Within the space of only five days, the European community of local and regional government researchers was forced to say farewell to two of its most prominent members: Professor Andreas Ladner († 07-02-2023) and Professor Larry Rose († 12-02-2023). Both Andreas and Larry, who worked closely together and became good friends during the ‘Size and Local Democracy’ project, had successful academic careers based on excellent research and impressive publication lists. We had the privilege of working with Andreas and Larry for many years. The passing of Andreas and Larry not only marks the final farewell to two eminent researchers with whom it has always been a pleasure to work. Much more than that we have lost two good friends. We are left with sadness and in mourning.

In the Paris Agreement of 2015, a reduction of 49% CO2 emissions compared to 1990 was agreed. To implement this, the Netherlands has concluded a Climate Agreement, part of which will include the drawing up of Regional Energy Strategies (RES). As a ‘RES region’, provinces, municipalities and water authorities must work together to make broadly supported regional choices for the sustainable generation of electricity. In this study we examine the extent to which the RES in Groningen, Fryslân and Drenthe are democratically legitimized. A broad understanding of democracy is central to this: on the basis of a scorecard with a large number of criteria, we sketch a picture of the ‘democratic content’ of the decision-making on the RES. We look at representative democracy, stakeholder participation and citizen involvement. For each category, we look at input, throughput and output legitimacy. The research shows that there is still a lot to be gained in all these areas. Legitimacy through represen­tative democracy is on the thin side. Furthermore, although stakeholders can participate in the discussion, it is often unclear how their input will affect the plans. Citizens hardly participate at the regional level. Decision-making regarding RES 2.0 will have to be strengthened in all these areas.

In the previous essay in this series, I discussed the importance of the legal approach for (local) administrative sciences in the Netherlands since the appearance of the man who is considered the founder of Public Administration in the Netherlands: Gerrit van Poelje. More specifically, I addressed the question of the relationship between Public Administration and law during more than a hundred years of (local) administrative sciences. This essay answers the same question for the relationship between Public Administration and economics. The history of the relationship between Public Administration and economics begins with the business analysts Johannes Volmer and Jan Goudriaan. I do this on the basis of twelve main characters and twelve other key persons. The relationship between the main characters and the other key persons is always that of a teacher (usually as a PhD supervisor) and a student (usually as a PhD candidate). In this essay, doctoral genealogy is therefore again an important tool for discovering connections in the history of (local) administrative sciences. I divide the main characters and other key persons into four generations. The journey through time takes us to various universities and various study programmes in the Netherlands: Delft, Rotterdam, Amsterdam (University of Amsterdam and Free University), Utrecht, Tilburg, Leiden, Twente, Leiden, Groningen, Nijmegen and Maastricht. In this journey we also encounter various specific approaches within economic science. Finally, I will discuss the place of economics within (local) administrative sciences. One aspect of this is the discussion, in line with Jan Tinbergen’s work; he was awarded the first Nobel Prize in economics, about the malleability of society.

An ongoing study conducted by the Dutch Social and Cultural Planning Agency (SCP) shows that structural social inequalities did not changed radically in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2020. Although economic conditions were mostly favourable during that period, nevertheless, the SCP also sees major contrasts in that period between groups with many and few resources (work, income, education, social networks, cultural capital and health). There are vulnerable citizens who are being left behind, partly because arrears are accumulating in all kinds of areas. However, the developments of the last few years have only increased poverty and social inequality. What can and should Dutch municipalities do about the phenomena of poverty and social inequality? A few reflections in this essay may help. To better understand the situation in municipalities in this respect Weber’s methodological tool of Idealtypen is used. Municipalities are the specific battleground of poverty and social inequality. We experience that a dichotomy in society is actually a ‘penetrating multotomy’. A breakthrough (or breakthrough method) is absolutely necessary, where laws alone are not sufficient. The authorities involved at the municipal level speak of ‘mopping with the tap open’ and mayors are launching a ‘cri du coeur’. Is it ‘dropping out’ or ‘dropping in’? Is what municipalities are doing to combat poverty and reduce social inequality enough? Whatever they do, it would be good if their policies did not fall into some notorious pitfalls.