64
5 Challenges: Sectoral Descriptions
Fig. 5.1 Dunes at the Schelde protecting the hinterland, The Netherlands. c
Ahlhorn
should be learned from the Dutch neighbors and the improvement should be done with and
not against nature (Fig. 5.1).
The same conclusions were drawn by inhabitants at the peninsula Eiderstedt in
Schleswig-Holstein. In 1770 the responsible authority wanted to protect the mainland
against flooding by building a dike. But the inhabitants insisted to construct an artificial
protection wall. Allemeyer (2007) pinpointed that a distinction was made between natural
and artificial coastal protection. Of course, one of the reasons to vote against the construction of the dike were the costs because they would have been paid by the inhabitants.
The further difference was dikes are purchasable and dunes were made by nature and have
protected the assets and the people without any costs (Allemeyer, 2007, p. 93).
A comprehensive treatise of the knowledge on natural phenomenon and science of that
time was prepared by Brahms (1754). Herein, Brahms described thoroughly the expertise
on hydrology, hydraulics and civil engineering. He reduced the storm surge events and
their consequences on the perceptions of natural sciences. This opinion might be strongly
influenced by the enlightenment of that time. According to Allemeyer (2007) could the
treatise of Brahms (1754) be taken as an example that the question was transformed from
if to how human kind should interfere in natural processes?
In parallel, the opposite position was raised by a clergyman – see Allemeyer (2007).
He has principal doubts that human kind should interfere in natural processes. One argument was that all efforts for protecting people and assets by dikes and the drainage of
the hinterland derived their necessity from the given situation of that time, that is, settlement in a highly vulnerable coastal area. But he put this argument in a broader context
whilst he generally asked if it would not have been wiser to stay with the traditional way
of live. Building dikes was an interference of men into natural processes which will cause
continuous work over centuries.
This description shows that already in ancient times the debate about the right way of
protecting people against storm surges did occur. More details and literature can be found
in Allemeyer (2006) and in Allemeyer (2007). It was the intention to highlight the fact
that, looking back to past times, the development to the current status of coastal protection
5 Challenges: Sectoral Descriptions
Fig. 5.1 Dunes at the Schelde protecting the hinterland, The Netherlands. c
Ahlhorn
should be learned from the Dutch neighbors and the improvement should be done with and
not against nature (Fig. 5.1).
The same conclusions were drawn by inhabitants at the peninsula Eiderstedt in
Schleswig-Holstein. In 1770 the responsible authority wanted to protect the mainland
against flooding by building a dike. But the inhabitants insisted to construct an artificial
protection wall. Allemeyer (2007) pinpointed that a distinction was made between natural
and artificial coastal protection. Of course, one of the reasons to vote against the construction of the dike were the costs because they would have been paid by the inhabitants.
The further difference was dikes are purchasable and dunes were made by nature and have
protected the assets and the people without any costs (Allemeyer, 2007, p. 93).
A comprehensive treatise of the knowledge on natural phenomenon and science of that
time was prepared by Brahms (1754). Herein, Brahms described thoroughly the expertise
on hydrology, hydraulics and civil engineering. He reduced the storm surge events and
their consequences on the perceptions of natural sciences. This opinion might be strongly
influenced by the enlightenment of that time. According to Allemeyer (2007) could the
treatise of Brahms (1754) be taken as an example that the question was transformed from
if to how human kind should interfere in natural processes?
In parallel, the opposite position was raised by a clergyman – see Allemeyer (2007).
He has principal doubts that human kind should interfere in natural processes. One argument was that all efforts for protecting people and assets by dikes and the drainage of
the hinterland derived their necessity from the given situation of that time, that is, settlement in a highly vulnerable coastal area. But he put this argument in a broader context
whilst he generally asked if it would not have been wiser to stay with the traditional way
of live. Building dikes was an interference of men into natural processes which will cause
continuous work over centuries.
This description shows that already in ancient times the debate about the right way of
protecting people against storm surges did occur. More details and literature can be found
in Allemeyer (2006) and in Allemeyer (2007). It was the intention to highlight the fact
that, looking back to past times, the development to the current status of coastal protection