Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 196

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

What happened in 1953? The Big Flood in the Netherlands in retrospect

Gerritsen, Herman·2005·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences

Abstract

During the weekend of Saturday 31 January to Sunday 1 February 1953, a storm tide raged across the northwest European shelf and flooded the low-lying coastal areas of the countries around the North Sea. The peak high waters occurred during the night and the storm surprised many people in their sleep. The resulting disaster in terms of loss of life and damage to infrastructure was enormous. In the Netherlands, 1836 people fell victim to the flood; in the UK and Belgium, the casualities were 307 and 22, respectively. The large number of fatalities in the Netherlands was related to the fact that much of the affected area is below sea-level. This paper focuses on the case of the Netherlands. It discusses the history of land reclamation, and the fact that living in low-lying areas protected by dykes, often below sea-level, is an accepted fact of life in the Netherlands. The historical approach to dyke maintenance is then outlined, and the state of the dykes in the early twentieth century and after the war is discussed. The characteristics of the storm and the flood are discussed, along with people's experiences of the first hours and days following the flood. The impact of this human stress has often been lasting—many survivors continue to live with daily memories of the flood. Attention is given to the large-scale rescue and relief efforts, the closure of the dykes during the following nine months and the concept of the Delta Plan, designed to prevent such a large-scale disaster ever happening again. Although the 1953 storm was indeed a low probability event leading to very high storm-induced water-levels, and occurred in combination with spring tide, several arguments are presented that explain why this flood turned into a disaster of such a large scale. Equally, the question is raised whether the disaster could have been prevented. The paper concludes by noting the importance of awareness and preparedness in order to prevent a future storm threat of this scale turning into a disaster of the scope of the Big Flood of 1953.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsta.2005.1568

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 196

Metadata

Authors
Gerritsen, H.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Published
2005-06-15
Volume
363
Issue
1831
Pages
1271-1291
ISSN
  • 1364-503X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2962
OpenAlex
W2131715270
Cited by
196
References
0
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What happened in 1953? The Big Flood in the Netherlands in retrospect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rsta.2005.1568
The paper
Gerritsen, H. (2005). What happened in 1953? The Big Flood in the Netherlands in retrospect. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2005.1568

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.