) coast. 57

Implementation Knowledge The research and monitoring programme to be launched by the central government and the water boards in 2015 as part of decision on the sandy system will focus on the tidal inlet systems specifically for the Wadden region. Until 2020, this will require two minor pilot projects. A large-scale pilot project is planned for the period after 2020. The preparatory study will focus on how sand replenishments are best made in the outer delta. In addition to these studies, a study is being conducted into the options that each island offers for allowing the surface of the islands to adapt to the rise in sea level by means of a natural supply of sand drifting from the dunes and allowing island tails to be flooded (i.e. washovers). In 2013, the three water boards in the northern Netherlands launched a POV to ascertain how dyke improvement along the hard coast can be linked to the ambitions for nature, recreation and the economy and to soften the hard coast. A study into the green Eems-Dollard is a step ahead of this.

Spatial aspects The innovative dyke concepts have a spatial impact. Their appearance (i.e. their dimensions and use of material) may have consequences for the perception of the landscape, cultural history and land use. Depending on the dyke concept, it may be necessary to free up extra space for the dyke and the foreland and to look for combinations with other functions. Expansion of the area outside the dykes by means of dyke improvement has a direct impact on the Wadden Sea as a world heritage site and Natura 2000 area.

7 Financing

The central government, water boards, provinces, municipalities and drinking water companies now (2013) invest approximately €6.9 billion a year in water tasks in the Netherlands. The central government covers approximately 17% of all costs. The central government’s share is lower than in the National Water Plan 2009-2015, for which the central government paid approximately 25% of the costs. This is primarily due to the efficient water management task and the co-financing agreements with the water boards in the Administrative Agreement on Water (2011), which require the water boards to contribute towards the costs of Flood Protection Programme. The Delta Fund forms the financial framework for central government contributions to flood risk management and freshwater challenges of national importance. The Delta Fund was separated from the Infrastructure Fund as of 1 January 2013.

Flood risk management The proper protection of the Netherlands will require several billion euros in investment over the next few decades. By addressing the various types of flood risk management challenges, such as new standardisation, soil subsidence, climate change and tackling the piping issue, concordantly, the new challenges will be carried out optimally and efficiently.

The establishment of the Delta Fund and the formation of the Administrative Agreement on Water has established a solid foundation for funding the flood risk management measures. The Administrative Agreement includes agreements with the water boards on the co-financing of the Flood Protection Programme. The central government, provinces, municipalities, water boards and drinking water companies have reached agreements on more efficient water management. The joint parties aim to achieve a progressive efficiency gain of up to €750 million a year from 2020; €450 million is to be obtained from the water chain and €300 million in the water system. The efficiency gain is designed to limit cost increases and minimise any local financial burden. This will be reported to the Dutch House of Representatives in the Water Mapped Out report.

Agreements on the financing of the new flood risk management policy have been reached with the Unie van Waterschappen (Union of Water Boards). The basic principle of these agreements is that all primary flood defence systems meet the new standards by 2050. The current cost allocation on the basis of the Administrative Agreement on Water (50% central government, 40% solidarity share of water boards, 10% project- related share of implementing water board) will also apply to the costs associated with the new standard specifications. This underscores the joint responsibility of the central government and water boards for flood risk management. Until 2028, any resources that become available from the current Flood Protection Programme (also known by the Dutch acronym HWBP2) will be added to the budget for the new HWBP, in accordance with the Administrative Agreement on Water in order to gradually increase the HWBP investment level. Moreover, it has been agreed that any savings on dyke improvements as a result of river widening or smart combinations can be used for such measures. The contributions to the Flood Protection Programme from the central government and the water boards will not be increased until 2028.

As the approach to flood risk management will change fundamentally from 2017

59 onwards, there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding the estimates of the costs that have to be incurred. As such, it has been agreed that, based on the results of the National Assessment Report 4 (ready by 2023), the need for any additional agreements will be ascertained.

Where extra costs are incurred for river widening purposes, the Cabinet is prepared to use resources from the Delta Fund, on the condition that a measure contributes substantially to safety, offers opportunities for achieving synergy at a regional level and is funded by means of co-financing. The Cabinet will earmark a portion in the programme scope in the Delta Fund of approximately €200 million up to and including 2028 for this.

Freshwater supplies For economic development, investing in freshwater supplies is of great importance: Until 2050, investments in a number of targeted measures can help to optimise freshwater supplies and make them more robust. The cost of the future freshwater challenges is estimated at approximately €800 million up to and including 2050. €150 million of programme scope has been earmarked for this in the Delta Fund for the period up to and including 2028. This reservation is a first step towards making the system more robust by means of cost-effective measures. The reservation is more than enough to be able to pay at least the central government’s contribution to the first package of freshwater measures, as outlined in the Delta Programme 2015.

Resources from other partners In comprehensive projects that serve more goals than just flood risk management and freshwater supplies, financial responsibility is borne by more Delta Programme partners. Even when flood risk management and freshwater measures generate additional costs but also additional benefits, a contribution from financial sources other than the Delta Fund is expected. The Delta Programme already includes a number of good examples of comprehensive projects to which various government authorities make a financial contribution, each from its own sector and with its own responsibility. For instance, area developments such as Ooijen-Wanssum, IJsseldelta-Zuid and WaalWeelde enjoy substantial financial support from the provinces of Limburg, Overijssel and Gelderland respectively. A nice recent example of a comprehensive project in which several parties contributed to the desired flood risk management solution is the sand-related improvement of the Prins Hendrikdijk on Texel. This project, which has positive effects on nature, is now being carried out with contributions from the Hollands Noorderkwartier higher water board, the province of Noord-Holland, municipality of Texel and the Wadden Fund.

Appendix 1a: Table with the standard specifications

In the table below, a number of stretches are marked with an asterisk (*). This is to indicate that an MIRT Study into smart combinations is being carried out or that further research is required. The outcomes of the studies may impact the standard class. The results are being processed for the purpose of being embedded in legislation.

Wadden region

Stretch Standard Explanation specification

Regional advice adopted (evacuation fraction of 0%); for the safety 1-1 1000 strategies drawn up for the individual islands, a multi-layer approach is considered

1-2 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

2-1 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice adopted (evacuation fraction of 0%); for the safety 2-2 1000 strategies drawn up for the individual islands, a multi-layer approach is considered

Regional advice adopted (evacuation fraction of 0%); for the safety 3-1 3000 strategies drawn up for the individual islands, a multi-layer approach is considered

3-2 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

4-1 300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

4-2 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice adopted (evacuation fraction of 0%); for the safety 5-1 3000 strategies drawn up for the individual islands, a multi-layer approach is considered

Regional advice adopted (evacuation fraction of 0%); for the safety 5-2 3000 strategies drawn up for the individual islands, a multi-layer approach is considered

6-3 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice adopted; the standard specification calculated is on the 6-4 3000 boundary between two classes; similar circumstances as in adjacent dyke stretches

6-5 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

6-6 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

6-7+6-8 10000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Coast

Standard Stretch Explanation specification

13-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

13-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

13-3 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-4 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-5 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-6 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-7 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-8 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-9 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-10 10,000* Further research into the category B-dyke at IJmuiden

20-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

25-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

26-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

29-1 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice adopted. Customised work for Ritthem and Buitenhaven- Oost is still being elaborated, which will lead to a lower standard 29-2 100,000* specification for this stretch and additional protection in two places, subject to legal safeguarding.

32-1 1,000* Further research into damage relating to recent recreational development

IJsselmeer region

Standard Stretch Explanation specification

6-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice adopted; the standard specification calculated is on the 6-2 3,000 boundary between two classes; similar circumstances as in adjacent dyke stretches

7-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

7-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

8-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

8-2 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

8-3 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

8-4 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

9-1 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

9-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

10-1 3,000* MIRT Study into smart combination at the IJssel-Vecht delta

10-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

10-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

11-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

11-2 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

12-1 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

12-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Customised work for Den Helder (additional protection for urban area) is 13-4 1000* being elaborated.

13-5 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

13-6 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

13-7 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

13-8 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Multi-layer safety solution; for the construction of IJburg 2, a suitable 13-a-1 300 standard specification for that area will again be looked into.

13-b-1 TBD* MIRT Study into smart combination for Marken

Further analysis required. 44-2 300* New calculations will be made on the basis of flood risk scenarios to be supplied by the province.

45-2 300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

46-1 300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Rhine Estuary-Drechtsteden

Standard Stretch Explanation specification

Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the 14-1 100,000 value calculated

14-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

14-3 10,000 Regional advice adopted on account of illogical, significant discrepancies

15-1 30,000 Division into stretches in accordance with Central Holland approach

15-2 10,000 Division into stretches in accordance with Central Holland approach

Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the 16-1 100,000 value calculated

Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the 16-2 30,000 value calculated

16-3 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

16-4 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

17-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

17-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

17-3 100,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

18-1 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the 19-1 100,000 value calculated

20-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the 20-3 30,000 value calculated

20-4 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

21-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Following research into the relationship with the frequency of using the Volkerak-Zoommeer lake for storage, the standard specification will be 21-2 300* adjusted as necessary.

22-1 3000* MIRT Study into smart combination for Dordrecht

MIRT Study into smart combination for Dordrecht and bearing in mind 22-2 10,000* that the value calculated for the standard specification may have to be one class up on account of the group risk.

Southwest Delta

Standard Stretch Explanation specification

25-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

25-2 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

26-1 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

26-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

26-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

27-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

27-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

28-1 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

28-0 and 29- Based on stretches being joined. Regional advice and national calculation 10,000 1 are consistent

30-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent Customised work for Borssele and Hansweert is still being elaborated, which will lead to a 30-2 100,000* lower standard specification for this stretch and additional protection in two places, subject to legal safeguarding.

31-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

31-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

32-1 1000* Further research into damage relating to recent recreational development

32-2 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Accelerated research into what possibilities the series of consequences 32-3 1000* has to offer for the protection of companies governed by the Hazards of Major Accidents Decree.

32-4 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

34-1 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

34-2 1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

34-a-1 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Rivers

Stretch Standard Explanation specification

Waal

16-1 100,000 Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the value calculated

16-2 30,000 Due to group risks, the standard specification is one class up from the value calculated

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 38-1 30,000

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 40-1 30,000

30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 41-1

10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 41-2

10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 42-1

30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 43-4

30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 43-5

30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 43-6

30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 48-1

Neder-Rijn-Lek

43-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

43-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

43-3 30,000 Regional advice adopted. Standard specification one class up to ensure that the bifurcation point continues to function (transmission effects)

44-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

45-1 100,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

16-3 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

16-4 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

IJssel

47-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

48-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

48-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

49-1 300* Final proposal depends on the outcome of the study into the option of a category B-dyke at the Doesburg sluice/weir complex

49-2 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

50-1 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

50-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

51-1 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

52a1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

52-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

52-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

52-3 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

52-4 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

53-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

53-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

53-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

10-1 3,000* MIRT Study into smart combinations at the IJssel-Vecht delta

10-2 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

10-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

11-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

11-2 3000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Rivers

Stretch Standard Explanation specification

Dyked river Meuse

36-1 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

36-2 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

36-3 30,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

36-4 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

36-5 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

41-3 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

41-4 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

40-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

36-a-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

39-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

38-2 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

37-1 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 23-1 3,000

24-1 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

24-2 1,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

24-3 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

35-1 10,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

35-2 3,000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent

Rivers

Stretch Standard Explanation specification

Limburgse Maas

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 54-1 1,000

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 55-1 1,000

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 56-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 57-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 58-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 59-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 60-1 300

61-1 and 62- 300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 63-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 64-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 65-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 66-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 67-1

1000 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 68-1

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 68-2 300

Regional advice adopted following further social cost-benefit analysis 69-1 1000 (SCBA)

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 70-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 71-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 72-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 73-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 74-1 300

Regional advice adopted following further social cost-benefit analysis 75-1 300 (SCBA)

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 76-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 76-2 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 76a-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 77-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 78-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 79-1 300

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 80-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 81-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 82-1

83-1 and 84- Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 85-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 86-1 300

Regional advice adopted following further social cost-benefit analysis 87-1 300 (SCBA)

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 88-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 89-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 90-1 3,000

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 91-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 92-1 300

Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 93-1 1,000

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 94-1

300 Regional advice and national calculation are consistent 95-1

Appendix 1: maps with locations of dyke stretches (accompanying table with standard specifications)

Northern Netherlands

Key to map Dijktrajecten

Dijktrajectnummer Dyke stretch number trajectgrens Stretch boundary De kleuren markeren de afbakening van de The colors mark the demarcation of the trajecten stretches

Central Netherlands

Southwest Netherlands

Northern Limburg

Southern Limburg

Map of The Netherlands

Publication Information

Design CO3 Photography Tineke Dijkstra Rijkswaterstaat image database (p. 62) Cartography Posad Spatial Strategies Illustrations Atelier 1:1 Printed by Drukgoed

This is joint publication by

Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment Ministry of Economic Affairs

Postbus 20901 / 2500 EX Den Haag www.rijksoverheid.nl/ienm

December 2014