M. (Marjolijn)  Haasnoot

Dr. M. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot

1. Deltares, 2600 MH, Delft, the Netherlands
+1

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2013 in Global Environmental Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MHM. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
M. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
J.H. (Jan)  KwakkelJ.H. (Jan) Kwakkel
J.H. (Jan) Kwakkel
WWWarren E. Walker
Warren E. Walker
JMJudith ter Maat
Judith ter Maat
A new paradigm for planning under conditions of deep uncertainty has emerged in the literature. According to this paradigm, a planner should create a strategic vision of the future, commit to short-term actions, and establish a framework to guide future actions. A plan that embodies these ideas allows for its dynamic adaptation over time to meet changing circumstances. We propose a method for decisionmaking under uncertain global and regional changes called ‘Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways’. We base our approach on two complementary approaches for designing adaptive plans: ‘Adaptive Policymaking’ and ‘Adaptation Pathways’. Adaptive Policymaking is a theoretical approach describing a planning process with different types of actions (e.g. ‘mitigating actions’ and ‘hedging actions’) and signposts to monitor to see if adaptation is needed. In contrast, Adaptation Pathways provides an analytical approach for exploring and sequencing a set of possible actions based on alternative external developments over time. We illustrate the Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways approach by producing an adaptive plan for long-term water management of the Rhine Delta in the Netherlands that takes into account the deep uncertainties about the future arising from social, political, technological, economic, and climate changes. The results suggest that it is worthwhile to further test and use the approach

28 October 2021 in Nature Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LBLea Berrang-Ford
Lea Berrang-Ford
ASA. R. Siders
A. R. Siders
ALAlexandra Lesnikowski
Alexandra Lesnikowski
AFAlexandra Paige Fischer
Alexandra Paige Fischer
MCMax W. Callaghan
Max W. Callaghan
TAThelma Zulfawu Abu
Thelma Zulfawu Abu

4 March 2013 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Warren WalkerWarren Walker
Warren Walker
MHM. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
M. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
J.H. (Jan)  KwakkelJ.H. (Jan) Kwakkel
J.H. (Jan) Kwakkel
There is increasing interest in long-term plans that can adapt to changing situations under conditions of deep uncertainty. We argue that a sustainable plan should not only achieve economic, environmental, and social objectives, but should be robust and able to be adapted over time to (unforeseen) future conditions. Large numbers of papers dealing with robustness and adaptive plans have begun to appear, but the literature is fragmented. The papers appear in disparate journals, and deal with a wide variety of policy domains. This paper (1) describes and compares a family of related conceptual approaches to designing a sustainable plan, and (2) describes several computational tools supporting these approaches. The conceptual approaches all have their roots in an approach to long-term planning called Assumption-Based Planning. Guiding principles for the design of a sustainable adaptive plan are: explore a wide variety of relevant uncertainties, connect short-term targets to long-term goals over time, commit to short-term actions while keeping options open, and continuously monitor the world and take actions if necessary. A key computational tool across the conceptual approaches is a fast, simple (policy analysis) model that is used to make large numbers of runs, in order to explore the full range of uncertainties and to identify situations in which the plan would fail.

14 September 2015 in Nature Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
NPN. LeRoy Poff
N. LeRoy Poff
CBCasey M. Brown
Casey M. Brown
TGTheodore E. Grantham
Theodore E. Grantham
JMJohn H. Matthews
John H. Matthews
MPMargaret A. Palmer
Margaret A. Palmer
ABAndres Baeza
Andres Baeza
A new decision framework, eco-engineering decision scaling, aims to provide a robust foundation for advancing sustainable water management that will meet the needs of both humans and ecosystems under future hydrological uncertainty.

24 August 2010 in Wires Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JKJaap C. J. Kwadijk
Jaap C. J. Kwadijk
MHM. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
M. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
JMJan P. M. Mulder
Jan P. M. Mulder
MHMarco M. C. Hoogvliet
Marco M. C. Hoogvliet
AJAd B. M. Jeuken
Ad B. M. Jeuken
MWMarcel J. M. de Wit
Marcel J. M. de Wit

24 March 2012 in Climatic Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHM. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
M. (Marjolijn) Haasnoot
HMHans Middelkoop
Hans Middelkoop
AOAstrid Offermans
Astrid Offermans
EBEelco van Beek
Eelco van Beek
WDWillem P. A. van Deursen
Willem P. A. van Deursen
Exploring adaptation pathways into an uncertain future can support decisionmaking in achieving sustainable water management in a changing environment. Our objective is to develop and test a method to identify such pathways by including dynamics from natural variability and the interaction between the water system and society. Present planning studies on long-term water management often use a few plausible futures for one or two projection years, ignoring the dynamic aspect of adaptation through the interaction between the water system and society. Our approach is to explore pathways using multiple realisations of transient scenarios with an Integrated Assessment Meta Model (IAMM). This paper presents the first application of the method using a hypothetical case study. The case study shows how to explore and evaluate adaptation pathways. With the pathways it is possible to identify opportunities, threats, timing and sequence of policy options, which can be used by policymakers to develop water management roadmaps into the future. By including the dynamics between the water system and society, the influence of uncertainties in both systems becomes clearer. The results show, among others, that climate variability rather than climate change appears to be important for taking decisions in water management.