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.

Intervention methods to establish commitment to (collaborative) action are of potential interest to researchers and policymakers intent upon including stakeholder perspectives in natural risk governance (Scolobig, Nat Hazards 81:27–43, 2016). In this paper, a 6-step co-design method for engaging with local people in collaboratively envisioning nature-based solutions for flood defence is described. The problem structuring base of the participatory method is extended to accommodate the multi-actor situation and the local context of flood risk management. The intervention method is applied in a workshop in the Houston–Galveston Bay area in October 2014. At that time there was strong contestation surrounding the proposed Ike Dike with alternative combinations of nature-based and smaller conventional engineering solutions being proposed. The results indicate that the local participants were able to envision a wide range of future outcomes for the bay and were able to use the insights on nature-based solutions and the social contacts that they acquired at the transdisciplinary workshop to mobilize commitment to joint action. This action focused on collaboration rather than specifying ecological or technical infrastructural requirements and was instrumental in initiating more open discourse on flood defence options for the Houston–Galveston Bay area. The paper concludes that the generic applicability of the co-design method is limited by the requirement to understand and accommodate local circumstances and participants’ insights within the workshop.

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.

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.

In several coastal regions around the world, movable storm surge barriers have been implemented to protect against flooding induced by storm surges and waves. These barriers often form an integral part of the coastal defense system. In urban deltas, they are mostly intended to protect urban and industrial interests, while providing access for shipping. The movable structure also offers other advantages, for example, the preservation of natural ecosystems. Where dams and dikes completely close off an area from the ocean, movable storm surge barriers ensure that a gradual freshwater-saltwater transition and tidal effects are maintained, while still providing the necessary flood protection. This multifunctionality makes these types of barriers sought-after for new flood protection schemes, as in the Houston-Galveston Bay area. In this respect, it is important to realize that movable storm surge barriers are assets with very specific characteristics. These characteristics have a major impact on the management, maintenance, and operations (MMO) of the barrier and can cause multiple challenges during its lifespan. However, by taking these specific characteristics into account in the design phase of the barrier, several of these challenges could largely be addressed. In the different contexts of coastal physics, climate, and flood risk approaches along the North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, the challenges and their consequences might differ. This chapter examines a number of specific characteristics of movable storm surge barriers and their implications for MMO. The aim of this chapter is to create awareness for these specific characteristics and to offer direction on how to deal with their impacts on MMO by means of a reasoned design.

In the field of flood risk reduction, comparative international work is rare. Even more so are book-length treatments that look not only across international boundaries, but disciplines as well. Coastal Flood Risk Reduction does just that and more. This book is the most systematic, integrated, and detailed study of flooding ever produced between the Netherlands and the Upper Texas Coast in the United States. Based on an ongoing 6-year collaborative investigation, 43 authors representing numerous academic entities in both countries contributed 35 chapters addressing seemingly every angle of the problem and their potential solutions. Even more unique, this body of work is driven by a place-based research and learning approach to address floods, where students provide the inspiration for inquiry and innovation.

International integrative research and education programs that address societal challenges such as flood risk can provide excellent out-of-class learning experiences for students by encouraging them to go beyond their own disciplines and tackle problems collaboratively with other students from various backgrounds. In recognition of the increasing importance of multidisciplinary approaches in research projects, it is worthwhile to discuss how to effectively design such integrative research and education programs to ensure successful learning outcomes for participating students. The NSF PIRE Coastal Flood Risk Reduction Program is an international place- and problem-based research education program in which students conduct case study research across the upper Texas coast in the United States and the North Sea coast in the Netherlands. Four yearly student research trips to the Netherlands were conducted from 2016 to 2019. Each year, multiple case studies (place-based) are designed for each country, covering both surge-based and precipitation-driven flood problems (problem-based). A total of 58 graduate and undergraduate students from various disciplines, including engineering, planning, economics, hydrology, biology, architecture, geography, communications, and computational hydraulics, participated. A 2-week long research trip in the Netherlands is designed to embrace the concepts of “convergence” to effectively provide students with transformative and authentic-learning experiences. This chapter describes how to design an international integrative research and education program by integrating and converging knowledge, data, and experiences across disciplines—from development to implementation. Then, it discusses reflections and lessons learned from the first 4 years (out of 7) of the program. This chapter will offer guidance to faculty, researchers, and program coordinators in higher education who desire to create a similar program.

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.

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.