Increasingly Dutch water authorities are considering to make their public (water) assets available for societal value creation. This development is initiated by a growing demand for multi-functionality due to developments such as intertwining sectors and organizations, and a growing scarcity of space and budgets (Van STokkum & Smiths, 2005). An interesting example of this are the so-called integrated Water and Energy Works (or Energy Dikes). Dams or dikes are used by a private actor for the production of (tidal or blue) energy.
Such multifunctional public water works come along with a couple of dilemmas. Public authorities, who are solely responsible for water management and flood protection, have to make arrangements with private actors who have commercial ambitions and interests in energy production. This is difficult because public asset managers in the water domain normally use a quite restrictive, monofunctional and complexity-reducing asset management strategy (Roovers & Van Buuren, submitted). Moreover the institutional context in the Netherlands in which they operate supports such a style. This context is based on mono-functional dominance of water policies, developed throughout centuries of dealing with water. Thus, engaging with private actors in a joint venture to develop multifunctional assets in the Netherlands, meets various institutional barriers and necessitates adaptation of the ‘common’ asset management strategy (Van Buuren et al. 2015; Van Herk et al 2012).
In this paper we analyse four attempts to realize integrated Water & Energy Works in the Netherlands, within the context of a dominant restrictive, monofunctional and complexity-reducing institutional context. These cases have to do with using dams for the production of sustainable energy (tidal energy by using some of the world-famous Dutch Delta Works: the Afsluitdijk, the Brouwersdam and the Oosterschelde Dam, and the so-called Flakkeese Sluice). We in particular analyse which asset management strategy is used in these four cases and its effectiveness: how does this strategy evolve, to what extent does this strategy support private initiatives to come to integrated water works and to what extent does this ultimately result in public-private value creation through a broadened, multifunctional use of public water works?
References
van Herk, S., Rijke, J., Zevenbergen, C., & Ashley, R. (2012, November). Governance of integrated flood risk management to deliver large scale investment programmes: delivery focused social learning in the Netherlands. In Floodrisk 2012—2nd European Conference on flood risk management, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
van Stokkom, H. T., Smits, A. J., & Leuven, R. S. (2005). Flood defense in the Netherlands: a new era, a new approach. Water international, 30(1), 76-87.
Van Buuren, M.W. & G.Roovers (2015) Stijlen en condities voor het creëren van meerwaarde bij publiek asset management. Rooilijn (in Dutch).
Roovers, G. & M.W. van Buuren (submitted) Stakeholder management in strategic, long term planning of infrastructure. Infrastructure Complexity.
