Project “Strengthening strategic delta planning
processes in Bangladesh, the Netherlands,
Vietnam and beyond“ (2014-2019)
Inception workshop, 18-20 May, Delft
PBL
BUET
Objectives of today
• Present and discuss the outline of the project,
and provide opportunity for comments and
suggestions.
• Explore links with other activities and projects,
how projects can strengthen each other and
initial ideas for collaboration.
The outcomes of today will provide input to the
project team discussions the following two days.
Programme
• Introduction project
• Case presentations Vietnam, Bangladesh, the
Netherlands
• Lunch
• Intermezzo: Use Design Charettes (Stijn Koole, B&S)
• Presentation first ideas research team (PhDs Shahnoor,
Hoang, and Myrthe and post-doc Chris)
• MDP Vietnam: research-policy interface (Jake Brunner,
IUCN VN)
• Wrap-up (key comments and recommendations and
next steps)
Project “Strengthening strategic delta planning
processes in Bangladesh, the Netherlands,
Vietnam and beyond“ (2014-2019)
PBL
BUET
Delta pressures and changes
• River deltas worldwide face many threats to water safety,
water and food security and sustainable development.
The Urbanising Deltas of the World
programme (UDW) of the Dutch Scientific
Organisation (NWO)
• to provide more effective and efficient responses to
increasing pressure and rapid changes in river deltas
worldwide through:
– Knowledge and research,
– Relevance for sustainable development (new tools, technologies,
perspectives),
– Capacity to innovate (design interventions, adapt policies and create
market opportunities).
Starting points of our project
• A sustainable development of urbanizing deltas, raises
conflicting interests amongst stakeholders.
• This needs to be accommodated in an integrated
development / planning process which is often technically
complex and has knowledge limitations.
• Agreeing on strategic choices is difficult and often leads to:
– Only partial or even non-cooperation among key stakeholders,
– Not efficient use of knowledge and tools,
– Outcomes that are far away from the planned ones,
and hampering of innovations.
– Etc
• A better understanding helps to prevent issues and conflicts
and helps achieve envisioned developments.
Key questions in our project
•
What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes over
longer periods of time? With a focus on three key aspects:



Stakeholder coalitions
Participatory planning tools
Innovative solutions
Opportunity
Threat
Stakeholder
coalitions
Motivation
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting
(framing the puzzle)
Time
Ability
Solutions
Tools
2. Strategic Delta Planning
(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
3. Implementation (incl.
adaption and transformation)
>10 yrs
Stakeholders coalitions dynamics
(the MOTA model of Ho Long Phi)
Key questions in our project
•
What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning processes over
longer periods of time? With a focus on three key elements:



•
Stakeholder coalitions
Participatory planning tools
Innovative solutions
Does a delta planning process enable consent among key
stakeholders over strategic priorities and fitting innovative
solutions, which is sufficiently stable to allow for implementation
and further adaptation through learning-by-doing?
Example: Innovations in flood management
in the Netherlands
Shift in thinking: from ‘fighting against floods’ to ‘coping & living
with floods’, e.g. Room for the river project
•
•
•
How are innovative solutions
created, introduced, changed, as
planning processes evolve?
How did interests and positions of
stakeholders groups facilitate or
hamper consent over such
solutions and implementation?
What was role of participatory
planning tools in facilitating
understanding and cooperation and
consent amongst stakeholders?
Example: Innovations in flood management
in the Netherlands
Shift in thinking: from ‘fighting against floods’ to ‘coping & living
with floods’, e.g. Room for the river project
•
•
•
How are innovative solutions
formed and change, as delta
planning processes evolve?
How did issues and differences
between stakeholders hamper
agreement on innovative
solutions and plan
implementation?
What was effect of approaches /
tools used to build cooperation
and agreement between
stakeholders?
Project objectives
• Enhance understanding of the dynamics of strategic delta
planning processes, using a view of delta planning as a longterm adaptive process in an open system.
• Strengthen participatory tools that support the development
of more stable consent among key players, enabling
agreements that more effectively translate into innovative
solutions.
• Enhance capacities of key stakeholders through participatory
action research in ongoing delta planning projects.
Inter-related activities (2014-2019)
Research
Societal
relevance
Capacity
building
Research
Societal
relevance
Capacity
building
•
•
•
•
Stakeholder coalitions (PhD-1)
Interactive approaches and tools (PhD-2)
Innovative solutions (PhD-3)
Integration and comparison (Post-doc)
• Cases in Netherlands, Bangladesh and
Vietnam, linked to ongoing planning
processes
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting
(framing the puzzle)
Time
PhD
Myrte
Vermoolen
PhD
Shahnoor Hassan
2. Strategic Delta Planning
(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
>10 yrs
PhD
Thi Minh
Hoang Vo
Post-doc
Chris Seijger
3. Implementation (incl.
adaption and transformation)
Research
Linked to Delta planning
programmes, like Mekong and
Bangladesh Mekong delta plan.
Societal
relevance
Capacity
building
• A diagnostic tool is introduced for a rapid assessment of
existing stakeholder coalitions coupled with process guidance
for strategic planning processes, incl. enriched MOTA tool.
• Project partners Deltares, PBL, B&S have improved insights to
tailor approaches and tools to their clients.
• Guidance on arrangements that can help craft, create or bring
in “innovative” solutions.
Participatory planning tools to support
more stable agreement among key players
Including:
• Participatory Design Studios / Charretes (Bosch and
Slabbers)
• TouchTable (Deltares)
• Delta Envisioning Support System – DENVIS (PBL)
• Locally used / developed tools and approaches
Research
Societal
relevance
Capacity
building
• Local stakeholders participate in project events.
• PhDs continue to work on related topics in the region
afterwards.
• The yearly Delta planning training workshops as a platform for
sharing and presenting and discussing project insights.
• Research material is incorporated in local MSc university
curriculum.
Consortium and partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UNESCO-IHE
Technical University Delft (TUD)
Wageningen University (WU)
Center for Environmental and Geographic Information Services
(CEGIS)
IUCN Bangladesh and Vietnam Country Offices
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET)
Centre of Water Management and Climate Change of Vietnam
National University (VNU-WACC)
Bosch and Slabbers Landscape Architects
Deltares
PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Were are we now?
• Project started in September 2014
• Post-doc and 3 PhDs recruited, working on proposals, and
regularly meeting. Post-doc Chris leading a first overview
paper of the project’s concept.
• Aspects to be discussed and agreed upon during Inception:
– Integration PhDs
– Selection of their case study areas; cross case comparison
– Involvement consortium partners (tools, capacity building, outreach)
– Link to planning practice
– Link to other (UDW) projects
– Planning, organisation, communication, resources
Thank you
w.douven@unesco-ihe.org
Monday morning : Delta case studies
• Case illustrations of strategic delta planning from Bangladesh,
The Netherlands, and Vietnam
• Key features of delta, planning processes, elements of
framework, e.g. by means of covering framework elements
for a particular solution as discussed in a delta plan.
• Discussion: 1) link to project objectives, project framework
(does research contribute to better understanding), 2)
similarities / differences cases, cross-delta learning.
Tuesday morning : Integration /
comparison
Discussion of a proposal for:
• Integration PhDs; their contribution to framework; what PhDs
can gain from framework? Practical organisation.
• Cross-delta comparison; what can we achieve given fact that
deltas are quite different in various aspects?
Tuesday morning : Research issues
Case studies:
• Purpose and criteria of case studies, selection of case studies
• Organisation of case studies, which PhD what case study, etc..
Criteria selection case studies, e.g.:
• Objectives of project and conceptual framework should apply
• The importance of polder characteristics, as an earlier technical
innovation that shapes current delta management practices and
debates.
• Part of a larger strategic delta planning process
• Data availability
• Feasible in terms of organisation and resources
• …..
Wednesday morning: Research, tools, link
to planning, communication
1. Participatory planning tools
(choice planning tools, link to PhD Shahnoor, contribution / ToR PBL,
Deltares, B&S, ..; 2015-2016 planning)
2. Linking to local planning processes
(how to best link to ongoing processes? Learning from ? Contributing
to?; 2015-2016 planning)
3. Communication strategy
(check, update and local detailing of communication strategy; 20152016 planning)
Discussions in smaller groups. Use proposal as basis, plus available
resources (budget). Plus drafting of activity plans 2015-2016.
Plenary feed-back.
Activities (proposal)
Act. 1
Act. 2
Act. 3-6
Act. 7
Act. 8-11
Act. 12-15
Project preparation, coordination and monitoring
Communication and outreach
PhD 1-3, Post-doc
Testing of participatory planning tools
Development relevance (recommendations new
tools, enhanced tools, innovations, wider deltas)
Capacity development (stakeholder involvement,
PhDs, professional training delta planning, MSc
curriculum)
Responsibilities (proposal)
All communication (Act. 2), capacity building (Act. 12-15), and link to local planning
processes.
Consortium
Key responsibilities
Activity nr.
UNESCO-IHE
Project lead, guidance PhD-2, Postdoc
Act. 1, 4 and
6
TUD , WUR
(PhD-1), WUR (PhD-3)
Act. 3, 5
WACC
Co-supervising PhD-3 and support field work other researchers,
MOTA workshop, tools workshops, support guidelines
development
Act. 5, 7, 811, 12-15
BUET
Co-supervising PhD-2 and support field work other researchers
Act. 4, 12-15
CEGIS
CEGIS co-supervise PhDs, MOTA workshop, support tools
workshops, support guidelines development
Act. 7, 8-11,
12-15
IUCN BGD
MOTA workshop , local outreach and communication
Act. 2, 8-11
IUCN VN
Local outreach and communication
Act. 2
Deltares, PBL
Tool workshop, support guidelines development, co-supervising
PhD’s
Act. 1-3, 7, 811
B&S
Tool workshop, support guidelines development
Act. 7, 8-11
Wednesday afternoon: Project
activities 2015
• Planning 2015 activities based on outcomes morning
• Incl. joint activities, incl. UDW / other
Wednesday afternoon:
Project management
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consortium, role of partners
Organisation, decision-making
Internal communication
External communication (communication strategy)
Publication strategy
Reporting (technical and financial)
Not used slides
Three stages in a (delta) planning process
1. Framing of problems and solutions, and agenda-setting by
various stakeholders, experts and policymakers.
2. Cooperation and coming to common understanding as part
of a strategic delta plan followed by a political decision.
3. Detailed design and implementation.
Strategic delta planning does not take place in a vacuum. Delta
planning needs to fit within a longer history of past planning
efforts, societal structures and existing policy environments if it
wants to secure a successful implementation throughout its
longer-term planning horizon. Therefore, this project looks at the
larger picture to ensure a better connection between strategic
delta planning activities and their societal and technological
environment.
Project approach (2)
• Strong links with practice (e.g. ongoing delta planning
processes) to ensure the empirical grounding of research,
uptake of results and contributions to policy practice.
• Involvement of private sector, semi-public organisations who
have an interest in further testing and improving tools they
offer and the use of their tools (Deltares, PBL, Bosch and
Slabbers).
• Capacity building through the involvement of stakeholders in
the project activities, as well as through international
networks and educational programmes, e.g. NICHE.
Success of a strategic delta planning
process
• The success of strategic delta planning should not be
measured in terms of any specific solution or plan, but in the
degree of transformation of stakeholder coalitions and
perceptions over time.
• Does a delta planning process enable consent among key
stakeholders over strategic priorities and fitting innovative
solutions, which is sufficiently stable to allow for
implementation and further adaptation through learning-bydoing?
The issue: the need for strategic delta planning
• A sustainable development of urbanizing deltas,
raises conflicting interests amongst stakeholders.
• This needs to be accommodated in an integrated
development / planning process often
characterized by technical complexity and
knowledge limitations.
• In many deltas, strategic planning processes have
started as traditional planning can not cope with
the development challenge of urbanizing deltas.
The complication: agree on strategic choices in strategic planning
processes is difficult
• Agreeing on strategic choices is difficult and
often leads to:
– Only partial or even non-cooperation among key
stakeholders
– Not efficient use of tools and expert knowledge
– Outcomes that are far away from the planned ones
– Etc..
Innovative solutions
coalitions
• A better understanding
of the planningActor
process
helps to prevent issues and conflicts and help
achieve envisioned developments.
Participatory tools
The main question:
What are the dynamics of strategic delta planning
processes over longer periods of time, and what is
the role therin of stakeholder coalitions, innovative
solutions and participatory planning tools and
approaches?
This will be analysed for strategic planning processes
in:
Bangladesh
the Mekong Delta
Dutch South-West delta
the
Opportunity
Threat
PhD-1
Stakeholder
coalitions
Motivation
1. Advocacy and agenda-setting
(framing the puzzle)
Time
Ability
Solutions
PhD-3
2. Strategic Delta Planning
(fitting/fixing the puzzle)
>10 yrs
PhD-2
Post-doc
Integration
and cross-case
analysis
3. Implementation (incl.
adaption and transformation)
Returning to the title of the presentation: socially robust
solutions in delta regions
In planning processes, social robust solutions
could ideally refer to:
-solutions that are accepted by all actors
involved in planning processes
Tentative
thoughts on
-although solutions might change (e.g. costs,
socially
robust
outlook, multifunctionality), acceptance solutions
of the
solution is maintained by the involved actors.
Tentative thoughts on socially robust solutions in strategic delta
planning processes (1/2)
• Actor coalitions can contribute to socially robust solutions when:
– A professional facilitator can move within and between actor coalitions.
Social robustness improves since he/she mediates conflicts, ‘translates’
unclarities, ensures a sound connection with decision-makers, funders, legal
experts.
– Actors share responsibilties for strategic planning outcomes since that
creates a setting wherein socially robust solutions can be developed
– Note: social robustness is relative, and limited to the actors involved
• Innovative solutions can contribute to socially robust solutions when:
– They are developed interactively between researchers, policy makers and
stakeholders since that could broaden the support for the solutions
– Time is budgeted to address criticism and concerns of participating actors.
Tentative thoughts on socially robust solutions in strategic delta
planning processes (2/2)
Participatory tools can contribute to socially
robust solutions when:
– They make knowledge on delta systems and
proposed solutions easy understandible to all
actors involved
– They facilitate changes in proposed solutions
without loosing consent.
Socially robust solutions in strategic delta planning processes:
key relations between actors, innovative solutions and participatory
tools.
Participatory
tools
Innovative
solutions
Actor relations
influence use of
tools
Support
consensus,
trust
Actor coalitions