Building with Nature (BwN) infrastructure designs are characterised by disciplinary integration, non-linearity, diverse and fluid design requirements, and long-term time frames that balance the limitations of earth’s natural systems and the socio-technical systems created by humans. Differentiating roles in the engineering design process may offer strategies for better solutions. Four complementary engineering design roles were distinguished, namely: Specialists, System Integrators, Front-end Innovators, and Contextual Engineers. The key research question addressed in this paper asks, how can the introduction of engineering roles enhance interdisciplinary processes for BwN design? Three Building with Nature design workshops with international groups of students from multiple disciplines and various education levels provided the ideal context for investigating whether engineering roles enhance such interdisciplinary ways of working. Results indicate that the application of engineering roles in each of the three workshops indeed supported interdisciplinary design. A number of conditions for successful implementation within an authentic learning environment could be identified. The engineering roles sustain an early, divergent way of looking at the design problem and support the search for common ground across the diverse perspectives of the team members, each bringing different disciplinary backgrounds to the design table. The chapter closes with a discussion on the value of engineering design roles and their significance for the Building with Nature approach.@en

This chapter evaluated the educational effects of an international integrative research education program by analyzing the survey of participating students of the NSF PIRE CFRR Program. The survey was conducted from 2016 to 2019, before and after the 2-week research field trip in the Netherlands. The results show that a problem- and place-based research education program offering immersive and transformative training could significantly improve students’ knowledge and help students to approach a problem with a more integrative and holistic perspective in only two weeks if the program is properly designed.@en

The development of knowledge about the mechanism in the delta has had a high dependency on projects and techniques available. During the period from 1930 to 1939, there is a consolidation of the achievements and further development of hydraulic engineering techniques, based on model-based and mathematical analyses and prognoses (Schot et al., 1998). In this time two of the physical models were built, the Waterloopbos in the Netherlands and the Mississippi River basin in the USA. Both models have been used extensively to expand knowledge and build projects, but both became out of use when computers appeared in the 1980s. Then the calculation models were favoured, as they can be done faster, and are also capable of handling complex problems. Computer technology became increasingly dominated by measurement, prognosis, calibration, verification and validation. For this project section, the current state of the two models is brought forth as a new technique in which maybe the Longue Duree of the relation between humans and nature can become evident. @en

The aim of this survey is to give a concise overview of the pre- and post-barrier functioning of the Eastern Scheldt estuary. The survey builds upon the Eastern Scheldt Memo (dated March 2016), which explored possible sources and shortlisted leading publications, key institutes and contacts. In response to the memo’s reception by the commissioner of this study, the Severe Storm Prediction Education and Evacuation from Disasters (SSPEED)-centre, the survey has focused on two fields of interest:1. The first field targets key environmental changes in the estuary after 1986. These have been grouped under five main categories: hydrodynamics, morphology, benthos & primary production, fish & aquaculture, and wader bird population. These include topics like salinity, channel alignment and (re)location of aquaculture plots.2. The second field describes contemporary management- and mitigation efforts aimed to preserve the functioning of the estuary’s ecosystem.For a full view, the two parts of this study are to be read in concert, as the survey (part 2) only elaborates on selected issues from the memo (part 1).@en

The aim of this survey is to give a concise overview of the pre- and post-barrier functioning of the Eastern Scheldt estuary. The survey builds upon the Eastern Scheldt Memo (dated March 2016), which explored possible sources and shortlisted leading publications, key institutes and contacts. In response to the memo’s reception by the commissioner of this study, the Severe Storm Prediction Education and Evacuation from Disasters (SSPEED)-centre, the survey has focused on two fields of interest:1. The first field targets key environmental changes in the estuary after 1986. These have been grouped under five main categories: hydrodynamics, morphology, benthos & primary production, fish & aquaculture, and wader bird population. These include topics like salinity, channel alignment and (re)location of aquaculture plots.2. The second field describes contemporary management- and mitigation efforts aimed to preserve the functioning of the estuary’s ecosystem.For a full view, the two parts of this study are to be read in concert, as the survey (part 2) only elaborates on selected issues from the memo (part 1).@en

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey made landfall near Rockport, Texas as a Category 4 hurricane with maximum sustained winds of approximately 200 km/hour. Harvey caused severe damages in coastal Texas due to extreme winds and storm surge, but will go down in history for record-setting rainfall totals and flood-related damages. Across large portions of southeast Texas, rainfall totals during the six-day period between August 25 and 31, 2017 were amongst the highest ever recorded, causing flooding at an unprecedented scale. More than 100,000 residential properties are estimated to have been affected in southeast Texas. It is likely that Harvey will rank among the costliest storms in U.S. history. In the wake of Hurricane Harvey, Delft University of Technology has initiated a Harvey Research Team to undertake a coordinated multidisciplinary investigation of the events with a focus on the greater Houston area. This ‘fact-finding’ research is based on information available from public sources during and in the first weeks after the event. Results are therefore preliminary, but aim to provide insight into lessons that can be learned for both Texas and the Netherlands. As part of the investigations, a hackathon with more than 80 participants was organized to collect and analyze available public information. Houston was especially hard hit by flooding. During the event, all 22 watersheds in the greater Houston area experienced flooding. Many of Houston’s creeks and bayous exceeded their channel capacities, reaching water levels never before recorded. Across large portions of Harris County, rainfall totals exceeded the 1000-year return period. In addition, the water from the two reservoirs protecting downtown Houston (Addicks and Barker) were opened on August 28 to prevent catastrophic damages to the dams and further flooding in upstream communities. The releases exacerbated flooding in the areas downstream of the dams and an estimated 4,000 homes in neighborhoods downstream of the dams were impacted by flooding. The consequences of the event in the greater Houston area have been characterized in terms of economic damages, loss of life and impacts on critical infrastructure, airports and industry. In total, more than 100,000 homes were affected more than 70 fatalities were reported in the greater Houston area. The event highlighted the vulnerability of industrial facilities, as several cascading impacts (releases of toxic materials and explosions) were reported. Emergency response has been assessed. No large-scale mandatory evacuation was ordered before or during Harvey. However, it appeared that several local evacuations were ordered for areas with specific risks and circumstances. During the event, many people were trapped by rising waters necessitating a major rescue operation. In total, more than 10,000 rescues were made by professional and volunteer rescuers. Social media played an important role during the event and recovery, as an additional source of information, to inform emergency managers and as a means to organize community response e.g. for clean-up. Also, messages were conveyed through social media, e.g. a report of a levee breach that appeared to be incorrect afterwards. Major flooding is a problem that has multiple causes from both physical and social origin. Based on the investigations, recommendations for future research and lessons for flood management have been formulated. A better understanding of the issues studied in this report is expected to contribute to a knowledge basis for further in-depth investigations and future directions for flood risk reduction. Data collection and Report production funded by DIMI and DSys Special Case 'Houston Galveston Bay Region, Texas, USA' Project 'Harvey hackathon' and follow-up research @en

Floods are consistently ranked as the most financially devastating natural disasters worldwide. Recent flood events in the Netherlands, Caribbean, and US have drawn attention to flood risks resulting from pluvial and fluvial sources. Despite shared experiences with flooding, these regions employ distinct approaches and flood management strategies due to differences in governance and scale—offering a three-site case study comparison. A key, yet often lacking, factor for flood risk and damage assessments at the parcel level is building elevation compared to flood elevation. First-floor elevations (FFEs) are a critical element in the vulnerability of a building flooding. US-based flood insurance policies require FFEs; however, data availability limitations exist. Drone-based FFEs were measured in all locations to assess the flood vulnerabilities of structures. Flood vulnerability profiles revealed 64% of buildings were vulnerable to a form of inundation, with 40% belonging to “moderate” or “major” inundation, and inundation elevation means (IEMs) of −0.55 m, 0.19 m, and 0.71 m within the US, Netherlands, and Puerto Rico sites, respectively. Spatial statistics revealed FFEs were more responsible for flood vulnerabilities in the US site while topography was more responsible in the Netherlands and Puerto Rico sites. Additional findings in the Puerto Rico site reveal FFEs and next highest floor elevations (NHFEs) vulnerable to future sea level rise (SLR) flood elevations. The findings within the Netherlands provide support for developing novel multi-layered flood risk reduction strategies that include building elevation. We discuss future work recommendations and how the different sites could benefit significantly from strengthening FFE requirements.@en

Floods are consistently ranked as the most financially devastating natural disasters worldwide. Recent flood events in the Netherlands, Caribbean, and US have drawn attention to flood risks resulting from pluvial and fluvial sources. Despite shared experiences with flooding, these regions employ distinct approaches and flood management strategies due to differences in governance and scale—offering a three-site case study comparison. A key, yet often lacking, factor for flood risk and damage assessments at the parcel level is building elevation compared to flood elevation. First-floor elevations (FFEs) are a critical element in the vulnerability of a building flooding. US-based flood insurance policies require FFEs; however, data availability limitations exist. Drone-based FFEs were measured in all locations to assess the flood vulnerabilities of structures. Flood vulnerability profiles revealed 64% of buildings were vulnerable to a form of inundation, with 40% belonging to “moderate” or “major” inundation, and inundation elevation means (IEMs) of −0.55 m, 0.19 m, and 0.71 m within the US, Netherlands, and Puerto Rico sites, respectively. Spatial statistics revealed FFEs were more responsible for flood vulnerabilities in the US site while topography was more responsible in the Netherlands and Puerto Rico sites. Additional findings in the Puerto Rico site reveal FFEs and next highest floor elevations (NHFEs) vulnerable to future sea level rise (SLR) flood elevations. The findings within the Netherlands provide support for developing novel multi-layered flood risk reduction strategies that include building elevation. We discuss future work recommendations and how the different sites could benefit significantly from strengthening FFE requirements.@en

Floods are consistently ranked as the most financially devastating natural disasters worldwide. Recent flood events in the Netherlands, Caribbean, and US have drawn attention to flood risks resulting from pluvial and fluvial sources. Despite shared experiences with flooding, these regions employ distinct approaches and flood management strategies due to differences in governance and scale—offering a three-site case study comparison. A key, yet often lacking, factor for flood risk and damage assessments at the parcel level is building elevation compared to flood elevation. First-floor elevations (FFEs) are a critical element in the vulnerability of a building flooding. US-based flood insurance policies require FFEs; however, data availability limitations exist. Drone-based FFEs were measured in all locations to assess the flood vulnerabilities of structures. Flood vulnerability profiles revealed 64% of buildings were vulnerable to a form of inundation, with 40% belonging to “moderate” or “major” inundation, and inundation elevation means (IEMs) of −0.55 m, 0.19 m, and 0.71 m within the US, Netherlands, and Puerto Rico sites, respectively. Spatial statistics revealed FFEs were more responsible for flood vulnerabilities in the US site while topography was more responsible in the Netherlands and Puerto Rico sites. Additional findings in the Puerto Rico site reveal FFEs and next highest floor elevations (NHFEs) vulnerable to future sea level rise (SLR) flood elevations. The findings within the Netherlands provide support for developing novel multi-layered flood risk reduction strategies that include building elevation. We discuss future work recommendations and how the different sites could benefit significantly from strengthening FFE requirements.@en

Coastal Flood Risk Reduction: The Netherlands and the U.S. Upper Texas Coast represents the culmination of a 5-year international research and education partnership funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF) and more than 10 years of collaboration between Dutch and U.S. flood experts on the basic issue of how to protect society from growing flood risks. Multiple case studies integrating the fields of engineering, hydrology, landscape architecture, economics, and planning address the underlying characteristics of physical flood risks and their prediction; human communities and the associated built environment; physical, social, and built-environment variables; and mitigation techniques. In recognition of the lack of systematic research and the growing societal need to better understand flood impacts, this edited book provides an in-depth, comparative evaluation of flood problems and solutions in two key places: the Netherlands and the U.S. Upper Texas Coast. Both regions are extremely flood-prone and have experienced continual adverse impacts throughout their histories. For researchers in flood management, geographers, hydrologists, environmental studies, and social science as well as policymakers and decision-makers in flood management authorities and related industries, this book provides an essential resource.@en

Coastal Flood Risk Reduction: The Netherlands and the U.S. Upper Texas Coast represents the culmination of a 5-year international research and education partnership funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF) and more than 10 years of collaboration between Dutch and U.S. flood experts on the basic issue of how to protect society from growing flood risks. Multiple case studies integrating the fields of engineering, hydrology, landscape architecture, economics, and planning address the underlying characteristics of physical flood risks and their prediction; human communities and the associated built environment; physical, social, and built-environment variables; and mitigation techniques. In recognition of the lack of systematic research and the growing societal need to better understand flood impacts, this edited book provides an in-depth, comparative evaluation of flood problems and solutions in two key places: the Netherlands and the U.S. Upper Texas Coast. Both regions are extremely flood-prone and have experienced continual adverse impacts throughout their histories. For researchers in flood management, geographers, hydrologists, environmental studies, and social science as well as policymakers and decision-makers in flood management authorities and related industries, this book provides an essential resource.@en

Various interesting tools were used and/or developed to stimulate knowledge integration in the Multifunctional Flood Defenses program. This chapter will present a diverse collection of these tools, hopefully stimulating others to consider using some of them in future.@en

As there is increasing emphasis on transformative education and authentic learning in interdisciplinary research projects, it is meaningful to investigate how to effectively design a multidisciplinary research and education program to ensure beneficial outcomes for participating students. This is especially important for ocean and coastal engineering programs that are likely the most multidisciplinary engineering programs. The NSF PIRE Coastal Flood Risk Reduction Program is an international place and problem-based research education program in which students conduct case studies across the Houston-Galveston metropolitan area in the U.S. and in the Netherlands. There are three to four designated case studies (place-based) annually in each country, covering both surge-based and precipitation-driven flood problems (problem-based). From 2016 to 2018, there were three student research trips to the Netherlands (one each year, after the spring semesters). A total of 42 U.S. students, graduate and undergraduate were selected from four participating U.S. campuses apply for a designated Dutch case study. The three to four case studies change every year. Students from diverse disciplines, including engineering, planning, economics, hydrology, biology, architecture, geography, communications, and computational hydraulics, interested in flood risk reduction can apply. Those accepted into the Program are placed in interdisciplinary research teams composed of 5-6 students: 1-2 PhD, 2-3 Masters, and 2-3 undergraduate students. The teams are guided by project faculty mentors from both U.S. and Dutch partner institutions. A two-week long research trip to the Netherlands provides transformative education and an authentic learning environment through field trips, meetings with Dutch flood experts, lectures, and participation in design workshops. Students are required to present their research work three times while they are in the Netherlands: 5-minute research plan; 10-minute research progress; and 15-minute final presentation. By preparing these presentations, students learn how to collect data, interview stakeholders, lead/participate in brain-storming discussions, and adjust/improve their research products. Students also learn how to interact with people from different disciplines and look at the issues from diverse perspectives. This article describes the design process of the Program, from initial development through implementation. Reflections and lessons learned from the first three years of the Program are shared.@en

Dr. Baukje Kothuis was a Postdoc in the STW-MFFD program at the Faculty of Technology, Policy & Management, TU Delft in the project ‘Integrated design’. Currently she works at the Faculty of Civil Engineering & Geosciences as a researcher in the NWO Program ‘Integral & sustainable design of ports in Africa’ and for TU Delft and Texas-based universities as an independent consultant and co-PI in the NSF-PIRE research and education exchange program 'Coastal Flood Risk Reduction' to develop partnerships for international research and education. @en