Emmy Bergsma
Are we prepared if the dikes overflow or break? The government says it plans to take action, but is that actually happening? Researcher Emmy Bergsma examined the government's policy on multi-layered safety for the Netherlands Court of Audit.
"Raising the dikes is a political choice; be honest about the consequences."
What are you researching?
I research water policy. In recent years, I have done this at the Netherlands Court of Audit. I contributed to a report on water safety. Traditionally, we build dikes in the Netherlands to protect ourselves from water, but the chance of a dike overflowing or breaking is growing due to climate change. The consequences could be severe. That’s why the government decided in 2009 to focus on measures beyond just dike reinforcement. This includes giving rivers more space, reducing damage to homes during a flood, providing emergency shelters, and ensuring that electricity or the internet remains functional at crucial places like hospitals. This approach is called 'multi-layered safety'.
How did you get here?
I started out as a social geographer and became interested in questions about the distribution of water. When it's dry, who gets the water? And when we protect ourselves from floods, how much risk are we taking, and who faces the greatest risk? I first explored the philosophical question: what is a fair distribution? But in practice, the key question is: who decides? That was the focus of my PhD research. Eventually, I ended up at the Netherlands Court of Audit, where I assessed national water (safety) policy.
What does your research look like?
In our report, we concluded that the national government continues to reinforce dikes and rarely takes measures behind the dikes. This is mainly because coastal or river protection must comply with various regulations. These rules were created with the idea that dikes should stop the water. As a result, measures that consider the consequences of a flood are difficult to incorporate into the plans.
It's not necessarily wrong to focus mainly on reinforcing dikes; that choice is up to politics. However, you must be honest about the long-term consequences: for example, houses along the dikes may need to be removed to make space, the landscape will change, and costs will rise. And if a dike overflows or breaks, the damage could be immense. As a society, we need to be prepared for that.
Why is your research important?
The report was received in different ways. Some colleagues in the water sector agreed with our conclusions, while others thought we were too critical of dike reinforcement. Our report shows that there are different ways to protect the Netherlands from flooding, beyond just the dike. I personally believe it's especially important that politicians carefully and honestly consider all the options. This is not happening enough at the moment. That's why we've discussed our findings with governments and research institutes. We also developed a game to help people experience the challenges of multi-layered safety. It works really well! The game sparks important conversations about this issue.
What do you want to achieve in 5 years?
I am now starting as a water policy advisor at the municipality of Soest. It feels like a logical step, getting even closer to the action. Municipalities decide where construction can take place and how much space is given to water. This often involves balancing the interests of different groups. After years of research, I would love to contribute to concrete solutions for water policy.
Would you like to read more about 'Beyond the Dike' or Emmy Bergsma's work?
