1. NWO Context The case of the Markermeer - IJmeer Towards operationalisation 7 September Bas Waterhout – TU Delft

2. Contents Part 1 – Current situation Part 2 – Brief history Part 3 – Issues Part 4 – Towards an operationalisation

5. Part 1 – Current situation

6. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p29

8. 3 challenges: Green-Blue system Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p35

9. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p37

10. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p39

11. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p43-47 Five alternatives

12. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p55

13. July 2012: Three alternatives for consultation Source: RRAAM, July 2012, pp 27-30

14. July 2012 Indication of Optimised TBES – ‘Future Proof’ Ecological System Land-water transition zones (large scale marsh lands) Sheltered zone around Hoorn (silt control and clear water) Optimal ground flows (sand extraction and nature development) Synergies with dyke reinforcement Fish passages and seasonal water levels Source: RRAAM, July 2012, pp 32

15. Part 2 – A brief History 1960 - 2012

16. Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p31 A brief history: how it all begun

17. 1992 – IJburg 1: Referendum 1997 2004 – Verkenning IJmeer: some wise men... 2006 – Noordvleugel brief (Randstad Urgent) 2009 – Toekomstbeeld Markermeer-IJmeer 2009 – RRAAM 2012 – Consultation report 2005 – Visie IJmeer 2010 – Werkmaatschappij Markermeer-IJmeer 2007 – Toekomst perspectief Markermeer-IJmeer 2004 – IJburg 2: Land use plan annulled

18. Part 3 - Issues

19. Central Regulation Bird and Habitat Directives – Markermeer – IJmeer Bird protection zone Water framework Directive – Clear water as from 2015

20. Source: Ecoshape project http://www.ecoshape.nl/en_EN/project.html/environment/ 104-Delta+Lakes/project/133-MIJ+2.1+-+Project+summary The Markermeer: A bathtub? ANT: Autonomous Negative Trend A deteriorating ecological system

21. Slobeend Krooneend Aalscholvers Geoorde Fuut Kuifeend Tafeleend

22. Fontijnkruid in Gooimeer by Huizen 2012, Source: Gooi & Eemlander 30 juli 2012: ‘Ecoblunder in Eemmeer’ http://www.gooieneemlander.nl/regionaal/eemland/a rticle16951573.ece/Eco-blunder-in-Eemmeer?lref=sll http://www.gooieneemlander.nl/regionaal/eemland/a rticle16951573.ece/Eco-blunder-in-Eemmeer?lref=sll Kranswier

23. Driehoeksmossel

24. Werkmaatschappij Markermeer - IJmeer RWS DG Water Min I&M DG Ruimte DG Natuur Min ELI National gov stakeholder Zuiderzee land – Water boards Staatsbos beheer ANWB Natuurmonumenten Non-gov stakeholders Provincie Flevoland Provincie Noord Holland Regional gov stakeholders Almere Amsterdam Lelystad Waterland Local gov stakeholders EU: DG ENV Other stakeholders: -Pressure groups -Recreation - private companies Landsadvocaat

25. Parallel policy tracks Deltaprogramme – water safety IJsselmeer Policy Report 2006 Natura 2000 Maintanance plan

26. Part 4 – Towards operationalisation

27. Early Observations Central regulation, i.c. the Birds and Habitat directives, does not obstruct pro- active and integrative area based solutions. At the regional level this path is followed and generates broad support. At the national level it seems more difficult to embark on an area-based pro- active and integrative approach, which is partly due to the financial consequences. Hypothesis: sectoral regulation leads to further institutionalising of sectoral organisationstructure at the national level. Meta-governance frameworks such as Randstad Urgent and RRAAM (which is part of MIRT – another meta-governance framework) are quite productive in stimulating region cooperation, but less effective in terms of relating regional to national stakeholders. Design errors in the RRAAM and Randstad Urgent set of playing rules allow the national administration to sit aside and judge the efforts of the regional level, whereas effective meta-governance seems to rely on a condition of inclusiveness also of the meta-governor (Reff Petersen et al. 2010).

28. Research questions for the Markermeer – IJmeer case 1.How have the EU Birds and Habitat directive and the EU Water Framework Directive been transposed, implemented and enforced in the Netherlands and how has this affected the interpretation of this central regulation? 2.How has meta-governance influenced the process and contents of the Markermeer-IJmeer strategies and under what conditions can meta-governance contribute to relating central regulation to local interactive practices? 3.Are there mechanisms at the national level that cause central regulation to be interpreted, action and organisation which hamper area oriented policy making? 4.How is dealt with the uncertainty about how the ecological system operates in relation to jurisprudence and how does this affect policymaking? 5.How does the legal system, in particular access to the legal system, impact upon the policy process? 6.What is the origin of the parrallel policy tracks (natura 2000 beheerplan, IJsselmeergebied nota, Deltaprogramme, TMIJ) dealing with the same region and impacting upon each?