Safety first? : place attachment in the conflict of Durgerdam

Safety First?

Place attachment in the conflict of Durgerdam

Friso van Alphen, 10510303 frisovanalphen@gmail.com Master Urban and Regional Planning Graduate School of Social Sciences University of Amsterdam Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Maria Kaika Second reader: Prof. Dr.Tuna Tasan-Kok 11-06-2018


Safety First?

Place attachment in the conflict of Durgerdam

Preface

Dear reader,

In the summer of 2017, I made a bicycle tour with my father around the IJsselmeer, as he was surprised that I never cycled over the Afsluitdijk and thought this is something you have to do at least once in a lifetime. This became a tour with the theme of cycling and a father-son adventu-re, but also an informational tour on flood protection. The first village that we passed through was Durgerdam. Even though I have been there before, this time my interest was caught by the complex conflicts at the villages along the Markermeerdijken were facing. This made me realize that I would like to know more about what is happening in Durgerdam, but not through desk re-search, but by coming in contact with the residents themselves.

I would like to thank Maria Kaika in special for the motivational supervision and constructive feedback. The motivational feedback sessions were right what I needed and gave me new in-sights on how to improve this thesis. Also, I am grateful to the residents of Durgerdam for sha-ring their unique stories with me. I have been welcomed by all of you with open arms which gave me a warm feeling. Hester and Ben from Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier and Anke from Natuurmonumenten deserve a special thanks as well for making time to have a con-versation with me during these hectic and busy times. Finally, I would like to thank my brother Sander for brainstorming with me during the times that I got stuck with my results, My father Jos for making pictures with me of Durgerdam with his drone, and my friend Max for revising this thesis on grammar and legibility.

I hope you enjoy your reading.

Friso van Alphen

Index

1. Introduction………11

2. Theoretical framework……….13

3.1. Attachment to place and community……… 13

3.2. NIMBY conflicts……….16

3. Methodology……….20

4. Context of Durgerdam………24

4.1 History of Durgerdam………24

4.2 Durgerdam in the 21st century……….25

4.3 Dike reinforcement……….26

5. Analysis place attachment……….30

5.1. Physical landscape elements……….30

5.2. Landscape experiences……….33

5.3. Social identities………35

6. Analysis matters of conflict……….38

6.1. Practical matters………38 6.2. Aesthetics matters……….40 6.3. Trust matters……….…42 6.4. Scale matters……….44 7. Conclusion………46 8. Discussion………48 9. Literature………50 10. Appendix………54 . 


1.Introduction

For over 10 years already, there is a conflict about the dike at Durgerdam. The dike got condem-ned in 2006 because it is not stable enough to guarantee safety to the 1.2 million people living in North-Holland. The plans to reinforce the dike led to resistance of the local community as they were afraid that the reinforcement would harm the spatial characteristics of the historical village (Meershoek, 2017). This thesis is about the role of place attachment in the conflict of the dike reinforcement in Durgerdam, and the main research question is: What meanings does

the local population attribute to Durgerdam, and how does this play a role in the conflict?

The Netherlands is internationally well known for its battle against water. For centuries, the Dutch are fighting flooding hazard and it can be seen as part of its culture (Wesselink, 2007). Dikes keep the land free of flooding, but also big manmade structures such as the Maeslantke-ring are a symbol of the constant struggle of living below sea level and are part of the Dutch cul-tural landscapes. Due to climate change, this struggle against a rising sea level demands con-stant maintenance on these dikes. After the Watersnoodramp in 1957, dikes were built and rein-forced into such a heavy degree that sometimes dike houses were demolished and existing characteristic landscapes were affected (Van Rijswijk, 2014). This did not always go without op-position, for example in Brakel in the 1970’s. Houses that were standing on the dike got exprop-riated and demolished and the characteristic appearance of the village disappeared (van Meurs, n.d.). The citizens of Brakel came in protest but without any results. Houses, farms, the school, the mayor's house and the 100-year-old town hall got demolished, but more important, a part of their cultural landscape was destroyed.

The fear of similar matters is now present in Durgerdam. The 33-kilometer long

Markermeerdij-ken between Amsterdam and Hoorn got condemned in 2006 (Meershoek, 2016b). Within this 33

kilometer lies the small village of Durgerdam, a former fisherman village known for its unique long line of picturesque houses along a small road on top of the former Zuiderzeedijk (Everink, 2001). Plans to reinforce the dike were made but inhabitants of Durgerdam fear sharp damage to their monumental village as they are not convinced that dike reinforcement is necessary in the proposed way (Meershoek, 2017). The residents of Durgerdam objected to the proposed plans and a resistance was formed which gave them more time in the process of decision making. What has followed is a process in which residents and the waterboards together are figuring out a possible solution that is supported by the local community.

The way this conflict unfolds can be seen as a ‘’not in my backyard’’ (NIMBY) conflict. The

Mar-kermeerdijken protect 1.2 million Dutch citizens from flooding and the general attitude towards

flood protection is positive. However, residents of Durgerdam don’t agree on the measures that are proposed in this particular case. Different aspects of place attachment and sense of commu-nity play a role in this conflict as the residents fear that part of their unique place will be har-med. Therefore it is interesting to study this peculiar case of NIMBY conflict from a place

at-tachment point of view. NIMBY conflicts have been studied widely, especially on windmills. However, often these NIMBY conflicts are viewed from an individual ‘costs and benefits’ point of view (Quah & Tan, 1998). How feelings of belonging to a place and its community play a role in conflicts with different interests between stakeholders is still understudied. Devine-Wright (2009; 2013) and Manzo & Perkins (2006) are researchers that plead for more attention to place attachments and place identities in climate change issues.

While this research adds scientific value, it also is very relevant on a practical level. There is a trend occurring in which citizens are becoming more and more involved in spatial development programs in the Netherlands (Buitelaar et al., 2012). This research can add value as it can de-monstrate the role of spatial context in a world were involvement of citizens in spatial develop-ment will only increase. How to cope with resistance and how to create support for plans will take a more central role in urban planning and thus requires more attention.

The aim of this research is to create a better understanding of how the concept of place at-tachment plays a role in such conflicts. To do so, multiple forms of research that provide data that helps to understand the how’s and why’s in this conflict were conducted. Questionnaires have been handed out to all households in Durgerdam, and interviews with the residents were held. Also, interviews with important stakeholders such as the Hoogheemraadschap Hollands

Noorderkwartier and Natuurmonumenten were conducted. Finally, I visited one of the

participa-tion evening organized on April 3rd, 2018.

The chapters that follow are each concerned with questions about the place attachment of the residents of Durgerdam in this NIMBY conflict. In chapter 2, bodies of relevant literature are lin-ked with the research question ‘’What meanings does the local population attribute to Durger-dam, and how does this play a role in the conflict?’’. First, how landscape elements play a role in developing a sense of place is discussed, followed by the role of sense of community in devel-oping place attachment. Then a theoretical framework on the NIMBY concept and the importan-ce of plaimportan-ce and context in development programs is formed. Chapter 3 will show how the re-search question is examined by discussing the rere-search design and its execution. The way the data is collected and analyzed will be discussed. The 4th chapter will give a description of the history of Durgerdam, the current conflict and what stakeholders are involved. Then, my fin-dings based on the interviews and questionnaires will be presented. Chapter 5 will dig deeper into what meanings residents of Durgerdam attribute to the place and chapter 6 will focus more on the matters of the conflict in Durgerdam. In chapter 7 I will answer the research question and, finally, chapter 8 will discuss the research and the theoretical implications of this thesis and further research recommendations will be made.

2. Theoretical Framework

The concepts of place attachment and place identity have been studied widely. Different appro-aches on how different people are attached to certain places are developed. However, how the-se feelings of being attached to a place play a role in conflicts, especially NIMBY conflicts, is still understudied. First, this chapter will elaborate on different concepts of place attachment such as emotional bonds, landscape elements and sense of community. This is followed by a deeper analysis of the NIMBY concept. Finally, this chapter links the concept of place attachment and NIMBY conflicts and defines the gap in existing literature and practices by proposing a new way on how NIMBY’s should be perceived.

2.1 Attachment to place and community

Tuan (1977) is one of the first academics who wrote about concepts such as space and place. He states that space and place cannot be seen as separate, but are interdependent. Space can be seen as an abstract geometrical concept, which turns into a place when using it and adding va-lue to. Spaces, therefore are interpreted to equate with everywhere, whereas places are speci-fic. Spaces contain values that are assigned by the people who live in it. These memories and experiences with a place are what Tuan calls a ‘sense of place’, which is strongly related to ‘place attachment’. This means the emotional bond between human and place, something that humans create naturally according to Tuan (1977). The concept of place attachment helps us ‘’understand how particular preferences, perceptions, and emotional connections to place rela-te to community social cohesion, organized participation, and community development’’ (Manzo & Perkins, 2006: 336), as it describes the involvement and emotional bond between human and a certain place. Often this relates to the living environment, but Lewicka (2011) describes that this can also relate to a street, neighborhood, city, country, or even the world. Besides the sca-le, Manzao and Perkins (2006) note that the emotional bond with a place can be both positive and negative.

The concept of place attachment is widely used by researchers from multiple disciplines. Geo-graphers, psychologists, and sociologists are all researching the concept, which results in many different terms and definitions. However, Lewicka (2011) sees three important components that contribute to the attachment to a place: the physical environment, human behavior, and social or psychological processes. Geographers see place attachment as a product of the influence of the physical environment. Stedman, (2003) describes that people are attached to (symbolical) meanings that are produced by a place. Psychologists tend to focus more on how place attach-ment evolves as a psychological process, and sociologists see place attachattach-ment as a product that evolves from the community and consists of social contacts and cultural processes. These appro-aches are combined in the way how landscape elements create meaning for mankind.

The appreciation of the physical environment, also known as the landscape, is the starting point for triggering place attachment (Relph, 1987; Mohammad et al., 2013; Cullen, 1971). Even

though landscapes are complex things, which are described and interpreted in various ways throughout history, three universal characteristics are present, which are connected with each other. Relph (1987) argues that landscape elements are the ‘building blocks’ of the landscape. Everywhere around the world, landscapes look different. Places and landscapes are made by vi-sual images, and physical features are an important part of the process of creating landscapes. Second, Ralph argues that in order to exist, landscape elements need to be connected with soci-ety. Landscape elements need to be able to be used in a physical or mental way. De Groot (2006) argues that landscapes are sources that provide humans with ecological, economical and social-cultural goods that have an inseparable connection with society. Finally, the ability of the human to interpret, makes it possible that a landscape is something that can be seen (Relph, 1987). A landscape can be seen, but can also be read as it contains different layers of meaning. Cosgrove (1989) argues that these layers of meaning are socially constructed and therefore, based on one’s gained experiences, landscapes can be experienced in different ways. Landscapes contain a biophysical entity but are especially based on mental, cultural and social processes.

Mohammad et al. (2013) acknowledge the importance of landscape elements, as they describe that places are a fusion of human and cultural landscape elements and the landscape should be perceived that way. The elements centers on the way we experience the world. They state that more study has to be done on landscape elements to have a better understanding of how peop-le’s perceptions, experiences and responses towards their surroundings based on elements that relate to their culture and norms as value and uniqueness character are an important issue in environment-behavior study. Cullen (1971) confirms this in one of his early works, as he argues on what to achieve as a unique sense of place. He states that designing places is not only about facilitating our daily activities, but also providing symbolic and affective qualities such as lands-cape elements to bring people to a place. Mohammad et al. (2013) follow up upon this as they argue that when defining sense of place, components of landscape elements play a significant role and landscape elements should be designed as a whole.

Dikes can be seen as a peculiar landscape element. Their prior function is to protect land from being flooded, but they carry more meanings. Hall and Page (2006) see a dike landscape as a li-minal place as the dike symbolizes the direct separation between land and sea. They describe that the experience of landscape is at its optimum on this point of transition between two diffe-rent landscapes and, in this case, on the dike. Fischer (2007) argues that sea dikes symbolize the separation between wilderness and civilization. The seaside is untouched by human influences while the other side is created by humans and is fully under human control. Therefore he calls this difference order versus disorder, with the landside as order, and the seaside as disorder. This border is dynamic in its nature as it is influenced by dike breaches and spatial developments. On the other hand, dike can be a symbol of connection. ‘’Dikes are vital to the landscape's appea-rance: apart from their form and location, their uninterruptedness defines spaces in a landscape and connects areas with each other’’ (Nijhuis, 2014: 72). In this way, the continuity of the dike

can connect the local with the supra-regional and is capable of creating the connection between a landscape's history and our spatial experience.

What is being understudied within the concept of place attachment, is the role of sense of community and community identity (Manzo & Perkins, 2006). They argue that many researchers are focussed on economic, political, or social dynamics within and between communities and public agencies, but tend to forget the importance of place identity and sense of community. They describe the concept of place identity as ‘’it consists of dimensions of the self that develop in relation to the physical environment by means of a pattern of beliefs, preferences, feelings, values, and goals’’ (Manzo & Perkins, 2006: 337). Through the interaction of one with the com-munity of a place, one creates their own personal identity and values. The greatest agreement on the definition of sense of community revolves around the feeling of belonging to a group and being member of a group. This includes an emotional bond within the community that can be based on shared interests or a shared history (Perkins & Long, 2002). Two dimensions of sense of community were identified by Riger and Lavrakas (1981) within attachment with a community that is communal: a sense of bondedness and a sense of rootedness. It describes how one can feel being part of their neighborhood and its community, not only by individual emotional bonds but also external, social processes. These bonds are influenced by the length of residence and appear to be stronger among families with children and elderly (Hummon, 1992).

While sense of community and community identity are focussed on emotional bonds between people and within communities, place attachment, as an emotional bond between people and place, can complement the sense of community. Manzo and Perkins (2006) argue that both can motivate members of a community to actively participate in neighborhood development. They state that sense of community and place attachment can be linked at both individual and com-munity scale. Sense of comcom-munity also plays a role in conflicts that are related to place attach-ment. In many cases, perceived threats to the uniqueness of the identity of a place and its landscape ideas are connected with its local community that wishes to defend the characteris-tics of their identity and bounded place which they identify themselves with (Tilley, 2006). The result is an almost inevitably nostalgic imagination of how places should be preserved, and how heritage projects have to be conserved with compelling aims. The ethnic groups continuously search for a romanticized identity where this ethnic group stays pure in the face of change. Til-ley (2006) states that the affective power of place and locality is stronger than any influences of global processes. These feelings and ideas about their local identity are embedded in the characteristics of places and landscapes. What they look like, but also their appearance on post-cards, guidebooks, and tourist brochures, and how they feel. What kind of emotions certain landscapes are paired with and the relations that these places build on. ‘’Landscape and places express group identities to the outside world through passing through and identifying with parti-cular places and partiparti-cular histories’’ (Tilley, 2006: 14).

As shown, the way residents of a local community attach meaning to space, and turn it into a place as described by Tuan (1977) is done through place attachment and sense of community. To answer the question of what values the residents of Durgerdam attach to the place Durgerdam it is important to look at what kind of landscape elements trigger this place attachment, what kind of experiences the local community correspondent the place with, and what role a sense of community and community identity plays in this attachment of place.

2.2 NIMBY conflicts

The construction of public services and facilities such as wind energy farms, waste incineration plants, roads and highways require large amount of land. Choosing the best location can take many years while, due to public opposition, the start of the construction is often delayed (Wols-ink, 1994). During these discussions, the term ‘NIMBY’ (Not In My Backyard) often comes up. Ac-cording to Dear (1992: 288) ‘’NIMBY refers to the protectionist attitudes of oppositional tactics adopted by community groups facing an unwelcome development in their neighborhood’’. Ano-ther term which has been used often is `LULUS', which stands for `locally unwanted land uses' (Popper, 1985). For it advocates, the need for these facilities often seems clear, but for the nearby residents of the facilities, this might not always be the case (Botetzagias & Karamichas, 2009: 240). Residents may enjoy the advantages of living close to the facility, but they are also exposed to most of the negative externalities (Mingyuan & Bin, 2016: 376). Such facilities create benefits that may be large, but they are distributed over a wide range of people. This means that everybody enjoys the benefits, but the individual share of the benefits is small (Olson, 1965). Next to that, Olson describes that the burdens of providing the collective good tend to be unequally shared. The costs are mostly located in the local host community or neighborhood while the benefits are for a wider range of people. Research on NIMBY’s in energy projects are of particular interest. Although numerous opinion polls indicate a generally positive stance and a public support for renewable energy, actual development has to cope with opposition, leading to the project being delayed or even abandoned (Devine-Wright, 2009). This is typically described as ‘NIMBYism’ as there is a difference between the high levels of general public support and the disputed local projects.

According to Vlek (1995) the societal interest within NIMBY is recognized by the local communi-ty, but at the same time, the preference to execute the project somewhere else is expressed. He claims that it is a phenomenon that is an expression of local egoism as the local community wants to prevent its ‘backyard’ from attacks on free space. However, Wolsink (1994) states that conflicts are often too easily described as NIMBY when that is not the case and warns for the ‘nimby syndrome’. He explains that opponents are often described as ‘short-sighted’ and cynical motives are attributed to this group. Labeling a conflict as a NIMBY is an easy way to shut down opposition while this opposition is not always about self-interest. In some cases, NIMBY labels are attached while in reality there is a NIABY (not in anyone's backyard). Wolsink (1994) explains how residents opposed the plans of building a nuclear power plant not because they did not

want the power plant near their houses, but because the residents have a negative attitude to-wards the type of facility anywhere.

Futrell (2003), on the other hand, argues that NIMBY claims emerge from important social pro-cesses. He explains that residents often experience an ‘information haze’ which means “a condi-tion in which there are conflicting, contradicting, multiparty, multidireccondi-tional communicacondi-tions that fail to clarify the risks associated with a project, thus rendering lay interpretations of a si-tuation increasingly vague and difficult” (Futrell, 2003: 365). This ‘information haze’ might oc-cur because of the difference in the way experts and government officials talk in contrast with local citizens. Communication problems that result in resistance by the local community are triggered by this haze of information. The feeling of anxiety and threat are developed when the public asks questions that are not answered in a (partly) acceptable way. Botetzagias and Kara-michas (2009) recognize this problem. According to them, citizens of local communities are par-ticularly distrustful towards government officials and members of developing programs. They describe that various studies show that when a local community trust the administration and agrees with the sitting process, they are less likely to resist the plans (Botetzagias & Karami-chas, 2009: 940-941). Also being involved in the decision-making process has a positive effect on the support of the local community and projects face less protest. Cowan (2003) notes that Lack of consultation has three consequences. Objectors are excluded from the right to know about the project in the future, following the community is denied from supporting the project, and finally the lack of involvement results in a non-preferred location which would not have been selected with the involvement of members from the local community. Since resistance can be explained from fearing the unknown, consultation could have prevented this (Cowan, 2003: 382-383).

Devine-Wright (2013) understates this special attention to the context of the community in cli-mate adaptation programs and stresses the need for understanding the strength of property ow-nership and neighborhood cohesion in such cases. At the moment, government-led efforts are ‘’expert driven and fail to engage with residents, overlooked local knowledge and led to feelings of alienation’’ (p. 65). James (2010) describes the importance of seeing residents as experts and the importance of acknowledging the importance of the context. He also sees barriers in partici-patory planning such as mistrust between the local level and higher governmental levels.

To successfully plan and develop, there is a need for sense of place. Planners too often do not acknowledge the importance of place attachment and identity, resulting in competition instead of cooperation. ‘’Our thoughts, feelings, and beliefs about our local community places—what psychologists call “intra-psychic” phenomena—impact our behaviours toward such places, thus influencing whether and how we might participate in local planning efforts.’’ (Manzo & Perkins, 2006: 336). If these feelings and reactions are recognized, they can play a big role in mobilizing citizens. However, when this is not happening, these feelings could divide a community. The

‘sense of place’ influences their “normative evaluations of what battles are worth fighting for, what battles are best left to others, who to cooperate with, and who to dispute’’ Nicholls (2009: 80). Swyngedouw and Kaika (2008) follow up on this by claiming that in order to understand so-cio-ecological movements, their particular socio-spatial context has to be understood as well. Illustrative to the discussions about identity and landscapes, and community participation is the transformation of the Ladybower Reservoir and Rutland Water (Cosgrove, Roscoe & Rycroft, 1996). This article gives good insights into the role of landscape aesthetics and symbolism on both local and national level. The pure expression of modernist aesthetics was resisted, especi-ally in designing rural landscape and made place for a more place-specific design, consisting pic-turesque aesthetics. Heavy materials were concealed with soft materials in order to emphasize nature. Neither both local communities were on beforehand hostile to the modernist transfor-mation and only succeeded partly in their negotiations. However, these are good examples how national planning can bring special attention to place landscapes and identities within man-made nature.

Instead of looking at NIMBY’s from an individual psychological perspective, Devine-Wright (2009) argues that we should look at NIMBY’s from a place-attachment point of view. He argues that barely any study connects attitude towards a facility that might provide a NIMBY situation with place attachment, while there might be a connection between the two. The so-called ‘NIMBY’ responses he described should be re-conceived as place-protective actions, which are founded upon processes of place attachment and place identity (Devin-Wright, 2009). Vorkinn and Riese’s (2001) study is one of the exceptions that did attempts to establish a link between place at-tachment and attitudes towards a proposed hydropower project in Norway. Following the study, the more attached the residents felt towards the affected place, the more negative their attitu-de was against the hydropower project. However, Devine-Wright (2009) argues that the study left a number of gaps as it followed a particular quantitative research design.

Davidson and Howe (2014) follow up upon this in their research about antipathy towards needle distribution services. In such NIMBY conflicts as described before, they see that communities try to carve themselves out of a larger area ‘’and by doing so limit who can speak for the new space and hence what the material future of the space will be—what services and/or people are ‘ap-propriate’ for the ‘new’ space’’ (Davidson & Howe, 2014: 629). They suggest using the term ‘de-fensive place-making’ as this is a strategy used by residents of a community to more strongly classify the space and give new meaning to place making of a certain area. Looking at NIMBYs from a place-attachment point of view gives us new insights into how attitudes towards propo-sed projects emerge, and how negative attitudes and opposition are formed.

To answer the question what role the place attachment has in the conflict in Durgerdam, this theoretical framework offers a new way of approaching this conflict. Instead of labeling opposi-tion to the dike reinforcement as a NIMBY response, this theoretical framework argues that is

should be conceived as place protective action. Seeing conflicts through this lens can help to understand how negative attitudes towards the dike reinforcement in Durgerdam emerge. It helps us understand what role, for example, aesthetic matters and creating support take in the-se conflicts instead of labeling the residents of Durgerdam as egocentric and the-selfish.


3. Methodology

This chapter will summarize the research design used in this thesis and comment on its executi-on. To give an answer to the research question ‘'What meanings does the local population attri-bute to Durgerdam and how does this play a role in the conflict’’, I needed a research design that allowed me to research how various factors interact in a complex, specific pattern. A case study research design allows me to look through the eyes of the participants and give me a bet-ter understanding of how they perceive the world and its reality (Yin, 2012). It provides a lot of data, as a case study is known for its idiographic approach: it is concerned with the unique fea-tures of the case (Bryman, 2012: 52). The main goal of the research is to intensively examine the setting to get a better understanding of what meanings the local population attribute to a place and how this influences their attitude in a conflict in the context of a single case. Therefore I chose one single village that is in the middle of a conflict that concerns interference in its cultu-ral landscape.

The first method used for the collection of data was the questionnaire (see appendix) that was used to collect a body of data to function as a starting point. The questionnaire was based on a literature and newspaper review. This method is very effective to get a larger sample than with interviews and it functions very well as a way to gather data that can be used as a starting point for my research (Bryman, 2012). Asking the respondents to describe Durgerdam in 5 words, or using Likert scales to measure the affection of the residents towards the place Durgerdam, af-fection with other residents of Durgerdam, and afaf-fection towards the Durgerdammerdijk makes this method particularly fruitful to gather information that concerns answering the first research question. Also, the questionnaires contain open questions about the identification of the local residents with Durgerdam, the community, and the dike. The advantages of open questions are that they allow unusual responses, do not suggest answers and are useful for exploring new areas (Bryman, 2012: 247). In this way, I found new starting points about if and why the residents identify themselves with the place and the community. Also, this survey will give insights in if there is a homogeneous resistance against the current national plans or not.

The questionnaire is spread among all 182 households of Durgerdam. Respondents were asked to answer the questionnaire and send it back via mail, make a picture and send it to my email ad-dress or mobile phone number. Another possibility was to answer the questionnaire online. Reac-tions came via all possible ways, and especially via mobile phone was effective. Only the resi-dents who were older than 15 years were asked to participate in the questionnaire, because the-re is a higher chance that parts of the questionnaithe-re athe-re unclear for younger populations. The age groups 25-45 and <65 years are over-represented in the response group while the age groups 15-25 is underrepresented (figure 1). 42 of these questionnaires have been answered which means a response rate of 23%. According to Bryman (2012), this means that the results of the questionnaire are not representative for the community, but he also argues that this does not mean that the results are useless. I will only use the questionnaires as an indicator to have

star-ting points for the interviews. Likert scales can function as an indicator for subjects and items that are interesting to dig deeper in during the interviews (Bryman, 2012). The open questions still pointed out new anchor points that were interesting to investigate and the question in what 5 words the respondent would describe Durgerdam still gives a good idea of what kind of aspects are thought of when describing Durgerdam.

Figure 1: Left, age distribution of the response group. Right, age distribution of Durgerdam.

As explained, the questionnaires were supplemented by interviews that were conducted with individual residents of Durgerdam. In the interviews, I was especially interested in detailed sta-tements about personal experiences and underlying perspectives of how events were perceived. To do so I took a narrative approach to elicit detailed personal experiences and looked at how respondents reasoned about their situation. The function of these interviews with local residents is to have a better understanding on how local residents create meaning with the elements and history of the place, and also on why there is a conflict from the point of view of the local resi-dents.

The selection of respondents was done by ringing doorbells and after referring to the question-naire asked if they were open for an interview. Bryman (2012) describes this as convenience sampling, which means that the sample consists of respondents that are simply available and accessible to the researcher. The problem with this sampling strategy is that I cannot be certain that the respondents represent all residents of Durgerdam. On the other hand, when obtaining samples, I kept in mind that residents from all over Durgerdam had to be included in the sample set. This resulted in a set that was diverse in terms of length of residential stay in Durgerdam, which seems to play a main role in this research. Some of the respondents lived here for more than 70 years and have never lived somewhere else while others only lived here for a couple ye-ars. In this way, the set of interviewees are representable for the community of Durgerdam. In total, I collected 10 interviews between March 13th and April 23rd of around an hour each.

24%

43%

19%

14%

28%

43%

25%

4%

The interviews with the local residents were semi-structured which means that they will follow qualitative starting-points but were provided with a topic list. The questions were designed to focus on explicit subjects of being connected with the place and elicit personal stories. Usually, I opened the interview by asking about the residential history and, if they did, why they moved to Durgerdam. I discovered that asking about experiences is more effective than asking about opi-nions as respondents usually start talking about their opiopi-nions when asking about experiences. After asking about subjects related to place attachment and when a more confidential bond is formed, I went deeper into the conflict. This would consist of questions as ‘Have you been pre-sent at the participation evenings?’. Each interview was concluded with the question whether the respondent had things in mind that were not discussed yet that were important to under-stand their perspective and whether they wanted to add something. This makes sure that my opinion was neutral and nothing was overlooked.

To have a good understanding of the conflict from both sides I decided to join a participation evening organized by the Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier (HHNK) on April 3rd. The method used here was simple or contrived observation. This method allowed me to observe behavior directly without having influence over the situation that I observed (Bryman, 2012: 273). At this participation evening that was led by experts, residents informed each other about the process. This was also a moment for them to express their anger and concerns which is vital to understanding the conflict and its arguments. The aim of the observation was to record de-tails about the behavior of the participants and other parties involved in the conflict and devel-op a narrative account based on similar concerns from there. This is why unstructured observati-ons would fit.

At the end of this evening, I got in contact with a lot of experts. However, these interviews were not recorded so I had to make quick notes. I have spoken to experts of client water safety, landscape architecture, nature monuments, the village council and residents involved in the par-ticipation tracks. Following these conversations, two appointments have been made for a more in-depth interview. One with two members of the HHNK, and one with a member of

Natuurmo-numenten Amsterdam. The interview with members of the HHNK was very valuable to get a

complete picture of the conflict because they are responsible for meeting the national safety standards in Durgerdam and thus have partly other interests than the residents of Durgerdam. The interview with Natuurmonumenten Amsterdam was valuable, since it shed light on the con-flict from a new perspective as, they had researched different geographical scales. An extra in-terview with members of Boskalis and the Province of North Holland would have been preferred. Boskalis could give better insights into the technical engineering challenges and is seen by many residents as an opponent in the conflict. The province, on the other hand, is a stakeholder that is neutral as they have to grant the authorization for executing the plans. In the end, the pro-vince has to decide whether the proposed plans are a good compromise between the voice of the residents of Durgerdam and guaranteeing safety.

As described, for data collection I have chosen for multiple research methods. As Bryman (2012) describes, combining both quantitative and qualitative data triangulate findings in order that they may be mutually corroborated. Combining strengths of multiple methods may offset the weaknesses of both methods and can answer different research questions. I combined the diffe-rent methods of data collection to develop a narrative on the place attachment and conflict in Durgerdam.

This research does pose limitations. The most prominent critique on case studies is the issue of generalization, also known as external validity (Yin, 2012). How can the results that come from one single case be applied to other cases? This case study is an intense and detailed examination of a single example. The goal of this research is to look at particular details, but can also gene-rate new insights on broader topics. This case can help prove or reject theories described ear-lier.

Another limitation is the situatedness of the researcher. One of the crucial steps in qualitative research is describing and understanding the world as it is seen from the participant's points of view, and bringing this to a social scientific account. Studying the language, meaning and per-spectives from the respondents' view will bring insights in the way participants see the world. When arriving at a social scientific account, it is important to not lose touch with the world as those who provide data see it. In order to do so, it is important to acknowledge that data ga-thering and processing might lead to changes in how the researcher interprets the way the parti-cipants see the world.

The third limitation is the timeframe, as there was a limitation on the number of interviews and observations. More interviews and presence at more participation evenings would have given me better insights and might have given me results that are more representative for the community of Durgerdam. Especially having more time for interviews with other external parties involved in the conflict would have given me a clearer vision of the interests involved in the conflict.

4. Context of Durgerdam

The village of Durgerdam is situated in North-Holland and is part of the municipality of Amster-dam. Its proximity to the city of Amsterdam, but still being rural is what Durgerdam makes it attractive for many residents. Only 182 households in 2017 are part of the village (Allecijfers, 2017) but what makes it so unique is that all houses are built in the form of a ribbon, upon a dike (see figure 2). The area of Durgerdam has a unique genesis as the landscape is built and preserved by humans. Without the influence of mankind, this landscape would not have existed in its current shape. The role of the Durgerdammerdijk is key in the existence, conversation, and preservation of this landscape. To understand the meaning of this dike landscape for the lo-cal community it is necessary to understand the history and its forms of appearance of the landscape.

Figure 2: Aerial picture of Durgerdam (Swart, 2008)

4.1 History of Durgerdam

The natural landscape where Durgerdam is situated nowadays, used to be marshlands. It contai-ned big raised bogs that were crossed by small rivers and creeks, covered by reed and swamp forests with willows and birches. When in the 10th and 11th century the first pioneers from the higher situated shorelines got into the marshlands of Holland, the grounds were swampy but also a few meters above sea level. The draining of the soil was crucial to prepare the soil for resi-dence and agriculture. The soil was divided in plots by series of ditches and banks, dug parallel among each other. These hooked up with natural streams of water, such as the Bamestra, Ye, and Gisspe, and were able to discharge excessive water. These natural streams discharged their

water at the Almere, a freshwater lake that later became the Zuiderzee. This draining causes the peat to oxidate and the soil to subside while at the same time the sea level was rising. Drai-ning the rainwater became more complicated and every storm resulted in flooding (Waterlands Archief, n.d.). To protect the land from more floods, sea dikes around Waterland and along the IJ were built, which followed through in the 15th century with dams and dikes along the rivers (Gawronski, 2001). The Saint Elizabeth’s flood in 1421 that was caused by a storm surge, resul-ted in huge flooding of the former Zuiderzee with major damage as a result. As a result of this flood, the citizens of IJdoorn and Waterlandt got approval to build a new dike in 1422. The

Uit-dammerdijk was built and IJdoorn came to lie outside the dike. Meanwhile, the dam that was

built in the peat stream near Durgerdam moved to its current location Durgerdam (Gawronski, 2001). Along with this dike a new village established: Ydoornickerdam, named after the hamlet that got engulfed by the Saint Elizabeth’s flood ,which is known as Durgerdam nowadays.

In the ages following, the residents of Durgerdam financially mainly depended on the shipping industry. In the 18th century, the whole republic had to deal with deprivation and decay and that was tangible in Durgerdam. The whole village was forced into the fishing industry when demand for the shipping industry decreased (Centrale Dorpenraad Landelijk Amsterdam Noord, n.d.). More floods followed in 1625, 1687, 1825 and 1916, but that came to an end when in 1932 the

Afsluitdijk was established. However, this also resulted in a loss of a big share of the fishing

in-dustry as the former Zuiderzee became separated from the rest of the sea.

4.2 Durgerdam in the 21st century

The unique history of Durgerdam can still be seen in the current landscapes. The various land-scape characteristics form a whole and carry a unique appearance. The historical character de-scribed before can still be found in Durgerdam, as the houses still express the feeling of an old fisherman village (see figure 3). The picturesque village upon the former Zuiderzeedijk is situat-ed very close to Amsterdam. Traveling from Amsterdam to Durgerdam takes only a couple min-utes by bicycle or car. Once, Amsterdam was a hamlet, but it became very rich and grew explo-sively while surrounded by villages, such as Durgerdam, remained small. They enjoy the view over the water of the Buiten-IJ and the polder IJdoorn. Also from the backyards, there is a view over the Durgerdammer Die, a friendly polder landscape (Everink, 2001).

The uniqueness of the village, combined with its proximity to Amsterdam caused Durgerdam to become very popular. What used to be a poor fisherman village has now turned into a village where urban two-income earners come to reside (Schenk, 2000). Housing prices increased enor-mously and are relatively expensive for the amount of square meters. According to Mitula (n.d.) the recent prices per square meter is 4,887.23 euro, and the average price for a house 1,148,500 euro. The result of these explosive growing housing price is that the younger generations from families that grew up in Durgerdam are not able to stay in the village and the youths have to

leave (Schenk, 2000). Many of the residents of the current Durgerdam do not work as a fisher-man anymore, but commute between Durgerdam and Amsterdam.

Also, the pressure of tourists increased in the last years. The number of international tourists that visit Amsterdam is growing annually between 5 and 10 percent since 2000 (Centraal Bureau voor Statistiek, 2017). Because there is barely space for tourists in the city of Amsterdam, policy focusses on stimulating tourists to visit the area around Amsterdam, including Durgerdam. This results in more international tourists who visit Durgerdam, mainly by bicycle. According to the Centraal Bureau voor Statistiek (2017), it is expected that the number of international tourists in Durgerdam will continue to grow.

Figure 3: Street view of Durgerdam (Van der Pijl, 2006)

4.3 Dike reinforcement


The water authorities and the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment (Rijkswaterstaat) work in the Flood Protection Program, together with other actors, to ensure that the primary flood defenses meet the safety standards (Hoogwaterbeschermingsprogramma n.d.a). In North-Hol-land, the HHNK is responsible for ensuring safety. During the second national assessment round (2001-2006) of the Dutch dikes, it was concluded that the Markermeerdijken largely did not meet the legal standards. These dikes protect 1,2 million Dutch citizens from flooding. Among

others, the whole of the Waterlandse Zeedijk appeared to not meet safety standards. The legal water safety standard, expressed as the probability of exceeding an extreme flood level, is rated at 1/10.000. This means that the probability of flooding should be less than 1/10.000 per year. The entire Waterlandse Zeedijk did not meet this safety standard. The dikes did not appear to be stable enough and were not high enough at certain points (Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier, n.d.b). There is a danger that under extreme weather conditions the inside of the dike may shift and collapse. To ensure the dikes meet the safety standards, a Pre Design Pro-ject Plan was presented in Juli 2014 by the HHNK. This design serves as a basis for the final strengthening design.

The team that would execute the practical matters was formed in December 2015. The HHNK formed an Alliance with the consortium Boskalis and Volkerwessels private contracting parties. Together they are responsible for the technical preparation, the plan study, the legal procedures and executing the construction works (De Leeuw, 2017). Also, financial risks and savings are sha-red. In July 2016 the Alliance presented tow possible solutions: an outward reinforcement of the old dike or a new dike in front of the present dike in the water (Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier, 2016). Residents were asked to indicate their preference before the end of Au-gust, which was much too rapid according to the village council (Meershoek, 2016a). In Decem-ber 2016 the Alliance proposed the chosen design. The proposed design contained three break-waters in front of the current dike (see figure 4). The fact that there is no need to intervene in the current dike and maintaining its present shape is seen as a big advantage by the Alliance. However, this will be at the cost of the free view over open water (De Ingenieur, 2016). The re-sidents think differently: ‘’At the end, the solution that is experienced as most harmful by the residents is chosen’’ (Meershoek, 2016b).

Figure 4: Proposed plan from the Alliance 2016, three breakwaters (De Ingenieur, 2016)

An additional participation process with the residents, the municipality, the province and HHNK follows between February and July 2017, led by an external party. But due to lack of support of the local residents and ongoing resistance, extra time is taken. Minister Schultz from Infrastruc-ture and Environment writes in a letter that a separated plan will be made for Durgerdam and more time is needed for the decision-making process (Schultz van Haegen, 2017), in which the residents of Durgerdam will become more involved. This started in October 2017. Three so-call-ed ‘tracks’ were startso-call-ed in which residents participatso-call-ed: the technical neso-call-ed for strengthening the dike (track 1), considerations and decision-making (track 2), and the integrated design (track 3) (Hoogheemraadschap Hollands Noorderkwartier, 2017a). At the end of 2018, the new plan is expected to be submitted, and the dike will meet safety standards at the end of 2021.

5. Analysis place attachment

In this study, I chose ten residents in such a way that they would provide an as representative picture of the experience of Durgerdam as possible. These residents are from different geograp-hic parts of Durgerdam, come from different socio-economic backgrounds, and differ in their length of residence. They include both men and women whose ages ranged from 35 to 80 years. However, to get a fully representative picture, this sample is lacking respondents that are below the age of 35. Also, more background information on the highest level of education is needed.

The difference in profound understanding of the place is depicted by which elements the res-pondents prioritize and which they do not. Although there are differences in prioritizing these elements, a lot of similarities are found n how residents identify themselves with the place Dur-gerdam. Letting the residents fill in a questionnaire on what they value most about Durgerdam and how they would describe Durgerdam in 5 words gave a good impression of what elements are associated with Durgerdam. Subsequently, deeper meanings of these elements are re-searched by interviewing residents of Durgerdam.

5.1 Physical landscape elements

More than half of the answers on the question what the residents appreciate most of Durgerdam are related to physical landscape and natural characteristics. Associations such as water, mea-dows, sky, wind, nature, and reed are placed in this category. The variation of associations indi-cates that, within this category different, individual landscape elements form a landscape as a whole and are important for the mental construction of the dike as described by Cosgrove (1989). The analysis of the data has been done through coding. Within the codes, different groups of elements can be identified: water, flora and fauna, the dike, and cultural-historical elements. While analyzing the data in both the questionnaire and the interviews, data has been sorted based on the previously named groups.

The most important element that plays a role in the identification with the place Durgerdam is the water. For the residents of Durgerdam, this means the water of the Markermeer. It already starts with the fact that some of the respondents had their first contact with Durgerdam from the water. During sailing trips across the Markermeer and the Kinselmeer, some residents came into contact with Durgerdam for the first time. As one respondent said: ’’I used to sail and when

I went by I thought wooow, if you can live here’’. This might be a reason why inhabitants

associ-ate the wassoci-ater with recreation, relaxation, and leisure.

In addition, the water was of great importance for many residents who had several generations of ancestors living in Durgerdam. The village used to be a fisherman village that relied heavily on the activities that took place on the water. For a long time, fishing activities were the only source of income during the summers and winters. That shared history creates an association with the water that still prevails. Prior to the creation of the Afsluitdijk, Durgerdam was located

at the Zuiderzee. The fact that this has been the case does play an important role for some of the residents in choosing to live in Durgerdam. ‘’The realization that you have. Previously, here

was just the Zuiderzee, which came with salt water. There were ships here and if it was very rough they would sit in the ship instead of the house because if it was going to overflow then the ship went up anyway. And you can still see that a bit. You see the forms of the landscape. I think that's wonderful’’. From the interviews, this also follows when they explain why they

would not want to live in Holysloot or Ransdorp. The contact and the connection with the water make Durgerdam a unique place in Waterland, where it also plays an important role that the wa-ter is not stationary but flowing. These waves give the residents the feeling that they live 'on the big water' and 'really close to nature’.

The association with floods are barely made by the residents when examining the questionnai-res. Fear of a new flood is currently not appearing. However, the interviews do show that the respondents are aware of the damage caused by the water in the past and that this shared histo-ry of flooding also ensures a shared identity as described by Perkins and Long (2002).

While Durgerdam is often associated with water on the one hand, while on the other had it also is associated with ‘green’ and wildlife elements such as pastures and the local fauna which con-sists of cattle, but also birds such as spoonbills, godwits, and geese. The rears of the houses are adjacent to a large piece of pasture filled with cattle that varies from cows and sheep. The resi-dents indicate that the elements that belong to it such as the grass, the trees, and the cattle are highly appreciated and part of Durgerdam. ‘’On the other side you also look out on the

me-adows and you hear the cows that are going to be milked in the morning as they pass by in a procession. You see 10 billion birds’. Another resident confirmed this by saying ‘It is the nature, it is unique. You have the cows and the sheep behind you in the pasture. Nobody has that!’’.

These elements play an important role in the experience of what the residents describe when they live rurally and outside the city. They often indicate that they find the city too busy and have chosen for Durgerdam because it is more connected to nature. This includes that at the edge of Durgerdam, Polder IJdoorn is located. This is a bird breeding area on the edge of Dur-gerdam. Due to the vulnerable breeding birds, the area is not accessible, but can easily be over-looked from the dike, or for example through a bird viewing hut. But also smaller natural ele-ments contribute to the unique character of Durgerdam. For example, the reed along the edge of the water is often mentioned as a small natural detail, which still carries a large emotional load.

Between the water and meadows lies the Durgerdammerdijk. This element contributes to what many of the residents say that Durgerdam is about. The residents of Durgerdam rate the

Durger-dammerdijk as being a part of Durgerdam with a 9,2 relatively high. The primary function of the

dike, protection against floods, seems to play a role in the process of placemaking for the resi-dents. Interviews show that the respondents have the feeling that protecting themselves from

water has always been a part of the Dutch identity as the Dutch are famous for their battle with water, and especially been part of the identity of Durgerdam. ‘’The dike is actually not special

at all. That makes it so special. It's just there. This is what the village is about. It is a dike vil-lage. Because the dike has all those emotions of the Netherlands, of keeping things dry to-gether. There is a special kind of feeling. It is made by people’s hands to ensure that no water comes in. There have been many floods here. That's what it's for. But after a while, something so functional gets an emotional load. We already have few mountains or whatever. Landscape is of course a Dutch word because we create our own environment’’. Some of the residents even

noted that the village even would not exist without the dike as it would simply be flooded.

More importantly, the Durgerdammerdijk functions as a figural connection between the resi-dents of the village. It is associated as the basis of Durgerdam. The village is built as a ribbon with all houses built upon or along the dike. Several residents of Durgerdam describe the village as a ‘dike village’, with the dike as the basis of Durgerdam. Living on the dike is an experience that all the residents share and appreciate and connects them with each other. ‘’It's a ribbon

construction, so it's important to stop the water. But it is also called Durgerdam. We are really on a dam. Yes, it has multiple functions. I think it really belongs to the village. I cannot think it away (...) That is also something you share with each other. That you all live on a dike’’. This

seems similar to the way Nijhuis (2014) describes the figural meaning of a dike as a connecting element. In Durgerdam it connects the houses built upon the dike, and so its residents with each other.

Other words that are often used to describe Durgerdam have a connection with the history of the village, such as fisherman village, harbor town, old wooden village, monumental and cultu-ral heritage. This indicates the shared history experienced by the residents of Durgerdam. This was also an often recurring theme during the interviews with residents. The elements of this shared history results in a feeling of connection with the place and between the residents. ‘’Of

course you have very special houses here. If you drive into the village until you leave the villa-ge, you hardly know where to look. You have the water, the beautiful peek-throughs, beautiful facades, the houses in which you also recognize things. That these houses resemble each other but also are very own. That is why Durgerdam is so characteristic for me’’. The houses still

car-ry their old character, thanks to the appearance of the houses. The houses from the outside, for example, still carry many elements from the past, such as the fact that a lot of the houses are made of wood and bare their own color. Although the houses often have been renovated, enough attention has been paid to retaining these old elements in order to retain these characteristics. ‘’Those shapes and the beams and that just those elements have been preserved. I think that's

very nice. The character and atmosphere of a house is very decisive for me. I would not like to live in a new house’’.

The houses have also been around for a long time and they carry many stories with them. One of the residents told that his house used to be from an old merchant captain in the 1930s. The hou-se has been turned slightly towards the hou-sea and the roof was transverhou-se so that the roof tiles won’t be blown away. When there is a storm, roof tiles often were blown away because the wind is coming underneath them. Another tells that her house was her parents' house and that it goes back 5 generations. The house has always been part of the family and for this person there is also a long history in this house. The road also carries these characteristics of Durgerdam. Be-cause the dike is narrow and meanders through the village, it gives a unique experience that ta-kes you back in time and gives the feeling that you are really out of the city. The fact that the road surface consists of clinkers, and not asphalt, contributes to this unique character of Dur-gerdam. ‘’A commitment to a world that goes bigger than you only know yourself, but that you

see the shapes in the landscape that you think, that was the same a few hundred years ago. The vastness you have here and the old shapes’’.

The way the residents of Durgerdam describe different elements of the landscape of Durgerdam show similarities with the way how Relph (1987) describes landscape elements as ‘building blocks’ of the landscape as the respondents mention the water, flora and fauna, the dike and the houses. The way Cosgrove (1989) argues that layers of meaning are based on the interpretation of someone can be seen with the residents of Durgerdam as well and triggers a place attachment as mentioned by Cullen (1971) and Mohammad et al. (2013).

5.2 Landscape experiences

Next to the elements, the respondents often associate Durgerdam with the view and with other forms of landscape experience. These associations deal with the sensory perception of landscape and incorporate the landscape as a whole. They can be linked to the physical landscape ele-ments or nature characteristics in the sense that the whole of different landscape eleele-ments are a condition for a specific landscape experience and a specific view as described by Tuan (1977).

The questionnaire shows that the primary landscape experience that residents name is the view. Both at the front and at the rear of the houses the residents have a free view of the landscapes at the moment. At the front this is over the dike, over the water of the Markermeer. At the back, it is over the meadows of Waterland. The free view is experienced as a unique aspect in contrast to living in Amsterdam. This view seems to be the most important part of the feeling of freedom, space, tranquility and being in touch with nature. Here the respondents often repeat the contrast with the city of Amsterdam. ‘’Yes, and this is even stronger, that of those seasons.

It is also in the winter and in the fall I always get a little bit of an emotional dip, in the sense that it is dark and it never gets light again, and I really have that less here. And it is also be-cause it is a very nice place, but I really believe that when you go out, there are different co-lors. It is still very beautiful, even if it is a gray day. If you then look over the water or over the

meadow and then even if it is very foggy or cold. Then it is still beautiful and there is color or something’’.

This primary landscape experience mentioned by the residents refers to the geographical locati-on of Durgerdam. The inhabitants of Durgerdam are very aware of the unique locatilocati-on of Dur-gerdam. For many residents, the A10 is an imagined boundary of the city life of Amsterdam. When they pass under the highway they often feel that they have fled the hustle and other ne-gative aspects of life in the city. As one of the respondents described: ‘’It is really every time

you come under the A10 then you still think wow, all year round’’. Living in Durgerdam,

therefo-re, has for almost all residents the meaning of living outside the city life and this is often descri-bed as the 'village feeling'. ’’When I cycle home in the evening, oh, I'm glad I'm here. I could not

live in the city. We find this for us with such a garden... I am crazy about a garden. I could not live in the city. No really’’.

On the other hand, the pleasant thing about living in Durgerdam is that it is so close to the city. As the previous quote indicates, this respondent regularly goes to Amsterdam by bike. The inter-views and questionnaires show that many of the residents work in Amsterdam or regularly go there. The advantages of living in the city, such as having many amenities and shops in the neighborhood are present in Durgerdam. With that, it seems that Durgerdam is situated in a uni-que location where the advantages of living in the big city are absorbed, but the negative con-sequences do not come with it. As one of the residents described, ‘It feels like the best of both worlds’. When looking, there is virtually nothing to see from the city of Amsterdam. There is no big street traffic and in the evening it is not as noisy as in the city. The feeling that you are completely out of the city is strong here. But on the other hand, all the benefits you have in the city are present because the residents live within cycling distance of the city. As one of the resi-dents of Durgerdam mentioned: ‘’that you are able to go there [Amsterdam] by bicycle and still

have the comforts. It feels a bit like the best of two worlds. This is municipality Amsterdam, so you are not completely out of town. We also looked for a house in Holysloot, but only the idea is already very far away. And we don’t have that feeling here’’. This quotation is a good

example of how residents of Durgerdam feel very connected to Amsterdam on the one hand, but on the other hand, do not have the feeling of living in a big city. The associations with Durger-dam are rural, but still connected with the big city.

This experience of living on the border of wilderness and civilization is also described by Fischer (2007). However, Fischer (2007) describes the border of wilderness and civilization as the border between sea and agriculture, while the respondents mention both sea and agriculture as wilder-ness and Amsterdam as civilization. Living in Durgerdam can be seen as living on the border of wilderness and civilization, or as some respondents would call it ‘the backyard of Amsterdam’.

5.3 Social identities

For the residents of Durgerdam, the most important social identity is based on the distinction between rural and urban as mentioned earlier. When asking the respondents in the questionnaire what bonds the residents with each other, almost all of them replied with answers that relate to living outside the city, living with the peacefulness of the place, or the feeling of community. That these shared interests create bonding, is also mentioned by Perkings and Long (2002). The ‘here versus somewhere else’ or ‘we versus the others’. The word ‘we’ is often used by many people when interviewing them to refer to all residents of Durgerdam (‘’we didn’t like the plans’’, ‘’We enjoy the view’’). The residents feel like they share a particular attitude that is unique for the residents of Durgerdam and not common outside the area. For the residents of Durgerdam this means living outside the city and enjoying the peace, quietness and the view.

‘’It is a place where people choose for. People who love the water, love being outside. So maybe they are yuppies, but maybe they are also not. Because people also consciously choose not to live in the city’’. An external threat can be a catalyst for strengthening the identity of a

com-munity (Tilley, 2006). It might function as a reason for members of the comcom-munity to become more connected with each other. The initial decision of HHNK to strengthen the dike was a thre-at to everyone. Although residents might differ in the way they thre-attach meanings to the place and experiences, the presence of an external threat strengthens the feeling of a shared identity and the feeling of ‘we, the residents of Durgerdam’. This comes from the same fundamental will to protect their view and the characteristics of Durgerdam.

On a less fundamental level, changes in social identities can be identified resulting in different social identities of residents living in the same community. The older generation, who lived in Durgerdam before the opening of the A10 and know the village as a fisherman village, is decrea-sing in number, making room for younger people with different ideas. The former historical do-minant social identity will be characterized first, which upon I will describe the elements of the new social identity that is challenging this historical dominant social identity.

For the older generation, Durgerdam used to be a small fisherman village where everybody knows their neighbors. ‘’We used to walk in by everybody, and the door was always open at

eve-rybody’s house’’. To them, the feeling of community means looking after each other and having

small talk on the street. ‘’But it always seems that if your child is lost, you will be called later

that he is walking here. Everyone takes each other into account and you know a lot more’’. The

older residents often compare the feeling of being part of a community with the anonymous fee-ling of living in Amsterdam. ‘'It is nice that the community here is a bit bigger [than in the city

of Amsterdam]. That you know it. That gives a nice feeling. That you are on a street as part of your group or something’’. Being familiar with the people you live with in the street and in the

neighborhood is a very important aspect for them. This might originate from the time that Dur-gerdam was mainly inhabited by poorer families that needed each other’s help to survive. As one of the older respondents described ’’There used to be a different mentality and very different