The Netherlands is facing two crises at the same time: a housing shortage and rising climate risks. Sea level rise, soil subsidence and heavier rainfall are colliding with the need to rapidly build new homes. To make spatial planning more climate-resilient, the government introduced Water and Soil as Guiding Principles, a policy meant to ensure that natural conditions guide how and where development takes place. Are water and soil really guiding the way we build? In a new research report, Dr Emanuel Ubert and Adela Agnew set out for answers.

Emanuel Ubert of the Rotterdam School of Management and research assistant Adela Agnew delved into seven major development projects across the Netherlands, from new housing areas in low-lying polders to flood-prone port districts. They interviewed more than 50 professionals involved in planning, including civil servants, developers and water managers. The research was also supported by Richard Jorissen, who works on water safety at TU Delft’s Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences and at Rijkswaterstaat, and Maria Pregnolato.

Their central question: when do the “Water en Bodem Sturend” guidelines actually change decisions, and when do they remain a policy on paper?

From guideline to requirement

The researchers found that the success of WBS hinges on the way it is implemented. When local authorities treat the policy as a strict condition for approval, it influences design choices and planning strategies. When the policy is applied more loosely, its impact is limited. “The policy only becomes powerful when it is translated from a flexible guideline into a real requirement,” says Dr Ubert.

“If WBS measures are not mandatory, they’re easily outweighed by tight budgets, short deadlines or other pressures. What happens then is that climate risks are more likely to be dealt with later in the process, often as a technical issue rather than a guiding principle.”

To help reshape WBS from a flexible consideration to a non-negotiable condition, the report provides concrete recommendations for each layer of government – from municipalities to the national level.

Other decisive factors

Whether or not water and soil conditions are guiding in development projects also depends on other factors, such as financial models. In some projects, WBS measures were seen as an opportunity to add value, for example by creating attractive water-based neighborhoods.

Agnew points to a deeper issue in how risks and costs are assessed. “In many projects, short-term costs are much easier to calculate than long-term risks,” she says. “As a result, climate adaptation is often perceived as an extra expense, while the future costs of inaction remain largely invisible.”

Also important to success is an approach that focuses on collaboration. In projects where water authorities or external experts were included as partners from the start instead of just advisors in later stages, climate considerations were more fully integrated into plans.

Watch the explainer video

In the video below, Emanuel Ubert explains the importance of WBS, how the policy can be strengthened in practice, and what that could mean for the way we build in the future.

Expert meeting

The research findings were discussed at an expert meeting on 2 December, where researchers, policymakers and practitioners came together to reflect on the implications. In addition to academics, participants included professionals from development firms, water authorities, banks, local governments and national ministries.

The discussion focused on how national ambition can be translated into decisions that hold up in real projects, and what is needed to make climate resilience a structural part of development. Next steps will focus on solidifying an implementation pathway and facilitating knowledge exchange between regions and projects.