Een gedegen beleidsvoorbereiding kan beleidsfalen voorkomen. Hoewel deze thematiek al jaren aandacht krijgt in de politiek, lukt het de rijksoverheid nog niet hieraan structureel succesvol invulling te geven. In het licht van de recente Tweede Kamer verkiezingen is er hernieuwde aandacht voor samenspraak bij beleid en beleidsexperimenten om te komen tot beter beleid. Het rendement daarvan is naar verwachting beperkt. Ten eerste omdat samenspraak vaak zodanig ingeperkt is, dat de invloed van kennis voor beleid beperkt blijft. Ten tweede omdat wetenschappelijke kennis prevaleert boven de voor beleidseffectiviteit noodzakelijke tacit knowledge. De rijksoverheid kan meer rendement halen uit investeringen in een betere beleidsvoorbereiding, door de structurele afweging tot de inzet van samenspraak en beleidsexperimenten bij nieuw of gewijzigd beleid; verantwoording van deze afweging, alsmede onafhankelijke toetsing van de te verwachten beleidseffectiviteit. Investeringen in handreikingen zijn weinig zinvol. De gemeente Rotterdam geeft een goed voorbeeld.

E-democracy incorporates digital tools, the internet and social media to enhance democracy. There are many of these tools available to improve governmental responsiveness, transparency, and accountability, but also to support the inclusiveness, representativeness and influence of citizens’ participation. Examples are online petitions, apps for neighborhood watches, wikiplanning and social media monitoring. Web 3.0, which is more interactive and less location specific, enables governments to take a more personalized approach. It also allows for participation across administrative and geographical boundaries. In this symposium two contributions address the question of the influence of e-democracy on the democratization of governmental decision-making, information and service delivery, and of citizens’ participation.

While existing research shows that politicians fulfil many of their election promises, voters remain very sceptical about pledge fulfilment. A possible explanation is that the media report critical about election pledges. That is why, in this article, the occurrence of media logic is analysed in the coverage of election promise fulfilment in two countries: the Netherlands and the United States. The results indicate that media logic is indeed ubiquitous in the coverage of election promises, but also that there is a difference in media coverage during governing periods and campaign periods. In addition, the results show that, in contrast to what the existing literature suggests, coverage on election promises is more negative in the Netherlands than in the United States. The media evaluate Dutch politicians’ pledge fulfilment more critically. This result offers the valuable insight that citizens and the media may take a negative view of the traditional way of making policies through compromise in consensus democracies because it forces politicians and governments to break their election promises. This, in turn, can fuel political cynicism.

E-democracy incorporates digital tools, the internet and social media to enhance democracy. There are many of these tools available to improve governmental responsiveness, transparency, and accountability, but also to support the inclusiveness, representativeness and influence of citizens’ participation. Examples are online petitions, apps for neighborhood watches, wikiplanning and social media monitoring. Web 3.0, which is more interactive and less location specific, enables governments to take a more personalized approach. It also allows for participation across administrative and geographical boundaries. In this symposium two contributions address the question of the influence of e-democracy on the democratization of governmental decision-making, information and service delivery, and of citizens’ participation.

Social media monitoring is a topical and relevant phenomenon. It enables civil servants and politicians to gauge the sentiments voiced on social media, on the basis of which they are in a better position to take into account the wishes and needs of citizens. Social media monitoring is primarily used for rational and strategic purposes. In terms of democratic legitimacy, it may enhance the quality of the processes on the output side of the political system, i.e. authorities can be more responsive and can fine tune public policies. There also threats for the relation between citizens and government. When citizens communicate on networks they perceive as private, social media monitoring can be seen as an intrusion into their private sphere. This not only concerns individual privacy but also an interpersonal private sphere in terms of the right that people have to define a domain within which they can exchange experiences with peers. Transparency and accountability are therefore important conditions for the application of this instrument.

How do you profile a diverse region? Based on what story, and under what name? The Southern Randstad, a conglomeration of large cities, medium-sized cities and villages in the Netherlands, wishes to make a name for itself worldwide as a metropolitan and innovative region. In this article, we will discuss how such a profiling strategy is realized. We will use insights from public administration, geography and those obtained from forty interviews with regional stakeholders. Selecting a new regional profile is a complex matter and sometimes even inappropriate. From the case study, it will be evident that in a pluralistic region collective profiling is only promising if it does not function as a replacement but as an enhancement. Furthermore, it will become clear that an area reference that refers to the two largest cities (Rotterdam and The Hague) in the region name is the most preferable. Finally, municipalities have to ‘play with scales’,i.e. they will have to align their profiling to suit the scale level at which they are presenting themselves.

Various Dutch municipalities hire municipal law enforcement officers from private security companies. This process of outsourcing sometimes meets political resistance, because safety and security are central tasks of government that should not be carried out by commercial parties. At the same time, little is known about the actual pros and cons of private law enforcement officers in relation to their public colleagues. From the literature we expect differences in cost, flexibility, local knowledge, professional autonomy, job satisfaction and cooperation with the police. Our empirical research shows that these differences are smaller than initially assumed. Private law enforcement officers work longer hours under more or less the same working conditions (salary) as public law enforcement officers. Their turnover rate is also higher compared to public law enforcement officers, because of their lower career expectations. Overhead costs, including the costs of outsourcing processes, remain unknown.

Societal challenges are increasingly requiring cooperation and solutions on a regional scale. The recently formed metropolitan regions around Amsterdam, Rotterdam-The Hague and Eindhoven are examples. This essay serves as the introduction to a symposium on regionalization and the substantive and institutional questions that regionalization raises. It deals with the growing differences between regions and the call for a differentiated response. It also discusses the drivers for regional cooperation and the constraints of focusing on administrative structures. The essay exposes a number of tensions regarding the external profiling of regions, the benefits of regional cooperation, and the pursuit of broad societal goals. At the same time, it puts forward suggestions for follow-up research.

De bundel Kennis voor beleid (2015), onder redactie van Peter van Hoesel, Jos Mevissen en Bart Dekker, is een boek voor iedereen die werkzaam is op het snijvlak van onderzoek en beleid. De uitgave is vooral opgezet als leerboek of overzichtswerk voor studenten, beleidsonderzoekers en beleidsmedewerkers die in hun dagelijkse praktijk te maken hebben met beleidsonderzoek.

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.

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.

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.