‘Building 400 homes in floodplains: who came up with that?’

They want to speak to the newspaper together, they say. “Are we a surprising combination?” asks director Geeke Feiter-Van Heuvelen of the Dutch Association of Insurers. The topic of climate adaptation is important enough. Chairman Rogier van de Sande of the Union of Water Boards: “Water boards and insurers need each other to make it clear to the Netherlands that climate adaptation is not a far-fetched show, or a hobby of a few crazy people.” Geeke Feiter: “What water boards and insurers have in common is that they are long-thinkers and are also trained in recognizing risks. There is the parallel.”

The Netherlands is on the eve of drastic measures to tackle climate change, water boards and insurers are convinced of this. And it is very simple: water managers, supported by strong government policy, must ensure that the Netherlands remains free from foreseeable climate damage; Insurers must then bear the inevitable consequences of climate change, insure risks and, provided that policyholders have adequately protected themselves, compensate unforeseen damage. In this way, together they limit climate damage.

Prevention and cure, actually.

The Netherlands has a long tradition of water management, which costs billions every year. Van der Sande: “We can be proud of our Dutch model. We are doing much better in the Netherlands than in, for example, Belgium, France or the United Kingdom. There, climate risks are often allowed to result in damage. But we now have to step up our game. We know that it is not only getting wetter, but that it is also becoming drier in the summer. Drought can, for example, affect the foundation of your house. That’s not a risk, that’s a certainty. So what I hope is that a government will focus at least part of its attention on problems that will arise in ten or twenty or fifty years, problems that cannot be insured due to foreseeability, such as a weak soil or pile rot, but which can lead to can cause major social damage and therefore dissatisfaction and dissatisfaction. This means that a government must designate areas where we can live and work safely, and also design areas that are vulnerable in such a way that any climate damage is limited. And private individuals must also contribute to this.”

Feiter: “The current outgoing Minister Harbers of Infrastructure and Water Management has already determined that water and soil must become ‘guiding’ in spatial planning. We say: ensure that this principle is legally anchored. Because there may be a nice bill on all kinds of desks, but as long as provinces do not act on it and project developers do not have to take it into account when applying for a building permit, this is often the first thing to be crossed out of the plan when things get tense. ; At the end of the design phase, beautiful parts are always lost that are not crucial for completing a project financially and being able to start it. Mortgages should not be granted for homes in regions where you really do not want to build. I was surprised when I heard last year that four hundred homes were being built in the floodplains near Arnhem. I mean, who came up with that? Seriously: Insurers generally do not insure homes in river floodplains for flood damage. There is no insurer that covers this financial risk. And if that coverage is not provided, I will be surprised if a bank is still willing to provide a mortgage for those homes. Who will buy those homes then? Here you see that the market is turning the tide.” Van der Sande: “The fact that water and soil are decisive is still not enforceable. Rijkswaterstaat still cannot refuse a permit in floodplains, because this is not enshrined in the law. So: let’s get started.” Feiter: “Write this down in the coalition agreement and give it a blow in the House of Representatives.”

Major housing shortage

Water boards and insurers are looking at the housing construction plans of a new government with some concern. The housing shortage is certainly great and houses must be built quickly. Van der Sande: “But let’s not build stupidly. That’s my mantra. The housing shortage is a major source of dissatisfaction in the Netherlands and that is completely understandable. Then there is a tendency in politics to take the shortcut, to choose a goat path in order to be able to build some houses somewhere. But if you do this unwisely, we will still have problems in, say, ten or twenty years. Just ask the residents of moldy apartment buildings in some neighborhoods in The Hague. Just ask what this hasty construction does to their health and zest for life. What we want to prevent is that wrong decisions are made in the haste to do something good. Speed ​​should not become the enemy of good.”

The housing shortage is a major source of dissatisfaction in the Netherlands. But let’s not start building stupidlyRogier van de SandeChairman of the Union of Water Boards

Feiter: “Nicely said. We have to master our rational behavior. We must realize that living in times of climate change is not without consequences. Last year I heard that another permit had been issued for the construction of a hotel along the Geul. I’m surprised about that. That doesn’t happen in Austria. There you really can’t get a permit to build a large hotel in a valley, you have to be on a mountain.”

Floodable houses

In addition to water managers and politicians, residents themselves should also roll up their sleeves, according to the water boards and insurers. Van der Sande: “I am now thinking about Dordrecht. Houses have been built there on the Wantij, some of which are floodable. So you are not going to lay a parquet floor there.” Insurers should not be obliged to do the impossible. Feiter: “We are obliged to compensate the damage to a home up to the value the home had before the damage occurred.” But then it would be nice, she says, if the government had imposed rules on climate resilience for that home. Much in the same way that with burglary insurance you are expected to have proper locks on your house.

What remains is what to do with the unforeseen climate damage. Van der Sande: “Climate change will also increase unforeseen calamities.” In such cases, insurers will not hide, Feiter promises: “We have already taken a big step forward since the disaster in Valkenburg.” Damage caused by rain that falls elsewhere but floods your house will be reimbursed. 211 million euros were paid out in Valkenburg, more than twice as much as the government paid out through the Disaster Damage Compensation Act (WTS). Damage due to the collapse of important defenses in the Netherlands, such as the dunes or the Delta Works, the so-called primary defenses, is uninsurable. Feiter: “Two-thirds of Dutch people think that if a primary barrier fails, you can call the insurer, a survey showed last year. But to put it mildly: they really won’t answer the phone, because it’s just not covered. If the chance of such a collapse is one in two hundred, it will cost 14 billion euros. We as insurers cannot manage that. There must be government money behind this.”

Storm, downdrafts and hailstones

But damage due to the failure of secondary defences, i.e. defenses that do not directly protect the land against open water such as the sea and rivers, is insurable. And insurers have also prepared for damage that will inevitably increase as a result of climate change. Feiter: “We can handle storms well in the Netherlands. Even with the triple storm last year, Dudley, Eunice and Franklin, we paid out 700 million euros, you have not heard a parliamentary question about that. But climate change will cause us to experience more water damage. And damage from hail is also increasing. Hailstones get bigger. Think back to 2016 when 600 million damage was caused in Brabant in twenty minutes. Also consider the downwind we saw in Leersum in 2021. There will be more downpours. As non-life insurers, we must take this into account.”

We can handle storms well in the Netherlands. We paid out 700 million euros for last year’s triple storm, Dudley, Eunice and FranklinGeeke Feiter-Van HeuvelenDirector of the Dutch Association of Insurers

What helps enormously, says Geeke Feiter, is if residents of risk areas are warned of an impending danger. Feiter: “Anyone who had received a timely warning in South Limburg in 2021 could immediately take emergency measures and substantially reduce damage. Research has been done into this. Measures such as the use of sandbags, water pumps and raising household contents reduced the damage caused by flooding in Limburg by 30 percent to 40 percent. Intriguing figures.” Feiter also points out the importance of alertness among residents themselves. “Check the status of the Maas. I always do that with my brother. He lives in Roermond. Every now and then he says: it’s time to put a sandbag in the toilet again. We need to communicate that kind of awareness more.”

To share





Email the editor