In a 90-minute interactive session during the AMS Institute Scientific Conference, led by Maged Elsamny (AMS Institute, Resilient Delta Initiative), 39 participants were immersed in a hypothetical flood scenario affecting Dordrecht and Amsterdam’s Watergraafsmeer.

Set under GRIP 3 crisis conditions, the case combined large-scale evacuation, severe infrastructural failure, and prolonged inundation, up to five metres of water in Watergraafsmeer, requiring months to drain. Against this backdrop, the session introduced the Flood Crisis Framework, structuring disaster management across preparedness, immediate response, short-term recovery, and long-term recovery.

Participants, ranging from crisis professionals to researchers, were asked to collectively map roles and responsibilities across these phases. Working with thematic lenses such as vital infrastructure, food and water, shelters, finance, and “building back better,” groups identified both lead and supporting actors, physically placing their assessments on a shared board. The exercise revealed the complexity of multi-actor coordination and a striking ambiguity: preliminary findings suggest a systemic lack of clearly assumed responsibility, particularly in essential domains such as food and water distribution.

‘At this moment, nobody, or rather, no organization says: we are responsible for this specific thing during the event of a climate disaster.’ – Maged Elsamny

Discussions further highlighted temporal mismatches between phases. While immediate response emphasised urgency, restoring vital systems, securing shelters, activating budgets, later stages exposed governance frictions, including political accountability, delayed recognition of disaster status, and contested funding for recovery. Discussions showed that disaster planning in the Netherlands largely prioritises organisations over communities. Residents with flood experience offer valuable insights and should be actively connected with these organisations

By simulating real-world uncertainty and institutional fragmentation, the session aimed to bridge the gap between abstract planning assumptions and operational realities. Elsamny’s facilitation foregrounded co-creation across sectors, aligning with the broader RED&BLUE project’s ambition to develop equitable, integrated climate risk strategies. The outcome was a critical insight: disaster governance currently operates in a space where roles remain negotiated rather than owned.