US–Netherlands Connection

Professional Program

Delft, Netherlands

September 4-8 2017

US-Netherlands Connection Professional Program Exploring Knowledge Exchange Opportunities in Three Parts

The tenth year of USNC Pro takes on a new format by incorporating an embedded workshop in the middle of the program and then progresses to explore case studies in the transition of data into actionable knowledge which in turn produced very effective solutions to complicated earth science, engineering, business and policy challenges in the Netherlands.

Part 1: The Introduction Day One, Monday, September 4 Location: IHE Delft, Institute for Water Education, Westvest 7, Delft Purpose: Orientation and introduction to program Key Concepts: Dutch water expertise, setting stage for the week ahead

9:00 am Welcome and introduction to IHE Delft – Dr. Eddy Moors, Rector

9:10 am Netherlands 101 – Jan Luijendijk (IHE Delft)

9:20 am USNC Pro Orientation – Steering Committee Why We Are Here? Goals for the Week: Opportunities for Actionable Projects

9:40 am Break

10:00 am The Speed Date Exercise – participants meet each other for four minutes and then go to another participant Break. Part is this exercise is to identify respective knowledge gaps or programmatic gaps (to be used later)

12:15 am Lunch at IHE Cafe

1:15 pm Depart for Maasvlakte II

2:00 pm Arrive at Keringhuis at the Maeslant, the world’s largest moving object. Meet with Peter Persoon, Rijkswaterstaat

4:00 pm Depart Keringhuis

4:45 pm Arrive in Delft

6:15 pm Dinner at TBA

Part 2: The Workshop Day Two, Tuesday, September 5 Location: Deltares, Boussinesqweg 1, 2629 HV Delft Purpose: Crafting the Knowledge Exchange Platform, and what are its functions? Key Concepts: Converting knowledge to solutions, connecting solutions to capital

8:30 am Departure for Deltares

8:45 am Arrive at Deltares, Welcome

9:00 am Case Study: The Digital Delta – Joost de Haan (Delfland Water Authority)

9:30 am Identifying Gaps: Linking Knowledge, Solutions and Capital, Antonella Calvia-Goetz, European Investment Bank

10:00 am Break

10:15 am Chair: Hank Loescher Rapporteur: Mohammad Ilyas Group Breakout Session #1 – Identifying Knowledge and Programmatic Gaps. Break out groups will be designed by x-discipline expertise, e.g., private / economic sector, science, data and information technology, delivery actionable water science, enterprise building, etc. Each breakout group is to identify either i) the knowledge gaps between creating economic relevancy and the science deliverables, or ii) the missing programmatic or enterprise activities to link water science to actionable economic relevant decision making.

12:30 pm Report outs from each group

1:00 pm Lunch in Deltares Cafe

1:45 pm Use Case (conceptual?) Connecting Knowledge Producers and Consumers, Bill Whiteford and Simone Dominique (Florida Earth)

2:15 pm Chair: Beth Fleming Rapporteur: Adam Hosking Group Breakout Session #2 – Creating solutions to Reduce the Knowledge and Programmatic Gaps. Similar structure of previous break-out groups, and apply their expertise and resources to out-of-the box thinking of how to close the knowledge and programmatic gaps. We encourage not placing any constraints on this activity, as we wish to foster creative scientific and business solutions. (take your own break)

4:30 am Report outs from each group

5:00 pm Logistics and instructions for Wednesday. Adjourn

6:00 pm Optional: Arrive The Hague. Options: Walking tour of Parliament, King’s Palace and dinner on your own in the Hague

Day Three, Wednesday, September 6 Location: Deltares

Purpose: Continuation of Day 2; actionable plans and business model approaches. Provide timeline to

further development of this initiative

8:30 am Leave for Deltares

8:45 am Recap of previous day’s work – Simone Dominique and Bill Whiteford, Florida Earth

9:15 am Exemplar Talk: TBA

9:45 am Chair: Ben Preston Rapporteur: Karel Heynert Group Breakout Session #3 – Developing Actionable Plans: forming boots-ready projects, business models, and other approaches to realize specific projects Similar structure of previous break-out groups, outline the integration of ideas and the outcomes of the previous two breakouts into actionable paths forward. These are to include creative funding opportunities and means to acquire needed resources for actualization. (take your own break)

11:45 am Report outs from each group

12:15 pm Lunch at the Deltares Cafe

1:00 pm The Keynote: Preparing a Nation for the Future, Wim Kuijken, Dutch Delta Commissioner

1:45 pm Plenary session: Laying out an action plan for this initiative. What happens next?

3:15 pm Break

3:30 pm Assignments, and logistics for following day

4:30 pm Adjourn

Optional: tour of Deltares physical model center and the Delta Flume. Dinner on your own.

Part 3: The Dutch Case Studies Day Four, Thursday, September 7 Location: Province Zeeland

Purpose: The Delta Program is one of the world’s greatest examples of using the knowledge created by data to accomplish a seemingly impossible task. People who helped create solutions by true collaborations between science, engineering, business and policy was defined by the Dutch commitment of “Never Again” after the Great Flood of 1953. Another aspect of this case study is how the Dutch prioritized actions that created the Delta programs and how unsuspected consequences have created new challenges.

7:30 am Bus departs Delft

9:00 am Arrive De Val, location of the IMARES oyster reef trial

9:30 am Arrive Watersnood Museum. This venue sets the stage for why and how the Dutch created the political and economic will to enter into what became the Delta Program

11:30 pm Visit to Plompetoren, remnant from a village lost to the sea in the 16th century, and Plan Tureluur, nature development area

12:00 pm Arrival at Storm Surge Barrier. Lunch at Proef Zeeland

1:00 pm Arrive at the Topshuis, control center of the Eastern Storm Surge Barrier. Introduction by Jos Geluk, (Rijkswaterstaat, Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment). Walk inside the barrier.

3:00 pm Depart Barrier

3:30 pm Arrive at Middleburg Abbey. Turning Data into Resilience Knowledge: Introduction to Flood Impact Reduction and demonstration of the 3D Flood Aware simulation by Ylva Peddemors (policy expert flood protection, Province of Zeeland) and Bart Willemse (GIS specialist, Province of Zeeland)

5:00 pm Depart Middleburg

6:30 pm Dinner in Rotterdam

9:00 pm Arrive in Delft

Day Five, Friday, September 8 Location: Biesbosch National Park, Wageningen University and City of Nijmegen

Purpose: A study of the Room for the River Program, one of the largest public-private partnerships ever done.

Key concepts: Stakeholder engagement, public use of data and knowledge, collaboration from science,

engineering, business and policy to solve very complex problems.

8:00 am Depart Delft

9:00 am Arrive Biesbosch National Park Visitor’s Center. Presentation on Room for the River by Rijkswaterstaat.

11:00 am Depart the Biesbosch. Box lunch on bus.

12:30 pm Arrive at Wageningen University. Panel Discussion with Rick Leemans, Johan Feenstra and Huub Reijnaarts

2:00 pm Depart Wageningen

2:30 pm Arrive Nijmegen. Discussion of the Nijmegen River Project with Pim Nijssen, Principal at Twynstra Gudde

4:30 pm Depart Nijmegen. Debrief on bus back to Delft.

6:00 pm Arrive Delft

7:00 pm Farewell Dinner at Stadsherberg de Mol

2017 US-Netherlands Connections Professional Team

September 4-8, 2017

Delft, The Netherlands

Jennifer Adler Jennifer Adler is a National Geographic Explorer and

conservation photographer with a focus on freshwater.

She specializes in underwater photography and cave

diving, and her current work is focused on

reconnecting the next generation of Floridians to the

aquifer beneath their feet. She holds a Bachelor of Science in marine

biology from Brown University and is currently amidst the final year of

her PhD in Interdisciplinary Ecology at the University of Florida. Her

dissertation blends science and photography, part of which has been the

development and implementation of the Walking on Water program,

which puts elementary school students underwater with cameras in hand

and takes them on the first 360 virtual tour of the Floridan Aquifer. Her

research seeks to understand how we can use immersive education to help

connect next generation to their most vital resource:

freshwater. You can find more of her work at

jenniferadlerphotography.com, on Instagram @jmadler, or listen

to her TEDx talk at http://bit.ly/TEDx_JenniferAdler.

Monica A. Altamirano

Dr. Monica Altamirano is a Policy analyst and Systems Engineer with a

strong background in Economics. In 2010 she defended her PhD Thesis

titled: Innovative contracting practices in the road sector: Cross-national

lessons in dealing with opportunistic behavior, carried out at the Faculty of

Technology, Policy and Management of Delft University of Technology.

She researched the technical and institutional dimensions of road

procurement strategies and the preceding processes of road reform –

liberalization and privatization making use of New Institutional Economics

Her PhD research included Finland, Spain and the Netherlands. In addition,

by developing and playing the serious game “Road Roles” over 14 times,

she engaged in the experimental research of the impact of economic

incentives in contracts on the emergence of cooperative behavior from

private contractors towards the public client.

Since 2010 she joined Deltares and has promoted and carried out a number studies to translate the lessons

learned on PPP’s and private financing in the road sector to the water management sector. The focus of

her current work is on making green Adaptation to Climate Change a financially viable concept for

developing and emerging economies.

She serves regularly as Financial Expert to the Dutch Disaster Risk Reduction Team and has the academic

lead of the work group on Disaster Resilience within the Future of Construction Project of the World

Economic Forum.

Recent projects include the development of decision support tools, one for the

choice of project delivery and finance mechanism for Wastewater projects, and

another for value driven procurement of flood protection infrastructure projects.

As well as working in Bangladesh on the use of Satellite Data services for

Climate Risk Management in the Agriculture Sector; and projects to bring Water Stewardship in Action

in close collaboration with CDP and the South Pole Group.

David Berry

David manages the Sustainable Water Resources Roundtable, a Federal

Advisory group. At the White House Council on Environmental Quality,

he chaired work on Sustainable Development Indicators and Industrial

Ecology. He served on two committees of the National Academy of

Science and spoke several times on sustainability at the Russian Academy

of Science. He is on the steering committee of the Balaton Group, a forum

for sustainability and systems thinking.

Since leaving government David has led workshops in the US, Mexico,

Canada, Russia and elsewhere. He is a

Past President of the Dharma Centre of

Canada, one of the oldest meditation

centers in North America. He has

performed on television and radio including on National Public Radio’s "Prairie Home Companion.”

David is the author of the historical fiction novel "Gate in the Fence of Time: A Journey to the Birth of

America,"

Stan Bronson

Stan Bronson is a seven generation Floridian, born in Orlando, with

undergrad education done at Florida Southern College and grad work done

at Florida Atlantic University and the University of Florida. Spending

most of his career in the citrus industry, 14 years of which was COO of a

large citrus operation, in 1999 he joined the extension faculty of the

University of Florida, developing a natural resources education program

for South Florida ecosystem restoration initiatives. That program has

evolved into the Florida Earth Foundation, begun in January 2002. FEF is

a public-private partnership of over 120 agencies, universities, industries

and not-for-profits. The organization develops knowledge exchange

programs that center on water disciplines.

Bronson serves as Executive Director of Florida Earth, which administers the nation’s

only permanent US program in graduate water education with the United Nations, the

UNESCO-IHE/Florida Earth Partnership. Florida Earth also runs the US-Netherlands

Connection (USNC) program, which brings teams of delegates from the US to the

Netherlands to see Dutch expertise in water infrastructure and management, especially

as it relates to sea-level rise adaptation and knowledge exchange platform that puts

together those needing help in solving coastal resilience issues with those possessing expertise in those

issues. Coming from a ranching family who supplied the land for Walt Disney World in the 1960’s,

Stan’s love of the land has always been an inspiration throughout his career.

Antonella Calvia-Goetz Antonella Calvia-Goetz is a Lead Advisor on funding innovation in the

Projects Directorate of the European Investment Bank (EIB). Prior to this

position, she worked as Advisor to the EIB Executive Board and DG-

Enterprise at the European Commission in Brussels. At the start of her

career, she was Risk Manager at American Express Europe in London. Dr.

Calvia-Goetz is a recognized expert on European research infrastructures.

In 2013, DG-RTD appointed her Chair of a High Level Expert Group

tasked with assessing 35 research infrastructures of the ESFRI Roadmap.

She routinely collaborates with the Ministries of Higher Education and

Research and Universities of many EU Member States as author of funding

proposals for improving innovation governance in the EU. In recent years,

she is active in the domain of Global Environmental Observatories (GEO).

Her work aims at speeding up the GEO’s operational maturity in view of

preparing demonstration projects via public-private partnerships for

delivering innovative solutions linked to climate change mitigation measures.

She also serves as a non-executive independent director of a leading private

company in Benelux and she is an active member of a set of European

Corporate Governance initiatives.

Dr. Calvia-Goetz holds a Doctorate in Economics from Oxford University

(UK) and a Master degree in Business Studies and Economics from the University of Venice (Italy). She

also earned a Certificate in Strategy and Innovation from the Sloan School of Management of the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the US.

James Charles James Charles is the President of Volya Innovative Solutions, a consulting

firm that focuses on environmental, natural resources, cultural, and

governance issues and projects. He is also President of James E. Charles

Law, a law firm that focuses on environmental, government, cultural, and

natural resources legal issues and policy. He works closely with Tribal

Governments assisting and representing them with Government-to-

Government consultations; developing and implementing strategies to

protect tribal interests on and off tribal lands (cultural, environmental, and

natural resources); developing and negotiating agreements with local,

state and federal agencies; enhancing Tribal Self-Governance/Self

Determination; and developing tribal infrastructure and capacity. His

passion for working with Tribal Governments began with assisting the

Seminole Tribe of Florida in protecting their cultural and environmental interests in connection with

Everglades Restoration (the largest environmental restoration project in the world). This passion carries

forward as his greatest satisfaction is working collaboratively with Tribal Governments to develop tribal

capacity for self-governance and preserve tribal culture and heritage for future generations. In addition to his Tribal/Indigenous Peoples practice, James also represents

private and public-sector clients before local, state, and federal agencies and

courts regarding regulatory issues concerning historic, environmental and natural

resources. His practice includes providing legislative and rulemaking support on

behalf of clients on state and federal levels, which includes advocating client

interests during commenting periods, rulemaking workshops, public hearings,

stakeholder meetings, commission meetings, and agency meetings. James’

litigation experience includes representing clients before federal court, state court, and administrative

proceedings.

When he is not working, James enjoys spending time with family and friends, traveling, basketball, Tae-

Kwon-Do, all things Ukrainian, and tirelessly working to train his overly active puppy Aonghas.

James is a graduate of the University of Florida College of Law where he earned his J.D., with honors, in

2002 and was awarded the University’s Environmental and Land Use Law Certificate.

Simone Dominique

Simone Dominique is a social good consultant who specializes in

communications and business development. Her clients span multiple

sectors and include the not-for-profit organization Florida Earth

Foundation and the federal advisory subcommittee, the Sustainable Water

Resources Roundtable (SWRR), both of which bring together stakeholders

from federal, state, corporate, non-profit, indigenous nation and academic

sectors to advance water sustainability and the sharing of water knowledge.

Simone Dominique administers the UN Social 500, a gamification

platform for United Nations staff and contractors who use their social

media accounts to share the work of the UN. She covers social good events

such as the United Nations' Media Zone and the Mashable/United Nations Foundation Social Good

Summit. Her interviews have appeared in publications such as The Atlantic.

She serves on the advisory board of Hear Congo which rebuilds–through education and partnerships–the

'shattered lives' of women who were victims of rape as a weapon of war in the Democratic Republic of

Congo. She is an advisory board member of The WunderSpot Project which encourages small businesses

to adopt a triple bottom line approach of people, profits, and planet.

Previously, she was the Director of Marketing & Communications for the nonprofit Women of Tomorrow,

which was recognized 8 times on the floor of the United States Congress for its work to empower young

women to break cycles of violence and poverty. Prior to the social good sector, Simone Dominique was

the Vice President of Sales for NYSE traded companies and technology start-ups.

Beth Fleming Dr. Beth C. Fleming became Director of the Environmental Laboratory

(EL) at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center

(ERDC) in Vicksburg, Mississippi when she was selected to the Senior

Executive Service in June 2006. In 2008, Dr. Fleming was also selected

as the Civil Works (CW) Business Area lead. ERDC research and

development supports the Department of Defense and other agencies in

military and civilian projects. Principal mission areas include civil

engineering, environment, water resources engineering, and physical

sciences. Technical research areas under her purview include

infrastructure, environment, navigation, flood damage reduction,

hydropower, and water resources geospatial data, oceanography, and

information technology.

As CW Business Area lead, Dr. Fleming is responsible for the Army’s

$150M water resources program that transcends USACE’s $5B Navigation,

Flood Damage Reduction, Environment, Integrated Water Resources

Management, and Infrastructure Reliability and Resilience mission. Dr.

Fleming proactively seeks partnerships with Federal, state, academic, NGOs,

and other partners to accomplish the USACE CW R&D mission. As Director of the EL, Dr. Fleming

leads research in environmental assessment and restoration; climate change and resilience; environmental

engineering, modeling and simulation; environmental chemistry; wetlands technology; water quality,

dredging and dredge material management; endangered species, invasive species, outdoor recreation, and

cultural resources. Dr. Fleming is responsible for the day-to-day execution of the laboratory’s >$100M

research mission and administrative activities affecting 320 employees.

Tom Frazer Thomas K. Frazer, Ph.D., is Professor and Director of the School of Natural

Resources and Environment at the University of Florida. He holds a

bachelor’s degree in fisheries biology from Humboldt State University and a

master’s degree in fisheries and aquatic sciences from the University of

Florida. He earned his Ph.D. in biological sciences from the University of

California, Santa Barbara. The overarching goals of his individual and

collaborative research efforts are to develop and transfer into management a

mechanistic understanding of the effects of anthropogenic activities on the

ecology of both freshwater and marine ecosystems. His research is, by nature,

interdisciplinary, involves collaborators from

disparate disciplines and is carried out across

broad space and time scales in order to effectively

address contemporary and emerging environmental issues.

Marianna Grossman

Marianna Grossman is founder and managing partner of Minerva Ventures,

a consultancy focused on solutions for a resilient future. Minerva advises

companies and communities on climate risk, adaptation and resilience, and

guides clean tech startups in water, energy, remediation, finance and climate

analytics. For seven years Marianna led Sustainable Silicon Valley (SSV),

working to create a more resilient region. Previous to SSV, she had roles in

the automotive, computer and semiconductor industries. Board service

includes: California Climate Adaptation Action Plan Technical Advisory

Group; Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities; California

Congress of the International Living Future Institute; ClimateMusic Project;

the Sustainability Committee of the SF Bay Area Super Bowl 50 Host

Committee, and, advisory council for climate action for City of Palo Alto. She earned a BA cum laude,

with distinction in Policy Studies from Dartmouth, where she

studied with The Limits to Growth authors Dennis and Donella

Meadows. She earned an MBA from Yale School of Management.

Marianna brings people and institutions together across sectors to collaborate, invent and implement

solutions that enhance sustainability, build resilience and address the consequences of climate change.

Kirk Hatfield

Dr. Kirk Hatfield is the Director of the Engineering School of Sustainable

Infrastructure and Environment at the University of Florida, the Director of the

Florida Water Resources Research Center, and a Professor in the Department

of Civil and Coastal Engineering. Dr. Hatfield received his BS and MS degrees

from the University of Iowa and his PhD degree from the University of

Massachusetts in Amherst. Following graduation, he joined the University of

Florida, Department of Civil Engineering in 1987.

Dr. Hatfield’s ongoing research activities are in the areas of aqueous

environmental monitoring, contaminant fate and transport modeling in the

subsurface, environmental remediation, and water resources systems analysis.

He has active research collaborations with universities and institutes in Russia,

Brazil, Canada, Mexico, England,

and Germany. These collaborations have produced several

patents and several technical paper awards in 1994, 1998, 2006,

and 2011 from ASEE and ASCE and from the editorial board of

the most highly cited journal in his discipline, Environmental

Science and Technology. In 2006, the Department of Defense awarded Dr. Hatfield and his colleagues

the distinguished “Project of the Year Award” for their research to demonstrate and validate a new

technology that provides direct measures of water and contaminant fluxes in subsurface aquifers. Part of

Dr. Hatfield’s related activities include being a member of the Florida Earth Board of Directors.

Karel Heynert Karel Heijnert is a specialist in flood forecasting and warning, flood risk

management and integrated water resources management. He combines an in-

depth technical knowledge in the field of flood risk management, modelling

and hydro-informatics with an extensive track record as team leader for the

development of flood forecasting and warning systems worldwide. He has

been responsible for the successful implementation of a large number of

complex flood warning systems demonstrates his focus on practical results

and high stakeholder satisfaction.

Karel Heijnert has an MSc in Civil Engineering from Delft University of

Technology in The Netherlands. He has worked for over 25 years for Deltares

and previously Delft Hydraulics in various capacities including as manager

of departments focusing on the development and implementation of end-to-end flood forecasting and

warning systems. In the period 2015-17, he was employed by Deltares USA in Silver Spring, Maryland,

USA in the role of Program Manager Rivers & Coasts. Since 2017, he is based in The Netherlands again

and working on water resources and flood risk management project as a water management specialist and

project manager.

His work in the United States includes leading the design, implementation and support & maintenance of

the Community Hydrologic Prediction System (CHPS) for the National Weather

Service in the period 2006-09 and since 2015. CHPS is the national river forecast

system and is based on Delft FEWS (oss.deltares.nl/web/delft-fews). He is

currently working on urban water management, green infrastructure and climate

adaptation projects in Nassau County on Long Island (NY), and New Orleans. He is also coordinating the

Deltares’ projects for the Water Institute of the Gulf in Baton Rouge focusing on hydraulic,

morphodynamic and water quality modelling to support the management and restoration of the Mississippi

Delta. Currently, he is leading the development of the flood forecasting system development for Quebec

Province in Canada.

Adam Hosking Adam is CH2M’s Global Practice Director for Water Resources and Ecosystem

Management (WREM), including flood and coastal risk management, water

resources and Climate Change Resilience. With a background in coastal

geomorphology, he is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Water and

Environmental Management and Chartered Scientist with more than 23 years’

experience in projects and programs addressing coastal resilience. He has

expertise in the preparation of long-term strategic management plans and the

development of planning frameworks, including leading the definition of the

State of Louisiana’s framework for integrated flood risk reduction and wetland

restoration following Hurricanes Rita and Katrina.

He is experienced in the review and appraisal of climate change impacts and

their management, including impacts on infrastructure, and the potential management and policy options

to address changes. Throughout his entire career, Adam has championed, consistently analyzed, and

accounted for the impacts of climate change on his projects. Adam has successfully led design, strategic

planning, mathematical modelling, options assessment, economic

appraisal, environmental impact assessment, and geomorphological

reviews. He is very experienced in the development and execution of

stakeholder engagement strategies with a proven track record creating consensus and successfully

delivering policies at a range of spatial scales. He also has extensive experience in the economic appraisal

of coastal protection projects.

He is currently based in the UK, having spent 5 years in the US from 2006 to 2011. He has led resilience

projects globally, including New York City DEP’s wastewater infrastructure resilience strategy following

Hurricane Sandy, and has delivered projects in the UK, USA, Middle East, Singapore and Caribbean.

Mohammad Ilyas Dr. Mohammad Ilyas is a Professor in the Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering and

Computer Science, in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at Florida Atlantic University,

Boca Raton, Florida. He has been with the College since 1983. From 1994 to 2000, he was Chair of the

Department of Computer Science and Engineering. He served as Associate

Dean for Research for the College from 2002 through 2011, and as Dean of

the College from 2011 to 2017. From July 2004 to September 2005, he also

served the University as Interim Associate Vice President for Research and

Graduate Studies. During 1993-94 academic year, he was on sabbatical leave

with the Department of Computer Engineering, King Saud University,

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Dr. Ilyas has earned four academic degrees from four different countries. He

received his B.Sc. degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of

Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan, in 1976. From March 1977 to

September 1978, he worked for the Water and Power Development Authority, Pakistan. In 1978, he was

awarded a scholarship for his graduate studies and he completed his MS degree in Electrical and Electronic

Engineering in June 1980 at Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. In September 1980, he joined the doctoral

program at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. He completed his Ph.D. degree in 1983. His

doctoral research was about switching and flow control techniques in computer communication networks.

In 2015, he earned his second Ph.D. in Educational Leadership

– Higher Education, from Florida Atlantic University, Boca

Raton, Florida.

Dr. Ilyas has conducted successful research in the field of

computer communication networks. His current research interests include wireless sensor networks,

Internet of Things, smart systems, healthcare technologies. performance modeling, and simulation. He has

published one book, 26 handbooks, and over 175 research articles. He has supervised 12 Ph.D.

dissertations and 38 M.S. theses to completion. He has been a consultant to several national and

international organizations. Dr. Ilyas is an active participant in several IEEE Technical committees and

activities.

Dr. Ilyas is a senior member of IEEE, a member of ASEE, member of Global Engineering Deans Council

(GEDC), and is listed as a Fulbright Specialist.

Praveen Kumar

Praveen Kumar holds a B.Tech. (Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay,

India 1987), M.S. (Iowa State University 1989), and Ph.D. (University of

Minnesota 1993), all in civil engineering, and has been on the UIUC faculty

since 1995. He is also an Affiliate Faculty in the Department of Atmospheric

Science. His research focus is on complex hydrologic systems bridging across

theory, modeling, and informatics. He presently

serves as the Director of the NSF funded Critical

Zone Observatory for Intensively Managed

Landscapes, which is part of a national and

international network. He has been an Associate of

the Center for Advanced Studies, and two-times

Fellow of the National Center for Super Computing

Applications. He is an AGU Fellow and a recipient of the Mahatma Gandhi Pravasi Samman (Non-

Resident Honor) Award 2017 given by the NRI Welfare Society of India. He has also received the Xerox

Award for Research, and Engineering Council Award for Excellence in Advising. From 2002-2008, he

served as a founding Board member for CUAHSI, a consortium of over 110 universities for the

advancement of hydrologic science. From 2009-2013 he served as the Editor-in-Chief of Water Resources

Research, the leading journal in the field with about 500 published articles per year. Prior to that he also

served as the Editor of Geophysical Research Letters, a leading journal for inter-disciplinary research.

Rick Lawford Richard (Rick) Lawford is a senior scientist at Morgan State University where

he undertakes projects in support of NASA’s Water Applications Program,

serves as interim secretariat for the GEO Global Water Sustainability

(GEOGLOWS) and provides water expertise for the US Group on Earth

Observations (GEO) program. Recent and current activities include completion

of the GEOSS Water Strategy and co-leading a Future Earth Cluster project on

the Water-Energy-Food Nexus.

Previous work experience has included work as a consultant

working for the Japan Aerospace Agency (JAXA) on matters

related to the water component of the Global Earth

Observations System of System (GEOSS), contributing to the

Global Enhanced Water Monitoring Initiative (GEMI) in support of the UN Water

Sustainable Development Goal and as the Network Manager for the Canadian Drought

Research Initiative.

He is a member of the Sustainable Water Future Science and Planning Teams, the chair of the Water

Future Data Committee and Chair of the GEO Integrated Global Water Cycle Observations Community

of Practice. Formerly he served on the Executive member of the Global Water Systems Project. Other

positions held include the Director of the International Global Energy and Water Experiment Project

Office and the NOAA Program Manager for the GEWEX Continental Scale International Project (GCIP).

Hank Loescher Dr. Loescher’s career has been at the nexus of science, engineering and project

development. Formally educated as an Ecosystem Scientist. He received his

PhD and MSc from the University of Florida and undergraduate degrees from

SUNY and the Vermont State College. He was the second hire for the National

Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), a first-of its continental-scale

ecology major research facility that integrates science, engineering and project

management. Hank has lead multiple NEON Project Science Teams (i.e.,

Instruments, Mobile Platforms, Aquatic) through the important NSF/NSB

Review stage and early construction. Hank was also part of a small elite team

that crafted NEON’s Continental Design, and has

contributed to numerous engineering efforts. He is currently directing

NEON’s strategic development efforts (presentations available), and focusing on public/private

enterprises. His research interests include determining the biotic and abiotic controls on ecosystem-level

carbon and energy balance across spatial and temporal scales. He continues to publish, and has over 70

peer review papers. Prior to his tenure at NEON, he was at Oregon State University administrating the

DOE AmeriFlux Program.

Leah Potts Leah Potts, 23, is the 2017 Our World-Underwater Scholarship Society North

American Rolex Scholar. Water has been her passion for as long as she can

remember, particularly exploring its depths as an avid scuba diver. Since

becoming a professional in the dive industry six years ago, she has worked as

an educator, researcher, trip leader, photographer, and production assistant.

She recently graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering

from University of Florida, where she spent her weekends cave diving through

the aquifer beneath her very feet. Leah has also worked for

Divers Alert Network, a dive safety organization at which

she researched cave diving fatalities and diver physiology

in conjunction with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration.

Leah’s interests lie in sustainable engineering and underwater exploration. Her

scholarship is a $25,000 award to travel the world for a year gaining hands-on experience in underwater

fields. She is centering her scholarship year around water-related engineering and expedition-based diving

experiences and cannot wait to see where this incredible opportunity takes her.

Ben Preston Benjamin Preston is a senior policy researcher and Director of RAND's

Infrastructure Resilience and Environmental Policy Program. At RAND, he

helps to coordinate research on energy policy, environmental policy,

community and infrastructure resilience, climate risk management, and

workplace health and safety. Prior to joining RAND, he served as the Deputy

Director of the Climate Change Science Institute at Oak Ridge National

Laboratory (ORNL). While working at ORNL, he engaged in research on

vulnerability and resilience of U.S. energy systems to climate variability and

change as well as opportunities and constraints associated with climate risk

management. Previously, he served as a research scientist in Australia with

the CSIRO's Division of Marine and Atmospheric Research and as a Senior

Research Fellow at the Pew Center on Global Change.

Benjamin has contributed dozens of publications to the scientific literature on climate

change impacts, adaptation, and environmental assessment, and he currently serves as

editor-in-chief for the Elsevier journal Climate Risk Management. He has participated in

a range of national and international scientific assessments including the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, the National

Climate Assessment, Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic, and the Quadrennial

Energy Review. In addition to his research activities, Benjamin has received multiple awards for science

communication and public engagement. In 2015, he was the recipient of the Charles S. Falkenberg award

from the American Geophysical Union, and in 2016 he became one of the inaugural fellows of the

American Association for the Advancement of Science’s Leshner Leadership Institute.

Roselyn Smith Dr. Smith is a Clinical Psychologist Miami, Florida. She has been recognized

as a Fulbright Specialist and is a Subject Matter Advisor to the Rockefeller

Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities global effort for her work in resilience,

critical incident and disaster mental health, preparedness, response and

recovery. In addition to her clinical practice and resilience consulting, she has

two Adjunct Faculty appointments with the University of Miami, one as a

member of the Psychology Department for assisting with doctoral level

assessment supervision and external practicum placement, and the other as

UM Counseling Center Affiliated Training Staff, where she has conducted resilience,

disaster and critical incident mental health and Psychological First Aid training for

trainees, Center professional staff, and their cadre of community critical incident

volunteers since 2007. She has also served as a Critical Incident/Disaster Mental Health consultant to the

University of Miami (main campus) for critical incident planning and response, and the U.M. Miller

School of Medicine, Center for Disaster Epidemiology and Emergency Preparedness (DEEP Center),

where she assisted in the development and presentation of responder resiliency, disaster stress

management, and Psychological First Aid (PFA) curriculum. While at the DEEP center, Dr. Smith

presented disaster behavioral health and responder resiliency seminars with the former Assistant Surgeon

General of the United States for Mental Health Care, Dr. Brian Flynn, Rear Admiral, Ret., Public Health

Corps. She has been an invited participant in tabletop disaster planning sessions with the Palm Beach

County Department of Public Health, was an advisor to the former Mayor of the City of Coral Gables,

Florida on community resilience/disaster-related matters, and assisted the coordination and delivery of a

disaster mental health training day for Miami area mental health and social service providers likely to

become involved in providing support to Haitian immigrants following the devastating 2010 Haiti

earthquake. Dr. Smith conducts corporate and public sector leadership development, stress management,

and mindfulness training for increased resilience, focus and work-related performance and regularly

provides international critical incident psychological support to numerous private entities. She is one of

few mental health professionals, nationwide, qualified to conduct Resilience and Psychological First Aid

training to medical, mental health, and social work professionals for continuing education credits. She has

also presented Psychological First Aid and resiliency training to thousands of responders, safety managers,

military, public health officials and other private and public sector lay personnel across the United States

and internationally, including at a Chernobyl Rehabilitation Center in Ivankyv, Ukraine in 2010. With an

undergraduate degree in Macro Economics from UCLA and a Masters Fellowship in Public Policy

Analysis, prior to returning for her doctoral studies, Dr. Smith worked as a marketing and corporate

development executive in the healthcare and passenger transportation industries, where she was the

corporate spokesperson in the midst of crises on a routine basis.

Xander de Bruine

Most of Xander’s project experience is in the field of International Water

Management initiating new knowledge platforms and networks. He has

extensive know-how to develop effective and pragmatic International

meetings, publications and virtual communication. All Xander his project

experience is characterized by initiatives to bring together international

professionals within the fields of science, business and government. Creating

partnerships and symbiosis between different partners, whether it be in

knowledge or exchange of innovative solutions. The projects have a focus on

delta and river region development, integrated water solutions and balanced

use of international water resources. His goal in general is to facilitate

sustainable development, the responsible use of natural resources, balancing

the built and natural environment and using nature’s potential to improve

people’s quality of life. He considers dissemination of knowledge an exciting field.

Bill Whiteford

Bill is a graduate of Rollins College in Winter Park, Florida, where he earned

a B.A. in environmental studies and biology, and holds a Master of Arts in

Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Florida. He is currently

assisting in the assimilation of the Florida Earth Foundation with the

University of Florida, where he received his Ph.D. from the College of Design,

Construction and Planning and a Ph.D. minor in real estate from the

Warrington College of Business. His primary

fields of research are in sustainability in the built

environment and community resilience, where he

creates 3D models of future development using

parcel-based land use suitability analysis.

Prior to receiving his Ph.D., Bill was the Zoning Director for Palm Beach

County, FL, where he was responsible for the update, maintenance, and implementation of the Palm Beach

County Unified Land Development Code, and worked as the Land Development Director for a private

real estate investment firm in Boca Raton, FL. At present, Bill is a principal at Team Plan Inc., a land

planning, landscape architecture, and urban design firm located in North Palm Beach, FL, where he enjoys

fishing, grilling, and spending time with his family.

John Woolschlager John Woolschlager, Ph.D. joined the U. A. Whitaker College of Engineering

in August of 2016 as the Backe Chair, Professor of Environmental

Engineering, Director of the Emergent Technologies Institute (ETI), and

Director of Engineering Graduate programs. Dr. Woolschlager's major

responsibilities as the Backe Chair will include leading the continued

development of a university-wide Emergent Technologies Institute,

significantly increasing collaborative external research funding, leading the

development of new graduate engineering programs, organizing and

conducting outreach activities, and supporting the efforts to attract industry

partners in renewable energy and other technologies to Southwest Florida.

Dr. Woolschlager has Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in Environmental Engineering from Northwestern

University and a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Prior to joining

FGCU, Dr. Woolschlager was the Director of the Center for Sustainability at Saint Louis University

(SLU), an interdisciplinary graduate degree-granting unit. Dr. Woolschlager joined SLU as the Founding

Chair of a new department of Civil Engineering in 2010 and he led that program through its initial ABET

accreditation. Dr. Woolschlager held prior faculty appointments at Arizona State University and the

University of North Florida.

Dr. Woolschlager’s research focus on biotechnology using complex models to

simulate biological, chemical, and physical processes. Dr. Woolschlager applies his

modeling work to water quality, environmental systems optimization, and bioenergy

projects. Some examples of his funded projects include the neural-network

optimization of urban drinking water systems to improve water quality and save

energy; process optimization of wastewater treatment plants to achieve nutrient

pollution reduction and reduce energy consumption; applied research addressing

global energy and sanitation issues in developing nations; and analysis of regional

sustainability issues using advanced GIS modeling tools to create smarter, more energy efficient and

sustainable cities.

1

Welcome to the US-Netherlands Connection Project’s Professional Team 2017!

Pre-trip Preparations

Our Working Group Site

Be sure you have joined the USNC Pro Group on http://floridaearth.thewaternetwork.com. If you have

this handbook it means you probably got it from the cluster site. This website is an incredible tool that

we will use constantly.

What to Bring to Wear

Weather is certainly unpredictable but this time in September is generally around 55 degrees Fahrenheit

in the morning and warming up to high-60’s in the afternoon. The wind blows 24/7 which can make it

cold, especially if it rains. Remember we will be on the same latitude as Maine. Count on it raining

during at least some days of the trip and when it rains it is a slow drizzle that will last for 24 hours or

longer. That being said, bring layers that you can shed as the day warms. Also, bring a compact

umbrella.

Suggested dress by day:

1. Monday – Casual. Comfortable shoes for walking. Jeans are acceptable. We will be outside, so

bring a light jacket. Rain in forecast.

2. Tuesday – Business casual. Inside all day.

3. Wednesday – Business casual. Inside all day.

4. Thursday – Jeans are fine and shoes you can get muddy. Windbreaker, etc.

5. Friday – Same as Thursday.

Other Things to Bring

1. European electrical sockets are different than in the US, so pick up a socket adapter, which is less

than $10. Most things we use electronically like laptops, phone chargers, etc., are already dual voltage

compatible, so no need to get a voltage converter unless you have something you want to bring that is

not adapted to 220 volts. Ladies, the hotel has hair dryers which run off of 220 volts so do not bring

yours.

2. It is very customary for delegations like ours to give a gift of appreciation to hosts at each location. It

does not have to be anything of significant value, but if your organization has anything like pens, key

chains, medallions, etc., you might want to bring to hand out (less than 10).

3. Call your phone carrier and switch to an international plan. When you land, turn roaming off. There

will be some expensive lessons if you do not do this. Use Wi-Fi for data unless it is imperative you do

otherwise.

Credit Cards vs. Cash

Major US credit cards work fine in the Netherlands in restaurants, hotels, shops and just about

everywhere except for trains. European credit cards have an imbedded chip in them that some US cards

do not have and the train systems requires the chip. If you have the chip on a credit card you will be OK,

2

but some Bank cards with a chip don’t work. So, when you land and get out of customs, the first thing

to do is trade dollars for euros to pay for trains. ATM’s are everywhere and accept all US credit cards.

There are physical banks located in at Schiphol Airport so currency exchange is quite easy. The euro has

been hovering around $1.17 over the past couple of months. Do not carry large amounts of cash. 100

euros will last for days.

Pre-program Options

Because we are not going to Amsterdam proper during the program, quite a few team members are

flying out September 1, and arriving in Amsterdam Saturday morning, September 2. Others will get in

Sunday morning or later. The team will rendezvous with everyone at Schiphol Airport and do a tour of

Amsterdam that day before everyone goes to Delft. When you go out of the Customs Area at Schiphol,

go to the center of the great hall and you will find a Burger King, which will be the rendezvous point.

There are very good luggage lockers that we can use at Schiphol, so we will place luggage in a locker, do

the tour during the day and then come back to Schiphol, pick up the luggage and proceed to Delft late

afternoon. We have done this many times and it works well.

Transportation Cards

All members of the team will receive their own “ChipKaart” which is a voucher card to use on the trains,

buses and trams. It will be preloaded with €50, which should last most of the week. Those arriving on

Saturday and Sunday morning will get their cards before we leave Schiphol. Those arriving on Sunday or

later will need to get their cards Monday morning at the beginning of the program.

How to travel from Schiphol Airport to Delft

Schiphol Airport (near Amsterdam) is the Netherlands main airport. You can take the train very easily

from Schiphol Airport to Delft (Central station). The train station is underneath the Great Hall of

Schiphol. The airport has good signage about where to buy train tickets, which train to take, at what

time, and from which platform. The cashier at the register will be able to give you all that information. If

you take the ‘sneltrein’ (fast train), it takes about 40 minutes. Keep in mind, you may need to transfer at

another train station to travel to Delft Central Station. Most likely you will have to change trains in

either Den Haag HS or Leiden. Upon arrival in Delft you turn left across the canal on leaving the station

square. The hotels are a short 10 minute walk from Delft Central Station.

Important Addresses & Phone numbers: Stan Bronson’s cell phone is 561-281-5081. Put this number

in your phone before you depart.

Hotel Johannes Vermeer

Molslaan 18

2611 RM Delft

The Netherlands

Telephone: +31 15 212 6466

Email: info@hotelvermeer.nl Website: http://hotelvermeer.nl

3

UNESCO-IHE (is situated more or less opposite the railway station)

Westvest 7, 2611 AX Delft

Phone: +31-15-21 51 76

Web: http://www.unesco-ihe.org/

4

The Netherlands Consular Information Sheet For detailed information please visit the website: http://travel.state.gov The Netherlands, Country Specific Information. This replaces the Country Specific Information for the

Netherlands dated June 17, 2011, to update all sections.

COUNTRY DESCRIPTION: The Netherlands is a highly developed, stable democracy. Tourist facilities are

available throughout the country. Read the Department of State’s Background Notes on the Netherlands

for additional information.

SMART TRAVELER ENROLLMENT PROGRAM (STEP) / EMBASSY LOCATION: If you are going to live in or

visit the Netherlands, please take the time to tell our Consulate General in Amsterdam about your trip. If

you enroll, we can keep you up to date with important safety and security announcements. It will also

help your friends and family get in touch with you in an emergency. Here’s the link to the Smart Traveler

Enrollment Program.

Local embassy and consulate information is available below and at the Department of State’s list of

embassies and consulates.

Please note that all requests for consular assistance in the Netherlands must be directed to the

Consulate General in Amsterdam. There are no consular services available at the Embassy in The

Hague. Consulate General of the

United States, Amsterdam

Museumplein 19

1071 DJ Amsterdam

Telephone: (31) (20) 575-5309

Emergency after-hours telephone: (31) (70) 310-2209

Facsimile: (31) (20) 679-0321

Embassy of the United States, The Hague

Lange Voorhout 102

2514 EJ The Hague

Telephone: (31) (70) 310-2209

Facsimile: (31) (70) 361-4688

5

ENTRY / EXIT REQUIREMENTS FOR U.S. CITIZENS: The Netherlands is a party to the Schengen

Agreement. As such, you may enter the Netherlands for up to 90 days for tourist or business purposes

without a visa. If you are traveling for any other purpose, you may need to obtain a visa. Your passport

should be valid for at least three months beyond the period of stay. The 90-day period begins when you

enter any of the Schengen group of countries. For further details about travel into and within Schengen

countries, please see our Schengen fact sheet. Anyone intending to stay longer than 90 days must obtain

the appropriate visa from the Dutch Embassy or a Dutch consulate in the United States.

For further information, contact the Embassy of the Netherlands at 4200 Linnean Avenue NW,

Washington, DC, 20008, one of the Dutch consulates in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, or Miami, or

one of the various honorary Dutch consulates throughout the United States. Additional information is

available on the Dutch Board of Tourism and Conventions website. Visit the Embassy of the Netherlands'

website for the most current visa information. Information on work, residency, and immigration

requirements in the Netherlands can be found on the website of the Dutch Immigration and

Naturalization Service.

The U.S. Department of State is unaware of any HIV/AIDS entry restrictions for visitors to or foreign

residents of the Netherlands.

Information about dual nationality or the prevention of international child abduction can be found on

our website. For further information about customs regulations, please read our Customs Information

page.

THREATS TO SAFETY AND SECURITY: Since 2004, Dutch government security measures have been in

place in response to concerns about terrorist activity in the Netherlands by international and domestic

extremist groups. The Dutch Government has determined the current terrorist threat level to be

"limited." According to the Dutch National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, this level, the second-

lowest of four levels, means that “the chance of an attack against the Netherlands is small, but that it

certainly cannot be entirely excluded.”

We encourage you to keep up with the latest news while in the Netherlands and to take steps to

increase your security awareness. As with other countries in the Schengen area, the Netherlands’ open

borders with its European neighbors allow for the possibility of terrorist groups entering/exiting the

country with anonymity.

Demonstrations are commonplace in the Netherlands and may range in number from a few

demonstrators to several thousand. Prior police notice is required for public demonstrations, and police

oversight is routinely provided. Nonetheless, even demonstrations intended to be peaceful can turn

confrontational and possibly escalate into violence. We urge you to avoid areas of demonstrations if

possible, and to exercise caution if near one.

Stay up to date by:

6

Bookmarking our Bureau of Consular Affairs website, which contains the current Travel Warnings

and Travel Alerts as well as the Worldwide Caution.

Follow us on Twitter and the Bureau of Consular Affairs page on Facebook as well.

Download our free Smart Traveler iPhone App to have travel information at your fingertip

Calling 1-888-407-4747 toll-free within the U.S. and Canada, or a regular toll line, 1-202-501-4444,

from other countries.

Take some time before travel to consider your personal security –Here are some useful tips for

traveling safely abroad.

CRIME: While the rate of violent crime in the Netherlands is low, tourists are often targeted by thieves.

Visitors frequently fall prey to pickpockets, bag snatchers, and other petty thieves who target

automobiles and hotel rooms. You should use your room or hotel safe, and keep your baggage locked or

secured when you’re away.

While thieves may operate anywhere, the U.S. Consulate General in Amsterdam receives frequent

reports of thefts from specific areas. Within Amsterdam, thieves and pickpockets are very active in and

around train and tram stations, in the city center, and aboard public transportation. Theft is especially

common on trains to and from Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, where hand luggage and laptop

computers are often targeted. Thieves often work in pairs; one distracts you, often by asking for

directions, while the accomplice moves in on your momentarily unguarded property. The timing of these

thefts usually coincides with train stops, enabling the thieves to escape. In addition, many U.S. citizens

have reported the theft of purses and briefcases while eating in downtown restaurants, including hotel

breakfast rooms. Never leave your personal items or baggage unattended when going to the restroom,

buffet table, etc.

In 2007, several U.S. citizens visitors reported experiencing excessive drowsiness, confusion, dizziness,

and nausea after drinking alcohol in public areas such as hotel bars and night clubs in several cities

throughout the Netherlands. These effects may be the result of unknowingly ingesting drugs

surreptitiously placed in drinks. These drugs do not have a distinctive color, smell, or flavor and come in

powder, liquid, and pill forms. If you believe you have been drugged, seek assistance immediately. Try to

keep the original beverage container, along with any remaining amount of the beverage, to assist the

police with their investigation.

Confidence artists have victimized U.S. citizens around the world, including in the Netherlands. Typically,

a U.S. citizen is notified via email of a winning lottery ticket, an inheritance, or other offer requiring his

or her assistance and cooperation. The U.S. citizen is asked to forward advance payments for alleged

“official expenses,” “taxes,” etc. and, often, to come to Amsterdam to conclude the operation. Another

common scam involves an Internet friend or partner who is reported to have been detained by

immigration authorities in the Netherlands en route to the U.S., and will not be released unless

additional funds are paid to the “traveler.” In every case, these reports have been determined to be

confidence schemes. Several U.S. citizens have lost tens of thousands of dollars in such scams. Funds

transferred in response to such offers can rarely be recovered. Information on fraud schemes can be

found on the U.S. Consulate General's website, and the Department of State's International Financial

7

Scams page. If you suspect you have been targeted by a scam based in the Netherlands, you may report

it to Dutch law enforcement authorities by email atvoorlichting@klpd.politie.nl, or at the following

address:

KLPD, Financial Crimes Unit

PO Box 3016

2700 KX Zoetermeer

The Netherlands

Attention: Project Apollo

The Dutch Embassy in Washington, DC has a prepared letter that can be used to inform the Dutch Police

of fraud.

Don’t buy counterfeit and pirated goods, even if they are widely available. Not only are the bootlegs

illegal to bring back into the United States, if you purchase them you may also be breaking local law.

VICTIMS OF CRIME: If you or someone you know becomes the victim of a crime abroad, you should

contact the local police and the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate. We can:

Replace a stolen passport.

For violent crimes such as assault or rape, help you find appropriate medical care,

Put you in contact with the appropriate police authorities, and contact family members or friends.

Although the local authorities are responsible for investigating and prosecuting the crime, consular

officers can help you understand the local criminal justice process and can direct you to local

attorneys.

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Fund (CICF) of the Netherlands provides financial compensation,

under specific circumstances, for victims of crime and for those who have suffered injuries and

consequent loss as a result of such incidents. The fund also provides for dependents or immediate family

members of homicide victims. For more information, contact the Dutch Ministry of Justice at (31) (70)

414-2000.

The local equivalent to the “911” emergency line in the Netherlands is 112.

Please see our information on victims of crime, including possible victim compensation programs in the

United States.

CRIMINAL PENALTIES: While you are traveling in The Netherlands, you are subject to its laws even if you

are a U.S. citizen. Foreign laws and legal systems can be vastly different from our own. Under Dutch law,

for example, you may be taken in for questioning if you are unable to present your passport to local

authorities. It’s very important to know what’s legal and what’s not in the country you are visiting.

8

Note that your U.S. passport won’t help you avoid arrest or prosecution if you break local laws. If you

are arrested in The Netherlands, however, you do have the right to request that the police, prison

officials, or other authorities alert the Consulate General of your arrest, and to have communications

from you forwarded to the Consulate General. This accommodation is based on the Vienna Convention

on Consular Relations, bilateral agreements with certain countries, and customary international law.

While some countries will automatically notify the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate if a U.S. citizen is

detained or arrested in a foreign country, that might not always be the case. To ensure that the United

States is aware of your circumstances, request that the police and prison officials notify the nearest U.S.

embassy or consulate as soon as you are arrested or detained overseas.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: The Netherlands instituted a comprehensive indoor smoking ban in July

2008. The ban includes all cafes, pubs, clubs, theatres, coffee shops, restaurants, hotels, airports,

shopping malls, amusement centers, etc. Smoking is only allowed in private homes, in the open air, and

in designated smoking areas.

Dutch customs authorities stringently enforce regulations concerning importation into the Netherlands

of items such as firearms and other controlled materials. Contact the Embassy of the Netherlands in

Washington, D.C. or one of the Dutch consulates in Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, or New York for

specific information regarding customs requirements.

You must carry identification at all times in the Netherlands if you are age 14 or older. Accepted forms of

identification for U.S. citizens include a U.S. passport or a Dutch residence card issued by the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs. A copy of a U.S. passport is not sufficient under Dutch law.

Dutch authorities may require U.S. citizens who apply for or obtain Dutch nationality to renounce their

U.S. citizenship. For further information, visit the Dutch immigration and naturalization authority

website and the U.S. Consulate General website.

Accessibility: Dutch law guarantees equality and the right to access for people with disabilities.

Information is available in Dutch on the Ministry of Public Health website.

MEDICAL FACILITIES AND HEALTH INFORMATION: Good medical facilities are widely available.

Emergency medical response can be accessed by dialing 112. Pharmacies (“Apotheek”) are widely

available and can assist with emergency prescription needs. Some common medications are not

available in the Netherlands without a prescription, and some prescription drugs cannot be sent to the

country. Travelers are urged to carry an adequate supply of prescription drugs in their original container,

in their carry-on luggage. Please carry a letter from your pharmacist or medical doctor with you, as some

drugs are subject to confiscation by local custom agents. Those traveling with any pre-existing medical

problems should bring a letter from the attending physician, describing the medical condition and any

prescription medications, including the generic name of prescribed drugs.

Vaccinations are not required for travel to the Netherlands.

9

You can find good information on vaccinations and other health precautions, on the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention ( CDC) website. For information about outbreaks of infectious diseases abroad,

consult the World Health Organization (WHO) website, which also contains additional health

information for travelers, including detailed country-specific health information.

MEDICAL INSURANCE: You can’t assume your insurance will go with you when you travel. It’s very

important to find out BEFORE you leave. You need to ask your insurance company two questions:

Does my policy apply when I’m out of the United States?

Will it cover emergencies like a trip to a foreign hospital or an evacuation?

In many places, doctors and hospitals still expect payment in cash at the time of service. Your regular

U.S. health insurance may not cover doctors’ and hospital visits in other countries. If your policy doesn’t

go with you when you travel, it’s a very good idea to take out another one for your trip. For more

information, please see our medical insurance overseas page.

TRAFFIC SAFETY AND ROAD CONDITIONS: While in the Netherlands, you may encounter road

conditions that differ significantly from those in the United States.

In the Netherlands, travel in, around, and between cities is possible via a highly developed national

public transportation system, an extensive system of bike paths, and by automobile and motorcycle on a

modern highway system. Rail is often a convenient alternative to driving, particularly in the areas

around Amsterdam, The Hague, and Rotterdam, where road congestion is frequent. Rail network

information is available online.

Intercity travel by road is relatively safe in comparison to some other European countries; nonetheless,

more than 1,000 people die and another 10,000 are injured in traffic accidents in the Netherlands each

year. More than two-thirds of the fatal accidents occur outside urban areas.

A valid driver’s license issued by a Department of Motor Vehicles in the U.S. is valid for use in the

Netherlands for up to 180 days while in tourist or visitor status. You must use seat belts and child seats.

Driving is on the right side of the road, as in the United States. Speed limits are strictly enforced via

radar. Traffic cameras are pervasive throughout the Netherlands and tickets for traveling even 2-5 km/h

over the limit are common. The maximum speed limit on highways is 120 km/h, with a highway speed

limit of 100 km/h posted in most urban areas. Secondary roads and some urban-area highways have a

speed limit of 80 km/h. The speed limit in towns and cities is 50 km/h, with 30 km/h zones in residential

areas. The Dutch Government has reduced speed limits on certain roads near cities in an effort to

reduce air pollution. You should be aware that speed limit signs are electronic, and therefore speed

limits may be changed remotely by authorities depending on traffic conditions. Drivers must yield the

right-of-way to drivers and bicyclists coming from the right at intersections or traffic circles unless

otherwise posted. The maximum allowable blood-alcohol content in the Netherlands is 0.05%. Use of

cellular telephones while driving without the use of a hands-free device is prohibited, and is punishable

by severe fines.

10

Lanes in the center of many urban two-way streets are reserved for buses, trams, and taxis. In cities,

pedestrians should be mindful of trams, which often cross or share bicycle and pedestrian paths. Serious

– and sometimes fatal – accidents involving pedestrians or bicyclists colliding with trams occur each

year. Motorists should be especially mindful that bicyclists have the right-of-way; motorists must yield

to bicyclists. Pedestrians should not walk along bicycle paths, which are often adjacent to the sidewalk

and usually designated by red pavement.

Bicyclists and pedestrians should be particularly cautious during the winter months, when paths, roads,

and especially bridges can be icy and extremely slippery.

Taxi service in the Netherlands is safe but expensive. Trams and buses are both convenient and

economical, but are often frequented by pickpockets.

Please refer to our Road Safety page for more information. Also, we suggest that you visit the website of

the Dutch Board of Tourism and Conventions for additional information.

AVIATION SAFETY OVERSIGHT: The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assessed the

government of the Netherlands’ Civil Aviation Authority as being in compliance with International Civil

Aviation Organization (ICAO) aviation safety standards for oversight of the Netherlands’ air carrier

operations. Further information may be found on the FAA’s safety assessment page.

CHILDREN’S ISSUES: Please see our Office of Children’s Issues web pages on intercountry adoption and

international parental child abduction

How to get help in the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Police, ambulance, fire: Dial 112

For more information on medical emergencies, visit https://www.angloinfo.com/how-

to/netherlands/healthcare/emergencies

How to find the embassy for your home country:

https://embassy.goabroad.com/

US citizens and residents

Before you go, enroll in STEP: https://step.state.gov/step/

If you need help from the US Department of State, see instructions according to your

specific scenario:

https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/emergencies.html

Contact the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate:

Netherlands U.S. Consulate General Amsterdam

U.S. Embassy The Hague Museumplein 19

Lange Voorhout 102 1071 DJ Amsterdam

2514 EJ The Hague The Netherlands

11

Phone: +31 70 310-2209

Or call the U.S Embassy or Consulate:

From the U.S. & Canada From Overseas

1-888-407-4747 +1 202-501-4444

Visit the U.S Embassy or Consulate on Social Media:

Twitter @StateDept

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/usdos/ (Includes Facebook messenger contact link)

U.S. Embassy The Hague

Twitter: https://twitter.com/usembthehague

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/US-Embassy-The-Hague-147599291963527/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/usembthehague

https://www.instagram.com/u.s.embassythehague/

U.S. Consulate General Amsterdam

Twitter: https://twitter.com/ConGenAMS

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/USConGenAmsterdam/

https://www.instagram.com/uscongenams/

12

A safe trip abroad – Travel. State.Gov

US Department of State

When you travel abroad, the odds are you will have a safe and incident-free trip. Travelers can,

however, become victims of crime and violence, or experience unexpected difficulties. No one is better

able to tell you this than the U.S. consular officers who work in more than 250 U.S. embassies and

consulates around the globe. Every day of the year, U.S. embassies and consulates receive calls from

American citizens in distress.

Happily, most problems can be solved over the phone or with a visit to the Consular Section of the

nearest U.S. embassy or consulate. There are other occasions, however, when U.S. consular officers are

called upon to help U.S. citizens who are in foreign hospitals or prisons, or to assist the families of U.S.

citizens who have passed away overseas.

We have prepared the following travel tips to help you avoid serious difficulties during your time

abroad. We wish you a safe and wonderful journey!

Before You Go

What to Take

Safety begins when you pack. To help avoid becoming a target, do not dress in a way that could mark

you as an affluent tourist. Expensive-looking jewelry, for instance, can draw the wrong attention.

Always try to travel light. You can move more quickly and will be more likely to have a free hand. You

will also be less tired and less likely to set your luggage down, leaving it unattended.

Carry the minimum number of valuables, and plan places to conceal them. Your passport, cash and

credit cards are most secure when locked in a hotel safe. When you have to carry them on your person,

you may wish to put them each in a different place rather than all in one wallet or pouch. Avoid

handbags, fanny packs and outside pockets that are easy targets for thieves. Inside pockets and a sturdy

shoulder bag with the strap worn across your chest are somewhat safer. One of the safest places to

carry valuables is in a pouch or money belt worn under your clothing.

If you wear glasses, pack an extra pair. Pack them and any medicines you need in your carry-on luggage.

To avoid problems when passing through customs, keep medicines in their original, labeled containers.

Bring copies of your prescriptions and the generic names for the drugs. If a medication is unusual or

contains narcotics, carry a letter from your doctor attesting to your need to take the drug. If you have

any doubt about the legality of carrying a certain drug into a country, consult the embassy or consulate

of that country before you travel.

13

Bring travelers’ checks and one or two major credit cards instead of cash.

Pack an extra set of passport photos along with a photocopy of your passport’s information page to

make replacement of your passport easier in the event it is lost or stolen.

Put your name, address and telephone numbers inside and outside of each piece of luggage. Use

covered luggage tags to avoid casual observation of your identity or nationality. If possible, lock your

luggage.

What to Leave Behind

Don't bring anything you would hate to lose. Leave at home:

Valuable or expensive-looking jewelry

Irreplaceable family objects

All unnecessary credit cards

Your Social Security card, library card, and similar items you may routinely carry in your wallet.

Leave a copy of your itinerary with family or friends at home in case they need to contact you in an

emergency.

Make two photocopies of your passport identification page, airline tickets, driver's license and the credit

cards that you plan to bring with you. Leave one photocopy of this data with family or friends at home;

pack the other in a place separate from where you carry the originals.

Leave a copy of the serial numbers of your travelers' checks with a friend or relative at home. Carry your

copy with you in a separate place and, as you cash the checks, cross them off the list.

What to Learn About Before You Go

Local Laws and Customs

When you leave the United States, you are subject to the laws of the country you are visiting. Therefore,

before you go, learn as much as you can about the local laws and customs of the places you plan to visit.

Good resources are your library, your travel agent, and the embassies, consulates or tourist bureaus of

the countries you will visit. In addition, keep track of what is being reported in the media about recent

developments in those countries.

Things to Arrange Before You Go

Your Itinerary

14

As much as possible, plan to stay in larger hotels that have more elaborate security. Safety experts

recommend booking a room from the second to seventh floors above ground level – high enough to

deter easy entry from outside, but low enough for fire equipment to reach.

When there is a choice of airport or airline, ask your travel agent about comparative safety records.

Legal Documents

Have your affairs in order at home. If you leave a current will, insurance documents, and power of

attorney with your family or a friend, you can feel secure about traveling and will be prepared for any

emergency that may arise while you are away. If you have minor children, consider making guardianship

arrangements for them.

Register your travel

It is a good idea to sign up for the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program --think of it as checking in-- so that

you may be contacted if need be, whether because of a family emergency in the U.S., or because of a

crisis in the area in which you are traveling. It is a free service provided by the State Department, and is

easily accomplished online at https://travelregistration.state.gov. (In accordance with the Privacy Act,

the Department of State may not release information on your welfare or whereabouts to inquirers

without your express written authorization.)

Credit

Make a note of the credit limit on each credit card that you bring, and avoid charging over that limit

while traveling. Americans have been arrested for innocently exceeding their credit limit. Ask your credit

card company how to report the loss of your card from abroad. 1-800 numbers do not work from

abroad, but your company should have a number that you can call while you are overseas.

Insurance

Find out if your personal property insurance covers you for loss or theft abroad. Also, check on whether

your health insurance covers you abroad. Medicare and Medicaid do not provide payment for medical

care outside the United States. Even if your health insurance will reimburse you for medical care that

you pay for abroad, health insurance usually does not pay for medical evacuation from a remote area or

from a country where medical facilities are inadequate. Consider purchasing a policy designed for

travelers, and covering short-term health and emergency assistance, as well as medical evacuation in

the event of an accident or serious illness.

Precautions to Take While Traveling

Safety on the Street

15

Use the same common sense traveling overseas that you would at home. Be especially cautious in (or

avoid) areas where you may be more easily victimized. These include crowded subways, train stations,

elevators, tourist sites, market places, festivals and crime-ridden neighborhoods.

Don't use short cuts, narrow alleys or poorly lit streets.

Try not to travel alone at night.

Avoid public demonstrations and other civil disturbances.

Keep a low profile and avoid loud conversations or arguments.

Do not discuss travel plans or other personal matters with strangers.

Avoid scam artists by being wary of strangers who approach you and offer to be your guide or sell

you something at bargain prices.

Beware of pickpockets. They often have an accomplice who will:

o jostle you,

o ask you for directions or the time,

o point to something spilled on your clothing,

o or distract you by creating a disturbance.

Beware of groups of vagrant children who could create a distraction to pick your pocket.

Wear the shoulder strap of your bag across your chest and walk with the bag away from the curb

to avoid drive-by purse-snatchers.

Try to seem purposeful when you move about. Even if you are lost, act as if you know where you

are going. Try to ask for directions only from individuals in authority.

Know how to use a pay telephone and have the proper change or token on hand.

Learn a few phrases in the local language or have them handy in written form so that you can

signal your need for police or medical help.

Make a note of emergency telephone numbers you may need: police, fire, your hotel, and the

nearest U.S. embassy or consulate.

If you are confronted, don't fight back -- give up your valuables.

Safety in Your Hotel

Keep your hotel door locked at all times. Meet visitors in the lobby.

Do not leave money and other valuables in your hotel room while you are out. Use the hotel safe.

If you are out late at night, let someone know when you expect to return.

If you are alone, do not get on an elevator if there is a suspicious-looking person inside.

Read the fire safety instructions in your hotel room. Know how to report a fire, and be sure you

know where the nearest fire exits and alternate exits are located. (Count the doors between your

room and the nearest exit; this could be a lifesaver if you have to crawl through a smoke-filled

corridor.)

Safety on Public Transportation

If a country has a pattern of tourists being targeted by criminals on public transport, that information is

mentioned in each country’s Country Specific Information in the section about crime.

16

Taxis

Only take taxis clearly identified with official markings. Beware of unmarked cabs.

Trains

Well-organized, systematic robbery of passengers on trains along popular tourist routes is a problem. It

is more common at night and especially on overnight trains.

If you see your way being blocked by a stranger and another person is very close to you from behind,

move away. This can happen in the corridor of the train or on the platform or station.

Do not accept food or drink from strangers. Criminals have been known to drug food or drink offered to

passengers. Criminals may also spray sleeping gas in train compartments. Where possible, lock your

compartment. If it cannot be locked securely, take turns sleeping in shifts with your traveling

companions. If that is not possible, stay awake. If you must sleep unprotected, tie down your luggage

and secure your valuables to the extent possible.

Do not be afraid to alert authorities if you feel threatened in any way. Extra police are often assigned to

ride trains on routes where crime is a serious problem.

Buses

The same type of criminal activity found on trains can be found on public buses on popular tourist

routes. For example, tourists have been drugged and robbed while sleeping on buses or in bus stations.

In some countries, whole busloads of passengers have been held up and robbed by gangs of bandits.

Safety When You Drive

When you rent a car, choose a type that is commonly available locally. Where possible, ask that

markings that identify it as a rental car be removed. Make certain it is in good repair. If available, choose

a car with universal door locks and power windows, features that give the driver better control of

access. An air conditioner, when available, is also a safety feature, allowing you to drive with windows

closed. Thieves can and do snatch purses through open windows of moving cars.

Keep car doors locked at all times. Wear seat belts.

As much as possible, avoid driving at night.

Don't leave valuables in the car. If you must carry things with you, keep them out of sight locked in

the trunk, and then take them with you when you leave the car.

Don't park your car on the street overnight. If the hotel or municipality does not have a parking

garage or other secure area, select a well-lit area.

Never pick up hitchhikers.

Don't get out of the car if there are suspicious looking individuals nearby. Drive away.

17

Patterns of Crime Against Motorists

In many places frequented by tourists, including areas of southern Europe, victimization of motorists has

been refined to an art. Where it is a problem, U.S. embassies are aware of it and consular officers try to

work with local authorities to warn the public about the dangers. In some locations, these efforts at

public awareness have paid off, reducing the frequency of incidents. You may also wish to ask your

rental car agency for advice on avoiding robbery while visiting tourist destinations.

Carjackers and thieves operate at gas stations, parking lots, in city traffic and along the highway. Be

suspicious of anyone who hails you or tries to get your attention when you are in or near your car.

Criminals use ingenious ploys. They may pose as good Samaritans, offering help for tires that they claim

are flat or that they have made flat. Or they may flag down a motorist, ask for assistance, and then steal

the rescuer's luggage or car. Usually they work in groups, one person carrying on the pretense while the

others rob you.

Other criminals get your attention with abuse, either trying to drive you off the road, or causing an

"accident" by rear-ending you.

In some urban areas, thieves don't waste time on ploys, they simply smash car windows at traffic lights,

grab your valuables or your car and get away. In cities around the world, "defensive driving" has come to

mean more than avoiding auto accidents; it means keeping an eye out for potentially criminal

pedestrians, cyclists and scooter riders.

How to Handle Money Safely

To avoid carrying large amounts of cash, change your travelers’ checks only as you need currency.

Countersign travelers’ checks only in front of the person who will cash them.

Do not flash large amounts of money when paying a bill. Make sure your credit card is returned to

you after each transaction.

Deal only with authorized agents when you exchange money, buy airline tickets or purchase

souvenirs. Do not change money on the black market.

If your possessions are lost or stolen, report the loss immediately to the local police. Keep a copy of the

police report for insurance claims and as an explanation of what happened.

After reporting missing items to the police, report the loss or theft of:

Travelers' checks to the nearest agent of the issuing company

Credit cards to the issuing company

Airline tickets to the airline or travel agent

Passport to the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate

How to Avoid Legal Difficulties

18

When you are in a foreign country, you are subject to its laws and are under its jurisdiction. You can be

arrested overseas for actions that may be either legal or considered minor infractions in the United

States. Familiarize yourself with legal expectations in the countries you will visit. The Country Specific

Information pages include information on unusual patterns of arrests in particular countries, as

appropriate.

Drug Violations

More than one-third of U.S. citizens incarcerated abroad are held on drug charges. Some countries do

not distinguish between possession and trafficking, and many have mandatory sentences – even for

possession of a small amount of marijuana or cocaine. A number of Americans have been arrested for

possessing prescription drugs, particularly tranquilizers and amphetamines, that they purchased legally

elsewhere. Other U.S. citizens have been arrested for purchasing prescription drugs abroad in quantities

that local authorities suspected were for commercial use. If in doubt about foreign drug laws, ask local

authorities or the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate.

Possession of Firearms

The places where U.S. citizens most often experience difficulties for illegal possession of firearms are

nearby – Mexico, Canada and the Caribbean. Sentences for possession of firearms in Mexico can be up

to 30 years. In general, firearms, even those legally registered in the U.S., cannot be brought into a

country unless a permit is obtained in advance from the embassy or a consulate of that country and the

firearm is registered with foreign authorities on arrival. (NOTE: There are also strict rules about bringing

firearms or ammunition into the U.S; check with U.S. Customs before your trip.

Photography

In many countries you can be detained for photographing security-related institutions, such as police

and military installations, government buildings, border areas and transportation facilities. If you are in

doubt, ask permission before taking photographs.

Purchasing Antiques

Americans have been arrested for purchasing souvenirs that were, or looked like, antiques and that local

customs authorities believed were national treasures. This is especially true in Turkey, Egypt and

Mexico. Familiarize yourself with any local regulations of antiques. In countries with strict control of

antiques, document your purchases as reproductions if that is the case, or if they are authentic, secure

the necessary export permit (often from the national museum). It is a good idea to inquire about

exporting these items before you purchase them.

The State Department is committed to assisting American citizens who become victims of crime while

abroad. We help in two ways:

19

Overseas: consular officers, agents, and staff work with crime victims and help them with the local

police and medical systems.

In the United States: our office of Overseas Citizens Services will stay in touch with family

members in the United States, and help provide U.S.-based resources for the victim when

possible.

If you are the victim of a crime overseas:

Contact the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate:

o Consular officers are available for emergency assistance 24 hours/day, 7 days/week.

o Contact information for U.S. Embassies and Consulates overseas can be found at

http://www.usembassy.gov/.

o Embassy of the United States of America

Lange Voorhout 102

2514 EJ The Hague.

T: +31 70 310-2209

The Consulate General is located at Museumplein 19, 1071 DJ AMSTERDAM. This is on the corner of

the Museumplein, opposite of the Stedelijk Museum and across from the Van Gogh Museum. American

Citizen Services

U.S. Consulate General

Museumplein 19

1071 DJ Amsterdam

The Netherlands

E-mail: USCitizenServicesAms@state.gov

Fax: (31)(0)20-575 5330

You can call our American Citizen Services Unit in the afternoon between 1:30 and 4:30, Monday

through Friday. The morning hours are reserved for visitors with appointments and only emergency

phone calls (see instructions below) can be answered.

The number to call is 31(0)20 575 5309.

o To contact the Department of State in the U.S. call 1-888-407-4747 during business hours, and

202-647-5225 after hours.

Contact the local police to report the incident and get immediate help. Request a copy of the

police report.

Consular Assistance to American Crime Victims:

When an American is the victim of a crime overseas, he or she may suffer from physical, emotional or

financial injuries. It can be more difficult because the victim may be in unfamiliar surroundings, and may

not know the local language or customs. Consuls, consular agents, and local employees at overseas

posts know local government agencies and resources in the country where they work.

We can help:

20

Replace a stolen passport

Contact family, friends, or employers

Obtain appropriate medical care

Address emergency needs that arise as a result of the crime

Explain the local criminal justice process

Obtain information about your case

Connect you to local and U.S. resources to assist victims of crime

Obtain information about local and U.S. victim compensation programs

Provide a list of local lawyers who speak English

We cannot:

Investigate crimes

Provide legal advice or represent you in court

Serve as official interpreters or translators

Pay legal, medical, or other fees for you

Resources and Information for Crime Victims upon Return to the United States:

Some U.S. cities and communities offer programs help residents who are victims of overseas crime,

including:

Rape crisis counseling programs

Shelter and counseling programs for battered women

Support groups and bereavement counseling for members of murder victims

Diagnostic and treatment programs for child abuse victims

Assistance for victims of drunk driving crashes

All U.S. states have victim compensation programs, and many offer benefits to residents who are victims

of violent crime overseas. Most programs require the victim to file a report at the time of the incident,

and to provide a copy with the application. Programs include financial assistance to pay for:

Medical costs

Funeral expenses

Lost income or loss of support

Information about each state’s compensation program and how to apply for benefits is available from

the National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards.

Contact Information for Victim Assistance Programs:

Sexual Assault:

21

RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network) – Toll-free 24/7 hotline for sexual assault

counseling and referrals: 1-800-656-HOPE, http://www.rainn.org

U.S. Department of Justice Violence Against Women Office – Information about local sexual

assault victim assistance: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/help.htm

Domestic Violence:

National Domestic Violence Hotline – Toll-free 24/7 hotline for crisis counseling and referrals: 1-

800-799-SAFE

U.S. Department of Justice Violence Against Women Office – Information about local domestic

violence victim assistance: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/help.htm

Families and Friends of Murder Victims:

POMC, Inc. (National Organization of Parents of Murdered Children) – Toll-free 24/7 hotline for

crisis counseling and referrals: 1-888-818-POMC, http://www.pomc.org

Victims and Families of Drunk Driving Crashes:

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) – Information about local resources for victims and family

members: http://www.madd.org

General Victim Assistance:

U.S. Department of Justice Office for Victims of Crime – Contact information for non-emergency

services in communities throughout U.S.: http://ovc.ncjrs.org/findvictimservices/

National Crime Victim Center – Information for crime victims on the impact of crime, safety

planning, legal rights and civil legal remedies, and options for assistance and referrals to local

programs. Call toll free (8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. EST) 1-800-FYI-CALL or call TTY for hearing impaired

(8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. EST) 1-800-211-7996.http://www.ncvc.org

National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) – Toll-free 24/7 hotline for information and

referral to victim assistance programs: 1-800-TRY-NOVA, http://www.try-nova.org

Overseas Resources:

Victim Assistance On-line – Information about victim assistance programs in approximately 20

countries: http://www.vaonline.org

22

23

Delft (Wikipedia)

Province: South Holland Area (2006) Total 9.30 sq mi Land 8.96 sq mi Water 0.34 sq mi Population (20 February 2017) Total 99,737 Density 10,800/sq mi Delft is a city and municipality in the

province of South Holland (Zuid-Holland),

the Netherlands. It is located between

Rotterdam and The Hague. Delft is

primarily known for its typically Dutch town center (with canals); also for the painter Vermeer, Delft

Blue pottery (Delftware), the Delft University of Technology, and its association with the Dutch royal

family, the House of Orange-Nassau.

From a rural village in the early Middle Ages Delft developed to a city that received its charter in the 13th century (1246). The town's association with the House of Orange started when William of Orange (Willem van Oranje), nicknamed William the Silent (Willem de Zwijger), took up residence in 1572 At the time he was the leader of growing national Dutch resistance against Spanish occupation of the country, which struggle is known as the Eighty Years' War. By then Delft was one of the leading cities of Holland and it was equipped with the necessary city walls to serve as a headquarters.

After the Act of Abjuration was proclaimed in 1581 Delft became the de facto capital of the newly independent Netherlands, as the seat of the Prince of Orange. When William was shot dead in 1584, by Balthazar Gerards in the hall of the Prinsenhof, the family's traditional burial place in Breda was still in the hands of the Spanish. Therefore, he was buried in the Delft Nieuwe Kerk (New Church), starting a tradition for the House of Orange that has continued to the present day.

Delft Explosion The Delft Explosion, also known in history as the Delft Thunderclap, occurred on 12 October 1654 when a gunpowder store exploded, destroying much of the city. Over a hundred people were killed and thousands wounded. About 30 tonnes of gunpowder were stored in barrels in a magazine in a former Clarissen convent in the Doelenkwartier district. Cornelis Soetens, the keeper of the magazine, opened the store to check a sample of the powder and a huge explosion followed. Luckily, many citizens were away, visiting a market in Schiedam or a fair in The Hague. Artist Carel Fabritius was wounded in the explosion and died of his injuries. Later on, Egbert van der Poel painted several pictures of Delft showing

24

the devastation. The Delft Explosion is the principal reason why Delft University of Technology maintains explosion science as a key topic within its research portfolio and graduate skill-set.

Sights

The city center retains a large number of monumental buildings, whereas in many streets there are

canals of which the borders are connected by typical bridges, altogether making this city a notable

tourist destination.[2]

Historical buildings include:

Oude Kerk (Old Church). Buried here: Piet Hein, Johannes Vermeer, Anthony van Leeuwenhoek. Nieuwe Kerk (New Church), constructed between 1381 and 1496. It contains the Dutch royal

family's burial vault, which between funerals is sealed with a 5000 kg cover stone. The Prinsenhof (Princes' Court), now a museum. City Hall on the Markt. The Oostpoort (Eastern gate), built around 1400. This is the only remaining gate of the old city

walls. The Gemeenlandshuis Delfland, or Huyterhuis, built in 1505, which has housed the Delfland

regional water authority since 1645. The Koninklijk Nederlands Legermuseum, the national museum of the Royal Dutch Army housed

in the Armamentarium. Waag (Delft)

Culture Delft is well known for the Delft pottery ceramic products which were styled on the imported Chinese porcelain of the 17th century. The city had an early start in this area since it was a home port of the Dutch East India Company. The painter Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675) was born in Delft. Vermeer used Delft streets and home interiors as the subject or background of his paintings.

Several other famous painters lived and worked in Delft at that time, such as Pieter de Hoogh, Carel Fabritius, Nicolaes Maes, Gerard Houckgeest and Hendrick Cornelisz. van Vliet. They all were members of the Delft School. The Delft School is known for its images of domestic life, views of households, church interiors, courtyards, squares and the streets of Delft. The painters also produced pictures showing historic events, flower paintings, portraits for patrons and the court, and decorative pieces of art.

Education Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) is one of three universities of technology in the Netherlands. It was founded as an academy for civil engineering in 1842 by King William II. Today well over 16,000 students are enrolled.

IHE Delft, the Institute for Water Education, providing postgraduate education for people from developing countries, draws on the strong tradition in water management and hydraulic engineering of the Delft University.

25

Economy In the local economic field essential elements are:

education; (a.o. TU Delft Delft University of Technology) (As of 2007 21,223 students, 2.712 scientists and 1.859 researchers),

scientific research; (a.o. "TNO" ( Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research), Stichting GeoDelft, Nederlands Normalisatie-Instituut

tourism; (about one million registered visitors a year), industry; (DSM Gist Services BV, (Delftware) earthenware production by De Koninklijke

Porceleyne Fles, Exact Software Nederland BV, retail; (Ikea ( Inter IKEA Systems B.V., owner and worldwide franchisor of the IKEA Concept, is

based in Delft), Makro, Eneco Engergy NV).

26

The Hague (Wikipedia)

Province: South Holland Area: City and municipality 37.92 sq mi Land 31.92 sq mi Water 6.00 sq mi City and municipality 500,000 Density 15, 270/sq mi Urban 1,022,256 Metro 1,406,000 Randstad 6,659,300

The Hague (Dutch: Den Haag), officially 's-Gravenhage is the capital city of the province of South Holland in the Netherlands. With a population of 500,000 inhabitants (as of 1 September 2011),[1][2] it is the third largest city of the Netherlands, after Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Located in the west of the Netherlands, The Hague is in the centre of the Haaglanden conurbation and lies at the southwest corner of the larger Randstad conurbation.

The Hague is the seat of the Dutch government and parliament, the Supreme Court, and the Council of State, but the city is not the capital of the Netherlands which constitutionally is Amsterdam. Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands lives at Huis ten Bosch and works at Noordeinde Palace in The Hague. All foreign embassies in the Netherlands and 150 international organisations are located in the city, including the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, which makes The Hague one of the major cities hosting the United Nations, along with New York, Vienna, Geneva and Nairobi.

The Hague originated around 1230, when Floris IV, Count of Holland purchased land alongside a pond (now the Hofvijver) in order to build a hunting residence. In 1248 William II, Count of Holland and Rex Romanorum, decided to extend the residence to a palace. He died in 1256 before this palace was completed, but parts of it were finished by his son Floris V, of which the Ridderzaal (Knights' Hall), still extant, is the most prominent. It is still used for political events, such as the annual speech from the

27

throne by the monarch. From the 13th century on the counts of Holland used The Hague as their administrative centre and residence when in Holland.

Name and status The Hague is first mentioned as 'Die Hage' in a document dating from 1242. In the fifteenth century the more formal 'des Graven hage' came into use, literally "the count's wood", with connotations like "the count's hedge, private enclosure or hunting grounds". 's Gravenshage was officially used for the city from the 17th century on. Nowadays this name is only used in official documents. The city itself uses "Den Haag" in all its other communications.

When the Dukes of Burgundy gained control over the counties of Holland and Zeeland at the beginning of the 15th century, they appointed a stadtholder to rule in their stead with the States of Holland as an advisory council. Their seat was located in The Hague. At the beginning of the Eighty Years' War, the absence of city walls proved disastrous, as it allowed Spanish troops easily to occupy the town. In 1575 the States of Holland even considered demolishing the city, but this proposal was abandoned, after mediation by William of Orange. From 1588 The Hague also became the location of the government of the Dutch Republic. In order for the administration to maintain control over city matters, The Hague never received official city status (although it did have many of the privileges normally granted only to cities). However, since the days of King Louis Napoleon (1806) The Hague has been allowed to call itself a city.

After the Napoleonic Wars, modern-day Belgium and the Netherlands were combined in the United Kingdom of the Netherlands to form a buffer against France. As a compromise, Brussels and The Hague alternated as capital every two years, with the government remaining in The Hague. After the separation of Belgium in 1830, Amsterdam remained the capital of the Netherlands, while the government was situated in The Hague. Since early times, probably as far back as the 16th century, the stork has been the symbol of The Hague. Modern city Because of its history, the historical inner city of The Hague differs in various respects from the nearby smaller cities of Leiden and Delft. It does not have a cramped inner city, bordered by canals and walls. Instead it has some small streets in the town centre that may be dated from the late Middle Ages, and several spacious streets boasting rich 18th century houses built for diplomats and affluent Dutch families. It has a large church dating from the 15th century, an impressive City Hall (built as such) from the 16th century, several large 17th-century palaces, a 17th-century Protestant church built in what was then a modern style, and many important 18th-century buildings. When the government started to play a more prominent role in Dutch society after 1850, The Hague quickly expanded. Many streets were specifically built for the large number of civil servants employed in the country's government and for the Dutchmen who were retiring from the administration and exploitation of the Netherlands East Indies. The growing city annexed the rural municipality of Loosduinen partly in 1903 and completely in 1923.

Parts of the city sustained heavy damage during World War II. The Atlantic Wall was built through part of the city, causing a large quarter to be torn down by the Nazi occupants. On March 3, 1945, the Royal Air Force mistakenly bombed the Bezuidenhout quarter. The target was an installation of V-2 rockets in a nearby park. Because of navigational errors, the bombs fell on a heavily populated and historic part of the city. 511 people died and the scars in the city may still be seen today.

28

After the war The Hague was at one point the largest building site in Europe. The city expanded massively to the southwest. The destroyed areas were also quickly rebuilt. The population peaked at 600,000 inhabitants around 1965. In the 1970s and 1980s many, mostly white, middle class families moved to neighbouring towns like Voorburg, Leidschendam, Rijswijk and, most of all, Zoetermeer. This led to the traditional pattern of an impoverished inner city and more prosperous suburbs. Attempts to include parts of these municipalities in the city of The Hague were highly controversial. In the 1990s, with the consent of Dutch Parliament, The Hague annexed fairly large areas from neighbouring towns as well as from not even bordering ones, on which complete new residential areas were built and are still being built.

Cityscape City life concentrates around the Hofvijver and the Binnenhof, where the Parliament is located. The city has a limited student culture due to its lack of an actual university], although the Royal Conservatory of The Hague is located there, as well as The Hague University, a vocational university and a branch of The Open University of the Netherlands. The city has many civil servants and diplomats. In fact, the number and variety of foreign residents (especially the expatriates) makes the city quite culturally diverse, with many foreign pubs, shops and cultural events.

The Hague is the largest Dutch city on the North Sea and includes two distinct beach resorts. The main beach resort Scheveningen, in the northwestern part of the city, is a popular destination for tourists as well as for inhabitants. With 10 million visitors a year, it is the most popular beach town in the Benelux. Kijkduin, in the southwest, is The Hague's other beach resort. It is significantly smaller and attracts mainly local residents.

The former Dutch colony of Netherlands East Indies ("Nederlands-Indië", now Indonesia) has left its mark on The Hague. Since the 19th century high level civil servants from the Dutch East Indies often spent long term leave and vacation in The Hague. Many streets are named after places in the Netherlands East Indies (as well as other former Dutch colonies such as Suriname) and there is a sizable "Indo" (i.e. mixed Dutch-Indonesian) community. Since the loss of these Dutch possessions in December 1949, "Indo people" also known as "Indische people" often refer to The Hague as "the Widow of the Indies".

The older parts of the town have many characteristically wide and long streets. Houses are generally low-rise (often not more than three floors). A large part of the southwestern city was planned by the progressive Dutch architect H.P. Berlage about 1910. This 'Plan Berlage' decided the spacious and homely streets for several decades. In World War II a large part of western The Hague was destroyed by the Germans. Afterwards, modernist architect W.M. Dudok planned its renewal, putting apartment blocks for the middle class in open, park-like settings.

The layout of the city is more spacious than other Dutch cities, and because of the incorporation of large and old nobility estates, the creation of various parks and the use of green zones around natural streams, it is a much more green city than any other in the Netherlands. That is, excepting some mediaeval close-knitted streets in the centre. There are only a few canals in The Hague, as most of these were drained in the late 19th century.

Some of the most prosperous and some of the poorest neighbourhoods of the Netherlands can be found in The Hague. The wealthier areas (Statenkwartier, Belgisch Park, Marlot, Benoordenhout and Archipelbuurt) are generally located in the northwest part of the city; however, the Vogelwijk and

29

several very recently built quarters like Vroondaal are in the southwest, not far from the sea. Poorer areas like Transvaal, Moerwijk, and the Schilderswijk can be found in the southeastern areas, or near the coast in Scheveningen (Duindorp). This division is reflected in the local accent: The more affluent citizens are usually called "Hagenaars" and speak so-called "bekakt Haags" ("Bekakt" is Dutch for "posh" or "stuck-up"). This contrasts with the "Hagenezen", who speak "plat Haags" ("plat" meaning "common" or "vulgar"). The tallest building is the 142-metre-tall Hoftoren.

Geography The Hague has eight official districts (stadsdelen). They are divided into smaller parts (wijken).

See Districts of The Hague for a detailed breakdown.

Escamp Haagse Hout Laak Leidschenveen-Ypenburg Loosduinen The Hague Center Scheveningen Segbroek

Demographics Origin of citizens of The Hague in 2011:

Population of The Hague on 1 September 2011 500,000 inhabitants and are with that the third city of the Netherlands. The proportion of immigrants in The Hague 49% and ethnic Dutch 51%. On 1 January 2011 The Hague 241,000 immigrants counted: 73,000 of Western origin and 168,000 with Other non-western. International relations The city contributes substantially to international politics: The Hague is home to over 150 international organizations. These include the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).

The foundation of The Hague as an "international city of peace and justice" was laid in 1899, when the world's first Peace Conference took place in The Hague on Tobias Asser's initiative, followed by a second in 1907. A direct result of these meetings was the establishment of the world's first organization for the settlement of international disputes: the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). Shortly thereafter the Scottish-American millionaire Andrew Carnegie made the necessary funds available to build the Peace Palace ("Vredespaleis") to house the PCA.

After the establishment of the League of Nations, The Hague became the seat of the Permanent Court of International Justice, which was replaced by the UN's International Court of Justice after the Second World War. The establishment of the Iran-US Claims Tribunal (1981), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (1993) and the International Criminal Court (2002) in the city further consolidated the role of The Hague as a center for international legal arbitration. Most recently, on 1 March 2009, a U.N. tribunal to investigate and prosecute suspects in the 2005 assassination of Lebanese

30

Prime Minister Rafik Hariri opened in the former headquarters of the Netherlands General Intelligence Agency in Leidschendam, a town within the greater The Hague area.

The Hague is the fourth major center for the UN, after New York, Geneva and Vienna. In line with the city's history as an important convention center and the current presence of institutions such as the ICJ, The Hague's city council employs a city branding strategy that aims to establish The Hague as the Legal Capital of the World and the International City of Peace and Justice.

Major international organizations based in The Hague include:

Eurojust, European Union body composed of national prosecutors European Police Office, (Europol) Hague Academy of International Law, center for high-level education in both public and private

international law Hague Conference on Private International Law, (HCCH), the oldest and preeminent private

international law harmonization institution International Court of Justice, located in the Peace Palace International Criminal Court, (ICC) International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, (ICTY) International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR, appeals court only). The tribunal itself is in

Arusha, Tanzania. Iran-United States Claims Tribunal Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization

NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency, (NC3A) Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, (OPCW) Permanent Court of Arbitration, the oldest institution for international dispute resolution. The European Library

Many academic institutions in the fields of international relations, international law and international development are based in The Hague. The Hague Academic Coalition (HAC) is a consortium of those institutions.

Its member institutions are:

Carnegie Foundation Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law (HiiL) International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS) Leiden University College The Hague Netherlands Institute of International Relations 'Clingendael' The Hague Academy of International Law The Hague University of Applied Sciences (Haagse Hogeschool) T.M.C. Asser Instituut

In 1948 The Hague Congress was held with 750 delegates from 26 European countries, providing them with the opportunity to discuss ideas about the development of the European Union.

31

Business Professional life in The Hague is dominated by the large number of civil servants and diplomats who work in the city. Government ministries and public institutions are almost all located in The Hague. It is also home to several large international businesses, including:

AEGON, one of the world’s leading insurance companies APM Terminals, the world's second largest container terminal operator KPN (Koninklijke PTT Nederland), the Dutch national telephone company (fixed and mobile

divisions) ING Investment Management, an asset management company that is part of the ING Group Nationale Nederlanden, an insurance company that is part of the ING Group (shared HQ with

Rotterdam) Royal Dutch Shell, the world's second largest international energy company Schlumberger, the world's largest oilservice company maintains a principal office there (along

with Houston and Paris) Siemens A.G., Europe's largest engineering company has its Dutch headquarters there T-Mobile, a mobile network operator, part of Deutsche Telekom. PostNL a mail, parcel and e-commerce corporation with operations in the Netherlands,

Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom.

There has never been any large-scale industrial activity in The Hague, with the possible exception of the fishing harbour in Scheveningen. Many of the city’s logistical and minor-industrial services are located in the Binckhorst (Laak district), which contains many large warehouses.

The Hague has its share of museums and cultural institutions:

Madurodam is a miniature city, containing hundreds of scale-models of Dutch landmarks in a typically Dutch miniature landscape.

The Mauritshuis exhibits many paintings by Dutch masters, such as Johannes Vermeer, Rembrandt van Rijn and Paulus Potter.

The Escher Museum is located in the former Royal Palace on the Lange Voorhout. The Haags Historisch museum showcases the history of the city from the Middle Ages to the

present day. The Museum Bredius houses part of the collection of 19th century art historian Abraham

Bredius, containing antique furniture, silverware and porcelain. Museum Gevangenpoort (lit. the "Prison Gate") is a former prison housed in a 15th century

gatehouse, with genuine mediaeval dungeons and torture chambers. The Gemeentemuseum (Municipal museum) is home to the world’s largest collection of works

by the Dutch painter Piet Mondriaan as well as other modern art. The Museon is an interactive and historical science museum. The Omniversum is Europe’s first 360° IMAX-cinema. Panorama Mesdag houses a cylindrical 360° "panoramic" painting, 14 meters high by 120

meters long, depicting the sea-front at Scheveningen in the late 19th century, made by Hendrik Willem Mesdag. It is presented in such a way that it is almost as if one is looking at a real scene rather than a painting.

The Museum voor Communicatie (formerly the "PTT Museum") is the national postal museum and houses interactive exhibits as well as one of the country’s best collections of stamps.

The Louis Couperus Museum is devoted to the life and works of Louis Couperus (1863–1923).

32

The museum Beelden aan Zee in Scheveningen has a large collection of sculptures, mainly from the 20th century artists.

The Koninklijke Schouwburg ("Royal Theatre"), located on the Korte Voorhout, is the home of the "Nationaal Toneel" ("National theatre-group").

The Lucent Danstheater is home to the internationally celebrated Nederlands Dans Theatre, a modern dance company. The building was designed by the Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas in 1988. It shares a lobby with the Anton Philipszaal, home of the Residentie Orkest, the city's most important symphony orchestra.

New European Ensemble is an ensemble for contemporary music consisting on international musicians. The ensemble has it's main base in the city.

Paard van Troje is located in The Hague and is one of the 10 biggest music venues in the Netherlands focused on popular music.

Muziekcafé de Paap is located in The Hague and famous for its live music. Some of the biggest Dutch artists are discovered here.

Other tourist attractions and landmarks in The Hague include:

The historic Binnenhof ("Inner Court") and Medieval Ridderzaal ("Knights' Hall"), which now contains the Houses of Parliament and government offices. A good view can be obtained from the leafy Lange Vijverberg on the other side of the adjacent lake called the "Hofvijver" (lit. "Court Pond").

The Lange Voorhout is a wide avenue containing many splendid houses (now home to several embassies) as well as The Hague's oldest and narrowest house and the famous "Hotel des Indes", the city’s most luxurious hotel.

"De Passage" (pronounced as in French) was the Netherlands' first covered shopping mall. Dating from the late 19th century, it contains many expensive and speciality shops.

The "Paleis Noordeinde" has been Queen Beatrix' official work-palace since 1984. It is closed to the public, but the Palace Gardens ("Paleistuin") are accessible to the public.

The Clingendael Park is an old landed estate with a Japanese Garden. Nearby one can also find the home of the Clingendael Institute of International Relations.

Queen Beatrix' residential Palace, "Paleis Huis ten Bosch", can be found a little outside the city centre in the "Haagse Bosch" forest.

The Hague does not have the customary metropolitan reputation for a bustling night life, with some festivity exceptions in the course of the year. This is partly explained by the city's lack of a university and hence student life. Night life centers around the three main squares in the city center: the Plein (literally "Square"), the Grote Markt (literally "Great Market") and the Buitenhof (literally the "Outer Court", which lies just outside the Binnenhof). The Plein is taken by several large sidewalk cafés where often politicians may be spotted. The Grote Markt is completely strewn with chairs and tables, summer or winter. The Buitenhof contains the popular Pathé Buitenhof cinema and a handful of bars and restaurants in the immediate vicinity. A similar pattern of night life centers on the cinema in Scheveningen, although, especially in summer, night life concentrates around the sea-front boulevard with its bars, restaurants and gambling halls.

Transportation The Hague shares an airport with Rotterdam. It can be reached from Central Station by RandstadRail Line E, with an Airport Shuttle to and from Meijersplein Station. However, with several direct trains per

33

hour from the railway stations Hollands Spoor and Centraal, Amsterdam Airport Schiphol is more frequently used by people travelling to and from The Hague by air.

There are two main train stations in The Hague: Den Haag Hollands Spoor (HS) and Den Haag Centraal Station (CS), only 1.5 km distant from each other. Because these two stations were built and exploited by two different railway companies in the 19th century, east-west lines terminate at Centraal Station, whereas north-south lines run through Hollands Spoor. The international Benelux trains to Brussels call only at Hollands Spoor. Centraal Station does, however, now offer good connections with the rest of the country, with direct services to most major cities, for instance Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht.

Public transport in The Hague consists of a tramway network and a sizeable number of bus routes, operated by HTM Personenvervoer. Plans for a subway were shelved in the early 1970s. However, in 2004 a tunnel was built under the city centre with two underground tram stations ("Spui" and "Grote Markt"); it is shared by tram routes 2, 3, 4 and 6.

A regional light rail system called RandstadRail connects The Hague to nearby cities, Zoetermeer and Rotterdam. The system suffered from startup problems and derailings in 2006, but is fully operational now.

Major motorways connecting to The Hague include the A12, running to Utrecht and the German border. The A12 runs directly into the heart of the city in a cutting. Built in the 1970s, this section of motorway (the "Utrechtsebaan") is now heavily overburdened. Plans were made in the late 1990s for a second artery road into the city (the "Trekvliettracé" or previously called "Rotterdamsebaan") but have continually been put on hold. Other connecting motorways are the A4, which connects the city with Amsterdam, and the A13, which runs to Rotterdam and connects to motorways towards the Belgian border. There is also the A44 that connects the city to Leiden, Haarlem and Amsterdam.

34

Amsterdam (Wikipedia)

Province: North Holland Area Municipality/city 85 sq mi Land 64 sq mi Water 20 sq mi Metro 701 sq mi

Amsterdam is the largest city and the capital of the Netherlands. The city's status as the capital of the nation is governed by the constitution. Amsterdam has a population of 783,364 within city limits, an urban population of 1,209,419 and a metropolitan population of 2,158,592. The city is located in the province of North Holland in the west of the country. It comprises the northern part of the Randstad, one of the larger conurbations in Europe, with a population of approximately 7 million.

Amsterdam's name is derived from Amstelredamme, indicative of the city's origin: a dam in the river Amstel. Settled as a small fishing village in the late 12th century, Amsterdam became one of the most important ports in the world during the Dutch Golden Age, a result of its innovative developments in trade. During that time, the city was the leading center for finance and diamonds. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the city expanded, and many new neighborhoods and suburbs were formed. The 17th-century canals of Amsterdam (in Dutch: 'Grachtengordel'), located in the heart of Amsterdam, were added to the UNESCO World Heritage List in July 2010.

As Netherlands' commercial capital and one of the top financial centres in Europe, Amsterdam is considered an alpha world city by the Globalization and World Cities (GaWC) study group. The city is also cultural capital of the Netherlands. Many large Dutch institutions have their headquarters there, and 7 of the world's top 500 companies, including Philips and ING, are based in the city. In 2010, Amsterdam was ranked 13th globally on quality of living by Mercer, and previously ranked 3rd in innovation by 2thinknow in the Innovation Cities Index 2009.

The Amsterdam Stock Exchange, the oldest stock exchange in the world, is located in the city center. Amsterdam's main attractions, including its historic canals, the Rijksmuseum, the Van Gogh Museum, Stedelijk Museum, Hermitage Amsterdam, Anne Frank House, Amsterdam Museum, its red-light district, and its many cannabis coffee shops draw more than 3.66 million international visitors annually.

History The earliest recorded use of the name "Amsterdam" is from a certificate dated 27 October 1275, when the inhabitants, who had built a bridge with a dam across the Amstel, were exempted from paying a bridge toll by Count Floris V. The certificate describes the inhabitants as homines manentes apud Amestelledamme (people living near Amestelledamme). By 1327, the name had developed into Aemsterdam. Amsterdam's founding is relatively recent compared with much older Dutch cities such as Nijmegen, Rotterdam, and Utrecht. In October 2008, historical geographer Chris de Bont suggested that

the land around Amsterdam was being reclaimed as early as the late 10th century. This does not

35

necessarily mean that there was already a settlement then since reclamation of land may not have been for farming—it may have been for peat, used as fuel.

Amsterdam was granted city rights in either 1300 or 1306. From the 14th century on, Amsterdam flourished, largely because of trade with the Hanseatic League. In 1345, an alleged Eucharistic miracle in the Kalverstraat rendered the city an important place of pilgrimage until the adoption of the Protestant faith. The Stille Omgang—a silent procession in civil attire—is today a remnant of the rich pilgrimage history.

In the 16th century, the Dutch rebelled against Philip II of Spain and his successors. The main reasons for the uprising were the imposition of new taxes, the tenth penny, and the religious persecution of Protestants by the Spanish Inquisition. The revolt escalated into the Eighty Years' War, which ultimately led to Dutch independence. Strongly pushed by Dutch Revolt leader William the Silent, the Dutch Republic became known for its relative religious tolerance. Jews from the Iberian Peninsula, Huguenots from France, prosperous merchants and printers from Flanders, and economic and religious refugees from the Spanish-controlled parts of the Low Countries found safety in Amsterdam. The influx of Flemish printers and the city's intellectual tolerance made Amsterdam a centre for the European free press

The 17th century is considered Amsterdam's Golden Age, during which it became the wealthiest city in the world. Ships sailed from Amsterdam to the Baltic Sea, North America, and Africa, as well as present-day Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, and Brazil, forming the basis of a worldwide trading network. Amsterdam's merchants had the largest share in both the Dutch East India Company and the Dutch West India Company. These companies acquired overseas possessions that later became Dutch colonies. Amsterdam was Europe's most important point for the shipment of goods and was the leading Financial Centre of the world. In 1602, the Amsterdam office of the Dutch East India Company became the world's first stock exchange by trading in its own shares.

Amsterdam lost over 10% of its population to plague in 1623–1625, and again in 1635–1636, 1655, and 1664. Nevertheless, the population of Amsterdam rose in the 17th century (largely through immigration) from 50,000 to 200,000.

Amsterdam's prosperity declined during the 18th and early 19th centuries. The wars of the Dutch Republic with England and France took their toll on Amsterdam. During the Napoleonic Wars, Amsterdam's significance reached its lowest point, with Holland being absorbed into the French Empire. However, the later establishment of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1815 marked a turning point.

The end of the 19th century is sometimes called Amsterdam's second Golden Age. New museums, a train station, and the Concertgebouw were built; in this same time, the Industrial Revolution reached the city. The Amsterdam-Rhine Canal was dug to give Amsterdam a direct connection to the Rhine, and the North Sea Canal was dug to give the port a shorter connection to the North Sea. Both projects dramatically improved commerce with the rest of Europe and the world. In 1906, Joseph Conrad gave a brief description of Amsterdam as seen from the seaside, in The Mirror of the Sea. Shortly before the First World War, the city began expanding, and new suburbs were built. Even though the Netherlands remained neutral in this war, Amsterdam suffered a food shortage, and heating fuel became scarce. The shortages sparked riots in which several people were killed. These riots are known as the Aardappeloproer (Potato rebellion). People started looting stores and warehouses in order to get supplies, mainly food

36

Germany invaded the Netherlands on 10 May 1940 and took control of the country. Some Amsterdam citizens sheltered Jews, thereby exposing themselves and their families to the high risk of being imprisoned or sent to concentration camps. More than 100,000 Dutch Jews were deported to Nazi concentration camps. Perhaps the most famous deportee was the young Jewish girl Anne Frank, who died in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. At the end of the Second World War, communication with the rest of the country broke down, and food and fuel became scarce. Many citizens traveled to the countryside to forage. Dogs, cats, raw sugar beets, and Tulip bulbs—cooked to a pulp—were consumed to stay alive. Most of the trees in Amsterdam were cut down for fuel, and all the wood was taken from the apartments of deported Jews.

From left to right and top to bottom: Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, statue in the Vondelpark, Keizersgracht, Zuiderkerk, Royal Palace Amsterdam, ING house.

Many new suburbs, such as Osdorp, Slotervaart, Slotermeer, and Geuzenveld, were built in the years after the Second World War. These suburbs contained many public parks and wide, open spaces, and the new buildings provided improved housing conditions with larger and brighter rooms, gardens, and balconies. Because of the war and other incidents of the 20th century, almost the entire city centre had fallen into disrepair. As society was changing, politicians and other influential figures made plans to redesign large parts of it. There was an increasing demand for office buildings and new roads as the automobile became available to most common people. A metro started operating in 1977 between the new suburb of Bijlmer and the centre of Amsterdam. Further plans were to build a new highway above the metro to connect the Central Station and city centre with other parts of the city.

The incorporated large-scale demolitions began in Amsterdam's formerly Jewish neighbourhood. Smaller streets, such as the Jodenbreestraat, were widened and saw almost all of their houses demolished.

During the destruction's peak, the Nieuwmarktrellen (Nieuwmarkt riots) broke out, where people expressed their fury about the demolition caused by the restructuring of the city.

As a result, the demolition was stopped, and the highway was never built, with only the metro being finished. Only a few streets remained widened. The new city hall was built on the almost completely demolished Waterlooplein. Meanwhile, large private organisations, such as Stadsherstel Amsterdam,

37

were founded with the aim of restoring the entire city centre. Although the success of this struggle is visible today, efforts for further restoration are still ongoing. The entire city centre has reattained its former splendor and, as a whole, is now a protected area. Many of its buildings have become monuments, and in July 2010 the Grachtengordel (Herengracht, Keizersgracht, and Prinsengracht) was added to the UNESCO World Heritage List.

Geography Amsterdam is part of the province of North-Holland and is located in the west of the Netherlands next to the provinces of Utrecht and Flevoland. The river Amstel terminates in the city centre and connects to a large number of canals that eventually terminate in the IJ. Amsterdam is situated 2 metres above sea level. The surrounding land is flat as it is formed of large polders. To the southwest of the city lies a man-made forest called het Amsterdamse Bos. Amsterdam is connected to the North Sea through the long North Sea Canal. Amsterdam is intensely urbanized, as is the Amsterdam metropolitan area surrounding the city. Comprising 219.4 square kilometres of land, the city proper has 4,457 inhabitants per km2 and 2,275 houses per km2. Parks and nature reserves make up 12% of Amsterdam's land area.

Climate Amsterdam has an oceanic climate (Köppen climate classification Cfb), strongly influenced by its proximity to the North Sea to the west, with prevailing westerly winds. Winters are mild. Amsterdam, as well as most of the North-Holland province, lies in USDA Hardiness zone 8b, the northernmost such occurrence in continental Europe. Frosts mainly occur during spells of easterly or northeasterly winds from the inner European continent. Even then, because Amsterdam is surrounded on three sides by large bodies of water, as well as having a significant heat-island effect, nights rarely fall below −5 °C (23 °F), while it could easily be −12 °C (10 °F) in Hilversum, 25 kilometres southeast. Summers are moderately warm but rarely hot. The average daily high in August is 22.1 °C (71.8 °F), and 30 °C (86 °F) or higher is only measured on average on 2.5 days, placing Amsterdam in AHS Heat Zone 2. The record extremes range from −24 °C (−11 °F) to 36.8 °C (98.2 °F). Days with measurable precipitation are common, on average 187 days per year. Amsterdam's average annual precipitation is 915 millimetres (36.0 in). A large part of this precipitation falls as light rain or brief showers. Cloudy and damp days are common during the cooler months of October through March.

Cityscape and architecture Amsterdam fans out south from the Amsterdam Centraal railway station. The Damrak is the main street and leads into the street Rokin. The oldest area of the town is known as de Wallen (the quays). It lies to the east of Damrak and contains the city's famous red light district. To the south of de Wallen is the old Jewish quarter of Waterlooplein. The 17th century canals of Amsterdam, known as the Grachtengordel, embraces the heart of the city where homes have interesting gables. Beyond the Grachtengordel are the former working class areas of Jordaan and de Pijp. The Museumplein with the city's major museums, the Vondelpark, a 19th century park named after the Dutch writer Joost van den Vondel, and the Plantage neighbourhood, with the zoo, are also located outside the Grachtengordel.

Several parts of the city and the surrounding urban area are polders. This can be recognised by the suffix -meer which means lake, as in Aalsmeer, Bijlmermeer, Haarlemmermeer, and Watergraafsmeer.

The Amsterdam canal system is the result of conscious city planning. In the early 17th century, when immigration was at a peak, a comprehensive plan was developed that was based on four concentric half-circles of canals with their ends emerging at the IJ bay. Known as the Grachtengordel, three of the canals were mostly for residential development: the Herengracht (where "Heren" refers to Heren

38

Regeerders van de stad Amsterdam (ruling lords of Amsterdam), and gracht means canal, so the name can be roughly translated as "Canal of the lords"), Keizersgracht (Emperor's Canal), and Prinsengracht (Prince's Canal). The fourth and outermost canal is the Singelgracht, which is often not mentioned on maps, because it is a collective name for all canals in the outer ring. The Singelgracht should not be confused with the oldest and most inner canal Singel. The canals served for defence, water management and transport. The defences took the form of a moat and earthen dikes, with gates at transit points, but otherwise no masonry superstructures.[41] The original plans have been lost, so historians, such as Ed Taverne, need to speculate on the original intentions: it is thought that the considerations of the layout were purely practical and defensive rather than ornamental.

Construction started in 1613 and preceded from west to east, across the breadth of the layout, like a gigantic windshield wiper as the historian Geert Mak calls it – and not from the centre outwards, as a popular myth has it. The canal construction in the southern sector was completed by 1656. Subsequently, the construction of residential buildings proceeded slowly. The eastern part of the concentric canal plan, covering the area between the Amstel river and the IJ bay, has never been implemented. In the following centuries, the land was used for parks, senior citizens' homes, theatres, other public facilities, and waterways without much planning. Over the years, several canals have been filled in, becoming streets or squares, such as the Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal and the Spui

Expansion After the development of Amsterdam's canals in the 17th century, the city did not grow beyond its borders for two centuries. During the 19th century, Samuel Sarphati devised a plan based on the grandeur of Paris and London at that time. The plan envisaged the construction of new houses, public buildings and streets just outside the grachtengordel. The main aim of the plan, however, was to improve public health. Although the plan did not expand the city, it did produce some of the largest public buildings to date, like the Paleis voor Volksvlijt.

Following Sarphati, Van Niftrik and Kalff designed an entire ring of 19th century neighbourhoods surrounding the city’s centre, with the city preserving the ownership of all land outside the 17th century limit, thus firmly controlling development. Most of these neighbourhoods became home to the working class. In response to overcrowding, two plans were designed at the beginning of the 20th century which were very different from anything Amsterdam had ever seen before: Plan Zuid, designed by the architect Berlage, and West. These plans involved the development of new neighbourhoods consisting of housing blocks for all social classes.

After the Second World War, large new neighbourhoods were built in the western, southeastern, and northern parts of the city. These new neighbourhoods were built to relieve the city's shortage of living space and give people affordable houses with modern conveniences. The neighbourhoods consisted mainly of large housing blocks situated among green spaces, connected to wide roads, making the neighbourhoods easily accessible by motor car. The western suburbs which were built in that period are collectively called the Westelijke Tuinsteden. The area to the southeast of the city built during the same period is known as the Bijlmer.

39

Architecture Amsterdam has a rich architectural history. The oldest building in Amsterdam is the Oude Kerk (Old Church), at the heart of the Wallen, consecrated in 1306. The oldest wooden building is het Houten Huys at the Begijnhof. It was constructed around 1425 and is one of only two existing wooden buildings. It is also one of the few examples of Gothic architecture in Amsterdam.

In the 16th century, wooden buildings were razed and replaced with brick ones. During this period, many buildings were constructed in the architectural style of the Renaissance. Buildings of this period are very recognisable with their stepped gable façades, which is the common Dutch Renaissance style. Amsterdam quickly developed its own Renaissance architecture. These buildings were built according to the principles of the architect Hendrick de Keyser. One of the most striking buildings designed by Hendrick de Keyer is the Westerkerk. In the 17th century baroque architecture became very popular, as it was elsewhere in Europe. This roughly coincided with Amsterdam’s Golden Age. The leading architects of this style in Amsterdam were Jacob van Campen, Philip Vingboons and Daniel Stalpaert.

Philip Vingboons designed splendid merchants' houses throughout the city. A famous building in baroque style in Amsterdam is the Royal Palace on Dam Square. Throughout the 18th century, Amsterdam was heavily influenced by French culture. This is reflected in the architecture of that period. Around 1815, architects broke with the baroque style and started building in different neo-styles. Most Gothic style buildings date from that era and are therefore said to be built in a neo-gothic style. At the end of the 19th century, the Jugendstil or Art Nouveau style became popular and many new buildings were constructed in this architectural style. Since Amsterdam expanded rapidly during this period, new buildings adjacent to the city centre were also built in this style. The houses in the vicinity of the Museum Square in Amsterdam Oud-Zuid are an example of Jugendstil. The last style that was popular in Amsterdam before the modern era was Art Deco. Amsterdam had its own version of the style, which was called the Amsterdamse School. Whole districts were built this style, such as the Rivierenbuurt. A notable feature of the façades of buildings designed in Amsterdamse School is that they are highly decorated and ornate, with oddly shaped windows and doors.

The old city centre is the focal point of all the architectural styles before the end of the 19th century. Jugendstil and Georgian are mostly found outside the city’s centre in the neighbourhoods built in the early 20th century, although there are also some striking examples of these styles in the city centre. Most historic buildings in the city centre and nearby are houses, such as the famous merchants' houses lining the canals.

Government

The administration of the municipality of Amsterdam is divided into 15 boroughs or stadsdelen; the

central one, Centrum, being circled by Westerpark, Bos en Lommer, De Baarsjes, Oud-West, Oud-Zuid,

Oost/Watergraafsmeer, Zeeburg and Amsterdam-Noord, with the six outer boroughs (Westpoort,

Geuzenveld-Slotermeer, Osdorp, Slotervaart, Zuideramstel, and Zuidoost) creating a further

encirclement. On 1 May 2010, the number of boroughs was reduced to eight (Centrum, Noord, Oost,

Zuid, West, Nieuw-West, Zuidoost, and Westpoort).

40

City government As with all Dutch municipalities, Amsterdam is governed by a mayor, aldermen, and the municipal council. However, unlike most other Dutch municipalities, Amsterdam is subdivided into seven "stadsdelen" (boroughs), a system that was implemented in the 1980s to improve local governance. The stadsdelen are responsible for many activities that had previously been run by the central city. The city had initially been divided into 15 stadsdelen. 14 of those had their own council, chosen by a popular election. The 15th, Westpoort, covers the harbour of Amsterdam, had very few residents, and was governed by the central municipal council. Local decisions are made at borough level, and only affairs pertaining to the whole city, such as major infrastructure projects, are handled by the central city council.

National government Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands in a technical legal sense. The present version of the Dutch constitution mentions "Amsterdam" and "capital" only in one place, chapter 2, article 32: The king's confirmation by oath and his coronation take place in "the capital Amsterdam" ("de hoofdstad Amsterdam"). Previous versions of the constitution spoke of "the city of Amsterdam" ("de stad Amsterdam"), without mention of capital. In any case, the seat of the government, parliament and supreme court of the Netherlands is (and always has been, with the exception of a brief period between 1808 and 1810) located at The Hague. Foreign embassies are also in The Hague. The capital of North Holland is Haarlem.

Economy Amsterdam is the financial and business capital of the Netherlands. Amsterdam is currently one of the best European cities in which to locate an International Business. It is ranked fifth in this category and is only surpassed by London, Paris, Frankfurt and Barcelona. Many large corporations and banks have their headquarters in Amsterdam, including Royal Bank of Scotland, Akzo Nobel, Heineken International, ING Group, Ahold, TomTom, Delta Lloyd Group and Philips. KPMG International's global headquarters is located in nearby Amstelveen, where many non-Dutch companies have settled as well, because surrounding communities allow full land ownership, contrary to Amsterdam's land-lease system.

Though many small offices are still located on the old canals, companies are increasingly relocating outside the city centre. The Zuidas (English: South Axis) has become the new financial and legal hub. The five largest law firms of the Netherlands, a number of Dutch subsidiaries of large consulting firms like Boston Consulting Group and Accenture, and the World Trade Center Amsterdam are also located in Zuidas. There are three other smaller financial districts in Amsterdam. The first is the area surrounding Amsterdam Sloterdijk railway station, where several newspapers like De Telegraaf have their offices. Also, the municipal public transport company (Gemeentelijk Vervoersbedrijf) and the Dutch tax offices (Belastingdienst) are located there. The second Financial District is the area surrounding Amsterdam Arena. The third is the area surrounding Amsterdam Amstel railway station. The tallest building in Amsterdam, the Rembrandt Tower, is situated there, as is the headquarters of Philips. The Amsterdam Stock Exchange (AEX), nowadays part of Euronext, is the world's oldest stock exchange and is one of Europe's largest bourses. It is situated near Dam Square in the city's centre.

Tourism

Amsterdam is one of the most popular tourist destinations in Europe, receiving more than 4.63 million

international visitors annually, this is excluding the 16 million day trippers visiting the city every year.

41

The number of visitors has been growing steadily over the past decade. This can be attributed to an

increasing number of European visitors. Two thirds of the hotels are located in the city's centre. Hotels

with 4 or 5 stars contribute 42% of the total beds available and 41% of the overnight stays in

Amsterdam. The room occupation rate was 78% in 2006, up from 70% in 2005. The majority of tourists

(74%) originate from Europe. The largest group of non-European visitors come from the United States,

accounting for 14% of the total. Certain years have a theme in Amsterdam to attract extra tourists. For

example, the year 2006 was designated "Rembrandt 400", to celebrate the 400th birthday of Rembrandt

van Rijn. Some hotels offer special arrangements or activities during these years. The average number of

guests per year staying at the four campsites around the city range from 12,000 to 65,000.

Demographics

Amsterdam has a population of 783,364 inhabitants. On 1 January 2011, the ethnic makeup of

Amsterdam was 49.7% Dutch and 50.3% foreigners. In the 16th and 17th century non-Dutch immigrants

to Amsterdam were mostly Huguenots, Flemings, Sephardi Jews and Westphalians. Huguenots came

after the Edict of Fontainebleau in 1685, while the Flemish Protestants came during the Eighty Years'

War. The Westphalians came to Amsterdam mostly for economic reasons – their influx continued

through the 18th and 19th centuries. Before the Second World War, 10% of the city population was

Jewish.

The first mass immigration in the 20th century were by people from Indonesia, who came to Amsterdam after the independence of the Dutch East Indies in the 1940s and 1950s. In the 1960s guest workers from Turkey, Morocco, Italy and Spain emigrated to Amsterdam. After the independence of Suriname in 1975, a large wave of Surinamese settled in Amsterdam, mostly in the Bijlmer area. Other immigrants, including refugees asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, came from Europe, America, Asia, and Africa. In the 1970s and 1980s, many 'old' Amsterdammers moved to 'new' cities like Almere and Purmerend, prompted by the third planological bill of the Dutch government. This bill promoted suburbanisation and arranged for new developments in so called "groeikernen", literally "cores of growth". Young professionals and artists moved into neighbourhoods de Pijp and the Jordaan abandoned by these Amsterdammers. The non-Western immigrants settled mostly in the social housing projects in Amsterdam-West and the Bijlmer. Today, people of non-Western origin make up approximately one-third of the population of Amsterdam, and more than 50% of children. The largest religious group are Christians, who are divided between Roman Catholics and Protestants. The next largest religion is Islam, most of whose followers are Sunni.

Transport In the city centre, driving a car is discouraged. Parking fees are expensive, and many streets are closed to cars or are one-way. The local government sponsors carsharing and carpooling initiatives such as Autodelen and Meerijden.nu.

Public transport in Amsterdam mainly consists of (night) bus and tram lines operated by Gemeentelijk Vervoerbedrijf. Regional buses, and some suburban buses, are operated by Connexxion and Arriva. Currently, there are 16 different tram lines, and four metro lines, with a fifth line, the North/South line, under construction. Three free ferries carry pedestrians and cyclists across the IJ to Amsterdam-Noord, and two fare-charging ferries run east and west along the harbour. There are also water taxis, a water

42

bus, a boat sharing operation, electric rental boats (Boaty) and canal cruises, that transport people along Amsterdam's waterways.

The A10 ringroad surrounding the city connects Amsterdam with the Dutch national network of freeways. Interchanges on the A10 allow cars to enter the city by transferring to one of the 18 city roads, numbered S101 through to S118. These city roads are regional roads without grade separation, and sometimes without a central reservation. Most are accessible by cyclists. The S100 Centrumring is a smaller ringroad circumnavigating the city's center. Amsterdam was intended in 1932 to be the hub, a kind of Kilometre Zero, of the highway system of the Netherlands,[91] with freeways numbered one through eight planned to originate from the city.[91] The outbreak of the Second World War and shifting priorities led to the current situation, where only roads A1, A2, and A4 originate from Amsterdam according to the original plan. The A3 road to Rotterdam was cancelled in 1970 in order to conserve the Groene Hart. Road A8, leading north to Zaandam and the A10 Ringroad were opened between 1968 and 1974. Besides the A1, A2, A4 and A8, several freeways, such as the A7 and A6, carry traffic mainly bound for Amsterdam.

Amsterdam is served by ten stations of the Nederlandse Spoorwegen (Dutch Railways). Five are intercity stops: Sloterdijk, Zuid, Amstel, Bijlmer ArenA and Amsterdam Centraal. The stations for local services are: Lelylaan, RAI, Holendrecht, Muiderpoort and Science Park. Amsterdam Centraal is also an international train station. From the station there are regular services to destinations such as Austria, Belarus, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Russia and Switzerland. Among these trains are international trains of the Nederlandse Spoorwegen and the Thalys(Amsterdam-Brussels-Paris-Cologne), CityNightLine, and InterCityExpress Eurolines has coaches from Amsterdam Amstel railway station to destinations all over Europe.

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol is less than 20 minutes by train from Amsterdam Central Station. It is the biggest airport in the Netherlands, the fifth largest in Europe, and the twelfth largest in the world in terms of passengers. It handles about 46 million passengers per year and is the home base of four airlines, KLM, transavia.com, Martinair and Arkefly. Schiphol was, in 2010, the fourth busiest airport in the world measured by international passengers.

Amsterdam is one of the most bicycle-friendly large cities in the world and is a centre of bicycle culture

with good facilities for cyclists such as bike paths and bike racks, and several guarded bike storage

garages (Fietsenstalling) which can be used for a nominal fee. In 2006, there were about 465,000

bicycles in Amsterdam. Theft is widespread – in 2005, about 54,000 bicycles were stolen in Amsterdam.

Bicycles are used by all socio-economic groups because of their convenience, Amsterdam's small size,

the 400 km of bike paths, the flat terrain, and the arguable inconvenience of driving an automobile.

43

Rotterdam (Wikipedia)

Province: South Holland Area: Municipality / City 123 sq mi Land 80 sq mi Water 44 sq mi

Population (20 February 2017) Municipality / City 619,879 Density 7,400/sq mi Metro 1,211,523

Rotterdam is the second-largest city in the Netherlands and one of the largest ports in the world. Starting as a dam constructed in 1270 on the Rotte River, Rotterdam has grown into a major international commercial centre. Its strategic location at the Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt delta on the North Sea and at the heart of a massive rail, road, air and inland waterway distribution system extending throughout Europe is the reason that Rotterdam is often called the "Gateway to Europe".

Located in the Province of South Holland, Rotterdam is found in the west of the Netherlands and at the south end of the Randstad. The population of the city proper was 616,003 in November 2011. The population of the greater Rotterdam area, called "Rotterdam-Rijnmond" or just "Rijnmond", is around 1.3 million people. Rotterdam is one of Europe's most vibrant, multicultural cities. The city is known for its university (Erasmus), its cutting-edge architecture, its lively cultural life, its striking riverside setting, its maritime heritage and the Rotterdam Blitz.

The largest port in Europe and still one of the busiest ports in the world, the port of Rotterdam was the world's busiest port from 1962 to 2004, at which point it was surpassed by Shanghai. Rotterdam's commercial and strategic importance is based on its location near the mouth of the Nieuwe Maas (New Meuse), one of the channels in the delta formed by the Rhine and Meuse on the North Sea. These rivers lead directly into the centre of Europe, including the industrial Ruhr region. Rotterdam is currently bidding to host the 2018 Summer Youth Olympics.

History Settlement at the lower end of the fen stream Rotte (or Rotta, as it was then known, from rot, 'muddy' and a, 'water', thus 'muddy water') dates from at least 900 CE. Around 1150, large floods in the area ended development, leading to the construction of protective dikes and dams, including Schielands Hoge Zeedijk ('Schieland’s High Sea Dike') along the northern banks of the present-day Nieuwe Maas. A dam on the Rotte or 'Rotterdam' was built in the 1260s and was located at the present-day Hoogstraat ('High Street').

On 7 July 1340, Count Willem IV of Holland granted city rights to Rotterdam, which then had approximately 2000 inhabitants. Around 1350 a shipping canal, the Rotterdamse Schie was completed, which provided Rotterdam access to the larger towns in the north, allowing it to become a local transshipment centre between Holland, England and Germany, and to urbanize. The port of Rotterdam grew slowly but steadily into a port of importance, becoming the seat of one of the six 'chambers' of the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC), the Dutch East India Company.

44

The greatest spurt of growth, both in port activity and population, followed the completion of the Nieuwe Waterweg in 1872. The city and harbor started to expand on the south bank of the river. The Witte Huis or White House skyscraper,[4] inspired by American office buildings and built in 1898 in the French Chateau-style, is evidence of Rotterdam's rapid growth and success. When completed, it was the tallest office building in Europe, with a height of 45 m (147.64 ft).

During World War II, the German army invaded the Netherlands on 10 May 1940. Adolf Hitler had hoped to conquer the country in just one day, but his forces met unexpectedly fierce resistance. The Dutch army was finally forced to capitulate on 14 May 1940, following Hitler's bombing Rotterdam and threatening to bomb other Dutch cities. The heart of Rotterdam was almost completely destroyed by the Luftwaffe; 900 civilians were killed and 80,000 made homeless. The City Hall survived the bombing. Ossip Zadkine later strikingly captured the event with his statue De Verwoeste Stad ('The Destroyed City'). The statue stands near the Leuvehaven, not far from the Erasmusbrug in the centre of the city, on the north shore of the river Nieuwe Maas.

Rotterdam was gradually rebuilt from the 1950s through the 1970s. It remained quite windy and open until the city councils from the 1980s on began developing an active architectural policy. Daring and new styles of apartments, office buildings and recreation facilities resulted in a more 'livable' city centre with a new skyline. In the 1990s, the Kop van Zuid was built on the south bank of the river as a new business centre.

Rotterdam Blitz The Rotterdam Blitz refers to the aerial bombardment of Rotterdam by the German Air Force on 14 May 1940, during the German invasion of the Netherlands in World War II. The objective was to support the German troops fighting in the city, break Dutch resistance and force the Dutch to surrender. Even though negotiations were successful, failing communications on the German side caused the unnecessary bombardment of much of the city centre.

Prelude The Netherlands was strategically lodged between Great Britain and Germany, making it an ideal prospective German air and naval "base" during Operation Sea Lion, the planned invasion of the British Isles that was to follow the forthcoming aerial Battle of Britain. It had firmly opted for neutrality throughout the First World War and had planned to do the same for the Second World War. It most notably refused to accept armaments from France, making the case that they wanted no association with either side. While armament production was slightly increased after the invasion of Denmark in April 1940, the Netherlands possessed 35 modern wheeled AFVs, no tracked AFVs, 135 aircraft and 280,000 soldiers, while Germany had 159 tanks, 1,200 modern aircraft and around 150,000 soldiers at their disposal [for the Dutch theatre only].[1]

With a significant military advantage, Germany prepared to use their 'Blitzkrieg' tactics, by first taking control of key military and strategic targets, such as airfields, bridges and roads and then using these to take over control of the remainder of the country. An invasion of the Netherlands was first made reference to on 9 October 1939, when Hitler ordered that "Preparations should be made for offensive action on the northern flank of the Western Front crossing the area of Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands. This attack must be carried out as soon and as forcefully as possible."[2] Preparation was started when Hitler ordered German army officers to capture Dutch army uniforms and use them to gain insider information on Dutch defence tactics.[3]

45

Germany finally attacked the Netherlands in the early hours of 10 May 1940. The attack started with the Luftwaffe crossing through Dutch airspace, giving the impression that Britain was the ultimate target. Instead, the aircraft turned around over the North Sea and returned to attack from the west, dropping paratroopers at Valkenburg and Ockenburg airfields, near the Dutch seat of government and the Royal Palace in The Hague, starting the Battle for the Hague. While Germany had planned to take over swiftly using this tactic, the Dutch halted the advance at the core region of Fortress Holland, slowing down the German invasion.

Battle for Rotterdam The situation in Rotterdam on the morning of 13 May 1940 was a stalemate as it had been over the past three days. Dutch garrison forces under Colonel Scharroo held the north bank of the Nieuwe Maas river, which runs through the city and prevented the Germans from crossing; German forces included airlanding and airborne forces of General Student and newly-arrived ground forces under General Schmidt, based on the 9th Panzer Division and the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler, a motorized SS regiment.

A Dutch counterattack led by a Dutch marine company had failed to recapture the Willemsbrug traffic bridge, the key crossing. Several efforts by the Dutch Army Aviation Brigade to destroy the bridge also failed.

On the Morning of 14 May, Hitler issued his "Weisung" Nr. 11. Concerning the Dutch theatre of operations he says the following: "The resistance capability of the Dutch army has proved to be stronger than expected. Political as well as military reasons demand that this resistance is broken as soon as possible. It is the task of the army to capture the Fortress Holland by committing enough forces from the south, combined with an attack on the east front. In addition to that the air force must, while weakening the forces that up till now have supported the 6th Army, facilitate the rapid fall of the Fortress Holland."

Gen. Schmidt had planned a combined assault the next day, 14 May, using tanks of the 9th Panzer supported by flame throwers, SS troops and combat engineers. The airlanding troops were to make an amphibious crossing of the river upstream and then a flank attack through the Kralingen district. The attack was to be preceded by artillery bombardment, while Gen. Schmidt had requested the support of the Luftwaffe in the form of a Gruppe (about 25 aircraft) of Ju-87 Stuka dive-bombers, specifically for a precision raid. Schmidt's request for air support reached Berlin, staff of Luftflotte 2. Instead of precision bombers, Schmidt got carpet bombing by Heinkel He 111 bombers besides a Gruppe of Stuka's focussing on some strategic targets

The bombing Schmidt used the threat of destruction of the city to attempt to force Colonel Scharroo to surrender the city. Rotterdam, the largest industrial target in the Netherlands and of major strategic importance to the Germans, was to be bombed. Scharroo refused and stretched out negotiations. The start of the air raid had been set for 13:20 [Dutch time, MET – 1 hr 40]. Schmidt postponed a second ultimatum to 16:20. However, just as the Dutch negotiator was crossing the Willemsbrug to relay this information, the drone of bombers was heard: a total of 90 bombers from Kampfgeschwader 54 (54th Bomber Regiment) were sent over the city.

Student radioed to postpone the planned attack. When the message reached KG 54's command post, the Kommodore, Oberst Walter Lackner, was already approaching Rotterdam and his aircraft had

46

reeled-in their long-range aerials. Haze and smoke obscured the target, to ensure that Dutch defences were hit Lackner brought his formation down to 2,300 ft (700m). German forces in the city fired flares to warn the bombers off — after 3 planes of the southern formation had already unloaded, the remaining 24 from the southern bomber formation aborted their attack. The larger formation came from the north-east, out of position to spot red flares launched from the south side of the city, and proceeded with their attack. 54 He 111s dropped low to release 97 tonnes (213,848 lbs) of bombs, mostly in the heart of the city

Why the formation had not received the abort order sooner remains controversial. Oberst Lackner of the largest formation claimed that his crews were unable to spot red flares due to bad visibility caused by humidity and dense smoke of burning constructions and subsequently needed to decrease altitude to a mere 2,000 feet. But the red flare, which Lackner failed to see, might have also been used by the Germans to show their location in the city to avoid friendly fire. An official German form designated red as the colour for that purpose.

In total, 1,150 x 50 kg (110 lb) and 158 x 250 kg (550 lb) bombs were dropped, mainly in the residential areas of Kralingen and the medieval city centre. Most of these hit and ignited buildings, resulting in uncontrollable fires that worsened the following days when the wind grew fiercer and the fires emerged into a firestorm. Hooton states that bombs ignited vegetable oil tanks on the dockside, which caused fires that spread into the city centre, causing massive devastation. Although exact numbers are not known, nearly 1,000 people were killed and 85,000 made homeless. Around 2.6 square kilometres (1.0 sq mi) of the city was almost levelled. 24,978 homes, 24 churches, 2,320 stores, 775 warehouses and 62 schools were destroyed. Schmidt sent a conciliatory message to the Dutch commander General Winkelman, who surrendered shortly afterwards, at Rijsoord, a village southeast of Rotterdam. The school where the Dutch signed their surrender was later turned into a small museum.

The Dutch military had no effective means of stopping the bombers (the Dutch Air Force had practically ceased to exist and its anti-aircraft guns had been moved to The Hague), so when another similar ultimatum was given in which the Germans threatened to bomb the city of Utrecht, the Dutch government decided to capitulate rather than risk the destruction of another city. Western news agencies grossly exaggerated the event for propaganda purposes, portraying Rotterdam as a city mercilessly destroyed by terror bombing without regard to civilian life, with 30,000 dead lying under the ruins. The number of casualties 'lying under the ruins' was relatively small, because thousands of civilians had fled to safer parts of Rotterdam, or to other cities, during the previous four days of bombing and warfare. German weekly Die Mühle (The windmill) stated that the Dutch government was to blame for turning Rotterdam into a fortress, despite multiple summons to evacuate. It also claimed that the old city was ignited by Dutch bombs and incendiary devices.

The United Kingdom had had a policy of only bombing military targets and infrastructure such as ports and railways which were of military importance. While it was acknowledged that bombing of Germany would cause civilian casualties, the British government renounced the deliberate bombing of civilian property, outside combat zones (which after the fall of Poland, meant German areas east of the Rhine) as a military tactic. This policy was abandoned on 15 May 1940, one day after the Rotterdam Blitz, when the RAF was directed to attack targets in the Ruhr, including oil plants and other civilian industrial targets which aided the German war effort, such as blast furnaces that at night were self-illuminating. The first RAF raid on the interior of Germany took place on the night of 15/16 May 1940.

47

The destroyed city, sculpture in Rotterdam by Ossip Zadkin

Air raids 1940-1945

After the Luftwaffe bombardment of 14 May the city endured several air raids and shootings by allied air force during the German occupation of the Netherlands. 128 known air raids on Rotterdam and its surroundings were carried out by the RAF and the United States Army Air Force (USAAF). Around half of these attacks were directed at targets within the city limits of Rotterdam. The rest was mainly aimed at targets near Pernis (petrochemical industries and fuel storage tanks), at the shipyards in Schiedam and the area of the Nieuwe Waterweg. During these air raids 884 people died and 631

people were wounded.

Geography 'Rotterdam' is divided into a northern and a southern part by the river Nieuwe Maas, connected by (from west to east): the Beneluxtunnel; the Maastunnel; the Erasmusbrug ('Erasmus Bridge'); a subway tunnel; the Willemsspoortunnel ('Willems railway tunnel'); the Willemsbrug ('Willems Bridge'); the Koninginnebrug ('Queen's Bridge'); and the Van Brienenoordbrug ('Van Brienenoord Bridge'). The former railway lift bridge De Hef ('the Lift') is preserved as a monument in lifted position between the Noordereiland ('North Island') and the south of Rotterdam.

The city centre is located on the northern bank of the Nieuwe Maas, although recent urban development has extended the center to parts of southern Rotterdam known as De Kop van Zuid ('the Head of South', i.e. the northern part of southern Rotterdam). From its inland core, Rotterdam reaches the North Sea by a swathe of predominantly harbour area.

Built mostly behind dikes, large parts of the Rotterdam are below sea level. For instance, the Prins Alexander Polder in the northeast of Rotterdam extends 6 metres below sea level, or rather below Normal Amsterdams Peil (NAP) or 'Amsterdam Ordnance Datum'. The lowest point in the Netherlands (6.76 metres (22.2 ft) below NAP) is situated just to the east of Rotterdam, in the municipality of Nieuwerkerk aan den IJssel. The Rotte river no longer joins the Nieuwe Maas directly. Since the early 1980s, when the construction of Rotterdam’s second subway line interfered with the Rotte’s course, its waters have been pumped through a pipe into the Nieuwe Maas via the Boerengat.

Conurbations Rotterdam is located at the southern end of the Randstad. Having a population of 6.7 million, the Randstad is the sixth-largest metropolitan area in Europe (after Moscow, London, the Ruhr Area, Istanbul, and Paris). The southern part of the Randstad (i.e. the part located in the Province of South Holland) is called the "South Wing" (Zuidvleugel). Including Leiden, The Hague, Zoetermeer, Delft, Vlaardingen, Schiedam, Capelle aan den IJssel, Spijkenisse and Dordrecht, the Zuidvleugel has a population of around 3 million. At the heart of the Zuidvleugel are the conurbations surrounding The Hague and Rotterdam. They are close enough to be almost a single conurbation with a population of about 2.5 million. They share the

48

Rotterdam The Hague Airport and a light rail system called RandstadRail. Consideration is being given to creating a Rotterdam-The Hague metropolitan area (metropoolregio).

Overall the demographics differ per city area. According to a recent area analysis, the city centre has a singles population of 70%, between the age of 20 and 40, considerably more than other city areas. Also the city centre has a much larger population of people with higher education and higher income. Nonetheless, 80% of the homes are rented, not owned. City centre also has a higher percentage (51% vs 45%) of foreign-born citizens (Dutch: Allochtonen). The majority (70%) of shops are also run by foreign-born citizens.

Ethnic make-up Figures are from 2011:

Total: 610,386 Dutch: 319,265 (52.3%) Surinamese: 51,885 (8.5%) Turkish: 45,699 (7.5%) Moroccan: 37,476 (6.1%) Antillean / Aruban: 19,562 (3.2%) European immigrants: 67,371 (11.0%) Other: 61,504 (10.1%)

In the Netherlands, Rotterdam has the highest percentage of foreigners from non-industrialised nations. They form a large part of Rotterdam's multi ethnic and multicultural diversity. 47.7% of the population are of non Dutch origins or have at least one parent born outside the country. There are 80,000 Muslims, constituting 13% of the population. The mayor of Rotterdam, Ahmed Aboutaleb, is of Moroccan descent and is a practicing Muslim. The city is home to the largest Dutch Antillean community. The city also has its own China Town at the (West-) Kruiskade, close to the central railway station.

Commerce and Industry Rotterdam has always been one of the main centers of the shipping industry in the Netherlands. From the Rotterdam Chamber of the VOC, the worlds first multinational, established in 1602, to the merchant shipping leader Royal Nedlloyd established in 1970, with its corporate headquarters located in the landmark building the 'Willemswerf' in 1988. In 1997 Nedlloyd merged with the British shipping industry leader P&O forming the third largest merchant shipping company in the world. The anglo-Dutch P&O Nedlloyd was bought by the Danish giant corporation 'AP Moller Maersk' in 2005 and its Dutch operations are still head quartered in the 'Willemswerf'. Rotterdam is also home to the Dutch half of the anglo-Dutch consumer goods giant Unilever, and Mittal Steel Company N.V., subsidiary of Luxembourg-based Arcelor Mittal, the world's largest steel company.

The Erasmus University has a strong focus on research and education in management and economics. The University is located on the east side of the city and is surrounded by numerous multinational firms. On Brainpark I, Brainpark II, Brainpark III and Het Rivium are located offices of major multinationals. In the center of the city are the above-mentioned Unilever offices, but also Robeco, Fortis (including Mees Pierson and Stad Rotterdam Verzekeringen), ABN AMRO, ING (Nationale Nederlanden), the Rotterdam WTC, and the before mentioned Maersk Line who incorporates the Dutch merchant marine legacy.

49

The City of Rotterdam makes use of the services of semi-government companies Roteb (to take care of sanitation, waste management and assorted services) and the Port of Rotterdam Authority (to maintain the Port of Rotterdam). Both these companies were once municipal bodies, now they are autonomous entities, owned by the City. Being the largest port and one of the largest cities of the country, Rotterdam attracts many seeking for a job, especially in the cheap labour segment. The city's unemployment rate is 8.5%, twice the national average.

Ports Rotterdam has the largest port in Europe, with the rivers Meuse and Rhine providing excellent access to the hinterland upstream reaching to Basel, Switzerland and into France. In 2004 Shanghai took over as the world's busiest port. In 2006, Rotterdam was the world's seventh largest container port in terms of twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) handled.[9]

The port's main activities are petrochemical industries and general cargo handling and transshipment. The harbour functions as an important transit point for bulk materials and between the European continent and overseas. From Rotterdam goods are transported by ship, river barge, train or road. In 2007, the Betuweroute, a new fast freight railway from Rotterdam to Germany, was completed.

In 1872, the Nieuwe Waterweg ('New Waterway') opened, a ship canal constructed to keep the city and port of Rotterdam accessible to seafaring vessels as the natural Meuse-Rhine channels silted up. The canal proper measures approximately 6.5 kilometres (4.0 mi) from the western tips of its protruding dams to the Maeslantkering ('Maeslant Barrier'). Many maps, however, include the Scheur as part of the Nieuwe Waterweg, leading to a length of approximately 19.5 kilometres (12.1 mi).

In the first half of the twentieth century, the port's center of gravity shifted westward towards the North Sea. Covering 105 square kilometres (41 sq mi), the port of Rotterdam now stretches over a distance of 40 kilometres (25 mi). It consists of the city center's historic harbor area, including Delfshaven; the Lloydkwartier; the Maashaven/Rijnhaven/Feijenoord complex; the harbors around Nieuw-Mathenesse; Waalhaven; Vondelingenplaat; Eemhaven; Botlek; Europoort, situated along the Calandkanaal, Nieuwe Waterweg and Scheur (the latter two being continuations of the Nieuwe Maas); and the reclaimed Maasvlakte area, which projects into the North Sea.

The construction of a second Maasvlakte received initial political approval in 2004, but was stopped by the Raad van State (the Dutch Council of State, which advises the government and parliament on legislation and governance) in 2005, because the plans did not take enough account of environmental issues. On 10 October 2006, however, approval was acquired to start construction in 2008, aiming for the first ship to anchor in 2013.

Education Rotterdam has one major university, the Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), named after one of the city's famous former inhabitants, Desiderius Erasmus. The Woudestein campus houses (among others) Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. In Financial Times' 2005 rankings it placed 29th globally and 7th in Europe. In the 2009 rankings of Masters of Management, the school reached first place with the CEMS Master in Management and a tenth place with its RSM Master in Management. The university is also home to Europe's largest student association, STAR Study Association Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the world's largest student association, AIESEC, has its international office in the city.

50

The Willem de Kooning Academy Rotterdam's main art school, which is part of the Hogeschool Rotterdam. It is regarded as one of the most prestigious art schools in the Netherlands and the number 1 in Advertising and Copywriting. Part of the Willem de Kooning Academy is the Piet Zwart Institute for postgraduate studies and research in Fine Art, Media Design and Retail Design. The Piet Zwart Institute boasts a selective roster of emerging international artists.

The Hoboken campus of EUR houses the Dijkzigt (general) hospital, the Sophia Hospital (for children) and the Medical Department of the University. These are known collectively as the Erasmus Medical Center, which is ranked third worldwide for medical research, behind the Harvard University and Johns Hopkins University. The Erasmus Medical Center ranks as the top European institution in clinical medicine according to the Times Higher Education rankings. As a combined medical treatment and research center it is particularly noted for its patient cohort studies in which large numbers of patients are followed for long periods of time.

There are also three Hogescholen (Universities of applied sciences) in Rotterdam. These schools award their students a professional Bachelor's degree and postgraduate or Master's degree. The three Hogescholen are Hogeschool Rotterdam, Hogeschool INHOLLAND and Hogeschool voor Muziek en Dans (uni for music and dance) which is also known as CodArts

Culture Alongside Porto, Rotterdam was European Capital of Culture in 2001. The city has its own orchestra, the Rotterdam Philharmonic, with its well-regarded young music director Yannick Nézet-Séguin; a large congress and concert building called De Doelen; several theaters (including the new Luxor) and movie theatres; and the Ahoy complex in the south of the city, which is used for pop concerts, exhibitions, tennis tournaments, and other activities. A major zoo called Diergaarde Blijdorp is situated at the northwest side of Rotterdam, complete with a walkthrough sea aquarium called the Oceanium. The city is home to the Willem de Kooning Academy and Piet Zwart Institute.

Rotterdam is currently going through a sort of renaissance, with some urban architecture projects, a nightlife, and many summer festivals celebrating the city's multicultural population and identity, such as the Caribbean-inspired "Summer Carnival", the Dance Parade, Rotterdam 666, the Metropolis pop festival and the World Port days. In the years 2005-2011 the city struggled with venues for popmusic. Many of the venues suffered severe financial problems. This resulted in the disappearance of the major music venues Nighttown and WATT and smaller stages such as Waterfront, Exit, and Heidegger. Currently the city has a few venues for pop music like Rotown, Poortgebouw. The venue WORM focuses on experimental music and related cutting edge subcultural music. There are also the International Film Festival in January, the Poetry International Festival in June, the North Sea Jazz Festival in July, the Valery Gergiev Festival in September, September in Rotterdam and the World of the Witte de With. In June 1970, The Holland Pop Festival (which featured Jefferson Airplane, The Byrds, Canned Heat, It's a Beautiful Day, and Santana) was held and filmed at the Stamping Grounds in Rotterdam.

The self-image of the city is that of a no-nonsense workers' city. In that sense, there is a healthy competition with Amsterdam, which is often viewed as the cultural capital of the Netherlands. There is a saying: "Amsterdam to party, Den Haag (The Hague) to live, Rotterdam to work". Another one, more popular by Rotterdammers, is "Money is earned in Rotterdam, divided in The Hague and spent in Amsterdam". Another saying that reflects both the rivalry between Rotterdam and Amsterdam is "Amsterdam has it, Rotterdam doesn't need it". Rotterdam has had a rich hiphop music scene since the early 1980s. It is also the home of Gabber, a type

51

of hardcore electronic music popular in the mid-1990s, with hard beats and samples. Groups like Neophyte and Rotterdam Terror Corps (RTC) started in Rotterdam.

The main cultural organisations in Amsterdam, such as the Concertgebouw and Holland Festival, have joint forces with similar organisations in Rotterdam, via A'R'dam. In 2007 these organisations published with plans for co-operation. One of the goals is to strengthen the international position of culture and art in the Netherlands in the international context.

Museums Rotterdam has many museums. Well known museums are the Boijmans-van Beuningen Museum, the NAi (Netherlands Architecture Institute), the Volkenkundig Museum (foreign peoples and cultures), the Kunsthal (design by Rem Koolhaas),the center for contemporary art Witte de With, the Maritime Museum and the Brandweermuseum (Fire brigade museum). The Historisch Museum (Historical museum) has two buildings: the Dubbelde Palmboom and the Schielandshuis. Other museums include the tax museum and the nature historical museum. At the historical shipyard and museum Scheepswerf 'De Delft' the reconstruction of ship of the line Delft can be visited.

Architecture and skyline In 1898, the 45 meter high-rise office building the White House (in Dutch Witte Huis) was completed, at that time the tallest office building in Europe. In the first decades of the 20th century, some influential architecture in the modern style was built in Rotterdam. Notable are the Van Nelle fabriek (1929) a monument of modern factory design by Brinkman en Van der Vlugt, the Jugendstil clubhouse of the Royal Maas Yacht Club designed by Hooijkaas jr. en Brinkman (1909), and Feyenoord's football stadium De Kuip (1936) also by Brinkman en Van der Vlugt. The architect J. J. P. Oud was a famous Rotterdammer in those days. During the early stages of World War II the center of Rotterdam was bombed by the Germans, destroying many of the older buildings in the center of the city. After initial crisis re-construction the center of Rotterdam has become the site of ambitious new architecture.

Rotterdam is also famous for its Kubuswoningen or cube houses built by architect Piet Blom in 1984. In addition to that there are many international well known architects based in Rotterdam like O.M.A (Rem Koolhaas), MVRDV, Neutelings & Riedijk and Erick van Egeraat to name a few.

Rotterdam houses several of the tallest structures in the Netherlands.

The Erasmusbrug (1996) is a 790-meter (2,600 ft) cable stayed bridge linking the north and south of Rotterdam. It is held up by a 138 metres (453 ft) tall pylon with a characteristic bend, earning the bridge its nickname 'De Zwaan' ('the Swan').

Rotterdam has the tallest residential building in the Netherlands: the New Orleans Tower (158.35 metres (519.5 ft)).

Rotterdam is also home to the tallest office building 'Maastoren' (164.75 m (540.5 ft)) which houses Deloitte. This office tower surpassed the 'Delftse Poort' (160 m (520 ft)) which houses Nationale-Nederlanden insurance company, part of ING Group as tallest office tower in 2009.

The city also houses the 186 metres (610 ft) tall Euromast, which has long been a major tourist attraction. It was built in 1960, initially reaching a height of 101 metres (331 ft); in 1970, the Euromast was extended by 85 metres (279 ft) to its current height.

52

Rotterdam has a reputation in being a platform for architectural development and education through the Berlage Institute, a postgraduate laboratory of architecture, and the NAi (Netherlands Architecture Institute), which is open to the public and has a variety of good exhibitions on architecture and urban planning issues. Rotterdam is standing in the best European SkylineTop together with Frankfurt, London, Madrid, Paris, Warsaw and Moscow. Over 30 new highrise projects are being developed at the moment. Two architectural landmarks are located in the Lloydkwartier: the STC college building and the Schiecentrale 4b.

53

The flood of 1953 (information from Deltaworks.com) Before the flood of 1953

Years before the disaster of 1953, experts had already warned that something had to be done about the condition of the dikes. Nevertheless, the flood occurred. It is a mystery why nobody had listened to the advice given by the experts. The condition of the dikes will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

Condition of the dikes In 1929, the Department of Waterways and Public Works (Rijkswaterstaat) started the “Study service of rivers, sea arms and coasts” (Studiedienst van de Benedenrivieren, Zeearmen en Kusten). In its first years, this service mostly studied the encouragement of

shipping traffic. Later, the service got involved with studying the conditions and water turning capacities of the dikes. In 1934, the service studied the consequences of impoldering the ‘Biesbosch’. Research showed that the consequences for Dordrecht would be disastrous - almost all the dikes appeared to be too low. A report from 1928 had already stated that the dikes in West-Brabant did not meet the safety requirements, but nobody felt like spending a vast amount of money on raising the dikes. Both surveys showed that something definitely had to be done about the condition of the dikes along the rivers. Mr. Muralt invented a cheap way to solve the problem. He suggested raising the dikes by building concrete walls of a few centimetres high on top of the dikes. In particular, in Schouwen and Zuid-Beveland, 120 kilometres of dikes were raised between 1906 and 1935, by building the so-called ‘Muralt walls’.

High water levels in 1943 In 1943, the water level was extremely high. The water ran over the dikes in many places. Again, further research was conducted to check the heights and widths of the dikes, and just like before, the outcome was not good at all. The dikes were proven seriously defective and according to the Department of Waterways and Public Works, severe problems following a high storm tide were highly likely.

WW II The outbreak of the Second World War meant the plans to improve the condition of the dikes around Dordrecht were not carried out. The Storm tide commission, founded in 1939, discontinued its research during the Second World War. The Department of Waterways and Public Works therefore did not really receive the commission’s plans with open arms. The department preferred to focus its attention on the reclamation of the Zuyderzee, thus reclaiming more land. More land meant more space for agriculture and habitation, and this would yield money. During the Second World War, Zeeland suffered a tremendous amount of damage. Dikes were bombed and land was flooded in an attempt to chase away the Germans. Repairs to the landscape started in March 1945 and in February 1946 all the gaps were filled in. These unforeseen repairs also helped distract the attention away from raising the dikes.

54

Brackish problem

Meanwhile, the study service continued to

emphasize the need for raising the dikes, but money

was still a large problem. The agricultural sector in

the Delta area had to deal with a ‘brackish problem’,

which was costing farmers a lot of money, so the

Department of Waterways and Public Works decided

to focus their attention on this. Because of the

deepened waterways near the coast, it was easier for

the sea to come inland. As a result, the groundwater

would get salty (brackish), which hampered arable

farming. Many agricultural crops were unable to

survive the brackish water and died. Various plans

were drawn up as a consequent of the brackish

problem, each with the same goal, which was to stop

groundwater from becoming contaminated, and

protect a large area of land from the storm tides. However, it was important for the ‘Nieuwe Waterweg’

(“New Waterway”) to stay open, as it was vital for shipping traffic. Within these plans, dikes did not have

the highest priority. It was far more important to close the Zuid-Sloe and Brielse Maas.

It is understandable that people were not too interested in spending money on improving the dikes.

There had not been a flood in years and the money could be better spent keeping the agricultural sector

going. The agricultural land that had been contaminated by salt received further attention, because crop

failures were continuing to cost farmers a lot of money. The damages suffered during the Second World

War still had to be repaired, and food shortages during the war further helped distract the attention

from the condition of the dikes. To prevent food shortages, more farming land was required. Using

improved techniques, it was possible to impolder and dike lower lands as well. Even more attention was

taken away from the current unsafe dikes.

After the war, the reconstruction of the Netherlands began. Everything seemed to be running perfectly

well again. Nevertheless, in 1953, it turns out that the sea was still lurking...

Climatic circumstances Aside from the poor condition of the many dikes in the Delta area, the flood was largely due to an unfortunate combination of climatic circumstances. On January the 30th, a depression to the south of Iceland arose. The depression increased and moved towards Scotland. By one o’clock that night, there was a large storm field behind the depression. Originally, the depression moved towards the east, but the north-westerly storm drove the depression in a south-easterly direction. Soon, the storm field covered the entire North Sea. The storm continued to get heavier near Scotland, and then in the afternoon of the 31st of January, a hurricane developed near the northeast coast. The hurricane moved towards the Netherlands, which, at that moment, had a high

55

tide. The high tide was intensified by the hurricane's influence and in some places within the Netherlands, water began to run over the dikes.

Via Denmark and the German curve, the storm got closer to the Dutch coast. On the night of the 31st of January, the storm over the North Sea got even stronger, reaching gales of force 11. The Dutch coast was being hit with force 10 winds. The storm continued, and in the south-western Netherlands, wind speeds of force 9 were measured for 20 consecutive hours. The power of the storm drove the water so high that the water was unable to retreat away sufficiently. There was no ebb tide.

Shortly after midnight, the maximum whip up of the water was measured - the wind drove the water up to 3.1 metres. Three hours later, there was a spring tide. Through the combination of this spring tide, and the huge whipping up of the water, at 3h24, the highest recorded water level was reached - 4.55 metres above NAP (Normal Amsterdam Water Level). The dikes were not designed to hold such high water levels, and around 3 o’clock that night, the first dikes broke through. The dikes at the polder side broke through first, since they were the least maintained. Reinforcements of the dikes were mainly done on the sea side, because it was expected the sea would cause the most damage there. However, things did not happen as expected. The water surged over the dikes and hollowed them out on the land side. The power of the sea was then enough to break them.

The dikes near Kortgene, Kruiningen and Oude Tonge were first to break, then the dikes near Willemstad, Heijningen, Fijnaart, Gravendeel, Strijen, and Numansdorp followed. Many more dikes failed and, in total, 89 dikes were broke through. The damages and breaches could be found over a total distance of 187 kilometres.

It could have however been much worse if the maximum whip up of the water had occurred during spring tide and not three hours later, as was the case. The water in the rivers was relatively low and the tide had not yet reached its maximum height, but still, the dikes broke through.

Devastating powers of the sea

56

Illustration on left is flooded areas of the sea Many people were woken up that night because of the water. They were shut in their own homes and had to try to save themselves. Houses collapsed because of the awesome power of the water. Telephone and radio communications were cut off. On the morning of February 1st, the tide was finally able to retreat and the water level dropped. Some people seized the opportunity to move to higher areas, while others continued to take refuge on the roofs of their houses. There were individual rescue operations taking place. Villagers in boats were looking for victims and helping them get to higher land. The severity of the situation

was still not known to the outside world, due to the lost road connections. It therefore took a while before large-scale rescue operations got under way.

The situation worsened when there was a second flood in the afternoon of February 1st. This flood cost even more lives. Because the dikes had already been breached, the water flowed into the polders with ease. Many houses that survived the first flood collapsed during this one. People and livestock were swept away by the fast moving water. Drowning people grabbed desperately to anything they could that was also drifting in the water, hoping to either be saved or reach higher areas. For many people though, the help came too late; for others, another cold, dark night fell.

Rescue and consequences The Groenendijk After the collapse of numerous seawalls and dikes the dike at along the river Hollandse IJssel was all that remained to protect three million people in the extremely low laying area's of North and South Holland. Especially at a part called 'the Groenendijk', the situation became very critical. The section which wasn't reinforced with a stone layer was - despite attempts of volunteers to improve it - crumbling down. At 5:30 AM in the morning of February 1 this caused it to break under the immense pressure of the water. With the gab widening and moving rapidly into Holland the mayor of Nieuwerkerk commandeered a ship called “de Twee Gebroeders” to be sailed into the hole and plug it that way. Captain Aire Evegroen successfully sailed his ship into the hole and lodged itself firmly into the dike.

Rescue On Monday February 2nd, large-scale relief was slowly getting under way and the severity of the situation became clear. Reconnoitering helicopters flew over the disaster-hit area and started to drop supplies and sand bags. Aid from abroad was also offered. Belgium, England, the United States, Canada, Denmark, and France sent materials and soldiers. Cautiously, the first evacuations were started. On February 3rd, there were 12,000 men in harness, and by that night, the worst of the disaster was over. The storm had cleared and there are no more casualties. In some places, people were still stuck, but

57

they would be rescued soon. Within a few days, the evacuations of the flooded and dangerous areas were completed and people were able to start inspecting the damage and begin restoring the dikes.

Consequences The consequences of the flood were huge. 1,836 people died as a direct consequence of the flood. There were 846 casualties in the province of Zeeland, 247 in the province of North-Brabant, 677 in the province of South-Holland and 7 in the province of North-Holland. About 40 people died afterwards as a result of the flood. 200,000 cows, horses, pigs, and other cattle died in the water and almost 200,000 hectares of land was flooded. The contamination by the salty water meant that the once fertile soil was unusable for many years. 3,000 houses and 300 farms were destroyed and another 40,000 houses and 3,000 farms damaged. 72,000 people had to leave their houses and were evacuated to other areas. In South-Holland, dikes were damaged over a distance of 91 kilometres and there were breaches over a distance of 17.5 kilometres. The breaches had a combined total length of 1 kilometre. In North-Brabant, over 10 kilometres had broken and there were breaches over a distance of 6.7 kilometres. In Zeeland, the breaches were nearly 3.5 kilometres wide and 38 kilometres of dike was damaged. Breaches could be found over a distance of 17.7 kilometres.

International United Kingdom

Before the surge reached the Netherlands it already caused devastating disaster in the United Kingdom. Along its coastline more than 1.600 km of coastline and seawalls were damaged. At many places they breached, inundating 1,000 km². More than 24,000 properties were seriously damaged and over 30,000 people were forced to evacuate. At Felixstowe in Suffolk many people were killed when their prefabricated homes were destroyed by the water. This caused the

unfortunate death of 38 people. In Essex the damage was even bigger. Canvey Island was completely inundated. Over 58 lives were lost. The Seafront village of Jaywick near Clacton lost 37 inhabitants when I was flooded. In the United Kingdom a estimated 307 people died during the 1953 floods. Most of them drowned when their ferry the Princess Victoria sank at open sea. An estimate 224 lives were lost.

Belgium

Along the Belgium coast, fortunately the damage was smaller. Nevertheless over 4400 hectares of ground were inundated, mostly in the area around Antwerp. A total of 25 people lost their live in several smaller incidents along the Belgium coast.

Help from home and abroad Both from the Netherlands itself and from abroad, aid goods continued to arrive. There was so much help that within a few days, warehouses were unable to store all the supplies. Besides, since some of the supplies were not suitable for the local needs, not all the support could be used. Therefore, on February 4th, the Red Cross requested people to stop sending clothes and furniture. For the remaining goods, other destinations were found. Some goods were sent to the isolated city of West Berlin, and some to Korea, where a war was being waged at the time.

58

Financial help for people in the flooded areas was needed well after the disaster. Eventually, 100% of

the furniture of stricken families was replaced. For some people, this meant an improvement in lifestyle,

compared to their situation before the flood. However, whether people were compensated financially

or not, the emotional damage still remains today.

Recovery of the area afflicted The flood disaster of 1953 eventually led to the understanding that the condition of the dikes needed to be improved at last. On the 4th of February 1953, Minister Drees announced that the restoration of the dikes would receive the highest priority. A Delta committee was appointed with Mr Maris, director of the Ministry of Waterways and Public Works, as the leader. In August 1953, the Delta committee gave advice for the restoration of which dikes needed to be repaired most urgently: the dike of Schouwen and the moveable storm surge barrier in the Dutch IJssel (Hollandse IJssel). Meanwhile, volunteers and dike workers worked to close the gaps in the dikes. Within a week, 30,000 volunteers had registered to help repair the dikes. The Ministry of Waterways and Public Works led the restoration works, which was financed by the government.

Difficult start The restoration work was divided between different parties. In North-Brabant, the regional board of the Ministry of Waterways and Public Works took care of the restoration, together with the Dike Improvement Department. In South-Holland, the largest part of the works was executed by the Provincial Ministry of Waterways and Public Works, whereas in Zeeland the Dike Restoration Department was appointed. The conflicting opinions of the organisations meant a difficult start. The Dike Restoration Department, for instance, preferred to use caissons to close the gaps in the dikes. Caissons are large concrete blocks, which can stop the flow of water very quickly. Other parties preferred to close the dikes by means of clay and stone. Eventually, it was chosen to build so-called unit caissons: blocks that could be used in many different variations.

Difficult current gaps By the beginning of April 1953, the largest part of the disaster area was already dry, but there were still some current gaps that were difficult to repair, such as those near Bath, Kruiningen, Schelphoek, and Ouwerkerk. The current gap near Bath was closed on the 23rd of April 1953 by means of a vessel, after a method with raising the sand failed because of the strong water currents. Near Kruiningen, three gaps had to be closed: the western gap, the eastern gap, and the gap in the port. After the closure of the inner dikes, the western gap could be closed by means of clay, plunging stone and six uniform caissons. The eastern gap was a more difficult job and was unable to be closed at its original position. Instead, a ring dike had to be built on the land, in which forty caisson elements were used. Consequently, a pontoon with uniform caissons of 33 metres long was used, and the gap was finally closed on the 8th of July 1953. On the 24th of July, the last gap, the gap in the port, was closed and the railway traffic could continue once again.

On the 18th of August 1953, the largest current gap of the disaster area, near Schelphoek, was closed. Around 125 million cubic metres of water flowed through this gap during the ebb and the flood. As a

59

result, eight canals were created behind the gap. The canals were closed by different types of caissons and the new dike was built. The closing of the gaps near Ouwerkerk was another difficult job. A summer storm hampered the progress, and for a moment, Ouwerkerk seemed to be lost in the sea. The rates of water flow were high near Ouwerkerk, and it was not possible to fix the heavy caissons in the right position. It can be seen that the caissons were not placed correctly next to each other, nevertheless on the 24th of November the dike was completed.

Basis for the Delta law

The dike workers were very proud after successfully closing

these problematic current gaps. By the end of 1953, the area

was officially declared dry again. The dike workers learned a lot

from the restoration works. What was learned, for instance, is

that caissons need to be able to let through as much water as

possible, before they are placed in their correct positions. This

way, a strong current will not occur in the last remaining gap

and this facilitates the placement of the other caissons. To allow

as much water as possible to flow through the caissons, slides

were installed into them. The slides could then be closed after

the caissons were located in place.

The Delta committee extended the plans for large restoration

works. On March the 16th, 1953, the committee gave extensive

advice, which would be the basis of the Delta law of May the

8th, 1958.

60

The Delta Works (information from Deltaworks.com)

History

Studies conducted in 1937 by Rijkswaterstaat (Department of Public Works), showed that safety in many

parts of the Netherlands could not be guaranteed at times of storms and high sea levels. In the densely

populated areas near the river mouths of the Rhine, the Meuse, and the Schelde, it proved very difficult

to build new dikes or strengthen the original ones. The first solution was to close all the river mouths:

the Western Schelde, the Eastern Schelde, the Haringvliet, and the Brouwershavense Gat. This proposal

was christened 'the Deltaplan'. In 1950, the first river mouths of the Brieles' Gat and the Botlek were

closed. The Brielse Maas became a freshwater basin. This not only made the area safer, but it also

provided Voorne with a freshwater supply. The plan was to build the remaining dams in the following

decades. Unfortunately though, the infamous flood of 1953 prevented this from happening. Nearly two

thousand people died and more than 150,000 hectares of land were flooded. People soon became

aware that something had to be done, and very, very quickly.

Twenty days after the flood of 1953, the Delta commission was inaugurated. The commission would give

advice about the execution of the Deltaplan that would, in the long run, increase the safety of the Delta

area. Although safety was the number one priority, the seaways De Nieuwe Waterweg and the Western

Schelde would have to stay open, because of the economic importance of the ports of Rotterdam and

61

Antwerp. In order to be able to build dams in the rivers' mouths, some auxiliary dams would first have to

be built in the Zandkreek, the Krammer, the Grevelingen, and the Volkerak. These dams were known as

'compartment dams', since they would divide the large area of water into multiple compartments. In

1959, the Delta Law was passed, in order to organise the construction of the dams. The building of the

'Delta Works' was such an enormous project, that it was sometimes referred to as the 'eighth wonder of

the world' - and not without good reason.

Execution

The first works

By 1958 the first Deltawork was already operational. It was the storm

barrier in the river Hollandse Ijssel. This barrier (not a dam) was of

great importance because it protected the densely populated western

part of the Netherlands (known as 'the Randstad') against future

flooding. Three years later, in 1961, two more mouths were closed:

the Veerse Gat and the Zandkreek. The water between these dams

soon became fresh and is now known as the Veerse Meer (Lake of

Veere).

Haringvliet sluices and Brouwers dam

An enormous array of sluices was built in the mouth of the Haringvliet

in order to drain off excess water from the river Rhine. The sluices are

able to be opened during very cold winters, to prevent the tide from

freezing. This could be necessary to prevent the freezing of the large

Dutch rivers. It was therefore, only in emergency situations, that salt

water from the North Sea would be allowed to enter the freshwater

Haringvliet. After the construction of the Haringvliet dam, the

Haringvliet gradually became fresh. By 1971, the seventeen sixty-metres-wide sluices were fully

operational. The Brouwers dam, south of the Haringvliet dam, was finished almost a year later.

The Eastern Schelde

According to the original plans, the Eastern Schelde would be closed, just like the other river mouths.

The water enclosed behind the dam would therefore become fresh, exactly like the water in the

Haringvliet and the Lake of Veere. There was some unexpected resistance against the construction of a

closed dam, because people were concerned that the unique salt water environment of the Eastern

62

Schelde would cease to exist. Specifically, not only the environment, but also the fishing industry would

suffer from a dam.

In 1976, the Dutch government agreed to an alternative plan: instead

of building a closed dam, an open barrier would be built, containing a

number of sluices that would only be closed during heavy storms and

high water levels. The unique freshwater environment and the

favourable fishery conditions would be maintained. Sixty-two

openings, each forty metres wide, would be installed to allow as much

salt water through as possible. It was supposed to maintain the tidal

movement.

The Eastern Schelde storm surge barrier turned out to be one of the

biggest structures of the world. The costs of an 'open dam' were

considerable higher than the costs of a ordinary closed dam: 2.5 billion

euros were needed to complete the barrier. On October 4th, 1986, the

Dutch Queen Beatrix officially opened the Eastern Schelde storm surge

barrier.

Significance of the Delta Works

Besides shortening the total length of the dikes by 700 kilometres, the

Delta Works had many other advantages. Firstly, the agricultural

freshwater supply was improved. Because the border between

freshwater and saltwater was moved further west, less freshwater

was required to balance the freshwater-saltwater division. The excess

water could be transported to the north of the Netherlands, in the direction of the Ijsselmeer (Ijssel

lake), where extra freshwater was welcomed to improve the water conditions.

Secondly, the complete water balance of the Delta area was improved. Thanks to the construction of the

major and auxiliary dams, the streams in this area were able to be manipulated more easily. Different

types of sluices made it possible to allow fresh water in, or polluted or excess water out.

Thirdly, the construction of the Delta Works encouraged traffic between the many islands and

peninsulas. Large parts of the province of Zeeland had literally been isolated for centuries. The building

of the Zeeland Bridge together with a tunnel under the Westerscheldetunnel (2003), also helped

increase mobility.

63

Hartelkering

Fourthly, the inland waterways shipping was supported by the Delta

Works. In 1976, Belgium and the Netherlands signed a contract that

would regulate the shipping between the ports of Antwerp and

Rotterdam. Obviously, this agreement had to be taken into account

when building the Delta Works.

Lastly, the Delta Works have influenced new developments in the areas of nature and recreation.

Understandably, a number of nature reserves were irreparably damaged, but as compensation, new

nature reserves have emerged at different sites. Nowadays, dry shores are sometimes used as

recreational areas. Whether or not nature has benefited from the Delta Works will remain an unsolved

debate. However, there is no doubt over the need for durable water management, in which safety,

prosperity, and nature are taken into account.

Other developments

In addition to the construction of new dams and barriers, at several places, existing dams had to be

heightened. This was especially the fact in the western parts of the islands (Walcheren, Schouwen,

Goerree) and along the waterway of Rotterdam and the Western Schelde. The dikes needed

reinforcement because they were not directly protected by the large works. It is a common

misconception that the Delta Works were only built to replace dikes.

Maeslantbarrier

In most of the cases, building a deltawork was much quicker, and

cheaper than reinforcing existing dikes. Since the building and

strengthening of dikes are time consuming and expensive, another

deltawork was built to the west of Maassluis at the end of the 20th

century. The movable barrier, called the 'Maeslant Barrier', can close

off the New Waterway when water levels are threatening the dikes in

the environment. Due to the recent climate change and the rise in sea level, high water levels are more

likely to occur near the coasts of Zeeland and Holland. The number of people that live in the polders,

several metres below sea level, has actually increased since the flood of 1953. The general consensus

among scientists is that the reinforcement of dikes and the construction of dams and barriers is in no

way the final siege in the battle against the sea.

64

The Oosterschelde storm surge barrier The construction of the Oosterschelde barrier was such a large-scaled and complex project, that a whole

website could easily be devoted to this dam. The storm surge barrier of the Oosterschelde is, without

any doubt, the most impressive storm surging structure of the Netherlands. Other flood barriers can be

found in the ‘Hollandsche IJssel’ and the ‘Nieuwe Waterweg’.

The storm surge barrier, which eventually cost 2.5 billion euros, was officially opened by Queen Beatrix

on October 4th 1986. What had all this money been spent on? The chance to have another flood had

decreased from once per ???? years to once per 4,000 years. Moreover, the storm surge barrier would

not have to be replaced in the next two hundred years. Hopefully, one does not have to think about a

new solution until the middle of the 21st century.

Dam or barrier?

Initially, the Oosterschelde would be closed with a regular dam. In 1967, one had already started raising

three artificial islands. After that, concrete would be poured to close the Oosterschelde. This never

happened, however. More and more people began to realise that the closure of the Oosterschelde

would have several consequences. The first priority was safety, but nature could not be forgotten. One

possibility was to keep the Oosterschelde open and to systematically raise the 150 kilometres of dikes

around the Oosterschelde. In 1975, however, the then cabinet proposed to build an open barrier, which

could be closed. The barrier would consist of piers among which slides were hung. These slides could

close the Oosterschelde in time of necessity. The barrier would be much more expensive than a dam.

For that reason, a lot of discussion arose in the Dutch Lower Chamber. The parliament eventually agreed

in 1979 that two auxiliary dams had to be constructed: the Philips Dam and the Oester Dam. These dams

restricted the surface of the Oosterschelde and strengthened the tidal movements. Additionally, a tide-

free shipping route was created between Antwerp and the Rhine.

Nature conservation

The scenery around the Oosterschelde cannot be found anywhere else in the world. Nowhere else, the

combination of land and sea left such unique impressions. There is a great variety of life: more than 70

types of fish, 140 types of water plants and algae, 350 types of animals living in the water and between

500 and 600 types on the land. The Oosterschelde is an important area for birds that are looking for

food, or want to brood or are looking for a place to hibernate. If the Oosterschelde would have been

closed, this unique saltwater environment would have been lost, together with the mussel and oyster

culture. This would also have had severe economic consequences. Fishery has always been the largest

source of income for the traditional fishing villages such as Yerseke and Bruinisse. People have been

farming oysters in the Oosterschelde since 1870.

65

Construction

The storm surge barrier, with a total length of three kilometers, would be placed over three channels:

the ‘Hammen’, the ‘Schaar van Roggeplaat’ and the ‘Roompot’. It would consist of sixty-five

prefabricated concrete piers, among which sixty-two steel slides would be installed. When the slides are

open, three-quarters of the original tidal movement is maintained. That should be enough to maintain

the environment in the Oosterschelde. Some of the sandbars (‘Roggeplaat’ and ‘Geul’) were already

raised, in view of the full closure of the Oosterschelde.

The building excavations of Neeltje Jans and Noordland, together with the sandbar Geul, formed the

closed part of the storm surge barrier. Neeltje Jans was the island from which the operation was

performed. The greater part of the prefabricated elements were built there – the piers, tubes, and

foundation mats. The stones, which would be plunged around the piers later, were also stored there. As

many parts of the dam as possible were made beforehand, on the mainland. This increased the tidal

movement and the safety of the employees.

Bottom consolidation

Soon, the question arose whether the bottom of the Oosterschelde was prepared for the weight of the

barrier. For that reason, the bottom was thoroughly investigated. The solidity and density of the

foundation, the composition of the bottom, the bottom stratification and the geological structure of the

layers were examined. The research showed that several adaptations should be made before the barrier

could actually be constructed. The bottom on which the barrier would be placed, was revealed to be far

too weak. Tests were conducted in laboratories, in order to examine what would happen to the bottom

under certain circumstances.

Several operations were performed to consolidate the bottom. The

ship Mytilus, for instance, placed vibration pipes into the bottom.

After the vibration, the grains of sand were knocked closely to each

other down to fifteen metres of depth. Synthetic mats were also put

at the bottom around the location where the barrier would later be

placed. Consequently, these mats were covered with concrete

blocks. Next, the silt was dredged and replaced by sand. However,

the bottom of the Oosterschelde was still too weak to carry the

barrier. Because of that, special mats were made on the mainland,

which would be fitted to the relevant section of the storm surge

barrier. This mat was a kind of mattress, which was filled with sand

and gravel, instead of springs.

66

Piers and slides The piers Construction dock

The piers were the most important elements of the dam. They were

produced in a building excavation with a surface area of about one

square kilometre, located 15.2 metres below sea level. A ring-dike

kept the sea water outside the excavation. The dry dock consisted of

four parts. When the piers of one part were finished, this part would

be flooded. The lifting ship then sailed into the dock, lifted the heavy

pier and shipped it off to its place in the barrier. Each pier consisted of

7,000 cubic metre of concrete. Therefore, the dock may also be typified as a large concrete factory in

which 450,000 cubic metre of concrete was manufactured between 1979 and 1983.

Pillars

The construction of each pier almost took one and a half years. One

started building a new pier every two weeks. This way, thirty piers

were in production at the same time. It took an enormous amount of

organisation and planning to finish the giant and complex structures in

time. People worked day and night, because otherwise the concrete

could not harden properly. The sixty-five piers were each between 30.25 and 38.75 metres high and

weighed 18,000 tonnes. Two extra piers were built, for safety’s sake. Visitors of Neeltje Jans, the former

artificial island, can now climb one of these left-over piers.

The placement

Inundated construction dock

When all the piers were finished, the building excavation in which they

were built was flooded. Two ships took the piers to the right place. The

ship Ostrea could lift the piers one by one and sailed them to a floating

pontoon. This pontoon marked the place where the pier should be sunk.

The placement was precision work and could only take place when the

current was as weak as possible: during the turn of the tide. The hole

between the piers was filled to let the piers link up with the mats

perfectly. In order to increase the stability, the piers were filled with sand.

Finally, the piers were wrapped up in poured concrete. It was very important that the barrier was

absolutely immovable. When, for instance, one slide could not close, the current in the gap would

become gigantic. In total, five million tonnes of stone were put among the piers. The stones, which

67

weighed ten tonnes each, were put in their place perfectly by the Trias. Some of the stones were

imported from Germany, Finland, Sweden and Belgium, because the amount required was not available

in the Netherlands alone. Importantly, a stone with a high density was needed (2.8 to 3.0 tonnes per

cubic metre), in order to prevent the tide from moving it.

Slides

Bolt

When the piers stood firmly on the bottom of the Oosterschelde, the

construction of the barrier could be finished. The piers were raised

with the top-pieces, upon which the slides were fixed. Hollow tubes

were placed on the piers, and on top of this came a road. The tubes

provided room for the equipment responsible for making the slides

move. In fact, the slides are steel tubes, which are provided with

sheets on the side of the Oosterschelde. The height of the slides

depended on the depth of the gap to be closed. To close the deepest gap, a slide of twelve metres was

needed, which weighed 480 tonnes. The slides are driven by hydraulic cylinders, which are operated

from the ‘Ir. J.W. Tops house’ (1986).

Cooperation The construction of the storm surge barrier was so large-scaled and complicated that it could not be left

to one single building contractor. No single building contractor could promise that the dam could be

finished for a fixed price and within a certain period of time. Therefore, a so-called ‘framework contract’

was drawn up, consisting of a general framework which could be filled up in a later stadium. In 1977, the

Ministry of Waterways and Public Works concluded a contract with the Oosterschelde Storm Surge

Barrier Building Combination (in Dutch: ‘DOSbouw’). This combination was formed on September 1st,

1976 by eleven building contractors:

· Ballast-Nedam Groep Inc

· Bos Kalis Westminster Group Inc

· Baggermaatschappij Breejenhout PLC

· Hollandse Aanneming Maatschappij BV

· Hollandse Beton Maatschappij PLC

· Van Oord-Utrecht PLC

· Stevin Baggeren PLC

· Stevin Beton en Waterbouw PLC

· Adriaan Volker Baggermaatschappij PLC

· Adriaan Volker Beton en Waterbouw PLC

68

· Aannemerscombinatie Zinkwerken PLC

Some of the ships that were used during the construction, were owned by the combination (‘Jan

Heymans’ and ‘Johan V’). Other ships were built under the authority of the Ministry of Waterways and

Public Works (the condensation pontoon ‘Mytilus’, the mat installer ‘Cardium’, the lifting ship ‘Ostrea’

and the mooring pontoon ‘Macoma’). DOSbouw was located at the port in Burghsluis and was removed

after the completion of the barrier on the 30th October 1986. The purchase of building materials

remained outside the contract and was directly arranged with the suppliers from within and outside the

country. A separate framework contract was concluded with the Combination of Construction

Companies Oosterschelde (also called ‘Ostem’), for the construction of the closure materials, such as the

slides.

The ships

Lifting

The barrier had a revolutionary design. Many techniques

had not been used before and if they had, it was not during

such a large-scaled project as this one. There were no ships

suitable for the construction of the storm surge barrier. For

the building of the dam, several ships were designed, which

were tours de force one by one. The ships were all ‘state-of-

the-art’. Most of the ships were provided with a system

which could automatically and very precisely determine the location of the ship. The bearing techniques

for orientation were quite new. In addition, new techniques were used to identify the surface and the

structure of the sea bottom. Equipment such as gyroscopes and accelerometers would have been

indispensable. To process the data flows provided by the equipment, large computers were necessary.

Mytilus (mussel)

This ship made sure that the bottom of the Oosterschelde was

compressed along the section were the barrier would be built. When

the bottom is compressed, the sand and clay parts are compacted

more closely to each other. The bottom becomes more solid. Without

the work of the Mytilus, the barrier would not have been as firm. The

entire compression process took place under water and continued

twenty-four hours per day. The ship consists of five pontoons: a main

pontoon of 18.9 metres long and four auxiliary pontoons with a total length of 32.9 metres. On the ship

were lifting porches of fifty-five metres high. The lifting winches which were fixed to them had a pulling

69

power of 120 tonnes. Vibration needles with a diameter of 2.1 metres and a length of eighteen metres

were drilled into the bottom of the sea. The engine of the ship generated vibrations which were

transferred into the needles. The needles transferred vibrations to the sea bottom, with a frequency of

between 25 and 30 Hertz and an amplitude of 4 to 5 millimetres.

Cardium (cockle)

Although the Ostrea was the most impressive ship of the fleet, the

Cardium was the most expensive one. Nobody ever thought the ship

would cost so much. The actual costs were eighty percent higher than

expected. For this amount of money the Cardium carried out an

important task: putting down the mats. These mats which were thirty-

six centimetres thick, forty-two metres wide and two hundred metres

long. The synthetic mats were filled with sand and gravel in a factory.

The mat was moved to an enormous container, which was fixed to the

Cardium. The mats were put on the sea bottom at a rate of ten metres

every hour. An extra mat was put at the areas where the piers were to be placed. This was to protect

the mats against wear, which could be developed through the opening and closure of the slides.

The Ostrea (oyster)

The Ostrea was the flagship of the Delta fleet. With its length of

eighty-seven metres, the typical U-shape and a capability of 8,000

horsepower, it was the most impressive ship. The ship lifted the piers

from the dry dock and sailed them to the place of the barrier. With the

open side of the ‘U’, the ship manoeuvred around the pier. The ship

could steer easily, thanks to its four screw propellers. On both sides

there were two porches fifty metres high. The piers were fixed to

these porches. The porches could not lift more than 10,000 tonnes

however, whereas the piers weighed 18,000 tonnes. So how did the

Ostrea put the piers in the right place? Fortunately, the levers did not have to lift the piers completely

out of the water. The most important factor was that they did not touch the bottom of the sea during

transportation. Because of the upward pressure of the water, the levers needed to provide less power.

70

Macoma (nun)

This pontoon, named after a shellfish, was situated exactly in

front of the place where a pier would be placed. When the

Ostrea had taken a pier, it moored against the Macoma. To

offer the Ostrea some stability, the pontoon had a coupling

mechanism with a power of six hundred tonnes. The Macoma

also had a second function: an enormous vacuum cleaner was

used to ensure there was no sand between the pier and the

bottom. This was an extremely difficult job, because the tidal

movements moved large amounts of sand each day.

Wijker Rib (fish)

This inspection ship originally plunged stone. During the construction of the Oosterschelde barrier, the

Wijker Rib was multifunctional. It, among others, supported the small inspection vehicle Portunus. This

vehicle was the size of a small van and could drive on the bottom of the sea with caterpillar tracks. The

observations of the Portunus were transferred to the mother ship via an umbilical cord. The data was

checked, processed and interpreted in the Wijker Rib.

Other ships

Jan Heymans

There were many more ships cooperating in the construction.

The Johan V was a geotechnical reconnaissance pontoon,

which was built especially for this project. It was provided with

a drill and a diving bell. By means of a diving bell, samples of

the sea bottom could be taken. Another ship, the Jan Heijmans,

helped the Cardium place the mattresses. The Jan Heijmans

was also responsible for the filling of the holes between the

mattresses and the gravel. The Macoma worked together with

the Sepia and the Donax I during the placement of gravel

ballast mats on the bottom.

71

Nature

Many types of plants and animals live in and around the Oosterschelde. The optimal water temperature,

the salt content and the food supply make sure that many birds, fishes and water plants flourish here.

Not only are there many different types, but they are also living in large quantities.

Fishes

There are about sixty-six sorts of fish, which are continually present in the Oosterschelde. Plaice, sole,

young flatfishes and flounder are just a small sample. About fifteen types, such as salmon, sturgeon and

angler, are rarely seen. The litter of many sorts of fish, such as sole, cod, bass, plaice, dab and herring,

grow up in the Oosterschelde. The litter of the following sorts of fish are born in the Oosterschelde:

anchovy, sea needles and eel pout.

Birds

The Oosterschelde is full of birds. Apart from the West Frisian Islands, this is the area with the most fish.

There are four factors which influence the bird population: 1) running water with a high salt calibre; 2)

clean, unpolluted water; 3) a quiet, rural environment, and 4) sufficient food. There is an excess of food

here. Birds can eat mussels, worms, cockles, shrimps, small fish, sea grass, seaweed and sea lettuce. The

favourable circumstances make the Oosterschelde a popular destination for migratory birds. During

spring and autumn large groups of birds, ducks and gooses come and go. The most famous are the

autumnal migrations towards the warmer areas and the spring migrations towards the breeding ground.

The period in which the migration starts differs strongly among the sorts. Larks already return to their

breeding places in February, whereas most migration birds do not reach the Netherlands until April, or

even May like swifts. In the beginning of August, the swifts, cuckoos and golden orioles leave again,

followed by the autumnal migration of many insect-eating songbirds in September. By the time of

October, the climax of the autumnal migration is reached.

Mussels and oysters

These shellfish are very important for the fishers in Zeeland. The mussel farmers depend to a great

extent on a variety of circumstances that can influence the cultivation. The place where the mussels or

oysters grow needs to be chosen carefully. Firstly, the water must run fast enough for a sufficient supply

of plankton. Secondly, the water cannot run too fast, because the mussels may then be flooded with

sand. Thirdly, long branches of ash wood or oak wood must surround each section. Finally, the mussels

need to lie on a harsh, flat bottom during the dilution (settling), surrounded by clean water. Despite the

dependency on the quality of the water and the weather influences, the mussel and oyster culture

became more professional. The image of old rickety ships has been history for a long time.

The weak parts, also called ‘meat’, are a delicatessen. The mussel season runs from July until early

spring. Many mussels are exported to France and Belgium, where one strives to serve the first new

mussels. Of course, many mussels are consumed in Zeeland as well. The ultimate mussel town is

72

Yerseke, which almost completely depends on the mussel industry. Mussels contain fewer calories per

100 grams than for instance fish and meat (242 kilojoules – 57 kilocalories). They contain more minerals

than meat (100 milligrams calcium, 250 milligrams phosphorus, 6 milligrams iron, 300 milligrams sodium

and 300 milligrams potassium) and about the same amount of vitamins (mostly B-complex and 2

milligrams vitamin C). Unfortunately though, many people are oversensitive to mussels.

Other animals

During the construction of the Oosterschelde barrier, different sorts of stone were used. The fact is that

sea anemones, sponges, tunicates, and crumble starfish (Ophiothrix fragilis) each have their own

favourite stone. Seaweed also appears in many different types. There are forty-two types of red

seaweed, thirty-four types of brown seaweed, thirty types of blue seaweed, and thirty-eight types of

green seaweed in the Oosterschelde. Other special creatures, which can be found in relatively large

amounts are slugs, Chaetopodes, sea acorns, starfish, jellyfish, crabs and shrimp. Octopuses rarely

appear. Although the environment is improving, water sports enthusiasts regularly disturb the animals’

rest.

73

Maeslant barrier

Competition

A year after the opening of the Oosterschelde barrier, the Ministry of Waterways and Public Works held

a competition for the construction of another storm surge barrier. Were the costs of 2.5 billion Euros for

the Oosterschelde barrier not high enough? Wasn’t Zeeland protected against the upcoming water?

Weren’t all waterways closed, except for the Westerschelde?

The winner

Design Maeslantbarrier

This time, there would not be a storm surge barrier in Zeeland, but in the New Waterway (Nieuwe

Waterweg). Raising the dikes around Rotterdam would not be necessary anymore. The most important

demand for the design was that the barrier should not hinder the shipping. The barrier should only be

closed under exceptional circumstances - no more than once or twice every ten years. In 1991, four

years after the competition was held, construction started. Which design had won? Out of six

submissions, the design of the Building Combination Maeslant Barrier won. The Maeslant barrier would

consist of two steel doors which could be sunk down and could be turned away in the docks in the

shores.

Party-time!

On Saturday May 10th 1997, the Storm Surge Barrier New Waterway near the Hoek of Holland was

introduced. The barrier was officially opened by the Dutch Queen Beatrix. At 4:30 PM, the giant storm-

surging doors were sailed equally from the shores on to the New Waterway for the first time.

Altogether, this took about two hours.

The functioning

During water levels of 3 metres above Amsterdam ordnance zero, the arms of the barrier are activated.

The waterway, with a width of 360 metres, can then be closed completely. At first sight, it is almost

unbelievable that such a barrier is capable of such an achievement. The Maeslant barrier is almost as

long as the Eiffel tower and weighs about four times as much. It is the only storm surge barrier in the

world with such large moveable parts. The storm surging doors have a length of 240 metres each. Under

normal circumstances, these doors are fully opened, so that the ships have access to the port of

Rotterdam. The doors are stored in docks with a length of 210 metres, which lie along both shores.

74

During storm tide the docks are flooded and the hollow doors begin to float. They are driven into the

water by means of a small train. This lasts for about half an hour. When the doors are situated in the

middle of the river, valves are opened and as a result the doors are flooded. Consequently, the doors

sink to the bottom because of their weight. On the bottom, there is a concrete threshold. A lot of silt

gathers on this threshold. To close the New Waterway properly, arms need to be positioned exactly on

the threshold. The doors do not sit directly on the threshold yet, but are hung a little above them. The

current under the doors becomes so strong that the silt is washed away. After about an hour, the doors

can sit flat on a silt-free threshold. The water level on the seaside is then higher than the water on the

riverside. The force against the surging wall during a storm is about 350 Mega Newton: this is equal to

the weight of 350,000 strong men, carrying 100 kilograms each. The pressure difference is so large that

a ship of equal measurements would capsize instantly. The unique shape of the barrier prevents this

from happening.

Indispensable

Maeslantkering

The Storm Surge Barrier New Waterway formed the final piece of the

Delta works. Thanks to the storm surge barrier, about one million

people in South-Holland are protected from the sea. The Maeslant

barrier is indispensable, in many ways. The barrier will probably

become increasingly important to the protection of Rotterdam and its

surroundings in the near future. The sea water is coming up more and more due to the rising of the sea

level.

Rotterdam

Rotterdam was not the only area that needed to be protected. The

basin along the New Waterway and the New Maas also needed

protection. The Maeslant barrier could not handle all of this by itself.

Together with the Europort barrier and the Hartel barrier, the

Maeslant barrier forms a line of defence for the whole area. The

Europort barrier consists of a dike which runs from Rozenburg to the Maeslant barrier. In a south

eastern direction, the dike ends near the Hartel barrier. The whole project, including the dike

reinforcements cost 635 million Euros. This was 150 million Euros less than the alternative plan, in which

all dikes in the area would have been reinforced and raised. Moreover, the Maeslant barrier was

75

finished in 1997, whereas the dike reinforcement project would have taken an additional ten years of

work. Parts Ball-and-socket joints

Balljoint

The arms of the barrier are a treat to the eye.

However, their function is limited: the power

exerted on the retaining walls when they are closed

is transferred through to the ball-and-socket joints.

The ball-and-socket joints are in fact the main

figures. Both joints ensure the gates can move in all

directions, both horizontally (when sailing out) and

vertically (when sinking down). Furthermore the

gates must be able to sway on the waves in case of a storm. Finally it must be capable of transferring the

enormous water pressure on the gates through to the foundations.

Foundation Ball-joint

The only kind of joint that is able to follow all

these movements is a ball-and-socket joint. It can

be compared to a human hip or shoulder joint.

However, the joints of the dam have a diameter of

ten meters and weigh 680 tons.

Threshold

The threshold construction on the bottom of the New Waterway has three functions:

1. To form a flat base and strong foundation for the retaining walls, which are moored with buffers

onto the threshold blocks.

2. To limit the flow of water in the case of a closed barrier.

3. To grasp the base on which the blocks are founded.

76

Movement works

Locomotive

The movement works are operated from control buildings at

the north and south side. The movement works consist of

three parts: the dock gate, the locomotive and the ballast

system of the retaining wall. The dock gate opens when the

barrier is activated. The barrier is driven into the New

Waterway by the locomotive. The ballast system allows the

barrier to sink.

BOS and BES

The Maeslantkering is operated by a computer. In the case of a storm flood, the decision of whether or

not to close the barrier is left to a computer system (BOS). The chance of mistakes is greatly increased if

people were to make the decision.

Sinking barrier

A computer will only follow predefined procedures, it

doesn’t get its own ideas and it is not affected by poor

environmental conditions. The system only takes into

account the water and weather forecasts. On that basis it

calculates the expected water levels in Rotterdam,

Dordrecht and Spijkenisse. When the BOS decides to close

the barrier, it gives orders to another computer system, the BES. The BES carries out the orders of the

BOS. The system operates entirely automatically, but remains under constant human supervision with

regards to the procedures.

77

English Summary European Water Framework Directive

(From website Rijkswaterstaat, http://www.helpdeskwater.nl/onderwerpen/wetgeving-

beleid/kaderrichtlijn-water/engelstalig/english/

Water does not stick to national boundaries. EU member states have agreed therefore to the European Water Framework Directive (EWFD). The goal of this directive is to ensure that the quality of the surface water and groundwater in Europe reaches a high standard (‘good ecological status’) by the year 2015.

The EWFD is based on a river basin district approach to make sure that neighbouring member states assume joint responsibility for managing the rivers and other bodies of water they share. To meet the 2015 deadline, water authorities in each river basin district in Europe must have agreed on a coherent programme of measures by 2009. Where a river basin district includes more than one member state, a trans-boundary management plan must be drawn up. The Netherlands is involved in management plans for four trans-boundary river basin districts: Rhine, Meuse, Scheldt and Ems.

Organisation Public participation Publications

Bladwijzer Organisation

From the European level... The implementation of the EWFD starts on a European level. The European Water Directors provide an informal structure in which guidelines are drafted for the further implementation of the directive. Moreover, the European Union is preparing further measures, including a directive on priority substances, to address several aspects of the EWFD.

To the national... In the Netherlands, the implementation of the EWFD is managed by the national government. Issues that need to be addressed on a national level include basic monitoring principles, and the criteria for denominating the various types of water bodies. All these issues are coordinated by the ministry responsible for water management. As far as possible, however, decisions are made in close cooperation with other relevant ministries, provinces, water boards and municipalities.

To the regional... A national basin area coordinator has been appointed for coordinating the drafting of the basin area management plans. For each basin area, the regional directorate of the water management ministry, provinces, water boards and municipalities have partial responsibility for water issues and must closely cooperate in drawing up the management plans as well as executing the programme of measures contained in these plans.

And across the border... To make sure that goals and measures fit in with the overall picture for the river basin involved, those responsible consult closely with the international river commissions for Meuse, Scheldt and Ems. The EWFD is also a prominent issue in the international discussions between Rhine Water Directors.

78

BladwijzerPublic participation Public involvement is an important part of the EWFD. The Dutch public will be kept up-to-date and will have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process. Over the next few years, each member of the public and organisation will have three chances to voice their opinion. In 2006, this will relate to the working programme and time schedule. In 2007, this will concern the most important issues that have to be addressed in the basin management plans, and in 2008 the consultation will involve the concept basin management plans.

In addition to the public, NGOs can be involved with the implementation process of the EWFD on both a national and a regional level. Regionally, organisations are to be given the chance to participate in sounding board groups, with a group in each basin district. On a national level, organisations are participating in a national platform that organises theme discussions on the EWFD. Moreover, these organisations can also participate in different working groups and contribute with their specific expertise in certain areas.

Bladwijzer Publications Most documents of the European Guidances of the Water Frame Directive. You have to choose for public library.

Brochure 'Delta Dilemmas ' Implementing the European Water Framework Directive in the Netherlands.

Brochure 'No frontiers for the Rhine' This brochure gives an overview of the most important conclusions from the international article 5-reports about the international river basin Rhine (1.8 MB).

WFD project factsheets The WFD Project Fact sheets on pollutants aims to provide a basis for the elaboration of the policy line for dealing with pollutants. Fact sheets have been compiled for a total number of 174 potentially significant pollutants. In this report, overviews have been distilled from the fact sheets regarding heavy metals/metalloids, pesticides and other organic micropollutants. A distinction is made between priority hazardous substances, priority substances and other substances. (481.3 KB)

MEP/GEP Guidelines in a nutshell Scope for local interpretation on ecological objectives for the Water Framework Directive

PERSPECTIVEpublished: 21 August 2017

doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2017.00049

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 1 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Edited by:

Christophe Darnault,

Clemson University, United States

Reviewed by:

Wilfred Otten,

Cranfield University, United Kingdom

Andrey S. Zaitsev,

Justus Liebig Universität Gießen,

Germany

*Correspondence:

Abad Chabbi

abad.chabbi@inra.fr

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to

Soil Processes,

a section of the journal

Frontiers in Environmental Science

Received: 19 March 2017

Accepted: 27 July 2017

Published: 21 August 2017

Citation:

Chabbi A, Loescher HW and

Dillon MS (2017) Integrating

Environmental Science and the

Economy: Innovative Partnerships

between the Private Sector and

Research Infrastructures.

Front. Environ. Sci. 5:49.

doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2017.00049

Integrating Environmental Scienceand the Economy: InnovativePartnerships between the PrivateSector and Research InfrastructuresAbad Chabbi 1, 2*, Henry W. Loescher 3, 4 and Margaux S. Dillon 2

1 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Lusignan, France, 2 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Ecosys,

Thiverval-Grignon, France, 3National Ecological Observatory Network (Battelle), Boulder, CO, United States, 4 Institute of

Alpine and Arctic Research, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, United States

The present paper is a preliminary analysis of the funding, organizational culture,

environmental, and innovation challenges that are currently faced by Environmental

Research Infrastructures (ERI) and private enterprises working together. We contend

there is a strong case for building creative collaboration models across these sectors

that also require to new management tools to effectively generate economically-driven

solutions to the global society at large in the face of climate change. To that end,

public/private stakeholders that are likely to partner to address climate change also

face new frontiers in how they will structurally and organizationally work together. We

explore these issues around changing political, scientific, commercial environments;

partnerships models; barriers in bridging these communities; and the role of formal

project management processes. There is no one solution to fit all conditions that can bring

together a specific public/private enterprise that incorporates a research infrastructure.

However, we have provided two examples of collaborative models of public/private

enterprises to highlight how these issues can be addressed, and to foster future dynamic

and creative solutions to this problem.

Keywords: research infrastructures, environmental science, private sector, ecosystem services, funding models,

public private enterprises, programmatic tools, uncertainty measures

INTRODUCTION

The economic exploitation of ecosystem services now threatens our food security, the stability ofnatural and managed ecosystems, and global biodiversity. Environmental Research Infrastructures(ERI) have emerged to fill important gaps in our understanding of ecological processes, in responseto the drivers of change the likes of climate, extreme climate events, invasive species, and landuse change (Table 1, Heinz Foundation, 2006, 2008; Peters et al., 2014). While ERIs are designedto fill such gaps, their potential to transform other sectors of the economy and decision-makingpatterns remains largely untapped worldwide. Moreover, meeting societal needs in a changingenvironmental landscape provides a new context for the private sector to explore emerging businessopportunities. Academicians (who utilize ERIs) and the private sector increasingly recognizethey may need to move toward less conventional partnerships to address societal needs, and tojustify ERIs operational budgets (Buhmann, 2016). Because these are still nascent ERIs, emerging

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

TABLE 1 | Environmental Research Infrastructures (ERIs) that are borad in both temporal and spatial scale and designed to address societal challenges, e.g., Loescher

et al. (2017).

Name Description Location Start date Website

Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Research

InfraStructure network (ACTRIS)

Aerosols, Clouds, and Trace

gases

Europe 2014 www.actris.net/

Advanced Modular Incoherent Scatter Radar

(AMISR)

Space weather North America

Polar

2003 www.isr.sri.com/iono/amisr/

Analysis and Experimentaion on Ecosystems

(AnaEE)

Ecosystem manipulations Europe 2012 www.anaee.com/

Chinese Environmental Research Network (CERN) Terrestrial systems China 2004 www.cern.ac.cn/0index/index.asp

Earthscope Seismology and geodesy US 2002 www.earthscope.org/about/observatories

European Incoherent Scatter Scientific Association

(EISCAT)

Space weather European Polar 2001 www.eiscat.se/about/

European Multidisciplinary Seafloor Observatory

(EMSO)

Oceans Europe 2013 www.emso-eu.org/

European Ocean Observatory Network (EuroSites) Oceans Europe 2008 www.eurosites.info/

European Plate Observing System (EPOS) Seismology and geodesy Europe 2015 www.epos-ip.org/

Global Earth Observation Systems of Systems

(GEOSS)

Environmental Global 2007 www.earthobservations.org/

ICOS (Integrated Carbon Observation System) Terrestrial and oceanic

systems. Greenhouse gases

Europe 2014 www.icos-infrastructuer.eu/

Lifewatch Biodiversity Europe 2012 www.lifewatch.eu/

NEON (National Ecological Observatory Network) Terrestrial and freshwater

ecosystems

United States 2013 www.neonscience.org/

OOI (Ocean Observatories Initiative) Oceans Western

hemi-sphere

2014 www.oceanobservations.org/

South African Ecological Observatory Network

(SAEON)

Terrestrial systems. South Africa 2013 www.saeon.ac.za/

Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) Terrestrial systems. Australia 2012 www.tern.org.au/

This is not an exhaustive list, but is presented to demonstrate the global distribution, diversity, and duration of ERIs.

economies and the corresponding opportunity are also still novel,and the means to establish public/private partnerships likewiserequires creative models of engagement.

ERIs were established to address unprecedented ecologicalresearch questions, such as, the deep-rooted causes and equallyfar-reaching consequences of the rising threats to globalecosystems (Soranno and Schimel, 2014). They now have aunique opportunity to contribute to new economies, naturalresource management, and meet the needs of private enterprises.ERIs, however, are structurally more akin to university and largeresearch structures. Likewise, the private sector and corporatestructures function quite differently from ERIs, universities, andpublic enterprises. For instance, the ability for ERIs to collectdata, challenge our current knowledge and provide (model)analytics would allow them to effectively forecast ecologicalstates, i.e., decision spaces (Schimel and Keller, 2015; Chabbiet al., 2017; Loescher et al., 2017). The financial and intellectualcapital brought to bear in this example typically cannot beafforded by the private sector. Likewise, the internal sciencescope and fiduciary responsibilities of ERIs do not necessarilyallow for the development of market-driven endeavors. Theaccuracy, precision, and timescales to deliver research data(seasons to years) to academicians differ from the near real-time need for actionable data capable of yielding a competitiveadvantage to the private sector. Hence, ERIs, private enterprises,

and other decision-makers must embrace a creative frontierin the variety of innovative partnerships models, identify andovercome barriers to work together and achieve sustainablenew economies. Here, we explore these frontiers, barriers, andpresent actionable solutions to link ERIs, private enterprisesand other decision-makers toward developing new economies,e.g., integrated information services for real-time environmentalmanagement across a wide market-sector of research, State andLocal governments, natural resource managers, and other novelbusinesses.

CURRENT POLITICAL, SCIENTIFIC, ANDPRIVATE SECTOR ENVIRONMENTS

The Political EnvironmentGovernmental and non-governmental organizations alike stressthe growing importance of environmental risks on nationaleconomies around the world (NRC, 2007; PCSAT, 2011;WEF, 2017). Climate change, climate-change mitigation andadaptation failure, man-made environmental disasters, extremeweather events, natural disasters, biodiversity loss, and ecosystemcollapse rank as high-risk and high-likelihood (WEF, 2017).Governmental bodies must therefore not fail to address thethreats to both the environmental and the economic aspectsof quality of life that derive from the accelerating degradation

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 2 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

of the environmental capital—the Nation’s ecosystems and thebiodiversity they harbor—and—from which ecosystem servicesflow (Dilling and Lemos, 2011; Holdren et al., 2014). Theeconomic and environmental dimensions of societal well-beingare as indispensable as well as they are tightly intertwined(PCSAT, 2011; Adams, 2015). Governmental planning isinherently complex, as are the prioritization of budgets to addressthe linkage between environments and economies, and thefunding of research infrastructures competing for governmentalbudgets (Sanz-Menéndez and Cruz-Castro, 2003). The financialcrisis of 2008 and the resulting degrees of economic recessionhave placed additional strain in governmental resource planningand the prioritization of budgets (Geels, 2013). It also severelyeroded public trust in public organizations and businesses(Edelman Intelligence, 2017). Moreover, the public and politicalinterest in addressing climate change has ebbed and flowedover the past decade (Lorenzoni and Pidgeon, 2006), whereassolutions have to be consistent over decades in order to besuccessful (IPCC, 2014). The need for governments to adaptto a changing environment requires robust decision-makingtools to inform policy and regulatory bodies and protect humanhealth and food security by moving toward a more sustainablemanagement of natural resources (UNCSD, 1987; Lozano et al.,2016; The European Commission, 2016).

The Scientific EnvironmentCurrent disparities in political reasoning for fundingcommitments of ERIs and correspondingly uneven nationalfunding instruments across ministries and agencies have resultedin a fragmented research landscape (PCSAT, 2011). Fundingfor large-scale science infrastructures has typically fared betterunder conservative governments, compared to more liberaladministrations. This funding also tends to favor projectsthat are apolitical in nature, that is to say, projects whichoutcomes do not affect political decisions (i.e., high-energyparticle accelerators, telescopes, ocean vessels, etc.; Miller pers.commun., 2009; T. Beasley pers. commun., 2009).

Though, ERIs are designed for basic research, they produceinformation relative to the state of the environment, and assuch, are actionable and politically responsible. In addition, thelegitimacy of environmental data often comes under politicalscrutiny (Mooney, 2005;McCright andDunlap, 2011), rekindlingthe same argument made by Ernst Mayr made that biologycannot be simply reducible to mathematical formulae orthe laws of chemistry and physics, and establishing it as alegitimate science in the eyes of many national academies (Mayr,1965, 1969). Moreover, traditional methods of extrapolatingon environmental observations either prove too limited forcommercialization, or provide justification for climate deniers(McCright and Dunlap, 2011; Howard-Grenville et al., 2014).Emblematic of such tensions, ERIs stand to deliver key solutionsto societal challenges by harnessing the opportunities provided byadvanced analytics (Hey et al., 2009; Soranno and Schimel, 2014).Even though, their long-term sustainability is still in question.

There is a need to reconcile the resources to meet a ERIs’core mission of under ongoing budgetary challenges and politicalagendas (Campbell et al., 2015; Beltrán-Esteve and Picazo-Tadeo,

2017). One strategy consists in ERIs working with governmentalstructures, to advocate their mission and align with legislation,planning documents, strategic roadmaps (NRC, 2004; NSF, 2014;ESFRI, 2016) in order to secure formal, long-term commitments.To solidify such commitments, it is also the responsibility of ERIsto adopt formal business management and project managementtools for status, reporting and future resource planning (Loescheret al., 2017). This in turn depends on funding agencies to providethe appropriate oversight to ensure the responsible use of publicfunds and alignment to their respective strategic roadmaps andpolitical mandates (NRC, 2001; NSF, 2015; ESFRI, 2016).

Additional strategies are needed to secure diversified fundingfor ERIs in today’s often negative political climate towardactionable science (Brown, 1997; Heritage Foundation, 2017;Malakoff and Cornwall, 2017). Diversification of fundingresources is one strategy that ERIs can implement to assuage thelack of current political resolve. Funding agencies often pointto the need for ERIs to partner with the private sector, more asa rationale to show that jobs and economies can be developedand less so to justify operational budgets. There are in factgrants and loan mechanisms to support innovation partnershipswith the private sector, e.g., InnovFin, as coordinated by theEuropean Investment Bank or the US Small Business InnovationResearch Grants and Technology Transfer Grants. In Europe,for example, ∼100 projects under FP7 cost 100B e since 2014and another ∼1.4 B e in loan guarantees (The EuropeanCommission, 2016; The European Investment Bank, 2017).Although this was considered a solution to cover constructioncosts, the European Commission itself recognizes the difficultyfor ERIs to apply for loans, given they are programmaticallyill-equipped to generate the funds to repay the bank. Overall,these programs are met with limited success as their developmentmodels tend to be structurally inflexible and their targeted effortsappear to lack the ability to align with entrepreneurial priorities.The European Commission nevertheless supports private sectorinvestment in co-designed products and services as a means tobridge ERI’s funding gap. Other (tax) incentives are likewiseunder consideration to strengthen private sector investmentsand encourage collaboration with ERIs. In other words, thechallenge in creating public/private ventures is increasingly beingaddressed by governmental program officers as they too arebecoming advocates in developing creative engagement models.

The Private SectorFrom a corporate viewpoint, environmental challenges areassociated to the additional and often unforeseen costs theygenerate (Eceiza et al., 2017). Planning and mitigation ofsuch risks constitute an active area of development (Lash andWellington, 2007)—as well as the business and innovationopportunities this creates. Market competition remains theprimary motivation to mitigate these risks and their associatedcosts. Corporations that seek cost mitigation solutions often relyon in-house efforts or external consultancies (excluding stand-alone efforts for the time being). It is therefore still uncommonfor the full breath of scientific expertise and resources to bebrought to bear.

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 3 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

Global environmental changes create new entrepreneurialopportunities for profitable enterprises, products, services, valuecreation, and markets. At the frontier of such efforts, York et al.(2016) found that “environmental entrepreneurs” are motivatedby both commercial and ecological concepts and prioritize theirdevelopment efforts based on the strength and linkages betweenthese two concepts. Organizational theories also recognize a levelof social responsibility, along with the creation of novel hybridorganizations (Battilana et al., 2012; Smith et al., 2013; Hockerts,2015). The linkage (organizational identity) among commercialecological and social interests arise as a key motivation in relationto unique products that public ERIs may contribute toward.This requires dispelling the sense that ERI are competitors inknowledge production and value creation and instead promotetheir inherent and mandated identity as collaborators (Schilloand Kinder, 2017). Linking commercial, ecological, and socialinterests in new innovative ventures should therefore be acornerstone of any ERI business plan (Porter and Kramer, 2011;Liu and Brody, 2016).

Working TogetherBuilding on the Millenium Report (MEA, 2005), the UnitedNations identified 17 Sustainable Goals to address climatechange, water resources, sustainable management of the oceansand land and food security—and the economic systems thatsupport this sustainability (UN, 2016 and others the likes ofKPMG, 2014). Tangible and actionable efforts to address thesegoals could amount to 60% of the immediate economy andcould yield well beyond $12 T US per year by 2030 andup to 380 million jobs globally—90% of which in developingcountries (Héraud, 2016). It would indeed require an injectionof public and commercial finance, and in particular (Héraud,2016) estimated an additional investment of $2.4T US in globalinfrastructure would be needed. Here, we focus on establishinga development strategy to link commercial ventures with theproducts and services provided by ERIs as part of their publicmandate.

SEEKING SOLUTIONS IN HYBRIDFUNDING MODELS FOR ERIS

To date, the scientific knowledge derived from ERIs typicallymakes its way into scientific publications by researchers exploringbasic and applied science. This flow of knowledge-based systemsis a common paradigm for funding agencies (Stocker, 2017),where the justification of ERIs operations directly supportsscientific research and indirectly, the economics of researchinstitutions, e.g., universities, agencies, and ministries. In today’scurrent political environment, there are implicit and explicitmandates to enhance the public resources spent on science forsocietal relevance, value-added efforts and innovative types ofengagement with the private sector to create new economiesand jobs (PCSAT, 2011; Chabbi et al., 2017). It may standto reason that new value created by leveraging scientificexpertise to co-develop new knowledge and services may bebeneficial to the private sector. This results in a fundamental

difference in funding mechanisms (public vs. corporate finance)and motivation (advancement of knowledge vs. competitiveadvantage and profit). In other words, few within the privatesector would consider a direct investment in research solelybased on publication performance (Lin and Bozeman, 2006).A business model that is likely to bring these two disparatecommunities together has yet to be established and with it,the necessary common language to bridge these communities.Indeed, capturing the value added of scientific research throughmetrics traditionally found in business models and adjacentmarketing strategies is difficult (Ehret et al., 2013).

The timelines that correspond to funding and projectlifecycles are different for scientists and entrepreneurs. Publicfunding mechanisms typically invest in research projects withina 1–5 year timeframe, whereas entrepreneurial projects oftendevelop over much longer periods of time. There are culturalbarriers in the different ways these partners think about theirroles and responsibilities in reaching innovation milestones,e.g., researchers forgo their academic calling to advance frontierscience, or be unclear as to their advisory/leadership role inrelations to their corporate counterparts. On the other hand,entrepreneurs may struggle with the notion that “better” isoften the enemy of “good” (Rodrigo et al., 2013). The lack ofa formalized structure or process to bring these communitiestogether around innovational ideas creates a disjunct relation atbest and a disincentive at worse.

In an effort to bridge this gap, governments have encourageduniversities to become innovation incubators in associationwith industries, through public incentives for cross-sectortechnological transfer and public/private partnerships(Perkmann and Walsh, 2004). Moreover, capital investmentsreturn to the universities in a business model which has provenfruitful (Youtie and Shapira, 2008). Universities provide theenvironment, the structure and functions needed to fosterinnovation and start-up companies. Innovations typically comefrom within the university faculty or student body. The corefunctions they support include legal support; management ofintellectual property rights (IPR); physical development space;access to engineering, design, manufacturing and marketingexpertise, market analyses, access to venture capital (VC), andongoing mentorship in the development process (Figure 1).In some instances, the private sector can also partner withuniversities to tap into promising scientific advances anduniversities’ developmental concepts, which cannot be generatedin-house. Through these types of business partnerships,universities can also access other means of capital that wouldotherwise not be available, e.g., seed funds, other VC and accessto external “private” datasets (Bozeman and Gaughan, 2007).This “non-zero sum game” continues to provide unexpectedadvantages and opportunities to all parties involved, e.g., newinnovations/products capable of assisting decision-makers,anticipating regulatory pressures, and identify additional publicfunds (Boardman and Corley, 2008). A key strength of thisuniversity model is that it can support a large range of innovationprojects with needs and markets yet to be determined.

Examples of university-based investments in such a model arenumerous. As such, the capabilities of their core functions have

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 4 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

limits. Universities cannot incorporate all ideas and innovationsthrough their processes and often rely on an application processby way to prioritize partners/ideas most likely to succeed, andmake periodic evaluations to determine the ongoing projectvalidity and manage the corresponding risk portfolio. Whilethis proves a sustainable model, it also results in key limitationin scaling such functions beyond what is fiscally (cost-returnstructure) and physically feasible in such a setting (Figure 1).

An alternative model is to develop a cyber infrastructure,analytical tools, and adaptive capacity, to augment newcapabilities based on the ongoing needs of the client base

(private sector; Figure 2). This value-added model is moreservice-oriented, targeted at decision-making and utilizes opendata sources. Key to this models’ success is the use of synthesiscenters to bring together diverse stakeholder communities(e.g., researchers, educators, decision-makers, managers,agencies/ministries, corporations, and entrepreneurs) and distillthe needs and capabilities of a novel project. This business modelis also based on the notion that analytics for decision-making aremost effective and critical within a 2–3-year planning window.This is true for governments and municipalities charged withmanaging public economics and growth models, but also

FIGURE 1 | University-based innovation incubator hub model. With core, internal incubator functions on the right, and external activities on the left. SE, system

engineering; VC, Venture capital. Description of “synthesis activities” can be found in Specht (2017).

FIGURE 2 | The National Center for Atmospheric Research’s Engineering for Extreme Climate Partnerships value-added model (www.ncar.ecep.edu), with core,

internal incubator functions on the left, and external activities on the right.

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 5 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

for private enterprises seeking to maintain their competitiveadvantage. This helps develop a clear, concise, and constrainedproject definition (use case) that can be managed and articulatedinto contractual form. It also identifies the needs, skillsets, andlevel-of-effort needed to complete the deliverable(s) required bythe client. The needs for each (private) client will be different anda tailored approach is required.

Developing a competitive advantage in natural resourcemanagement (supply chain) is only effective within a 2–3-yearplanning window (Christopher and Peck, 2004; Tietenberg andLewis, 2012). Moreover, the nuance with public environmentaldata (and ERIs) is that they provide data that is free andopenly available to research and educational communities.While advanced applied analytics for private enterprises are notincluded in this model, there is a social imperative in makingthese products available to the public at some point in time, whencompetitive advantage is no longer a contractual requirement(after the above-mentioned 2–3-year window). A 2–3-yearcompetitive advantage, if successful, provides the opportunityfor private and public enterprises to return to the partnershipand develop the next analytic that can generate their next 2–3-year window of competitive advantage. This model has beenproven successful by public/private partnerships in the NationalCenter for Atmospheric Research; Extreme Climate EngineeringPartnerships (www.ecep.ucar.edu; Figure 2).

Generally, environmental open-data represents an untappedresource for innovation worldwide. The need to better integratelarge-scale “Big Data” science into the private sector is articulatedas a “must do” by stakeholders, governments, and the publicat large (Pulwarty and Maia, 2015). Yet, opportunities to doso are limited and successes even less common. Often, successoccurs by happenstance rather than targeted consideration ofthe joint interests of public and private entities (see Figure 1.3in Chabbi et al., 2017). In this instance, changing the current(low success) paradigm of scientist-initiated innovation lies indeveloping the stakeholder-based needs first, then engaging indevelopment pathways. One of the roles of ERIs is therefore tocreate the forum to change the current paradigm of how publicand private enterprises interact, in order to facilitate innovation(Chabbi et al., 2017; Specht, 2017).

There are clear strengths and weaknesses with both theuniversity-based and value-added models for academia andprivate sector to partner. A potential middle-ground modelmight be a more holistic partnership with a public-privateenterprise that incorporates all the functional attributes of bothmodels and is directed toward key environmental markets. Thescalability issue in the university model can be addressed byfederating existing physical capabilities from ERIs, universities,private enterprises, and synthesis centers. Providing a sustainablestructure to bring together innovators and academicians will beinstrumental in generating successful outcomes and effectivelymodifying the current paradigm (see above). Pilot projectsare needed to provide proof-of-concept and lessons learnedin an adaptive structure. Training, joint strategic planning,and stakeholder engagement efforts will play an essential rolein bridging gaps in cultures, languages and approaches—andultimately foster innovation.

In all models, there is a persistent issue in managing the IPRand data sovereignty (DS) challenges that inevitably arise fromworking across geopolitical borders and other public and privateprotection frameworks. The mandate for open-source data isrequired of all governmentally-funded projects, i.e., the EuropeanCommission, US National Science Foundation, US Departmentof Energy, etc. While managing IPR and DS are not novel, newspecific challenges arise in relation to environmental sciences.For example, DS issues may arise when developing new venturesin crop futures, food security and or in incentives for shiftingagronomic economics that have competitive implications acrossborders and governments (Teece, 2010). There are neverthelessencouraging approaches to address IPR and DS and open-data access mandates, grounded in the delivery of added-valueanalytics, decision-space tools and federated web services tailoredto the private client needs—though this will have to be furtherdeveloped through use cases and prototype activities.

PROGRAMMATIC TOOLS TO FOSTER THEDEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC PRIVATEENTERPRISES

It is difficult for traditional grant structures based on the researchcapacity of principle investigators (PI) to provide consistent,long-term, quality-controlled, multi-dimensional data designedto provide data for services, and decision-making. This isparticularly true as most PI-based research is targeted fortheir specific hypotheses, and funding horizons are typically 1–5 years. Nevertheless, ERIs stand to provide novel solutionsto foster long-term sustainability in designing deliverables forcommercialization. Because of the large public expenditures forERIs (often > $200 M US investments), they are subject tostringent governmental oversight. This in turn requires the use offormal project management, system engineering, and corporateplanning tools (Loescher et al., 2017).

These corporate planning tools help ERIs define science scope,budget, identify and mitigate risk, resource load, define internalroles and responsibilities, integrated resource loaded schedulesand ultimately, provide reporting metrics to their sponsors(Lozano et al., 2016). Moving from PI-based hypothesis testingto a requirements-based framework is novel for the academicenvironmental community (Loescher et al., 2017). This approachpaves the way in to justify and delineate the scope of largegovernmental projects. The potential of large-scale, integratedscience requirements are however, only now being acknowledgedoutside the ERI framework, which has large implications forcommercialization. For example, ERI’s can clearly provide thephysical and cyber-infrastructure interfaces to ingest real-timedata and its associated metadata.

Other planning tools currently used by ERIs include classicSWOT analyses (Hill and Westbrook, 1997; Humphrey, 2005),stakeholder engagement (Herremans et al., 2016), sigma six(Tennat, 2001), PmBok (PMI, 2013), verification and validationengineering, commissioning processes, and the like (Bartocciand Picciaia, 2013). There are often heated debates on thetypes of software and specific reporting analytics used in project

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 6 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

management, but the corresponding variance is approximatively∼10% among these tools (T. Beasley, pers. commun., 2009).These tools accomplish a “linearization” of the inherently“non-linear” and time-variant problems that face all projectdevelopment at such a large scale. These planning tools providethe scope, the institutional health metrics, human resourceplanning, resources prioritization, market viability (Calabreseet al., 2016), key performance indicators, and organizational goals(Maas et al., 2016) necessary for ERIs to make the case to privateentities, for them to integrate their relevance and eventuallyengage and develop collaborative planning horizons (Braamaet al., 2016).

UNCERTAINTY MEASURES ANDDECISION-MAKING TRADE SPACES

Research quality data relies on mean trend estimates relativeto the processes in question (the signal) and variance measures(potential noise) in order to perform more advanced analytics.The general public often looks toward science to provideanswers to environmental problems (Miller et al., 2014). Yetproviding uncertainty estimates intended for decision-makersdiffers in approach to the classic production of statistics to testscientific hypotheses (JCGM, 2008). ERIs provide statisticallyand “International Standards Organization (ISO)” defensiblemeasures of uncertainty (Taylor and Loescher, 2013; rf. Csavinaet al., 2017). But the lack of statistical approaches capable ofunderpinning a range of probabilities given a specific decisionabout natural resource management that has to be made today.Important to note, that it is also imperative to attribute tocausality, not just trend and variance estimates, and not to

confuse a cause and a consequence of a particular processof interest. This is a particularly salient for any service-oriented collaboration that utilizes ERI data. The crux of thisissue lies with the ability of private entities to articulate theirconstraints to address a specific problem—and the level ofuncertainty needed to design a valuable commercial product,and in terms that scientists can understand. On the other hand,scientists struggle in communicating “what uncertainty means”in layman terms and are challenged to provide new statisticalapproaches to meet the growing societal demand for actionableresults.

The question of bringing together ERIs and the private sectorin an entrepreneurial venture is not novel. However, both ERIsand individual private entities must be mature enough in theirapproach toward engagement with the other partner, and havethe appropriate skillsets and vocabulary (Chabbi et al., 2017; fora list of ERIs, see Table 1, and Tables 1–3 in Peters et al., 2014).Road mapping activities have identified early adopters presentingthe skillsets likely to facilitate joint ventures (Table 2). Additionalunforeseen and serendipitous opportunities may well arise as aresult.

CONCLUSION

Overcoming the current challenges to bridge science and privateenterprises are underpinned by the strong sense of socialresponsibility of all parties to co-develop strategic productsand services. The frontier to tackle future environmentalproblems as well as the needed structure between public andprivate enterprise is unknown, and requires creative solutions.At the crux of this issue lies the shared responsibilities indemonstrating how advanced environmental analytics identify

TABLE 2 | Key markets, early adopters, and their attributes.

Market Attribute

Insurance and risk

management

Society is exposed to the economic impacts of weather extremes. We expect these costs will increase in the near future and affect

both environmental and societal resiliency (Kolstad et al., 2014; Kunreuther et al., 2014). Risk management models currently rely on the

integration of theory-model-observations to advance prognostic capability and evaluation of exposure. As such, they are able to

effectively articulate the parameters, constraints, and analytics to ERIs, which in turn provide them with environmental data with

enhanced spatial and temporal fidelity.

Agronomy and Crop

Production

Food security is a key societal challenge as the rise population numbers (Schauberger et al., 2017) has major implications for political

stability (Kolstad et al., 2014). ERI stand to address the practicalities of dealing with limited and changing resources (land, climate, soil

fertility, water availability, soil erosion) in relations to food production. This approach contrasts with the political and market pressures,

e.g., market futures, trade agreements, transport of water, war.

Sensors and Instrumentation For ERIs to stay at the forefront of science, new approaches and methodologies are continually being developed. For scientists to then

be competitive while relying on grants, they need to push scientific frontiers in such a way as to address applied questions with major

societal relevance. This is often accomplished through harnessing the latest advances in technology capable of facilitating the zietgiest

science. Sensor and instrument manufacturers have a long-standing partnership with scientists: in the face of growing environmental

challenges, these entrepreneurial ventures are expected to increase.

Market chain economies and

natural resource managers

Market chain economies (e.g., corn sugar, beer) and natural resource managers (e.g., public space, reservoir management) both

require a predictive understanding of the crop/resources they manage (Todeva and Rakhmatullin, 2016). This would indeed assist them

in determining if industry has to transition toward different markets or plan for transportation costs to access the desired commodity.

Predictive ecology is an strategic area of research and is being advanced through the data ERIs provide (Dietze et al., 2017).

Carbon economy managers ERIs are prime allies in estimating carbon exchanges between the environment (including urban networks) and the atmosphere. They

also have the ability to parse natural and anthropogenic sources and sinks (Law and Harmon, 2011). This is a unique MRV opportunity

for any policy choice affecting the exchange of carbon, i.e., low carbon cities, shifting agriculture, land conservation and management,

fracking mitigation, etc.

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 7 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

and structure priorities in organizational changes toward long-term, sustainable value to society at large. Secondary to thestrong societal imperative to tackle these issues, are also thecultural barriers that have to be overcome to link publicand private enterprises together. Successful programmatic toolsand organizational models do exist to help overcome thesebarriers that should be part of the explicit planning for anyspecific project. Each innovation project is different, and assuch, require unique solutions. Yet we highlight some commonissues external and internal, that have to be addressed andcognizant of in the development of public/private enterprises.Here, we have provided the current scientific, commercial, andpolitical landscape by which these solutions will develop, andwe have outlined some, creative, and successful models for suchendeavors.

We would also contend that knowledge-based economiesshould bring together all the actors involved (broad stakeholderinvolvement) are more likely to harness the diversity of suchwide-ranging challenges. At the same time, such collaborationscannot be everything to everyone, and each specific collaborativeproject should be well constrained and scoped. The benefit forERI lies principally in building upon publically-funded, bottom-up science, whereas the added valued of the use of public funds

in developing market-driven solutions also builds economicresilience (rather than the detrimental impacts of environmentalchange alone).

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

AC initiated the writing of the paper and led the work. HLcontributed substantially with the overall concept, ideas, andwriting of the paper. MD participated in the writing of the paper.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the European Commission throughthe FP7 project Analysis and Experimentation in EcosystemsGrant Agreement (AnaEE) Number 312690 and, the H2020ENVRIplus Grant Agreement number 654182 who fundedMD. HL acknowledges the National Science Foundation (NSF)for ongoing support. NEON is a project sponsored by theNSF and managed under cooperative support agreement (EF-1029808) to Battelle. Any opinions, findings, and conclusionsor recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our sponsoringagencies.

REFERENCES

Adams, C. A. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: a call to

action. Crit. Perspect. Account. 27, 23–28. doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2014.07.001

Bartocci, L., and Picciaia, F. (2013). “Towards integrated reporting in the public

sector,” in Integrated Reporting, eds C. Busco, M. Frigo, A. Riccaboni, and P.

Quattrone (Cham: Springer), 191–204. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-02168-3_12

Battilana, J., Lee,M.,Walker, J., andDorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal.

Stanford Soc. Innov. Rev. 10, 50–55.

Beltrán-Esteve, M., and Picazo-Tadeo, A.-J. (2017). Assessing environmental

performance in the European Union: eco-innovation versus catching-up.

Energy Policy 104, 240–252. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.01.054

Boardman, P. C., and Corley, E. A. (2008). University research centers

and the composition of research collaborations. Res. Policy 37, 900–913.

doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.012

Bozeman, B., and Gaughan, M. (2007). Impacts of grants and contracts on

academic researchers’ interactions with industry. Res. Policy 36, 694–707.

doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.007

Braama, G., Uit de Weerdb, L., Hauckc, M., and Huijbregtsc, M. (2016).

Determinants of corporate environmental reporting: the importance of

environmental performance and assurance. J. Clean. Prod. 129, 724–734.

doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.039

Brown, G. E. Jr. (1997). Environmental science under siege in the U.S. Congress.

Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 9, 12–31. doi: 10.1080/00139159709604359

Buhmann, K. (2016). Public regulators and CSR: the ‘social licence to

operate’ in recent united nations instruments on business and human

rights and the juridification of CSR. J. Bus. Ethics 136, 699–714.

doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2869-9

Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Levialdi, N., and Menichini, T. (2016). A fuzzy analytic

hierarchy process method to support materiality assessment in sustainability

reporting. J. Clean. Prod. 121, 248–264. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.005

Campbell, C. A., Lefroy, E. C., Caddy-Retalic, S., Bax, N., Doherty, P. J., Douglas,

M. M., et al. (2015). Designing environmental research for impact. Sci. Total

Environ. 534, 4–13. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.11.089

Chabbi, A., Loescher, H. W., Tye, M., and Hudnut, D. (2017). “Integrated

experimental research infrastructures as a paradigm shift to face an uncertain

world,” in Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challenges and

Opportunities, eds A. Chabbi and H. W. Loescher (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press;

Taylor & Francis Group), 3–23.

Christopher, M., and Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. Int. J.

Logist. Manage. 15, 1–13. doi: 10.1108/09574090410700275

Csavina, J., Roberti, J. A., Taylor, J. R., and Loescher, H. W. (2017). Uncertainty

primer for a traceable ecological sensor calibration. Ecosphere 8:e01683.

doi: 10.1002/ecs2.1683

Dietze, M. C., Fox, A., Betancourt, J., Hooten, M., Jarnevich, C., Keitt, T., et al.

(2017). Iterative Ecological Forecasting: Needs, Opportunities, and Challenges.

National Ecological Observatory Network Workshop Report.

Dilling, L., and Lemos, M. C. (2011). Creating usable science: opportunities

and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science

policy. Glob. Environ. Changes 21, 680–689. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.

11.006

Eceiza, J., Kaminski, P., and Poppensieker, T. (2017). Nonfinancial Risk Today:

Getting Risk and the Business Aligned. Available onlne at: http://www.mckinsey.

com/business-functions/risk/our-insights/nonfinancial-risk-today-getting-

risk-and-the-business-aligned?cid=other-soc-lkn-mip-mck-oth-1702&kui=

jf5TIl1J_14AG_OWmF58ww (Accessed February 13, 2017).

Edelman Intelligence (2017). The Edelman Trust Barometer; an on Online

Survey. Available online at: http://www.edelman.com/global-results. Accessed

February 21, 2017).

Ehret, M., Kashyap, V., and Wirtz, J. (2013). Business models: impact on business

markets and opportunities for marketing research. Ind. Market. Manage. 42,

649–655. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.06.003

Geels, F. W. (2013). The impact of the financial-economic crisis on

sustainability transitions: financial investment, governance and public

discourse. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 6, 67–95. doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2012.

11.004

Heinz Foundation (2008). The State of the Nation’s Ecosystems: Measuring the

Lands, Waters, and Living Resources of the United States and Filling the Gaps:

Priority Data Needs and Key Management Challenges for National Reporting on

Ecosystem Condition. Available online at: http://www.heinzctr.org/ecosystems

(Accessed February 6, 2017).

Heinz Foundation (2006). Filling the Gaps: Priority Data Needs and Key

Management Challenges for National Reporting on Ecosystem Condition.

Available online at: http://www.heinzctr.org/ecosystem

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 8 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

Heritage Foundation (2017). Blueprint for Balance, a Federal Budget for

2017. Available online at: http://thf-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/2016/

BlueprintforBalance.pdf

Héraud, J. A. (2016). A new approach of innovation: from the knowledge economy

to the theory of creativity applied to territorial development. J. Knowl. Econ.

1–17. doi: 10.1007/s13132-016-0393-5

Herremans, I., Nazari, J., and Mahmoudian, F. (2016). Stakeholder relationships,

engagement, and sustainability reporting. J. Bus. Ethics 138, 417–435.

Hey, T., Tansley, S., and Tolle, K. (2009). The fourth paradigm. Redmond, WA:

Microsoft Research. 284.

Hill, T., and Westbrook, R. (1997). SWOT analysis: it’s time for a product recall.

Long Range Plann. 30, 46–52. doi: 10.1016/S0024-6301(96)00095-7

Hockerts, K. (2015). How hybrid organizations turn antagonistic

assets into complementarities. Calif. Manage. Rev. 57, 83–106.

doi: 10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.83

Holdren, J., Lander, E., Press, W., Savitz, M., Bierbaum, R., Cassel, C., et al.

(2014).National Plan for Earth Observations.National Science and Technology

Council, Executive Office of the President, p. 71.

Howard-Grenville, J., Buckle, S., Hoskins, B., and George, G. (2014). Climate

change and management: from the editors. Acad. Manage. J. 57, 615–623.

doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.4003

Humphrey, A. (2005). SWOT Analysis for Management Consulting. SRI Alumni

Newsletter. SRI International.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014). “Climate Change

2014: mitigation of climate change,” in Contribution of Working Group III to the

Fifth Assessment, Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds

O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth,

A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S.

Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel, and J. C. Minx (Cambridge, UK; New

York, NY: Cambridge University Press), 1246.

Joint Committee for Guidelines in Metrology (JCGM) (2008). Evaluation of

Measurement Data - Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement

(GUM). Genève: International Organization for Standardization.

Kolstad, C., Urama, K., Broome, J., Bruvoll, A., Cari-o Olvera, M., Fullerton,

D., et al. (2014). “Social, economic and ethical concepts and methods,” in

Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working

Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change, eds O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani,

S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B.

Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J. C.

Minx (Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press), 173–248.

KPMG International (2014). Future State 2030: The Global Megatrends Shaping

Governments. 80. Available online at: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/

kpmg/pdf/2014/02/future-state-2030-v3.pdf (accessed January 18, 2017).

Kunreuther, H., Gupta, S., Bosetti, V., Cooke, R., Dutt, V., Ha-Duong, M., et al.

(2014). “Integrated risk and uncertainty assessment of climate change response

policies,” in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution

of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change. eds O. Edenhofer, R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E.

Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier,

B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J. C.

Minx (Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press), 151–205.

Lash, J., and Wellington, F. (2007). Competitive advantage on a warming planet.

Harv. Bus. Rev. 85, 94–102.

Law, B. E., and Harmon, M. (2011). Forest sector carbon management,

measurement and verification, and discussion of policy related to mitigation

and adaptation of forests to climate change. Carbon Manag. 2, 73–84.

doi: 10.4155/cmt.10.40

Lin, M.-W., and Bozeman, B. (2006). Researchers’ industry experience and

productivity in university-industry research centers: a “scientific and

technical human capital” explanation. J. Technol. Transf. 31, 269–290.

doi: 10.1007/s10961-005-6111-2

Liu, J., and Brody, P. (2016). Is Collaboration the New Innovation?, A Harvard

Business Review Analytics Services Report in Association with EY (Brighton,

MA:Harvard Business School Publishing), 12.

Loescher, H. W., Kelly, E., and Lea, R. (2017). “National ecological observatory

network: beginnings, programmatic and scientific challenges, and ecological

forecasting,” in Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challenges and

Opportunities, eds A. Chabbi and H. W. Loescher (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press;

Taylor & Francis Group), 27–48.

Lorenzoni, I., and Pidgeon, N. F. (2006). Public views on climate

change: European and USA perspectives. Clim. Change 77, 73–94.

doi: 10.1007/s10584-006-9072-z

Lozano, R., Nummert, B., and Ceulemans, K. (2016). Elucidating the relationship

between sustainability reporting and organizational change management for

sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 125, 168–188. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.021

Maas, K., Schaltegger, S., and Crutzen, N. (2016). Advancing the integration of

corporate sustainability measurement, management and reporting. J. Clean.

Prod. 133, 859–862. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.006

Malakoff, D., and Cornwall, W. (2017). Trump targets environmental science for

cuts. Science 355, 1000–1001. doi: 10.1126/science.355.6329.1000

Mayr, E. (1965). Comments. in Proceedings of the Boston Colloguium for the

Philosophy of Science, 1962–1964. Boston Stud. Philos. Sci. 2, 151–156.

Mayr, E. (1969). Discussion: footnotes on the philosophy of biology. Philos. Sci. 36,

197–202. doi: 10.1086/288246

McCright, A. M., and Dunlap, R. E. (2011). Cool dudes: the denial of climate

change among conservative white males in the United States. Global Environ.

Change 21, 1163–1172. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.06.003

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-

Being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Miller, T. R., Wiek, A., Sarewitz, D., Robinson, J., Olsson, L., Kriebel, D., et al.

(2014). The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research

agenda. Sustain. Sci. 9, 239–246. doi: 10.1007/s11625-013-0224-6

Mooney, C. (2005). The Republican War on Science. Cambridge, MA: Perseus

Books. 514.

National Research Council (NRC) (2001). Grand Challenges in Environmental

Sciences. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. 106.

NRC (2004). Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the

National Science Foundation, Committee on Setting Priorities for NSF-Sponsored

Large Research Facility Projects. National Research Council. 23.

NRC (2007). Understanding Multiple Environmental Stresses: Report of a

Workshop. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. 154.

National Science Foundation (NSF) (2015). Large Facilities Manual: NSF 15-089

(June 2015) Prepared by the Large Facilities Office in the Budget, Finance, and

Award Management Office (BFA-LFO). 228 Availaable online at: https://www.

nsf.gov/pubs/2015/nsf15089/nsf15089.pdf

NSF (2014). National Science Foundation Strategic Plan for 2014 – 2018: Investing

in Science, Engineering, and Education for the Nation’s Future. Arlington, VA:

National Science Foundation. Available online at: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/

2014/nsf14043/nsf14043.pdf

Peters, D. P. C., Loescher, H. W., SanClements, M., and Havstad, K. M.

(2014). Taking the pulse of a continent: role of observatories and long-

term research networks to fill critical knowledge gaps. Ecosphere 5, 1–23.

doi: 10.1890/ES13-00295.1

Perkmann, M., and Walsh, K. (2004). University–industry relationships and

open innovation: towards a research agenda. Int. J. Manage. Rev. 9, 259–280.

doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00225.x

Porter, M., and Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value: how to reinvent

capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. The Harvard

Business Review. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. p. 17.

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCSAT). (2011).

Sustaining Environmental Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy. Report

to the President. Available online at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/pcast

Project Management Institute (PMI) (2013). A Guide to the Project Management

Body of Knowledge (PMBOK R© Guide), 5th Edn. 589. Newton Square, PA.

Pulwarty, R. S., and Maia, R. (2015). Adaptation challenges in complex rivers

around the world: the guadiana and the colorado basins.Water Resour.Manage.

29, 273–293. doi: 10.1007/s11269-014-0885-7

Rodrigo, A., Alberts, S., Cranston, K., Kingsolver, J., Lapp, H., McClain, C.,

et al. (2013). Science incubators: synthesis centers and their role in the

research ecosystem. PLoS Biol. 11:e1001468. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.10

01468

Sanz-Menéndez, L., and Cruz-Castro, L. (2003). Coping with environmental

pressures: public research organization’s responses to funding

crises. Res. Policy 32, 1293–1308. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)

00120-8

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 9 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

Chabbi et al. Environmental Research Infrastructures and Private Enterprises

Schauberger, B., Archontoulis, S., Arneth, A., Balkovic, J., Ciais, P., Deryng,

D., et al. (2017). Consistent negative response of US crops to high

temperatures in observations and crop models. Nat. Commun. 8:13931.

doi: 10.1038/ncomms13931

Schillo, S., and Kinder, J. (2017). Delivering on societal impacts through open

innovation: a framework for government laboratories. J. Technol. Transfer 42,

1–20. doi: 10.1007/s10961-016-9521-4

Schimel, D., and Keller, M. (2015). Big questions, big science:

meeting the challenges of global ecology. Oecologia 177, 925–934.

doi: 10.1007/s00442-015-3236-3

Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., and Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business

tensions: a review and research agenda for social enterprise. Bus. Ethics Q. 23,

407–442. doi: 10.5840/beq201323327

Soranno, P., and Schimel, D. (2014). Macrosystems ecology: big data, big ecology.

Ecol. Soc. Am. Bull. 12:3. doi: 10.1890/1540-9295-12.1.3

Specht, A. (2017). “Synthesis centers: their relevance to and importance in

the anthropocene,” in Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures:

Challenges, New Developments and Perspectives, eds A. Chabbi, H.

W. Loescher (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group),

469–488.

Stocker, M. (2017). “Advancing the software systems of environmental knowledge

infrastructures,” in Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challenges

and Opportunities, eds A. Chabbi, H. W. Loescher (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press,

Taylor & Francis Group), 399–423.

Taylor, J., and Loescher, H. W. (2013). Automated quality control methods for

sensor data: a novel observatory approach. Biogeosciences 10, 4957–4971.

doi: 10.5194/bg-10-4957-2013

Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range

Plan. 43, 172–194. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003

Tennat, G. (2001). Six Sigma: SPC and TOM in Manufacturing and Services. New

York, NY: Gower Pub, p. 139.

The European Commission (2016). Report on the Consultation on the Long-Term

Sustainability of Research Infrastructures. Publications Office of the European

Union. 46.

The European Investment Bank (2017). InnovFin Presentation Leaflet. Available

online at: http://www.eib.europa.eu/attachments/thematic/innovfin_eu_

finance_for_innovators_en.pdf (Accessed February 21, 2017).

The European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) (2016).

Strategy Report on Research Infrastructure: A 2016 Roadmap. Science and

Technology Facilities Council Publications. 210.

The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) (1987).

Framing Sustainable Development: The Brundtland Report – 20 Years On

(referencing the Seminal United Nations World Commission on Environment

and Development 1987 Report Originally Entitled Our Common Future and

Referred to as the Brundtland Report). 2.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) (2017). Global Risks Perception Survey, 12th

Edn. Available online at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GRR17_Report_web.

pdf (Accessed on January 25, 2017).

Tietenberg, T., and Lewis, L. (2012). Environmental and Natural Resource

Economics, 9th Edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. Pub. 666.

Todeva, E., and Rakhmatullin, R. (2016). Industry Global Value Chains,

Connectivity and Regional Smart Specialisation in Europe: An Overview of

Theoretical Approaches and Mapping Methodologies. Science for Policy report

by the Joint Research Centre. 54.

United Nations (UN) (2016). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016.

Issued by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). New York,

NY: United Nations Publications. 52.

York, J. G., O’Neil, I., and Sarasvathy, S. D. (2016). Exploring environmental

entrepreneurship: identity coupling, venture goals, and stakeholder incentives.

J. Manage. Studies 53, 695–737. doi: 10.1111/joms.12198

Youtie, J., and Shapira, P. (2008). Building an innovation hub: a case study of

the transformation of university roles in regional technological and economic

development. Res. Policy 37, 1188–1204. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.012

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was

conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could

be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2017 Chabbi, Loescher and Dillon. This is an open-access article

distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).

The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the

original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this

journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution

or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Frontiers in Environmental Science | www.frontiersin.org 10 August 2017 | Volume 5 | Article 49

challenges

Perspective

The Lack of Alignment among Environmental ResearchInfrastructures May Impede Scientific Opportunities

Abad Chabbi 1,2,* and Henry W. Loescher 3,4

1 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), URP3F, 86600 Lusignan, France2 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Ecosys, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France3 Battelle-National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), 1685 38th Street, Boulder, CO 80301, USA;

hloescher@battelleecology.org4 Institute of Alpine and Arctic Research (INSTAAR), University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80301, USA* Correspondence: abad.chabbi@inra.fr; Tel.: +33-(0)1-3081-5289 or +33-(0)6-8280-0285

Received: 5 June 2017; Accepted: 13 July 2017; Published: 18 July 2017

Abstract: Faced with growing stakeholder attention to climate change-related societal impacts,Environmental Research Infrastructures (ERIs) find it difficult to engage beyond their initial userbase, which calls for an overarching governance scheme and transnational synergies. Forced by theenormity of tackling climate change, ERIs are indeed broaching collaborative venues, based on theassumption that no given institution can carry out this agenda alone. While strategic, this requiresthat ERIs address the complexities and barriers towards aligning multiple organizations, nationalresources and programmatic cultures, including science.

Keywords: Environmental Research Infrastructures; climate change; fragmentation; ESFRI; governance;societal challenges

1. Introduction

There is a societal and scientific imperative in understanding how anthropogenic change affectsecosystems, the economies they sustain and the services they provide. However, an excessiveeconomic exploitation of ecosystem services now threatens food security, natural and managedecosystems and biodiversity across Europe and around the world [1]. Environmental ResearchInfrastructures (ERIs, Table 1) focus on quantifying the change in natural and managed ecosystemprocesses (e.g., biodiversity, plant ecophysiology and agronomic techniques, nutrient cycles and soilphysics, atmospheric chemistry, water resources) and the drivers of these processes (invasive species,land use, climate and chemical climate changes) [2,3]. While ERIs fulfill a global demand for scientificdata products, their vision can only be realized through the political will of funding agencies andministries. In doing so, they are essential in addressing the corresponding societal challenges, ERIsremain a largely untapped scientific resource worldwide [4,5], in part because the management ofthe data, data products and services they provide lacks the coordination among stakeholder groups,i.e., specific data and products for specific stakeholders.

On one hand, this creates inefficiencies in data collection, funding and management. And onthe other hand, this becomes a strategic opportunity to harmonize ERI services and facilities, and tooptimize their respective resources to deliver their data, data products, and value-added services tothe broadest possible group of end-users. In this paper, we describe (i) the development pathwaysand science culture that has led to current fragmentation of the European research landscape andthe underlying difficulty to integrate ERIs, and (ii) conclude with recommendations to foster greaterbenefit from these novel ERIs.

Challenges 2017, 8, 18; doi:10.3390/challe8020018 www.mdpi.com/journal/challenges

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 2 of 8

Table 1. Examples of Environmental Research Infrastructures (ERIs) that are designed to addresssocietal challenges across large temporal and spatial scales, e.g., [6]. This demonstrates the globaldistribution and scientific diversity of ERIs.

Name Description Location

Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Research InfraStructurenetwork (ACTRIS);www.actris.net/

Aerosols, Clouds and Trace gases Europe

Advanced Modular Incoherent Scatter Radar (AMISR);isr.sri.com/iono/amisr/ Space weather North America Polar

Analysis and Experimentation on Ecosystems (AnaEE);www.anaee.com/ Ecosystem manipulations Europe

Chinese Environmental Research Network (CERN);www.cern.ac.cn/0index/index.asp Terrestrial Systems China

Earthscope;www.earthscope.org/about/observatories Seismology and geodesy US

European Incoherent Scatter Scientific Association (EISCAT);www.eiscat.se/about/ Space weather European Polar

European Multidisciplinary Seafloor Observatory (EMSO);www.emso-eu.org/ Oceans Europe

European Ocean Observatory Network (EuroSites);eurosites.info/ Oceans Europe

European Plate Observing System (EPOS);www.epos-ip.org/ Seismology and geodesy Europe

Global Earth Observation Systems of Systems (GEOSS);www.earthobservations.org/ Environmental Global

Integrated Carbon Observation System (ICOS);www.icos-infrastructure.eu/

Terrestrial and oceanic systems.Greenhouse gases Europe

Lifewatch;www.lifewatch.eu/ Biodiversity Europe

National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON);www.neonscience.org/

Terrestrial and freshwaterecosystems United States

OOI (Ocean Observatories Initiative);www.oceanobservations.org/ Oceans Western hemi-sphere

South African Ecological Observatory Network (SAEON);www.saeon.ac.za/ Terrestrial systems South Africa

Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN);www.tern.org.au/ Terrestrial systems Australia

2. Exploring the Roots of Europe’s Fragmented Research Landscape

When the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) was established in2002, 32 countries adopted its goals [7], thereby committing to pan-European ERIs. Since then,only 22 countries formalized participation; nine of which have not updated their commitments inrecent years [8], (Figure 1). The combination of political pragmatism, tensions and uneven nationalfunding instruments has hindered the development of European ERIs, adding to their inherentdifficulty in securing funding commitments from national partners, even though ERIs are prioritizedin national roadmaps (e.g., Nederland for the EU’s LifeWatch, United Kingdom for the EU’s IntegratedCarbon Observing System, and several in the US, NSF [9,10]. These national roadmaps link theirin-country priorities to pan-European ERI endeavors and in doing so, highlight their respectiveneeds and expectations in terms of research, the economy or science-based decision-making support.While European countries fund ERI development, they appear to lack the political will to earmarkspecific resources to further plan, build and operate ERIs. Even though, the very basis of an ERInevertheless provides both a planning horizon for governmental officials and encourages stakeholdersworldwide to provide active support to its development and operational lifecycle.

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 3 of 8

Figure 1. We highlight the, (i) commitments to formalized ERIs in National roadmaps (open triangle),(ii) presence of a National roadmap indicating commitment to one of more ERI (filled circle), (iii) absenceof a National roadmap and/or piecemeal involvement in ERI (open square), and (iv) none of the above(open rhombus). This is a result of all 22 national roadmaps (www.esfri.eu/national-roadmaps).

The design, planning, construction and operational phases of ERI follow formal developmentpathways [5], which are nevertheless new to the environmental field. Stakeholders (scientists, funders,policy-makers, etc.) therefore often lack the social context and culture to advance these projects [11].Contrary to publicly-funded Preparatory Phases (which consist in bringing the project to the requiredlevel of legal and financial maturity), the effective implementation of a European ERI depends onvoluntary participation and national membership fees [12]. This generates a misalignment betweenthe funding amounts required for the ERI and the in-country funding cycles, which renders thedevelopment of an ERI all the more complex and further contributes to the fragmentation of theresearch landscape [13]. The example is not only germane to the EU. It is also a common problem inAustralia’s TERN (Table 1), for example.

3. Solutions for ERI Governance and Management

Each ERI follows a unique development pathway. Much in the same way that corporate startupsare thought to be “agents of change” in the market for research and development. ERIs aim to re-inventthe current inefficient means of managing research [9,10,14]. Given that ERIs are funded throughpublic grants rather than competing in the global economy, researchers tend to focus on delivering dataand knowledge, rather than demonstrating the added economic value of their approach. It remainsthat ERIs are at the frontier of the research community, and as such, this necessitate the need to haveactive scientific input in its management and governance [5]. Only through bringing together scientificoutput and management will the profile of ERIs be raised in terms of visibility and intelligibilityto stakeholders other than the scientific community. For now, few ERIs emphasize scientific inputand stakeholder needs into project management [5,7,14–18]. In defense of project management, theconstraints in schedule, lack of scope definition, and miss-aligned funding cycles often necessitatesthe lack of stakeholder involvement for short-term gains, rather than long-term, more sustainableoperations. However, ERIs can draw inspiration from entrepreneurs in the open market for innovation,where ERIs can strengthen their managerial approach and broker a keen appreciation of the issues atstake, thereby creating new value-added opportunities for science and societal benefit. Scientists areseldom trained in management at this scale and complexity, though ERIs would benefit if such formaltraining were made available. Because there is no one-size-fits-all governance model for EuropeanERIs, their current piecemeal management approach all too often favors ‘self-serving, short-sighted

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 4 of 8

strategies with harmful consequences’ [14]. The ESFRI [15] itself recognizes ERI consistently lackcoherent management structures.

The key to an ERI’s success thus lies in robust scientific input as well as stakeholder engagementand ‘ownership’ [4]. The project manager’s role is to pragmatically balance the pressures of schedule,budget, human resources, risk management, and client relations to execute the construction andoperation of an ERI [10,15]. Instrumental to ERI success is an organizational structure designed tomaintain a certain degree of creative tension among researchers, user communities, and engineeringand management interests [5]. Ultimately, those that are legally responsible for the sponsor (fundingagency or ministry) must be entrusted with legal responsibility of ERI and must also have thediplomatic skills to generate enough trust to broker often difficult and contentious design decisions(which in turn have implications on science scope, budget, schedule, etc.). In order to avoiddisenfranchising stakeholder communities, however, any management decisions that have scienceimpact should be brokered with its science leadership, following a clear rationale that is transparentlycommunicated to the stakeholder communities. This is a particularly salient issue given that thescientific culture is very open-ended, e.g., scientists ‘eyes are always bigger than their (our) bellies’as opposed to project management, which focuses on constraining a problem with just enoughefficiency to ‘move the ship forward’. If designed correctly, governance and management structurescan balance top-down directives (i.e., project management, science) with bottom-up efforts (i.e., userand stakeholder engagement) with the aid of system engineering [5]. This approach is often difficult toimplement from inception, where all ERIs have to integrate additional governance and managementfunctions and/or structures as they develop, in order to address new complexities or pressures alongthe way. External evaluations of ERIs (required by sponsors), should explicitly review science scope,management and governance competencies, strategic planning and stakeholder involvement ona regular basis [6,7,14,19].

One—if not the most important feature of an ERI- is the deep scientific vision and creativity that isbrought to bear [5]. This should never be staunched. Science, at its core, sets out to explore and discovernew frontiers, which challenges the need to programmatically deliver and operate a scope-constrainedERI. ERIs thus need to incorporate structures to guarantee an interface with new ideas, scope andultimately tackle new scientific frontiers. Funding to incorporate these new ideas and scope are,however, typically allotted on a case-by-case basis. Another challenge lies in best constraining thescientific scope in order to meet the budget, schedule and risks. In this regard, system engineeringtools are helpful. While system engineering tools are used in physics, oceanography, astronomy,geodesy and seismology infrastructures, they remain novel for the environmental and ecologicalsciences. The US National Science Foundation (NSF) requires formal system engineering from all theirinfrastructures [20], while the EU developed the ESFRI reference model [7,21], which can lead to moredetailed system engineering approaches. System engineering tools include system architecture, workbreakdown structures, requirements (scope) capture, roles and responsibility definition, interfaces,resource-loaded schedule, critical path analyses, ongoing reporting matrices, controlled library anddecision-making processes [22]. Because of the numerous management pressures on an ERI, theirdevelopment pathway is always non-linear. System engineering tools provide a means to ‘linearize’the problems that face project management, and they also provide a robust approach that has yet tobe fully realized by the stakeholder communities, i.e., how to precisely harmonize data, networks,and understanding that has been available to other research disciplines. Because each ERI is different,we would not necessarily advocate using all these system-engineering tools to their highest potential.Each ERI should rather be encouraged to determine which tools make sense in managing science scopeand how that translates into project management. For instance, the NSF model for environmentalsciences still needs refinement, as system-engineering efforts within the National Ecological NetworkObservatory was not a balanced effort. Likewise, the ESFRI Reference Model requires a great dealmore fidelity.

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 5 of 8

New governance and managerial challenges arise after construction when justifying ongoingoperations (e.g., in EU parlance: a “business model”). Having a functional governance andmanagement structure assists in tackling new challenges as they emerge. In a time of declining researchbudgets [23], the typically large operational expenditure of ERI encourages them to further justify theirmission statements [24]. Additional ERI rationale should include regional (or country-wide) addedeconomic and policy value relevant decision-making [3]—even if it goes beyond the ERI’s originalintent to deliver basic science [12]. In other words, basic science is good, but how can an ERI benefitsociety in innovative ways? During operations, additional challenges manifest and require ERIs to(i) accelerate new and transnational collaborations [7], (ii) diversify their resource portfolio, (iii) developnew services outside their original scope [12] and (iv) avoid duplicating efforts and optimize theirapproach across ERIs and other networks [13,25–27]. Robust governance and management structuresmust also have the capacity to address these challenges by establishing the structures and functionswithin their organization as well as empowering stakeholder involvement. In doing so, ERIs furtherdevelop their capacity to meet external societal and economic needs (Figure 2).

Figure 2. A conceptual diagram that outlines the need to internally align the governance and thedirectives of sponsors (in this case, the member states) to further optimize and add value to otherexternal needs and economies, e.g., industry, non-governmental organizations, the United NationsFood and Agriculture Organization, and the like. This example highlights the external agronomicneeds and economies.

4. Advancing the Capabilities of Future ERIs

Each ERI is unique in terms of its scope and its development ‘environment’ upon its inception.Yet, all have common development pathways and barriers to overcome. Because each ERI is noveland unique (and perceives itself as such), they all either lack the programmatic foresight to recognizesome of these common pathways and barriers, or their most immediate programmatic needs takeprecedence. Learning from each other would be a first step in minimizing the impacts from thesebarriers and establishing better tools to integrate the scope, data, operations and services amongexisting ERIs. These real and common barriers in ERI development are:

a. All ERIs are first challenged by integrating science into a constrained project scope.Merging science and project management is as much a clash of cultures as it is a pragmaticnecessity. Merging these cultures is less of an issue for the sciences where their research can onlybe accomplished by the infrastructure itself, e.g., high-energy physics, astronomy.

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 6 of 8

b. Establishing formal project management is foreign to ERIs, the lack of which can bea source of failure. The need to manage cohesively the scope, budget, schedule and risksis particularly important, in light of distributed infrastructures supported by equally distributedfunding sources.

c. External optimization of design and deliverables, which can or cannot occur in the context of‘nearest neighbors’. Successful ERI rely on being used and a sense of ownership from theirstakeholder communities, thus enabling innovation [11]. ERIs capable of optimizing theirdesign and deliverables in partnership with universities, networks, infrastructures and thelike, effectively demonstrate fiscal and social responsibly, all the while increasing stakeholderinvolvement. The key challenge is to implement this approach within the ERI’s original scope.

d. The ERIs need to justify their raison d’être in terms of providing services and decision-makingtools at a local and regional level increases as they become more operational. Additional servicesmay not have been included within an ERI’s original design, but as ERIs approach an operationalstage, they all find themselves navigating a changing funding landscape that requires them to becreative and innovative to further advance their operations and economic relevancy. For example,a focused ERI on biodiversity or ecosystem functions may likely embrace the societal needs toinform food security, water management, public health or other economic relevance to furtherjustify their operations, and

e. Internal diversification and optimization of resources. Resource diversification and optimizationstrategies require ERI to challenge existing funding paradigms and develop diversified andsustainable funding models. In Europe, for instance, ERIs secure core funding from MemberStates (MS), Associated Countries (AC) and the relevant ministries—which all operate accordingto different funding mandates and cycles. Such mandates and requirements for economicrelevancy will change during operations, as anticipated in the corresponding business models.Securing sufficient investment from MS and AC to support ERI management activities is essential,and misalignment of funding cycles may cause delays in their development.

Upon inception, the short-term necessity to pull together all the design elements and set an ERIon a development pathway (within the associated funding horizons) is a daunting task. Each ERI isfaced with its own suite of pre-conditions, but all have to contend with different scientific and projectmanagement cultures. Bringing these cultures together is instrumental to its success.

Many governments have mandates and policies that ERI data can contribute towards. For example,in the EU, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are not legally binding, but member states areexpected to take the lead and set up national frameworks including ESFRI RIs to achieve the respective17 SDGs. Countries have primary responsibility for monitoring and reviewing progress in this area,which will require the timely collection of quality and easily accessible data that can be done onlythrough a coordinated and integrated ERIs. Data from ERIs are designed to directly contribute toregional monitoring of ecosystem sustainability in order to meet the SDGs. With respect to Europeanenvironmental policies, climate change is already having an impact on public health, food security,security of water supply, migration, peace and security [28,29]. ERIs are contributing significantly tomeeting these political visions and policies. This also leads to more cost-efficient use of the supportprovided by the Member States’ and Associated States’ to the ERIs.

For the first time in the history of environmental science, we have the opportunity to ask societallyrelevant questions at spatial and temporal scales that have been previously unattainable. Moreover, weare now able to advance new scientific philosophies capable for making a substantial contribution toglobal societies that are adapting to a changing environment [11,30], and all the while bringing aboutmore sustainable economies [4]. A more systemic sharing of ‘lessons learned’ from successful ERIs andintentional planning and planning forums are likely to help ERIs to overcome these identified barriers.We could then expect more transformative science yielding more products, deeper understandings,correspondingly better capability to address societal needs. Overcoming these barriers will also bringabout the integration of ERIs with other research infrastructures to even further optimize resources and

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 7 of 8

foster new understandings. Demonstrating societal relevance and optimizing the resources for ERIswill make the use of ERIs to more common place in advancing science and helping society (Figure 2).In turn, this may bring down current barriers to Big Science investments [31,32], for multilateralknowledge exchanges to push technological frontiers and ultimately serve innovation [33,34].

Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the European Commission through the FP7 project Analysis andExperimentation in Ecosystems Grant Agreement (AnaEE) http://www.anaee.com/. Number 312690 and, theH2020 ENVRIplus Grant Agreement number 654182 http://www.envri.eu/. Henry W. Loescher acknowledges theNational Science Foundation (NSF) for ongoing support. NEON is a project sponsored by the NSF and managedunder cooperative support agreement (EF-1029808) to Battelle. The authors also acknowledge the collectivecontributions from numerous community-lead discussions and workshops over the past 5 years. Finally wethank Adriana Voicu and Margaux Dillon for their technical support and two anonymous reviewers for theirconstructive criticisms and insightful suggestions.

Author Contributions: Abad Chabbi conceived the idea for the manuscript, initiated the writing of the paper andled the work; Henry W. Loescher contributed with the overall concept, ideas, and writing of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Peters, D.P.C.; Loescher, H.W.; SanClements, M.D.; Havstad, K.M. Taking the pulse of a continent: Expandingsite-based research infrastructure for regional- to continental-scale ecology. Ecosphere 2014, 5, 29. [CrossRef]

2. Heinz Foundation. Filling the Gaps: Priority Data Needs and Key Management Challenges forNational Reporting on Ecosystem Condition. 2016. Available online: www.heinzctr.org/ecosystems(accessed on 6 February 2017).

3. Heinz Foundation. The State of the Nation’s Ecosystems: Measuring the Lands, Waters, and Living Resourcesof the United States. 2008. Available online: www.heinzctr.org/ecosystems (accessed on 6 February 2017).

4. Chabbi, A.; Loescher, H.W.; Dillon, M. Integrating environmental science and the economy: Innovativepartnerships between the private sector and research infrastructures. Front. Environ. Sci. 2017. [CrossRef]

5. Loescher, H.W.; Kelly, E.; Lea, R. National Ecological Observatory Network: Beginnings, Programmatic andScientific Challenges, and Ecological Forecasting. In Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challenges andOpportunities; Chabbi, A., Loescher, H.W., Eds.; CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017;pp. 27–48, ISBN 978-1-49-875131-5.

6. Howard-Grenville, J.; Buckle, S.; Hoskins, B.; George, G. Climate change and management: from the editors.Acad. Manag. J. 2014, 57, 615–623. [CrossRef]

7. European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures. Strategy Report on Research Infrastructure: A 2016Roadmap; Science and Technology Facilities Council publications: Swindon, UK, 2016.

8. European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). A Public Roadmap 2018 Guide. 2016.Available online: www.esfri.eu/sites/default/files/u4/ESFRI_Roadmap_2018_Public_Guide_f_0.pdf(accessed on 21 February 2017).

9. Brinkman, W.; Auston, D.; Drell, P.; Dressler, A.; Friend, W.; Hevly, B.; Huntress, W.; Llewellyn-Smith, C.;Magid, L.; Pelaez, M.; et al. Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the National ScienceFoundation; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2004; ISBN 030-9-09-084-9.

10. National Science Foundation (NSF). National Science Foundation Strategic Plan for 2014–2018: Investing inScience, Engineering, and Education for the Nation’s Future; National Science Foundation: Arlington, VA, USA,2014. Available online: www.nsf.gov/pubs/2014/nsf14043/nsf14043.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2014).

11. Chabbi, A.; Loescher, H.W.; Tye, M.; Hudnut, D. Integrated experimental research infrastructures asa paradigm shift to face an uncertain world. In Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Infrastructures: Challengesand Opportunities; Chabbi, A., Loescher, H.W., Eds.; CRC Press, Group Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA,2017; pp. 3–23.

12. Breithaupt, H. The roads and bridges of science: Research infrastructures are key components of Europe’sfuture research, but their funding is not guaranteed. EMBO Rep. 2011, 12, 641–643. [PubMed]

13. Papon, P. European Scientific Cooperation and Research Infrastructures: Past Tendencies and FutureProspects. Minerva 2004, 42, 61–76. [CrossRef]

Challenges 2017, 8, 18 8 of 8

14. European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). Inspiring Excellence: Research Infrastructuresand the European 2020 Strategy. 2014. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/pdf/esfri/publications/esfri_inspiring_excellence.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2017).

15. European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). Environmental Sciences Roadmap WorkingGroup Report 2008. 2008. Available online: ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/pdf/esfri/esfri_roadmap/roadmap_2008/env_report_2008_en.pdf (accessed on 21 August 2007).

16. Mervis, J. Ecology’s megaproblem, fledging national observing network faces harsh realities. Science 2015.[CrossRef]

17. Mervis, J. NSF fires managers of troubled NEON ecology project. Science 2015. [CrossRef]18. Mervis, J. NEON contractor hanging by a thread, NSF tells Congress. Science 2015. [CrossRef]19. Pero, H. Research infrastructures of pan-European interest: The EU and Global issues. Nucl. Instrum. Methods

Phys. Res. Sect. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 2011, 626–627, S69–S71. [CrossRef]20. National Science Foundation (NSF). Large Facilities Manual: NSF 15-089 (June 2015) Prepared by the Large

Facilities Office in the Budget, Finance, and Award Management Office (BFA-LFO). 2015; p. 228. Availableonline: www.nsf.gov/pubs/2015/nsf15089/nsf15089.pdf (accessed on 23 July 2015).

21. Martin, P.; Grosso, P.; Magagna, B.; Schentz, H.; Chen, Y.; Hardisty, A.; Los, W.; Jeffery, K.; de Laat, C.;Zhao, Z. Open Information Linking for Environmental Research Infrastructures. In Proceedings of the 2015IEEE 11th International Conference on eScience, Munich, Germany, 31 August–4 September 2015.

22. Project Management Institute (PMI). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®Guide),5th ed.; Project Management Institute: Newtown Square, PA, USA, 2013; ISBN 978-1-93-558967-9.

23. Sanz-Menéndez, L.; Cruz-Castro, L. Coping with environmental pressures: Public research organizationsresponses to funding crises. Res. Policy 2003, 32, 1293–1308. [CrossRef]

24. Florio, M.; Sirtori, E. Social benefits and costs of large scale research infrastructures. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.2016, 112, 65–78. [CrossRef]

25. Dilling, L.; Lemos, M.C. Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge useand their implications for science policy. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2011, 21, 680–689. [CrossRef]

26. European Commission (EC). Enabling Synergies between European Structural and Investment Funds, Horizon2020 and Other Research, Innovation and Competitiveness-Related Union Programmes: Guidance for Policy-Makersand Implementing Bodies; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2014; p. 125.

27. European Commission EC. Report on the Consultation on the Long-Term Sustainability of Research Infrastructures;Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016.

28. Brauch, H.G.; Spring, Ú.S. Introduction: Coping with Global Environmental Change in the Anthropocene.In Coping with Global Environmental Change, Disasters and Security Threats, Challenges, Vulnerabilities and Risks;Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2011; pp. 31–60.

29. Cumming, G.; Peterson, G. Ecology in Global Scenarios. In Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Scenarios:Findings of the Scenarios Working Group; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; Carpenter, S.R., Pingali, P.L.,Bennett, E.M., Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; Chapter 3, pp. 47–70.

30. Del Bo, C. The rate of return to investment in R&D: The case of research infrastructures. Technol. Forecast.Soc. Chang. 2016, 112, 26–37.

31. Schimel, D.; Keller, M. Big questions, big science: Meeting the challenges of global ecology. Oecologia 2015,177, 925–934. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

32. Soranno, P.; Schimel, D. Macrosystems ecology: Big data, big ecology. Ecol. Soc. Am. Bull. 2014, 12, 3.[CrossRef]

33. Chesbrough, H. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology;Harvard Business School Press: Brighton, MA, USA, 2003.

34. Raunio, M.; Räsänen, P.; Kautonen, M. Case Finland, Tampere: Open Innovation Platforms as Policy ToolsFostering the Co-Creation and Value Creation in a Knowledge Triangle; Organization for Economic Cooperationand Development: Helsinki, Finland, 2016.

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open accessarticle distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).