ľ�ϸ���Ӱ��

10 meters is the almost surreal amount by which the Dutch peatlands have lowered over the last 1000 years of human dominance of the landscape. Today this is causing all sorts of problems. “From greenhouse gas emissions to collapsing buildings and rising flood risk, the problem of land subsidence needs serious attention,” says Mandy van den Ende, lead author of published in Environmental Science and Policy. The research identifies some of the main challenges in the governance of subsiding peatlands and gives suggestions on how to move forward.

The Dutch peatlands, immortalized in the early works of Vincent van Gogh, are spread across the western and northern parts of the Netherlands. Subsidence in the rural area has resulted from centuries of lowering the water table for agricultural purposes. Besides subsidence, this has also led to the release of greenhouse gases and the degradation of natural resources. In built-up areas, the weight of buildings and infrastructure causes subsidence, with serious economic consequences.

Wicked problems

What prevents the Dutch from addressing land subsidence adequately? “Simply put: inadequate governance”, says Van den Ende, a PhD researcher at Utrecht ľ�ϸ���Ӱ��’s Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development. This is also the last time that she uses the word ‘simple’ because Van den Ende and her colleagues typify land subsidence as a ‘wicked’ problem for its complex, uncertain, and ambiguous nature. In their research, Van den Ende and co-authors Dries Hegger, Heleen Mees and Peter Driessen discuss a number of governance challenges of wicked problems and illustrate them with the case of land subsidence.

Framing an ambiguous problem: “Firstly, and most importantly, there is no single definition of land subsidence”, emphasizes Van den Ende. Governments, farmers and citizens can have different perspectives of the nature of the problem and its causes. “The crucial point is that the choice of a particular problem frame determines the types of solutions available”. This is clear in the case of land subsidence, which is in the public debate presented as a water management problem that can be solved or adapted with technical measures. It is important to avoid only one dominant frame being used because that simplifies the complexity of the problem. “Land subsidence is also a problem of biodiversity, water safety, housing, infrastructure and unsustainable land-use. A plurality of frames is essential to expand the available solution space for land subsidence”.

The crucial point is that the choice of a particular problem frame determines the types of solutions available

Coordinating action across levels and domains: Land subsidence leads to local damage to houses and infrastructure, increased national flood risk, and global climate change. The problem also cross-cuts traditional policy domains, including public space, housing, nature, agriculture, and water safety. “It is a significant challenge to coordinate actions at multiple levels of government and by multiple sectors”, says Van den Ende.

Acting despite inherent uncertainties: “Even if responsibilities would be clear,” Van Den Ende continues, “there is a need for quick action despite high uncertainties”. The research found that the traditional way of evidence-based decision-making does not match the inherent incomplete understanding of causes, effects and the effectiveness of measures. “And then, to make it even worse, everything is taking place in the context of an inherently uncertain future.”

The role of science: “A logical response to uncertainty would be producing more knowledge. But even the strongest scientific evidence may not be decisive in formulating policy,” explains Van den Ende. “Decision-making on wicked problems is after all value-based”. The authors therefore argue for the need to move away from the traditional role of science of ‘speaking truth to power’ to ‘making sense together’. “However, this raises another challenge, namely the equal representation of underrepresented stakeholder groups vis-à-vis those in power.”

A logical response to uncertainty would be producing more knowledge. But even the strongest scientific evidence may not be decisive in formulating policy

From dead ends to ways forward

Because of these challenges, wicked problems are left long enough to develop into ‘creeping crises’. A creeping crisis is a persistent wicked problem whose threat potential increases steadily. “Because of their incremental nature, creeping crises problems are not perceived as urgent by society”, explains Van den Ende. “The challenge is therefore to recognize the signals of a creeping crisis before it bursts.”

Based on the insights of this study, Van den Ende and her colleagues will study the suitability of three alternative governance approaches. “It helps that there are a thousand reasons to improve governance of wicked problems. In the case of land subsidence, it is not only for the sake of preserving Dutch peatlands, but also for reducing economic costs, minimizing flood risk, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving biodiversity, and much more”.