Zoekresultaat: 1328 artikelen

x

    Municipal amalgamations form a red thread through the history of local government in the Netherlands. With varying intensity, this country was continuously confronted with adjustments of the municipal scale. Where once the focus was rather one-sided on the minimum number of inhabitants of a municipality, we see that since the nineties questions were asked about the amalgamation policy. From now on a lack of administrative power had to be demonstrated before an amalgamation would be carried through. These critical remarks however didn’t lead to a downfall in the number of municipal amalgamations. Amalgamation and merger will always continue in the Netherlands. The Flemish policy on amalgamation appears to be quite different. Since the large-scale merger operation in 1976 Flanders was no more confronted with municipal amalgamations. The former Flemish government however, announced at its appointment in 2009 that it would encourage voluntary mergers of municipalities with financial and administrative incentives. The present Flemish government treads the same path. The incentives put in place by the former Flemish legislature are even increased. They even appear to bear fruit. In the provinces Limburg and East-Flanders several municipalities have indicated to investigate a merger. Some of them even have taken the principal decision to merger in the municipal councils involved. This article describes and compares the municipal amalgamation policies of the Netherlands and Flanders. The authors also investigate what both can learn from each other.


Prof. dr. Koenraad De Ceuninck
Prof. dr. K. De Ceuninck is politicoloog en hoogleraar bij het Centrum voor Lokale Politiek aan de Universiteit Gent.

Dr. Klaas Abma
Dr. K. Abma is programmamanager bij de gemeente Súdwest-Fryslân (Zuidwest-Friesland). In 2012 promoveerde hij aan de Open Universiteit bij Arno Korsten op een onderzoek naar het beoordelen van gemeenten.

Prof. mr. Hans Engels
Prof. mr. J.W.M. Engels is bijzonder hoogleraar recht decentrale overheden (Oppenheim-leerstoel) aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.

Dr. Rik Reussing
Dr. G.H. Reussing is onderwijscoördinator van de joint degree Public Governance across Borders aan de Universiteit Twente en redactiesecretaris van Bestuurswetenschappen.
Artikel

Non-participatie in de doe-democratie

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2017
Auteurs Gideon Broekhuizen MSc LLB en Dr. Ank Michels
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Research into citizens’ initiatives usually focuses on those who already participate. In this article the central question is how those who do not participate yet can be motivated to take part in citizens’ initiatives. To investigate this the authors used vignettes in which four key motives for participation in citizens’ initiatives are linked to three types of citizens’ initiatives. The results of this research show that people are more likely to take part in an initiative if a call is made to altruism. Usually it is also in general easier for small-scale, more applied citizens’ initiatives to motivate people. Non-participants will be more inclined, certainly in the presence of a specific local problem and if they are asked, to respond in a positive manner to an invitation to take part. For more abstract citizens’ initiatives, like a citizens summit in which not one single specific problem is addressed, it is much more difficult to motivate people to take part. Participation in citizens’ initiatives indeed increases the quality of local democracy, but only if the (local) government doesn’t take over these initiatives. Also those who do not yet take part in citizens’ initiatives have a positive and constructive attitude towards them.


Gideon Broekhuizen MSc LLB
G.R. Broekhuizen MSc LLB deed een onderzoeksmaster bestuurskunde en organisatiewetenschap aan de Universiteit Utrecht en een bachelor bestuurskunde en recht aan de Universiteit Leiden. Hij schreef zijn scriptie over non-participatie in de doe-democratie.

Dr. Ank Michels
Dr. A.M.B. Michels is universitair docent aan de Universiteit Utrecht bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO).
Artikel

Belofte, pijn en medicijn: het verantwoorden van publieke waardecreatie aan de lokale politiek en maatschappelijke partners

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden public value creation, accountability, local government, performance management
Auteurs Mijke van de Noort MSc, Scott Douglas DPhil en Dr. Lieske van der Torre
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public value management encourages public organizations to move beyond existing frameworks and create value in flexible collaboration with societal partners. However, this approach creates problems for the accountability processes, because reports to politicians are often still directed at quantitative goals and rigid frameworks. This creates uncertainty and disagreement around the definition of value, the legitimacy of the new governance styles and the complexity of the new collaborations. This article describes the experiences of a large Dutch municipality where we conducted an experiment with an innovative accountability process for public value creation in the public health domain. Political administrators, council members, civil servants and societal partners have jointly assessed, through an interactive Public Value Table meeting format, what value their combined efforts in complex societal challenges have created. This experiment gives insight in the growing pains of public value creation, but also shows some possible solutions to address these tensions.


Mijke van de Noort MSc
M. van de Noort MSc studeerde Publiek Management aan de Universiteit Utrecht en werkt momenteel als Young Professional beleid volksgezondheid bij de gemeente Utrecht.

Scott Douglas DPhil
S.C. Douglas DPhil is universitair docent op het gebied van publiek management aan de Universiteit Utrecht bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO).

Dr. Lieske van der Torre
Dr. E.J. van der Torre is postdoctoraal onderzoeker aan de Universiteit Utrecht bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO).

    From 1974 until 1994 John Wevers was alderman in Maastricht (an old city in the deep south of the Netherlands) in the area of urban development. Before (from 1967 until 1974) Wevers was already a political activist in this domain. In 2016 he published his autobiography, which is very interesting for several reasons. The autobiography not only gives insight in the policy and the organization in the area of urban renewal in that period, but also in the functioning of local politics in general. At his farewell as an alderman in 1994 Wevers was the last remnant of a generation of Dutch Labour politicians (the other three were Adri Duivesteijn in The Hague, Ypke Gietema in Groningen and Fons Asselbergs in Amersfoort) who made architecture a public matter during the eighties. During the seventies Wevers also belonged to the generation of Dutch Labour politicians (amongst Jan van der Ploeg in Rotterdam, Max van den Berg in Groningen and Jan Schaefer in Amsterdam) who propagated the human scale and living in the inner city for ordinary people. In this respect they could rightfully call themselves the heirs of the legendary Labour alderman Floor Wibaut (alderman in Amsterdam from 1914 until 1931).


Dr. Rik Reussing
Dr. G.H. Reussing is onderwijscoördinator van de joint degree Public Governance across Borders aan de Universiteit Twente en redactiesecretaris van Bestuurswetenschappen.
Artikel

De prijs van openheid: een inleiding tot het themanummer informatieveiligheid

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden cybersecurity, government, hackers, leaks, governance
Auteurs Dr. Haiko van der Voort, Wouter Kisteman MSc en Drs. Henk Wesseling
Samenvatting

    Cybersecurity is daily news. Data leaks and hackers are common features in the media. We tend to look to the government when things go wrong: what is the government doing about it? In this special issue we also look to the government and ask ourselves whether we are ready for the challenges of cybersecurity. Asking this question is simple. Answering it, however, requires sophisticated knowledge. This includes knowledge about the technology of today and the future. It also includes knowledge about governance. Who should be prepared in the age of distributed responsibilities? Which public and private parties can enhance cybersecurity, including you and me? Finally, what is does ‘being prepared’ mean exactly? This special issue includes three academic articles, five interviews and a column. Cybersecurity is viewed from different academic perspectives and professional positions. In its entirety, this special issue provides state-of-the-art of academic and professional thinking on government cybersecurity.


Dr. Haiko van der Voort

Wouter Kisteman MSc

Drs. Henk Wesseling
Praktijk

Een doofpot, of nog erger … Geen doofpot!

Bestuurskundige lessen van en voor de Commissies-Oosting

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Prof. mr. dr. Stavros Zouridis

Prof. mr. dr. Stavros Zouridis
Artikel

Staat van de bestuurskunde

Samenvattend én persoonlijk slotakkoord

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Dr. Thomas Schillemans

Dr. Thomas Schillemans
Artikel

Cybersecurity: waar is de bestuurskunde?

Een schets van aangrijpingspunten voor toekomstig overheidsbeleid

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden cybersecurity, public administration, governance
Auteurs Drs. Michel van Leeuwen en Drs. Nelly Ghaoui
Samenvatting

    In this article the case is made that, unjustly, there is a lack of interest in the topic of cybersecurity of on the part of public administration scholars and professionals in the topic of cybersecurity. ICT has become persistent in society and so has cybercrime, cyber sabotage and cyberespionage. The threats are real and growing. There is market failure and consequently there is a need for government intervention. This poses new challenges to governments as jurisdiction problems and sovereignty-issues arise, together with the dominance of private actors. The authors argue that a multistakeholder approach in such a networked environment is crucial but not sufficient. The concepts of Lessig and Thaler/Sunstein are used to sketch new and broader potential policy strategies.


Drs. Michel van Leeuwen

Drs. Nelly Ghaoui
Artikel

Detectie moet centraal worden geregeld

Een interview met Ronald Prins

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Artikel

Informatieveiligheid: van Bentham naar Habermas

Een column van Digicommissaris Bas Eenhoorn

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Drs. Bas Eenhoorn

Drs. Bas Eenhoorn
Artikel

Een gezamenlijke rekening?

Over digitale innovatie en samenwerking in een institutional void

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden collaboration, digital security, institutional void, collaborative governance, financial cyber fraud
Auteurs Dr. ing. Bram Klievink, Rolf van Wegberg MSc. en Prof. dr. Michel van Eeten
Samenvatting

    The speed and disruptive character of digital innovations affect social structures and practices faster than institutions can keep up with them. This results in an ‘institutional void’, i.e. a gap between the rules and institutions and their ability and the effectiveness of their measures. It also affects the institutional stability that is the basis for the paradigm of collaboration-based types of governance. In this paper, we explore how parties are able to set up collaboration for digital security, which is inherently a topic that transcends organisational boundaries. Yet digital innovations constantly enable new challengers that might not share the same incentives for collaboration. Life in an institutional void is convenient for them and enables new business models. Hence, a key question is whether (institutionalised) collaboration is a sustainable model for addressing shared problems like digital security. We explore this question in the domain of financial cyber fraud. The new (regulatory) space currently being created for innovators suggests that the answer is ‘no’. It is too early to say how this will play out specifically and we argue for further research into the antecedents for collaboration in institutional voids.


Dr. ing. Bram Klievink

Rolf van Wegberg MSc.

Prof. dr. Michel van Eeten
Artikel

Wie niet vraagt, die niet wint

Een literatuurverkenning naar de determinanten van vraagverlegenheid voor vrijwillige inzet

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden helping behavior, informal help, non-take-up, local government, bureaucratic factors
Auteurs Mark Reijnders MSc MA, Dr. Jelmer Schalk en Prof. dr. Trui Steen
Samenvatting

    A major issue confronting Dutch municipalities is that informal help is not being accepted. This concerns potential clients who avoid or are reluctant to ask for support that can be provided by friends, family, neighbours or volunteers. This phenomenon of non-acceptance is still underexplored and our theoretical understanding is fragmented at best. We explore various explanations for why people avoid seeking help, drawn from various and – until now – largely separate bodies of literature. From an extensive literature review across the disciplines of psychology, sociology and public administration, we distil four possible causes for refusing to accept help. We conclude with a discussion of the practical implications and possible future research avenues.


Mark Reijnders MSc MA

Dr. Jelmer Schalk

Prof. dr. Trui Steen
Toont 1 - 20 van 1328 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 49 50
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.