In the 70 years after the North Sea Flood, Netherlands has changed from knowledge provider to knowledge sharer

The 1953 flood disaster forced us to face the facts: maintenance of dykes cannot be neglected. The poor quality of the flood protection was known, but in the difficult financial circumstances at the time politicians did not prioritize dyke improvement. Disaster ensued, with tragedy in its footsteps: 1.836 people died and 43.000 houses were damaged.

In a way, the disaster has also yielded a lot. We gained an understanding of how relentless the battle against the water is, along with a feeling of euphoria:  with the Delta Works – a marvel of engineering - we have been able to tame the monster for the time being. IHE Delft even owes its existence to it. In 1957, a request from the ambassador of the country now known as Bangladesh resulted in a Delft course for engineers from developing countries based on Dutch coastal engineering expertise.

Since then, much has changed, both in terms of our approach to water management and in our approach to expertise. Today, we recognize that working with water – for examples through the Dutch Room for River programme – is better than working against water. This change in attitude is also apparent from the Deltaworks where the first dams closed off entire estuaries, while later dams where flexible barriers only closing during storm surge. We also have changed our approach to knowledge: the days of disseminating Dutch expertise are long gone, and instead we focus on knowledge sharing and recognize that we have much to learn from other countries’ approaches.

We live in a time where many people know the 1953 disaster only through the stories of those who lived through it.

Several IHE Delft graduates from Bangladesh, studied with financing provided by local initiatives from the Dutch flood-stricken Zeeland province to stimulate international connections, knowledge exchange and solidarity. They learn from us.

And we learn from them. Flooding in countries such as Bangladesh, Vietnam, India or Indonesia might appear different than the Dutch flood of 1953. The spatial scale, flood frequency and the number of people affected is often an order of magnitude greater. At the same time, all such floods provide insight into the enormous resilience of people and governments worldwide in their handling of floods. Indonesia is moving its government buildings to higher and drier land. Bangladesh is experimenting with opening up polders so that the inflowing sediment raises the land again.

By dyke design, the Netherlands will be struck by a major flood once every 10,000 years, while parts of the United States have a flood risk of once every 100 years. Other countries do not even get around to designing clear flooding criteria. Maintaining these high flood safety standards say something about the Dutch entrepreneurial spirit and urge to control our landscape:  to reduce uncertainty, but also the realization that this is possible in the Netherlands due to the nature (predictability and size) of the floods and the financial resources at our disposal. After all, the Oosterscheldekering was partly made possible by huge revenues from the Dutch natural gas reserves.

Countries around the world are now facing similar challenges. Science suggests that our living environment will change enormously and at an increasingly rapid pace due to climate change and population growth. We will have to do something about the causes and at the same time act to limit the consequences. The Netherlands has changed from a knowledge provider into a knowledge sharer. It can learn from the international community how to deal with flooding, uncertainty and the spatial design of future-proof deltas.