In densely populated deltas, nature-inclusive solutions to water and climate challenges are often preferred over traditional engineering solutions. They are not only more adaptive with climate change, they also tend to deliver co-benefits or synergies (e.g. improving biodiversity, carbon capture and recreation). Despite that the widespread recognition of this integrative potential, the implementation of integrative solutions (i.e. solutions that contribute to solving multiple societal challenges at the same time) is not the status quo due to the persistence of siloed approaches (Warbroek et al, 2023).
Previous research into institutional factors that hinder or support the implementation of integrative solutions in the Netherlands has shown that three most hindering institutional factors are: diverging perceptions of desired outcomes (scope rule), exclusion of important actors from decision-making (position rule), and imbalances in the sharing of costs and benefits (payoff rule) (Bakhanova et al, 2025). As such, we assert that fulfilment of integrative potential requires actors to agree upon on integrative scope, invite actors that are relevant for achieving integration and adequate insight into and agreed upon arrangement about how costs and benefits are distributed.
This research aims to better understand how stakeholders are able to get grip on these hindering institutional factors. In the Netherlands, good example projects in which stakeholders were able to fully exploit integrative potential are scarce. Most of the eight icon projects that were selected by the water domain of the Dutch Collective Nature-inclusive (Collectief Natuurinclusief) seem to be noticeable exceptions. In projects like klimaatbuffer (PWN) or green-blue corridors (Stichtse Rijnlanden), nature-inclusive solutions to water and climate challenges seem quite successful at exploiting integrative potential.
This MSc research will evaluate agreed upon or implemented nature-inclusive water projects from an institutional perspective. Cases will be selected form the eight above-mentioned icon projects, if needed complemented by other projects. The focus will be on institutions, which we perceive as the rules that guide the actions and interactions of actors (see relevant publications below). In doing so, the research aims to to deliver action perspectives for actors who seeks to exploit integrative potential but do not know how. By comparing projects that are initiated and implemented in the same overall context but in diverse specific contexts, we aim to shed light on what works in which context. This study will specifically benefit from results of the RETSI project (see final report). Theoretically, it will dive deeper into the most relevant institutional factors. Qualitative data are expected to be collected and analysed using methods such as document analysis and semi-structured interviews, possibly complemented with focus groups.
References
- Warbroek, B., Holmatov, B., Vinke-de Kruijf, J., Arentsen, M., Shakeri, M., de Boer, C., ... & Dorée, A. (2022). From sectoral to integrative action situations: an institutional perspective on the energy transition implementation in the Netherlands. Sustainability Science. 18, 97–114. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11625-022-01272-2
- Bakhanova, E., Vinke-de Kruijf, J., Wöhler, L., Warbroek, B., & Arentsen, M. (2025). Integrative Approaches to Interconnected Environmental Challenges: How Institutional Factors Influence Cross-Sector Integration in Dutch Rural Areas. Environmental management, 1-14.
- Vinke-de Kruijf, J., & Oude Wesselink, C. (Eds.) (2022). Eindrapport Project “Regional Energy Transition as Systemic Integration”. University of Twente. https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/286390263/RETSI_Eindrapport_DEF_L.pdf
- Newsitems about RETSI project: https://www.nieuweenergieoverijssel.nl/tags/?tags%5B0%5D=241
- Collectief Natuurinclusief (waterdomein): https://collectiefnatuurinclusief.nl/water (scroll down for icoonprojecten). See also: https://www.pwn.nl/klimaatbuffer-ijsselmeer