Search

Sinds jaar en dag tracht de omgevingswetgever een balans te vinden tussen flexibiliteit en bundeling bij de aanvraag van de omgevingsvergunning. Met de komst van de Omgevingswet komt de nadruk meer te liggen op flexibiliteit bij het aanvraagproces van de omgevingsvergunning. De aanvrager krijgt – mede door het loslaten van het concept van onlosmakelijke samenhang – meer vrijheid om het aanvraagproces van de vergunningen zelf vorm te geven. Er dient kritisch naar deze ontwikkeling te worden gekeken. Wordt de positie van de aanvrager van de omgevingsvergunning beter door het bieden van meer vrijheid bij de aanvraag van de vereiste omgevingsvergunning(en)? Deze vraag staat centraal in deze bijdrage.

Climate adaptation and water management, in particular flood risk management (FRM), in the Netherlands are strongly integrated policy domains. The observed and expected effects of climate change in the Netherlands will create a variety of pressures, particularly in relation to sea-level rise, increasing river discharges and changing precipitation patterns. Effective FRM is therefore stressed as a critical precondition for any future development and living in the Netherlands, both on the short and longer term. Partly influenced by the adoption of the European Floods Directive in 2007, the urgent need for climate adaptation is driving major developments in Dutch FRM, the most striking of which is the diversification and a partial shift in flood risk management strategies (FRMSs). This is best reflected in the adoption of the Dutch Delta Program as a basis for the development of long-term strategies for both flood and drought risk management, which inter alia initiated the development of the policy concept of ‘multi-layered safety’ and the adoption of a risk-based approach under the development of Dutch FRM. Whereas the focus in the Netherlands until recently was mainly and successfully on minimizing the probability of flooding (‘the fight against water’) and preparedness in case of a flood threat, in the course of time other strategies aimed at mitigating the effects of potential floods have gained a more prominent position (‘living with water’). As a result, FRM measures increasingly demand more space and more diverse actors became involved in Dutch FRM. This has increased complexity and fragmentation in the responsibilities for Dutch FRM, which resulted in an increasing need for communication, coordination and collaboration between different public and private actors in order to secure the effectiveness of FRM. These developments form the backdrop to this article, in which we analyse this broadened Dutch system of FRM and flood risk regulation. After having presented relevant facts and figures about flood risks in the Netherlands in Section 2, we describe the flood risk management strategies (FRMSs) stemming from the Floods Directive and the way in which these have been implemented in the Dutch FRM system in section 3. In Section 4, we discuss current observed developments and shifts in strategies, as well as relevant challenges these have brought about. In a synthesizing Section 5, the paper ends with a discussion of its findings. One of our key conclusions is that the development of innovative approaches in Dutch FRM is promising, but requires increased attention for challenges regarding coordination and cooperation, public participation and the availability of legal instruments to make spatial claims on privately owned land.

Conspicuous interdisciplinary effort has been spent on addressing the consequences of climate change in a forward-looking way. The concept of solution space is a recent contribution to help decision-makers identify feasible and effective adaptation solutions and to provide guidance on when they should be implemented and by whom. Although the current conceptualization of solution space already considers multiple disciplines, it remains dominated by biophysical ones and has not yet fully integrated legal and governance dimensions. This article first reflects on the current solution space framework through the lenses of law and governance and then proposes approaches to enrich legal and governance dimensions in the solution space concept. We argue that the legal and governance dimensions of the current concept of solution space can be improved by taking into account four aspects: 1) understanding the institutional and legal systems in a context-specific way; 2) embracing the dynamics and reflexivity of law and governance in the episteme of path dependency; 3) applying more diverse analytical methods (qualitative, qualitative/ quantitative, value-oriented) and/or assessments on a case-by-case basis; and 4) adding a normative perspective that includes the principles of legitimacy, transparency, accountability, equity, and distributive justice to measure the appropriateness of a certain adaptation strategy. The article concludes with suggestions for future research on how to implement the enriched solution space concept.

This study uses a diagnostic and multidisciplinary water governance assessment framework to examine the main factors influencing water cooperation on the shared Mountain Aquifer between Israel and Palestine. It finds that effective cooperation between Israel and Palestine is unlikely in the foreseeable future if both parties persist with the business-as-usual approach. What constrains the two parties from achieving consensual agreement are political tensions, the constraints of current technology, the different perceptions of the value of the shared water, the mistrust between the two parties, the lack of external enforcement mechanisms, and the impacts of the domestic political environment.

Sound governance is needed to address water issues, but soundness is a contested concept that should be further specified in societal debates. These debates can benefit from interdisciplinary knowledge. The 10 Building Blocks Approach, a tool developed to generate such knowledge, has been widely applied in research and teaching. In this paper, we draw on the literature and reflect on the experiences of using this approach by elucidating the strengths and weaknesses identified during its applications. Based on our reflections, we propose a revised version of the approach.

The profitability of the French agricultural sector has fallen over the last two decades, leading to the suggestion of a &ldquo, rupture in technical progress&rdquo, Additionally, the intellectual property regime in force has contributed to the erosion of the cultivated biodiversity, limiting plant resiliency to climate change and other hazards. In the face of these challenges, agroecological farming practices are a viable alternative. This paper investigates the positive and negative aspects associated with the development of alternative seed procurement networks in France. The findings indicate that peasant seed networks can effectively contribute to overcoming many of the structural blockages with which French agriculture is confronted, but that yield concerns, higher information and supervisory costs, as well as the unfavourable legislative context, constitute key challenges to their development. However, these could be partially or totally eliminated if adequate policies are implemented. In this regard, the recommendations are to: (i) strengthen the dialogue with farmers in the shaping of policies related to the use of plant genetic resources, (ii) abrogate the &ldquo, obligatory voluntary contribution&rdquo, on farm-saved seeds, (iii) diversify the collection of Centres for Biological Resources, increase their number, and democratize their access, (iv) harmonize the French and European regime on intellectual property, and (v) encourage participatory research.