Benm_omslag_original_large
Rss

Beleid en Maatschappij

Over dit tijdschrift  
Aflevering 3, 2014 Alle samenvattingen uitklappen
Redactioneel

Van de redactie

Auteurs Ewald Engelen
Auteursinformatie

Ewald Engelen
Ewald Engelen is voorzitter van de redactie van Beleid en Maatschappij
Artikel

Vertrouwen in toezichtbeleid

Trefwoorden Trust, regulatory policy, accountability, control, supervision regime
Auteurs Lydia Paauw-Fikkert MSc, Dr. ir. Frédérique Six en Prof. dr. Paul Robben
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Regulatory supervision and inspection have become key features of public governance, some authors even talk about the ‘audit society’ or the age of ‘regulatory capitalism’. Despite international research showing the importance of trust in supervisory relations, there is still a fierce debate about the role of trust in Dutch supervisory relations. Several inspectorates have incorporated trust as a central theme in their supervisory policy. This article describes the role of trust within the policy of the Dutch Healthcare Inspectorate (IGZ). This research addresses four themes in dealing with the concept of trust in supervisory relations: from transparency to accountability, from output performance to performance and risk management, from trust or control to trust and control, and, finally, a special regime for reliable inspectees. The empirical analysis in this paper contributes to the knowledge about the role of trust in supervision (policy) and to the debate about the role of trust in regulatory supervision policy.


Lydia Paauw-Fikkert MSc
Lydia Paauw-Fikkert MSc is senior adviseur bij de Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg.

Dr. ir. Frédérique Six
Dr. ir. Frédérique Six MBA is universitair docent aan de VU Amsterdam.

Prof. dr. Paul Robben
Prof. dr. Paul Robben is adviseur bij de Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg en bij iBMG-Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Artikel

Professionals onder druk of professionele tegendruk? Gebalanceerde motivatie voor de publieke zaak in professionele publieke dienstverlening

Trefwoorden Professionals, public services, motivation, public values
Auteurs Nina Mari van Loon MSc en Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    There are many practical and academic concerns about public professionals and the pressures and burdens they experience. Professional autonomies and skills are reduced, it is argued, as a result of businesslike new public management, in order to control service results. The solution is clear: organizational logics must be weakened, professional autonomies must be enlarged and professional ways of working must be ‘rescued’. In this paper we re-interpret this presumed problem by analyzing: the interaction between organizational and professional logics, by relating these to a broader institutional logic and by tracing the contribution of individual professional motivations. Professionals, it is shown, can be motivated by broader ambitions to serve society. Such public service motivation consists of three types of motives: rational/instrumental, affective and normative. Our results show that employees in different public professional services show different patterns of motives, which we mainly explain by relating their motivations to the nature of the services they render – whether they render people-changing or people-processing services. These institutional dimensions imply that professional work can be managed, not so much by businesslike ‘market logic’ but by strengthening the meaning of the work professionals do. Professional pressures against organizations do not have to be suppressed – they can be productively used.


Nina Mari van Loon MSc
Nina van Loon MSc is als promovenda verbonden aan het departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO) van de Universiteit Utrecht.

Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf is als hoogleraar publiek management verbonden aan het departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO) van de Universiteit Utrecht.

    This paper attempts a normative assessment of the input and output-oriented legitimacy of the present euro-rescuing regime on the basis of policy analyses examining the causes of present crises, the available policy options, and the impact of the policies actually chosen. Concluding that the regime lacks input-oriented legitimacy and that its claim to output-oriented legitimacy is ambivalent at best, the paper explores potential – majoritarian or unilateral – exits from the present institutional constellation that is characterized by the synthesis of a non-democratic expertocracy and an extremely asymmetric intergovernmental bargaining system.


Prof. dr. Fritz W. Scharpf
Prof. dr. Fritz W. Scharpf is emeritus director van het Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies.
Discussie

Omgaan met een sub-optimale unie

de inzichten en frustraties van Fritz Scharpf

Auteurs Prof. Dr. Ben Crum
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Reflection and Debate initiates academically inspired discussions on issues that are on the current policy agenda.


Prof. Dr. Ben Crum
Prof. dr. Ben Crum is hoogleraar politicologie bij de afdeling Bestuurswetenschap en Politicologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam en codirecteur van het Amsterdam Centre for Contemporary European Studies (ACCESS EUROPE).

    Reflection and Debate initiates academically inspired discussions on issues that are on the current policy agenda.


Prof. dr. Tannelie Blom
Prof. dr. Tannelie Blom is hoogleraar European Studies aan de Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences van de Universiteit Maastricht

    In this feature authors review recently published books on subjects of interest to readers of Beleid en Maatschappij.


Dr. Wouter Mensink
Dr. Wouter Mensink is onderzoeker bij het Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau (SCP).

    In a column a journal editor or an author expresses his or her opinion on a particular subject.


Prof. dr. Ido de Haan
Prof. dr. Ido de Haan is hoogleraar politieke geschiedenis aan de Universiteit Utrecht.