An Engineered Landscape

Introduction

It wasn’t until I met my classmates at the art academy, that I really started reflecting on my home country, the Netherlands. They came from all over the world, Poland, Turkey, Iceland, and many other countries. We found each other in the Hague, and quickly became colleagues, friends, and roommates. While some were oceans away from their homes, I was only a 50-minute train ride away from Amsterdam, the place where I grew up. Time passed, and I started to forget that I was speaking English, when I heard Dutch all around me. Jokes about the tasteless food, broodjes kaas, and the loud pronunciation of “ggggg”, turned into me explaining to my friends why we pay taxes for water, and them explaining me that places I called a forest (bos), we’re really just parks. I realized it was their perspective from “outside” that eventually got me to look inside. One day, my friend shared a picture out of the airplane window, she captioned it “NL, you artificial country, I’m happy to see you again”. I remember being confused for a minute, sure this country was built in a specific way, but was it really so artificial? I felt a bit foolish, disconnected to “my” country’s history.

Although I had learned in school about the dikes that were built, and the land that was created, I had never really perceived the Netherlands as artificial. With this thesis, I want to come to a closer understanding of the Netherlands as an artificial country. I will do this by researching two leading maps: firstly, the map Plan of Closing and Reclamation of the Zuiderzee, portraying the plan of Dutch politician and engineer Cornelis Lely. While researching Lely’s plan, I will let myself investigate what his attitude was towards nature while planning the Zuiderzee-werken? The second map that I will research is A more natural future for the Netherlands in 2120 published by Wageningen University. I will investigate this map because it was created with the ideology of making the Netherlands climate positive. In my opinion a very interesting combination of “giving back to nature” while still interfering and controlling it. By investigating these maps in a chronological order from past to future, I hope to discover a possible change in attitude towards nature. Through these maps I wish to see how graphic design reflects on this relation with nature, or how it can influence it. While I let the two maps take its lead, I will also research examples of speculative maps that question the human relation to nature, and our possible future(s) together. To what extent did the Dutch interfere with nature, or are they planning to do in the future? And to the end, what does that say about their perception of nature?

1. From sea to land

For centuries, the Dutch landscape has been naturally changing; in some periods the water would rise, and the land would sink, therefor the areas where the water would flow were never consistent. From land to water, from water to land: The Dutch landscape has been in constant shift, and it wasn’t until the Middle Ages that humans started to interfere in this landscape. Around this time people learned to build dikes, windmills, and other water management techniques. The ever-shifting water levels and areas were problematic for the inhabitants since their living space was in constant threat of flooding. The Zuiderzee was one of these threats. Due to the flood risk, the in-land sea was urged to be “tamed”. This would partially happen in the Middle Ages when the sea reached its final size due to dikes and locks. After this period, the (now) Dutch would slowly make their way into reclaiming land, reaching their peak around the 19th and 20th century. Their famously rigid polders, and creation of new land led to the saying: “God created to earth, but the Dutch created the Netherlands”.

It is sayings such as these, together with other cultural artefacts that show us the connection the Dutch have with water, as well as the pride they have on “defeating” it. It is understandable to me that a folk who had to suffer through endless floods and water disasters, celebrates their safety. However, I find the level of celebration, and the numerous cultural artefacts, songs, poems, and sayings fascinating. For me, it is the position the Dutch give to nature, as something less, something to be shaped or conquered only for human benefit. The token in fig. 1 for instance, is part of a collector’s item association where historical events were depicted. The coin visualizes the impoldering of the Zuiderzee, the text goes “from sea to land”, and the backside shows the four created polders. A clear celebration of the Dutch accomplishments, something to remember and collect. In fig. 2 we see a decorative plate with the text “As the Zuiderzee, I belong to history. As a polder land I raise the glory of the Netherlands” expressing the expected prosperity. There are not only artefacts of earlier times, we also see the Dutch celebration of the polder landscape in recent art works. The Dutch government dedicated 800 million euros for a large-scale renovation of the Afsluitdijk in 2017.^[1] The Afsluitdijk is a 32km long flood defence, that closed the Zuiderzee from the North Sea. Artist Daan Roosegaarde was requested to design an innovative program, in order to celebrate the Afsluitdijk. The government stated that:

“The Afsluitdijk is a national symbol of the Dutch way of dealing with water, in the past, now and in the future. The designs by Daan Roosegaarde emphasize the value of the Afsluitdijk as a national and international calling card for Dutch hydraulic engineering, innovation and Dutch Design. I can recommend everyone to come and experience this for themselves with a visit to this special place.” ^[2]

The work, called Icoon Afsluitdijk, consist of three parts: Gates of Light,^[3] Wind Vogel,^[4] and Glowing Nature.^[5] All three projects play with light and lines and use nature as a source of light and energy. This is crucial for the future perspective, since the Dutch government aims to have all roads in The Netherlands energy neutral by 2030. The most prominent part of Roosengaarde’s work is Gates of Light (fig. 3&4), in which he accentuated the contours of the 60 monumental floodgates with reflective tape. The reflection is bright and directed towards the light source, creating an interactive experience for the passenger. Gates of Light generates a game of lines for passengers and shines new light on the original architecture. This the only permanent work of the three, the others were on display until 2018. One of those is Wind Vogel (fig. 5&6), which was made of kites that generated green energy. The movement of the kites create and immersive light show. The last part of Icoon Afsluitdijk, is Glowing Nature (fig. 7&8). In this work Roosegaarde combines biology and nature, by working with living algae. Roosegaarde tries to emphasise that humanity can find solutions in nature when it comes sustainable energy and light. Glowing nature is, just like the other two works an interactive experience, working with inspiring, innovating techniques that makes the viewer think about the future of the public landscape. The Dutch wish to advertise themselves and their national “accomplishments” of a hundred years ago, is odd for me. I think Roosegaarde’s work gives an interesting future perspective, and luckily does not only focus on celebrating the past.

Painters and illustrators took the chance of capturing the closure of the Zuiderzee, some were assigned to visit places along the "doomed inland sea" to capture what would get lost (fig. 9). One illustration that I personally feel intrigued by is The Reclamation of the Zuiderzee 16 February 1918 (fig. 10). This illustration displays the reclamation as a battle which what seems to be a “god of the sea”. The leader shouts, “conquer me that land!” and refers to Dutch annexationism. For me this shows the attitude the Dutch had towards the water, as something to be battled and defeated. This perspective can also be found in old ballads and stories with phrases as “taming the water” and “finally getting her down”. The sea is displayed as a wild animal or a monster, a good example of this we can find in the poem of Joost van den Vondel To the lion of Holland. Vondel dedicated this poem in 1641 to Jan Adriaanszoon Leeghwater, to support him in his plan to dry the Haarlemmermeer, a big lake bordering Amsterdam. In the poem, Vondel presents the water as a water wolf –a concept that Leeghwater also used– that attacks the Dutch lion from within.^[6]

Some parts of the poem:
“So sadly sigh and cough and discharge with whole chunks
The rotting guts out the throat, into the wave.
What good is it to pluck all east and west with your claws,
If you bite this cruel water wolf's heart”

“With d' Amstellanders on, to emergency aid of their lion.
With close with a dike this animal that comes to tease you.
The frost of the wind flies at it with his windmill blades.
The swift frost knows how to chase the water wolf”

Plan of Closing and Reclamation of the Zuiderzee

As mentioned before, the Zuiderzee reached its final size during the Middle Ages, but the sea was too strong for the methods of that time. The plan to close the connection between the Zuiderzee and the North Sea first appeared in 1667 by Hendrik Stevin. He proposed to "expel the violence and poison of the North Sea from the Netherlands”. In the late 1800s, Dutch engineer Cornelis Lely and the Zuiderzee Association concluded updated plans of closing the Zuiderzee would be achievable. It took however until 1918 for the state to pass the law to close and reclaim the sea. Two decisive factors for this law to finally be passed were one, that the agricultural (new) land would make up for the food shortages incurred during the First World War. Second, and more important, were the damaging consequences of the flood in 1916.

As said in my introduction, I will be researching two maps, the first map I will inspect is Plan of Closing and Reclamation of the Zuiderzee (fig. 11), portraying the plan of the Zuiderzee Association and Dutch (hydraulic) engineer, minister, governor and politician Cornelis Lely. His plan was designed in the eponymous titled map, by geographer Anton Albert Beekman. He was a big supporter of the Zuiderzee-werken. Amongst other things, he was one of the Dutch pioneers in cartography, a geographer, and passionate about history. He designed a horizontal map, with three centred cards –all zoomed in on the Zuiderzee area. It is a rigid looking map, everything is in thin frames; in its entire, the map looks serious. The centred, all caps, serif title –including dot in the end– has a persuasive tone (as if to say: this is what is going to happen, the end!).

The biggest map visualises the general plan: to create one massive dike, four polders, and one large lake (IJsselmeer) with two side branches. Then, there is a list of channels that will provide the broken shipping and drainage. A railway connection would be constructed over the Afsluitdijk. The railway, called “the Zuiderzee railway”, would have led to financial gain but was eventually abandoned because a profitable operation at the time proved impossible. The two smaller maps provide information about the geological condition of the bottom and a depth map that focusses on the elevation of the Netherlands. These two topics seem to be highlighted because of their quality and profit. The surrounding land seems irrelevant in the maps since it has not been given any colour. Further notions are that the Zuiderzee-werken would last 32 years and estimated cost would be 190 million guilders (which is around 86 million euros).

On the right text column in the map, a series of benefits are listed. The impoldering would deliver 216,000ha of land reclamation, the map hereby emphasizes that this is profitable land. As mentioned before, the Dutch aimed to increase food safety, so Lely’s promise of profitable land seems a clear selling point to the Dutch government. The same goes for the planned railway; in the map Lely displays the time profit for (for instance) transporting goods. The list of cons only has one item: the loss of the Zuiderzee fishery. Interesting to see is that the elaboration is only focussed on the proceeds that will be lost (1 to 1,5 million guilders per year). There is mention of the shift in fishing-areas, and only at the end, it is mentioned that some will change profession, but there is no mention on the impact this has on fishermen and their families. This while during the planning and executing of the Zuiderzee-werken, many protest were held from fishermen (fig. 12&13), even a political party was established (the Zuiderzee party, by Eibert der Herder). In fig. 14 we see another memory plate: this one recalls the difficult time that fishermen endured just before the closure of the Zuiderzee in 1932. Fishermen received a compensation from the government, but this was offset by the fact that many had to look for another occupation. The plate states: “Hold on! Despite the dark prospect, do not despair”. Eventually many fishermen were forced by the government to help build the Afsluitdijk, due to their (recent) unemployment.

The map answers questions about cost, time, health influence, profit, pros, and cons. And although these are all valid circumstances to consider, there is no mention of (possible) ecological consequences. By closing the Zuiderzee and creating the IJsselmeer, the water turned from salt to fresh within two years. This had a massive impact on fish: the number of freshwater fish increased, and some saltwater species were replaced, such as herring and anchovies for eel. Many other species decreased and eventually disappeared. It appears ecological effect were not part of the decision-making, leaving the Dutch with surprising changes. It seems the plan had almost exclusively focussed on human profit and safety, but not on the effects this interference could have on nature. Very well put in the publication Shallow Waters by Lada Hrsak; “How far do we want to intervene in nature and what are the long-term effects of this frame of mind in terms of biodiversity, the flood chain, and the life that we are all a part of? How to deal with policies pertaining to water and safety? How high can we build our dikes? For centuries, the so called ‘wet feet people’ from the shallow waters have been negotiating their relation with and the engineering of their local water landscapes.” Researching Lely’s plan, and the outcome of the Zuiderzee-werken, I am left with the same questions, how far, how high, how deep, but mostly, how much further are we willing to interfere? All by all, this map seems to be focussed on economic growth, not on a sustainable relation with nature. We have now taken a look at (a part of) the history of planning, speculating and engineering, of the Dutch and their land. I want to take you with me in my research to current times, has the Dutch attitude and their way of speculating about nature changed?

Mapping the future

One day we shall, with a sigh of relief, give up our country to the waves
– Johan van Veen

The Anthropocene is here, humans’ presence and interference in nature is leading to so called tipping points; moments when changes in some parts of the world are unstoppable. From melting ice, which could cause sea levels to rise thirteen meters, to the death of the Amazon rainforest, turning it from CO2 storage to a CO2 emitter. When we reach these tipping points, changes such as global warming continue beyond our control. Global warming is then not a linear process that will stop in any case when we no longer emit greenhouse gases by 2050.^[7] In the last decade, the impact of the climate change has been more visible (for everyone) than ever, although there are still a lot of climate change deniers, many people now understand that action needs to be taken. While writing this, I am reminded of a work from Hildo Krop at the Afsluitdijk (fig. 15), that says “A folk that lives, builds its future”. The monument is inspired by the protective factor the dike has against the North Sea and shows three dike workers who place basalt blocks. The human urge to build their future seems “natural”, but a change in attitude is necessary for us to have a future on this planet at all. In 2015 all member states of the UN signed the Paris Climate Agreement, facing responsibility to limit the effect of climate catastrophe. The Netherlands still has a long way to go to live up to the terms set by the agreement. For them (and others) to build on a sustainable future, we need people to in vision those futures and the roads that lead us there. I wonder how engineers, artists and designers are mapping the future considering the climate challenges we face? Talking about speculative futures, we need to talk about speculative design. This term has been popularised by artists duo Dunne and Raby, who published Speculating Everything.^[8] In their book they explain that “Speculative design thrives on imagination and aims to open up new perspectives on what are sometimes called wicked problems, to create spaces for discussion and debate about alternative ways of being, and to inspire and encourage people’s imaginations to flow freely. Design speculations can act as a catalyst for collectively redefining our relationship to reality.” Dunne and Raby contend that “if we speculate more —about everything— reality will become more malleable. The ideas freed by speculative design increase the odds of achieving desirable futures”.

In chapter one we discussed the map of the Zuiderzee-werken, this map introduces and speculates about the future of the Zuiderzee –and there for the future of the Dutch landscape. This project has secured safety for the Dutch folk in the past ~100 years, however with the knowledge of nowadays, we are in need to think about worst-case scenarios. It might seem like an obvious strategy to keep on raising the dikes and barriers, but this could lead to serious economical, societal, and financial consequences. Besides, the Dutch delta’s may be advanced; they have their limits and may not be secure enough for sea level rising. Since we need to prepare ourselves for failure of the Paris climate agreement, other scenario’s need to be sketched out. Luckily, artists, engineers and technicians have been doing so. A big number of speculative futures have been collected by technical institution Deltares.^[9] They divided these plans in four adaptive strategies: 1st, protect or 'keep water out' with, for example, flood defences or nature-based methods, 2nd,moving along or 'living with water', for example by means of floating houses and buildings on piles and mounds, 3rd, retreating to higher areas (going landward) and 4th, going seaward through land reclamation and islands that are higher up.

“Look at where the essential backbone is, in this case in the Netherlands, and where there is stretch. What are the areas with natural, urban, industrial and collected heritage that you need to protect, and what can you give up to better protect the rest?” ^[10]
- Dirk Sijmons

Engineer Geert van der Meulen sees the future going landwards. In his bachelor thesis from TU Delft, he envisioned a possible future; The New Netherlands (fig.16). His research questions “how best can the transition to transitional flood risk management strategies be facilitated to anticipate to extreme sea level rise scenarios?” In this mapping exercise, Van der Meulen suggest to “return” Zeeland, Friesland, and Groningen to the water; 1,7 million people would need to leave their regions. He imagines fifty percent of the Netherlands to be surrounded by dikes and densely populated, and the other half to be wet nature reserve. This way, the Netherlands could practise a more natural attitude towards water. What holds this concept together, is the adaption to a dynamic coastline, as well as the shortening of the Dutch coast with 300km2. In his plan, Van der Meulen chooses to prioritise cultural heritage by for instance choosing to “save” popular cities like Amsterdam or Rotterdam. The New Netherlands speculates about the Netherlands as a prosperous country and is capable of providing safety with a sea level rise of 2 to 10m.^[11]

A plan that considers to move along with the water is Plan B NL 2200 (fig. 17&18&19) from LOLA Landscape Architects.^[12] Their plan is made with expectations of the sea-level to have risen 6m by 2200. Their focus is to “keep their heads above water” by creating a sustainable way of living in the Netherlands. Plan B, similarly, to The New Netherlands, is focussed on shifting the majority of the population plus the coastline east. This would create a large lagoon in the east between the Wadden Islands, the western dune strip and the new coast. In this lagoon, the Netherlands would be fragmented but connected by bridges and waterways; cities stand on artificial hills (thorps) and agriculture float in this lagoon. The main outcome would be that the Netherlands lives above sea level, not below. This would avoid the need of endlessly constructing dikes and unnatural systems to protect. LOLA’s Plan B, which is also coordinated by the government is eventually introduced as an appeal to rethink the future of Dutch spatial planning. Personally, I feel intrigued by the ideas of moving with the sea, giving land back; it also seems the least invasive for nature, it will however be a big adaption for humans. A recurring idea seems to be to have floating cities/areas.

A more natural future for the Netherlands in 2120

In 2019, a team of researchers from Wageningen University & Research (WUR) presented the map A more natural future for the Netherlands in 2120 (fig.20).^[13] The map prioritises ‘nature-based solutions’ and aims for the Netherlands to be a country with more space for forest, water, swamp, green cities, and circular agriculture. The researchers state that “such a climate-proof Netherlands is not only desirable, but also possible.” The plan is based on five leading principles: 1. Natural systems as a base, 2. Optimal use of water, 3. Nature-inclusive society, 4. Circular Economy, 5. Moving (adaptive) spatial planning. The researchers developed their map, by unfolding current (2020) issues in the landscape and reversing them into a sustainable Netherlands (2120). NL 2120 is analytic, but not engineering: it analyses the functioning of landscape units at a conceptual level.^[14] The Afsluitdijk will remain the same, the IJsselmeer will shrink but will continue to be the largest freshwater source in North-west Europe. As for energy supply, offshore wind farms will be combined with solar panels and hydrogen plants on floating islands that become hubs for logistic and hydrogen based heavy industry . In the end, the map opens a conversation about the future of the Dutch landscape; and leaves the decision(s) to politicians. In general, this map has a positive aesthetic, the typography and colours communicate an optimistic and soft feel to me. The map expresses more freedom, in contrast with the rigid design of the Plan of Closing and Reclamation of the Zuiderzee. The designer seems to prioritise water over land, by giving it the most space. They could have made the land bigger or centre it, but instead water got the stage, showing the importance of the North Sea. In the legend, we that the North Sea will be terrain for floating service hubs, energy transitions, nature reservoirs, and sustainable fishery. Within the land area, more space for rivers. We can also see the comparison between 2020 and 2120, in which we can see a clear contrast in occupation of the North Sea. A big difference with other maps I have investigated (including the Zuiderzee-werken), this map does have a focus on ecology and biodiversity. They even make calculations and speculations on which animals could settle back in the Netherlands. In my opinion this could be even a bigger element of conversation in speculative maps, it will sketch a broader idea for our future. All by all, NL 2120 gives me confidence to say, that the Dutch perspective of nature has changed.

Conclusion

Through writing this thesis, I had the opportunity to learn about the history of my home country. Initially, my knowledge about polders, floods, the Zuiderzee-werken, and the engineered landscape was limited, mostly undetailed facts in my mind. Learning more about them was a pleasure and quickly became a fascination. My research surrounding the artefacts in chapter one opened my eyes to the poetic language the Dutch use when speaking of the water. Sayings I have known my entire life, got their context and showed me how much importance the Netherlands gives to their victories.

Plan of Closing and Reclamation of the Zuiderzee/A more natural future for the Netherlands in 2120

One map is a proposal, eager to persuade the government with economic profit, and shushes the Dutch folk by promising safety. A rigid map, mainly focussed on human gain. A map with a lot of historical context that has technically been in the making since the 1600s. The contrast could not have been bigger with the NL 2120 map. Which is an optimistic, and more speculative, map, designed from a more nature-based perspective of living in conjunction with nature, and sustainable solutions. The choice to highlight the NL 2120 map in the second chapter, is because I think it is a more compatible plan to investigate: due to its broad elaboration and minimal human impact on nature/climate. The other maps I mention in chapter two, focus on moving landwards, and giving back land to the water. Although I am intrigued by this concept, and retreating to higher areas seems logical, it would also have an enormous impact on the Dutch society. I am not sure if this drastic change on our society would be accepted and executed. Besides, it would be an expensive solution to move 1,7 million residents elsewhere, and the societal effect of this has not been speculated. By investigating these maps, I questioned whether our attitude and interference in nature has changed. The maps clearly show it did. The speculative maps I researched propose a future that includes space for both humans and nature. Luckily with the knowledge we have today, they understand we can only have a future if we change our attitude towards nature. That is, to not see nature as something we should aim to control as a resource for economic gains but rather see nature as part of our ecosystem and as an active, lively, component in the future of our land. Although this seems to be a common understanding between the speculative maps, there are still different stances in each map. Plan B and The New Netherlands, for instance, focus on surviving sea-level rising, they acknowledge climate change and their maps do accommodate nature. However, they are not as nature driven as NL 2120. This plan has the biggest change in attitude that I have seen so far. It needs to be stated though, that Cornelis Lely lived in times where climate change was not part of the public discussion. And besides being an engineer, he was also a politician with political objectives which could have affected his design/planning decisions.

Researching our landscape planning through maps taught me the importance of envisioning speculative futures through design, in order to open a debate. Artists and engineers must use their technical, creative thinking to serve others new perspectives. And for us humans now, we must deal with the complexity of climate change. Improving our attitude towards nature will bring us so many more options.

1. De Ingenieur. “Afsluitdijk in revisie”. De Ingenieur, 13 mei 2015, www.deingenieur.nl/artikel/afsluitdijk-in-revisie ↩
2. “Icoon Afsluitdijk gelanceerd”. De Afsluitdijk, 17 November 2017, " deafsluitdijk.nl/nieuws/icoon-afsluitdijk ↩
3. “Studio Roosegaarde.” Gates of Light, www.studioroosegaarde.net/project/gates-of-light ↩
4. “Studio Roosegaarde.” Windvogel, www.studioroosegaarde.net/project/windvogel ↩
5. “Studio Roosegaarde.” Glowing Nature, www.studioroosegaarde.net/project/glowing-nature ↩
6. Rene Dings, “Waterwolf en Landleeuw - over straatnamen uit een gedicht van Vondel”. 17 februari 2021, www.overstraatnamen.nl/2021/02/vondel-landleeuw-waterwolf.html ↩
7. “Deze tipping points bedreigen het voortbestaan van de mensheid”. VPRO, 2 juli 2021, www.vpro.nl/programmas/tegenlicht/lees/artikelen/2021/Tipping-points.html ↩
8. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. Speculative Everything. Amsterdam University Press, 2013. ↩
9. “Timmermans, Anouk. “Adaptatie aan zeespiegelstijging”. Deltares, 16 november 2021. publicwiki.deltares.nl/display/KWI/Adaptatie+aan+zeespiegelstijging. ↩
10. Wassink, By Jos. “Nieuw Nederlandje, Drastische Plannen Voor Droge Voeten – Inzicht - Wetenschapsjournalistiek”. Inzicht Wetenschapsjournalistiek, 19 december 2018. www.joswassink.nl/inzicht/?p=2058 ↩
11. Timmermans, Jos, e.a. “Panorama New Netherlands”. Panorama New Netherlands, 2020. Research Gate, www.researchgate.net/publication/350286986_Panorama_New_Netherlands ↩
12. “Plan B: NL2200”. LOLA, 6 september 2020, lola.land/project/plan-b-nl2200. ↩
13. Baptist, Martin en Tim Van Hattum. “Een natuurlijkere toekomst voor Nederland in 2120”. Wageningen University & Research, 2019. Wageningen University & Research, research.wur.nl/en/publications/een-natuurlijkere-toekomst-voor-nederland-in-2120-2 ↩
14. Meulen, Geert Van der. “New Netherlands”. TU Delft, 2018, repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object ↩