Deciding for Tomorrow, Today : What Makes Governmental Decisions About Water Infrastructure Forward Looking?
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Deciding for tomorrow, today What makes governmental decisions about water infrastructure forward looking? Wieke D. Pot Propositions belonging to the thesis, entitled Deciding for tomorrow, today What makes governmental decisions about water infrastructure forward looking? 1. Governing long-term problems means acting responsively in a responsible way. (this thesis) 2. Developing decision support tools is not sufficient for realizing forward-looking decisions. (this thesis) 3. Creating a strict division between agriculture and nature in the Netherlands cannot solve the nitrogen crisis. 4. Focusing on best value in asset management does not make government investments in infrastructure future-proof. 5. The university tenure track system delivers better social scientists when the system allows scientists to work up to 50% of their time outside of academia 6. People become less forward looking once they start to raise small children. Wieke D. Pot Wageningen, 19 March 2020 Deciding for tomorrow, today What makes governmental decisions about water infrastructure forward looking? Thesis committee Promotors Prof. Dr A. Dewulf Thesis Personal chair, Public Administration and Policy Group Wageningen University & Research submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University Prof. Dr C.J.A.M. Termeer by the authority of the Rector Magnificus, Professor of Public Administration and Policy Prof. Dr A.P.J. Mol, Wageningen University & Research in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Academic Board Co-promotor to be defended in public Dr G.R. Biesbroek on Friday 9 October 2020 Associate professor, Public Administration and Policy Group at 11 a.m. in the Aula. Wageningen University & Research Other members Prof. Dr S.R. Bush, Wageningen University & Research Prof. Dr V.A.W.J. Marchau, Radboud University Nijmegen Prof. Dr P. ‘t Hart, University of Utrecht Prof. Dr J. Newig, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Germany This research was conducted under the auspices of the Wageningen School of Social Sciences. To you, my love Wieke D. Pot Deciding for tomorrow, today. What makes governmental decisions about water infrastructure forward looking?, 286 pages. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands (2020) With references, with summary in English ISBN: 978-94-6395-391-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18174/520563 Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction 11 Chapter 2 What makes long-term investment decisions 29 forward looking: A framework applied to the case of Amsterdam’s new sea lock Chapter 3 What makes decisions about urban water 59 infrastructure forward looking? A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of investment decisions in 40 Dutch municipalities Chapter 4 Anticipating the future in urban water management: 85 An assessment of municipal investment decisions Chapter 5 The governance challenge of implementing 105 long-term sustainability objectives with present-day investment decisions Chapter 6 Governing long-term policy problems: Dilemmas and strategies 127 at a Dutch water authority Chapter 7 Conclusions and discussion 153 References 191 Supplementary materials 209 Summary 251 Samenvatting 261 About the author 273 Dankwoord (acknowledgments) 279 Education certificate graduate school 283 List of tables List of figures Table 1.1 Overview of research methods 25 Figure 1.1 Relationship between research questions (RQs) 21 Table 1.2 Overview of dissertation 27 Figure 2.1 Multiple stream model of decision making 34 Table 2.1 Criteria for forward-looking investment decisions 36 Figure 3.1 Sampled municipalities and their location in the Netherlands 66 Table 2.2 Analysis of case events and decisions about IJmuiden sea lock 42 Figure 4.1 Calculated average of the forward-looking problem definition, 93 Table 2.3 Evaluation of crucial investment decisions about IJmuiden sea 46 solution, and justification per municipal sewerage and drainage lock based on forward-looking criteria plan (MDP) Table 2.4 Causal mechanisms of forward-looking decisions 49 Figure 5.1 Relationship between mechanisms and their components, 111 Table 3.1 Measurement, operationalization, and calibration of the 68 conditions, context, and outcome conditions Figure 5.2 Causal mechanism for disconnecting sustainability objectives: 119 Table 3.2 Truth table 73 budget compliance Table 3.3 Analysis of necessary conditions for forward-looking investment 75 Figure 5.3 Causal mechanism for disconnecting sustainability objectives: 120 decisions goal satisfaction Table 3.4 Configurations that enable municipalities to make forward- 77 Figure 5.4 Causal mechanism for disconnecting sustainability objectives: 121 looking investment decisions risk avoidance Table 4.1 Assessment of current municipal sewerage and drainage plans 95 Figure 5.5 Overview of mechanisms 122 based on forward-looking criteria Figure 6.1 Framework to study dilemmas related to long-term policy 132 Table 4.2 Presence of forward-looking characteristics in municipal 97 problems sewerage and drainage plans Figure 6.2 Data collection and analysis process 135 Table 5.1 Summary of empirical narrative and crucial decisions 115 Figure 6.3 Dilemma of object versus objective orientation to address 144 Table 6.1 Overview of ethnographic data 134 long-term problems Table 6.2 Overview of dilemmas 139 Figure 6.4 Dilemma of using responsiveness versus stability towards 145 Table 6.3 Presence of strategies and dilemmas and number of quotations 143 long-term problems in which strategy was used Figure 6.5 Dilemma of reactive versus proactive stance towards the 147 Table 7.1 Different ways to measure the forward-lookingness of investment 156 external environment decisions Figure 7.1 Overview of conditions and processes behind forward-looking 175 Table 7.2 Conditions per stream 162 decisions Table 7.3 Overview of mechanisms and strategies shaping forward-looking 166 Figure 7.2 Causal explanations for forward-looking decisions about water 177 decisions infrastructure Table 7.4 Overview of recommendations for practice 189 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 The governance challenge of investing in end-of-lifetime water infrastructure The seven combinations of locks and weirs on the Dutch Meuse river were built between 1918 and 1929 to make the river navigable and enable vessels to transport CHAPTER coal to the western parts of the country. In the past century, the number and size of vessels using the waterway have expanded and the nature of goods transported has 1 similarly changed. This is impacting the functioning of the current locks and weirs. The locks and weirs are now approaching their end-of-lifetime, and this requires the Dutch government to make long-term investment decisions. Given the design lifetime of 100 years for locks and weirs, it is uncertain what type of infrastructure will be needed for the next century. A key question is whether the Meuse river and its locks and weirs can and will maintain their current functionalities, or whether these functionalities should change in response to, amongst other issues, climate change (probably increasing the frequency and intensity of both flooding and low river flows; see van Vliet & Zwolsman, 2008; Wind et al., 1999), economic change (impacting the type of goods transported), technological change (leading to, for example, larger vessels), and commitments by the Dutch government to reduce CO₂ emissions in response to national and international climate change agreements (leading to questions of whether the weirs could also be used to generate sustainable power) (Welberg et al., 2015). Considerations about these uncertain developments led the national water authority to consult a large number of parties in a co-creation process in 2015.1 This process resulted in a diverse range of possible solutions for the locks and weirs as well as for changing the functionalities of the Meuse river, some of which are currently being further explored by the national water authority before it proposes specific investment decisions to the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water. Another example of a long-term investment decision on water infrastructure that is likely to have immense consequences concerns the Maeslant storm surge barrier. This storm surge barrier is one of the Dutch Delta Works situated close to Rotterdam harbour. Recent insights about accelerated sea level rise (Pörtner et al., 2019) have caused the relevant authorities to realize that the storm surge barrier probably needs to be replaced 10 to 20 years earlier than its design lifetime (Haasnoot et al., 2018). It is currently expected that the decision process will start around 2030. 1 For more information, see: https://debouwcampus.nl/vraagstukken/vervangingsopgave-grip-op-de-maas 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Furthermore, changing circumstances force consideration of different infrastruc- as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). tural solutions. An open storm surge barrier similar to the current Maeslant storm Implementing these agreements requires national and local governments to exploit surge barrier will probably no longer be able to protect the Netherlands against investments in end-of-lifetime infrastructure to achieve specific long-term objectives floods and sea level rise in the future. Alternatives such as a sea lock have already (Hueskes et al., 2017; Pinz et al., 2018). been proposed and explored2 but will have a major impact on Rotterdam harbour’s economic prospects (Haasnoot, Diermanse, Kwadijk, De Winter, & Winter, 2019).