This is a map of the Netherlands indicating field levels as compared to the average sea level. Everything blue or bluish is below sea level, yet some of the bigger cities were built there, thanks to the polders.
Would you like to know how high above or how deep below sea level you live in the Netherlands? Find out for yourself. Go tohttp://www.ahn.nl/postcodetool and type your postal code in the box. For the TU building that would be 2628CJ. The average height in this postal code area is -0.9 m, that is 0.9 m below N.A.P (N.A.P. more or less equals the average sea level)
You may think of the Netherlands as a tiny little country, but it would have been much smaller without dikes and polders; the Dutch have been 'creating' the Netherlands for ages.
A polder is created by separating lower land (e.g. a lake or part of a river bed) from the surrounding higher land by means of a dike and pumping the water to the other side of the dike. In this way the water level in the polder can be controlled. This water management relies on a network of ditches and drainage canals, which must be maintained by the inhabitants, that is why all the farmers must inspect and maintain the ditches bordering their land twice a year. Only if everybody does this the system works, that is why from an early stage the farmers in the polders were united in water boards, which are said to be the earliest democratic institutions in the Netherlands. These water boards still exist to this day and have become seperate legal entities with their own elections and taxes. They are the competent authorities who issue permits with respect to ground water usage, sewage systems and emissions into the waterways. It is the water boards who decide on the water levels within the polders. The system works so well that we even have water boards in the higher parts of the country where there are no polders.
Although polders are not unique to be the Netherlands, they tend to be associated with our country. So much so that the Dutch version of consensus politics became internationally known as the Polder Model. In recent years polder has become a prefix meaning the Dutch (consensus) variety of, resulting in expressions such as poldermoskee (polder mosque) and polderimam (imam educated in the Netherlands). In the Dutch language the word has been turned into a verb polderen, meaning discussing (or for some; endlessly discussing) a subject with the intention of coming to an agreement which is acceptable to all parties.
How is it that as early as the middle ages the polder system with its water boards worked and that it still works? For an answer I turn to 'Á General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems' (2009) by Elinor Ostrom, in which she states that the users of a resource invest time and energy to avert a 'tragedy of the commons' when the expected benefits of managing a resource exceed the perceived costs of investing in better rules and norms for most users and their leaders.
The polders could only be built and maintained by joint effort, even if some invested more than others. Once the polder was in place all the dikes and ditches needed continuous maintenance. Your neigbour's ditch was essential to the water level in your land and vice versa. Just like in the SES described by Ostrom all profit from the individual's investment, but, unlike these, in the polder model the first to suffer in case you do not pull your weight is yourself. You will drown you own land first, and your neighbour's next. There is no reason for the individual to lean back and let the others do the work. On the other hand, if you neighbour is unable to maintain his ditch properly, for whatever reason, it is in your own interest to help. You do not only share in his benefit, but also in his loss, because the water levels cannot be managed properly. In addition to that there is a joint interest in the dike. One weak point in the dike can flood the entire polder, which is everyone's immediate loss. The same holds if the windmill breaks down. The common interest is also each individual's interest. The dike is too big for the individual to maintain, so a joint effort is indispensable. As each individual's part is of importance to all, this gives him some individual power, on the other hand each individual depends on the others. Unlike the classic case of the tragedy of the commons, there is no profit for the individual which will harm the community.The farmers in one polder are like siamese twins, they have no choice but to co-operate.
As a result the polders are a mix of private and public goods. The land is privately owned, but the water level, which is indispensible for the land to be inhabitable, is a public good.
Elinor Ostrom defines 10 variables which determine the perceived benefits and costs of self organization, which in turn determines whether self organization is going to take place. I shall apply these variables to the development and sustainability of the water boards.
size of the resource system. When polders were first made, long before the age of industrialization, they were relatively small, yet too big for individual farmers. They were small enough for each participant to be important, yet big enough to require organization. The dikes were manmade, yet 'natural' boundaries to the entities. In later ages the smaller polders were joined together to bigger ones and so were the water boards. Nowadays there are only 25 water boards left. This is possible only because they have been professionalized and formalized in legislation (Waterschapswet 1992). The farmers still have to maintain the ditches bordering their land and these are inspected by the water board twice a year. The inhabitants have to pay taxes, so that the water board can take care of water levels and the sewage treatment plants. There are elections for the water boards, but most people do not vote. For the non-farmers the water board has become a public service. One has to pay for it and it takes care of things. This allows for much bigger organizations.
productivity of the system. The growing population in the middle ages required more land. This was found by turning inhabitable land into agricultural land. This new land was very productive and could remain so with proper management. Uniting the smaller polders to bigger ones increased the efficientcy, as fewer kilometers of dike were required per hectare. Having the water board as a professional organization that was paid by the citizens who had neither the knowledge nor the equipment to do what is necessary was a further efficiency step up, necessary when cities were built in the polders.
predictability of system dyamics. The polder system was reasonably predictive as water levels rose and fell with the tides and the seasons. When the average water level on the outside of the dike went up, a higher dike was made. However, there were a few cases when nature surprised the Dutch. The latest big one was in 1953, when a combination of high tide and a heavy storm flooded large parts of the Netherlands. Some 1800 people were killed, but the system did not falter. This flood paved the way for the Delta Works. The polders were restored and maintained, but on top of that a national plan was made to reduce potential future flood damage.
resource unit mobility. Unlike many other resources, land is definitely immobile. This increases the chances of self organization to the maximum. The alternative is moving elsewhere in search of land. This was also widely practised. Especially second half of the 20th century a great many people emigrated.
number of users. Polders were initially made for small groups of users, but the numbers increased with the years. The growing numbers meant that the cost of organization rose, but the cost per individual fell. For many citizens the water board is just another tax to pay now. The service they get in return is invisible because it works. Yet, as soon as there is even a minor chance that a dike might give way, camera teams from all over the world flood in.
leadership. Creation of the odlest polders required lots of manual labour and could not be accomplished without cooperation. The much bigger polders in the later centuries required huge financiel investments which would take years to bring profits. This meant that they required knowledge, investments and leadership, either natural or hierarchical. This did not mean that everything went smoothly all the time. For those of you who read Dutch this is illustrated by the following excerpt from Oren van Steen, which describes the different interestst that different parties in the Aarlanderveen polder area had and how they came to an agreement.
norms/social capital. The first polders were small scale in a society was was not very dynamic, built by groups of people who knew each other very well and might be related by family ties. They knew what to expect from each other. In later years outsiders also stept in, which may have complicated matters. The excerpts from 'Oren van Steen' are an illustration of the fact that even in the water boards (and between water boards) there was a tension between public interest and private interests.
Nowadays the water boards system is embedded in legislation which means there is no excaping from your duties. Even the solidarity principle has been formalized; if you cannot afford to pay the municipal taxes you can apply for tax freedom (that is to say; it is the case where I live)
importance of the resource to users. Farmers do realize what the water board does, because a rise or fall in water level immediately influences their crops. Companies do because they have to obtain permits from the water boards. Civilians, however, hardly ever think of the fact that without proper water management their houses would be flooded. They simply take dry feet for granted. Does that mean that this resouce is not important? On the contrary, as soon as their floors get wet people feel that they have been treated wrongly, let alone if their polder is to be ontpolderd, which means that it is flooded again so as to create room for nature. The debates about the ontpoldering of the Hedwigepolder on the Belgian border show how important the resource is to the users. It also shows that the water board is no longer the 'natural' way for people to organize themselves. The opposition of the users against the ontpoldering has been organized via political parties and pressure groups, rather than the water board, which had its own way of defending their interests..
This brings us to the tenth variable mentioned by Elinor Ostrom, the collective choice rules. In the early water boards people knew each other and enforcement of the rules was easy. One could simply see what the others were doing every day. Nowadays both rules and enforcement have been formalized and the water boards have become much bigger. Although the inhabitants can vote for the water board their real influence is limited and they do not feel they 'are' the water board. It has simply become another type of government.
If we describe the social-ecological system of polders and water boards in the way Elinor Ostrom analyses SESs there has been a shift between the middle ages and now. The resource unit is still the water level but the resource system is not only the polder but increasingly also the water board area. Now that decisions on poldering and ontpoldering are taken on a national level (see http://www.ruimtevoorderivier.nl/) in some cases the resource system is the whole of the Netherlands. The users are not only the land owners and their servants but also companies and citizens and all kinds of organizations. As a governance system the water board is still in place and doing a good job, but its scope has been changed from one polder to about half a province. The users do make use of the existing water boards but when they feel the need to self-organize they will very probably use other governance systems, such as environmental societies, pressure groups or political parties.
source; Elinor Ostrom (2009) A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems
Would you like to know more about water boards? See the website of the Scheldestromen water board (also available in English)
http://www.scheldestromen.nl/algemene_onderdelen/talen/english
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten