Zoekresultaat: 672 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij x

Ringo Ossewaarde
Ringo Ossewaarde is universitair docent sociologie aan de faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. M.R.R. Ossewaarde Universiteit Twente Faculteit Management en Bestuur Vakgroep Maatschappelijke Risico's en Veiligheid Postbus 217 7500 AE Enschede
Artikel

De overheid en duurzaam beleggen

Een vergelijkende analyse tussen Nederland en België

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2008
Auteurs Tim Benijts en Marleen Brans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article examines the differences and similarities in public policy of the Dutch and Belgian government in the policy field of socially responsible investing (SRI). In particular the authors discuss both the content and the consequences of the Dutch arrangement 'Groen beleggen' and the Belgian 'Kringloopfonds'. Our empirical evidence states that, although both public policies are very similar (a tax incentive for investors investing financial means in socially responsible funds), they had a different influence on the socially responsible investment market. The Dutch arrangement 'Groen beleggen' lead to more assets under management, more green private funds, more financed projects and a bigger influence on the market of socially responsible investment products. This is mainly caused by the nature of the funding: the choice for private funds in the Netherlands, instead of a public fund like in Belgium.


Tim Benijts
Tim Benijts is als doctor-assistent verbonden aan het Departement Handelswetenschappen van de Lessius Hogeschool Antwerpen en als geaffilieerd onderzoeker aan het Instituut voor de Overheid van de Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Correspondentiegegevens: T. Benijts Lessius Hogeschool Antwerpen Departement Handelswetenschappen Korte Nieuwstraat 33 2000 Antwerpen tim.benijts@lessius.eu

Marleen Brans
Marleen Brans is als hoofddocent verbonden aan het Instituut voor de Overheid van de Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. Correspondentiegegevens: M. Brans Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen Instituut voor de Overheid Parkstraat 45 3000 Leuven marleen.brans@soc.kuleuven.be

Ido de Haan
Ido de Haan is hoogleraar politieke geschiedenis aan de Universiteit Utrecht. Correspondentiegegevens: Prof. dr. I. de Haan Universiteit Utrecht Departement Geschiedenis en Kunstgeschiedenis Drift 10 3512 BS Utrecht Ido.dehaan@let.uu.nl

Willem Schinkel
Willem Schinkel is universitair docent theoretische sociologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. W. Schinkel Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen Vakgroep Sociologie Postbus 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam Schinkel@fsw.eur.nl
Artikel

Etatisme in de polder?

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2008
Auteurs Berend Snijders en Femke van Esch
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Decision-making in the Netherlands is generally characterised as (neo) corporatist. Whether stakeholders enjoy a similar level of access to, and influence on the formulation of the national position, which the Dutch government advocates in Brussels, remains however unclear. This article aims at providing a first tentative answer to this question by studying the formulation of the Dutch position on EU resolution 882/2004 concerning the official controls on compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare.

    In-depth analysis of this case reveals that the development process of the Dutch stance on 882/2004 was largely devoid of stakeholder-input. As such, this process may be characterised as essentially etatist rather than corporatist. Moreover, it was established – as expected – that specialised lobby groups – those that could offer additional information and expertise to the dossier team responsible for 882/2004 – were able to exert more influence than general advocacy groups. Finally, the hypothesis that openness leads to more stakeholder-influence was not confirmed in this case. To the contrary, only during private bilateral discussion did a selection of business organizations manage to convince the dossier team of the benefits of limited border controls.


Berend Snijders
Berend Snijders is promovendus aan de Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO) van de Universiteit Utrecht. Correspondentiegegevens: Drs. Berend Snijders Universiteit Utrecht Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap Bijlhouwerstraat 6 3511 ZC Utrecht B.J.B.Snijders@uu.nl

Femke van Esch
Femke van Esch is als universitair docent verbonden aan de Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO) van de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

De beleidswetenschap van J.A.A. van Doorn (1925-2008)

Een grootse maar ongemakkelijke erfenis

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2008
Auteurs Jos de Beus
Auteursinformatie

Jos de Beus
Jos de Beus is hoogleraar politicologie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: Prof. dr. J.W. de Beus Universiteit van Amsterdam Afdeling Politicologie OZ Achterburgwal 237 1012 DL Amsterdam j.w.debeus@uva.nl

    Over the last decades, the number of European Union member states has significantly increased, resulting into a reduction of the relative formal power of the Dutch government. Improving Dutch influence in Brussels is therefore an important topic on the agenda of public administration scholars and advisory boards. Using experts at the various stages of the EU policymaking process is one option to increase the influence in the EU. This article evaluates the effectiveness of this strategy concerning one of the most complex and most controversial public policy issues in the history of the European Union: the revision of the EU's chemical policy (REACH). The article demonstrates that the 'expert strategy' has been successful in this case. However, the effectiveness of this strategy comes under pressure if the trend towards core departments will continue.


Markus Haverland
Markus Haverland is als universitair hoofddocent verbonden aan de afdeling Bestuurskunde van de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. Markus Haverland Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen Afdeling Bestuurskunde Postbus 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam haverland@fsw.eur.nl
Artikel

Besturen in commissie

Verklaring van een fenomeen

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2008
Auteurs Martin Schulz, Mark van Twist en Henk Geveke
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Governing the Netherlands seems to have become a form of governing by commission. Between 1995 and 2005 Dutch central government installed at least 364 commissions that we were able to identify. Cuts in this phenomenon are often called for by its opponents since commissions are often believed to be a strategic instrument for policymaker to cut democratic corners or slow down policy making processes. Dutch Parliament by motion has even asked government to keep from forming (so many) commissions. Still trends have not changed and new commissions are being formed almost every other week. Apparently there are compelling reasons for forming commissions. In this article we discuss how societal and public context lead to the installation of commissions. Furthermore we argue that installation of a commission can be clearly understood from the motives officials have with its formation. Hiring expertise (60%), independence of members (30%) and creating legitimacy (20%) are important factors regarding these motivations. Timing of commissions within election cycles is strategic: installation shortly after the new administration is effective, as is reporting back before the next elections. As long as politics remains politics calling for less commissions has mostly symbolic value.


Martin Schulz
Martin Schulz werkt aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg aan een proefschrift over commissies en is senior adviseur bij Berenschot Procesmanagement. Correspondentiegegevens: Drs. J.M. Schulz Universiteit van Tilburg Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur Postbus 90153 5000 LE Tilburg 013-4662128 j.m.schulz@uvt.nl

Mark van Twist
Mark van Twist is bijzonder hoogleraar Publiek-private samenwerking aan de Faculteit Managementwetenschappen van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, decaan van de NSOB en directeur bij Berenschot Procesmanagement. Correspondentiegegevens: Prof. dr. M.J.W. van Twist Nederlandse School voor het Openbaar Bestuur Lange Voorhout 17 2514 EB Den Haag 070-3024910 twist@nsob.nl

Henk Geveke
Henk Geveke is directeur Nationale Veiligheid bij het ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken. Correspondentiegegevens: Drs. H.G. Geveke Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties Postbus 20011 2500 EA Den Haag 070 426 8365 henk.geveke@minbzk.nl
Boekbespreking

Verstand, zweet en tranen

Een essay over meritocratie, onderwijs en ongelijkheid

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2008
Auteurs Sjoerd Karsten
Auteursinformatie

Sjoerd Karsten
Sjoerd Karsten is bijzonder hoogleraar Beleid en organisatie van het beroepsonderwijs, volwasseneneducatie en levenslang leren aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: Prof. dr. Sjoerd Karsten Universiteit van Amsterdam Afdeling Pedagogiek en Onderwijskunde Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130 1018 VZ Amsterdam S.Karsten@uva.nl
Artikel

Discoursen en waterveiligheid

Waarom leiden publiekscampagnes niet tot waterbewustzijn en waterbewust gedrag?

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2008
Auteurs Trudes Heems en Baukje Kothuis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Uncertainties about climate change are a major incentive for the Dutch government to communicate frequently about risks related to water safety. In September 2008, the 'New Delta Committee' even presented several coping strategies to safeguard the low-lying Delta of The Netherlands far into the next century. The government assumes that increased high water risk awareness and behaviour in society, based on a risk-based approach, is an important factor for sustainable future living with water and thus made this into the spearhead of policy. However, the main part of Dutch society still lives in a flush of victory. The Delta Works symbolize the victory over the water; The Netherlands is safe. The government doesn't succeed satisfactorily to realize high water risk awareness and behaviour in its society, notwithstanding years of campaigning. Cultural sociologists Heems and Kothuis demonstrate by means of a discourse analysis of public campaigns that government communication on high water safety is not only entangled but also creates confusion. Reason of the entanglement in communication is a breakthrough of the taboo on publicly speaking of a flood disaster as a realistic scenario. The confusion obstructs the Dutch government to bridge the gap in perception between itself and society and to achieve its policy objectives.


Trudes Heems
Trudes Heems is werkzaam als wetenschappelijk onderzoeker bij WATERWORKS Scientific Research Insititute in Amsterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: WATERWORKS Scientific Research Institute Buitenruspad 11hs 1097 MX Amsterdam waterworks@planet.nl

Baukje Kothuis
Baukje Kothuis is werkzaam als wetenschappelijk onderzoeker bij WATERWORKS Scientific Research Insititute in Amsterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: WATERWORKS Scientific Research Institute Buitenruspad 11hs 1097 MX Amsterdam waterworks@planet.nl
Artikel

De politieke aandachtscyclus voor openbaar bestuur en democratie

Een inhoudsanalyse van troonredes van 1945 tot 2007

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2008
Auteurs Gerard Breeman, Arco Timmermans, David Lowery e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article analyzes the attention to democratic performance and the functioning of public administration by governments in the Netherlands. The views of national governments on these matters have not been mapped systematically. Through a content analysis of all annual Dutch Queen's speeches between 1945 and 2007, which is part of our broader research on the national politics of attention, we analyze the pattern of attention for democracy and public administration. The theoretical perspective used is the model of policy generations. Our findings show that governmental attention for the functioning of public administration emerged in the 1960s and since then went up and down. The time intervals in which agenda changes occurred often were longer than the duration of individual governments, although some governments contributed strongly to a change in attention and tone. Attention not only showed rise and decline, also the emphasis on efficiency, long term planning, and democratization shifted considerably from one period to the next. This empirical pattern matches for the most part the theory of policy generations, which predicts a fixed sequence in policy emphasis. In addition to general cultural driving forces central to this theoretical model, we conclude that political and institutional conditions contribute to a better understanding of the pattern of political attention.


Gerard Breeman
Gerard Breeman is als docent Bestuurskunde verbonden aan de Wageningen Universiteit.

Arco Timmermans
Arco Timmermans is docent aan de Universiteit Leiden. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. Arco Timmermans Universiteit Leiden Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen Departement Bestuurskunde Wassenaarseweg 52 Postbus 9555 2300 RB Leiden atimmermans@fsw.leidenuniv.nl

David Lowery
David Lowery is hoogleraar aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Caelesta Poppelaars
Caelesta Poppelaars is postdoctoraal onderzoeker aan de Universiteit Antwerpen.

Sandra Resodihardjo
Sandra Resodihardjo is docent aan de Universiteit Leiden.

    This article poses the question whether the Dutch system of organized interest representation faces a transformation from neo-corporatist mediation to lobbyism similar to Scandinavian countries. Its main claim is that this has so far not been the case, because two essential features of neo-corporatist interest mediation have remained prominent in the Netherlands. First, policies regarding labour conditions continue to be determined within a network of employers' organisations, trade unions, and the government that is essentially closed to outsiders. Second, the system continues to be hierarchical in nature: the government, often below the surface, demonstrates a considerable capacity to steer the participants in its preferred direction. Such a closed network still allows for lobbying the parliament by both network members and outsiders. Lobbying may thus be complementary to closed neo-corporatist networks rather than a substitute. The article offers a research agenda exploring the latter suggestion.


Agnes Akkerman
Agnes Akkerman is als universitair docent verbonden aan de Faculteit der Management Wetenschappen van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Recente publicaties van haar hand zijn 'Identifying Latent Conflict in Collective Bargaining', Rationality and Society 15(1): 15-43; 'A theory of soft policy implementation in multilevel systems with an application to Dutch social partnership', Acta Politica 39(1): 31-58. Adres: Thomas van Aquinostraat 5, Postbus 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen,
Artikel

'Lobbyisme' in de Scandinavische landen

Een overzicht aan de hand van trends in Denemarken en Noorwegen

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs René Torenvlied
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper provides an overview of the results of Scandinavian research into the lobbying activities of interest organisations. The paper is based on the reports of Danish and Norwegian scholars. These studies suppose that an association exists between the downfall of corporatist decision-making and policy implementation (among others observed in the decreasing number of boards, councils, and commissions), the increasing influence of parliament, and the increase in lobbying by interest organisations. The most important empirical evidence for this association is presented and discussed.


René Torenvlied
René Torenvlied is als universitair hoofddocent verbonden aan de capaciteitsgroep Sociologie van de Universiteit Utrecht en het Interuniversitair Centrum voor Sociaal-wetenschappelijke theorievorming en methodenontwikkeling aldaar. Enkele recente publicaties zijn: 'When will they ever make up their minds? The social structure of unstable decision-making.' Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 28(3): 171-196 en 'Polarization and Policy Conflict.' Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming. Adres: Heidelberglaan 2, 3884 CS Utrecht.

    This paper offers an introduction to the research theme of 'lobbyism'. Recent Scandinavian research shows that lobbyism is a modern mirror view of corporatism, which develops through changes in the structure of decision-making and implementation by interest groups and government. Three questions are put forward: (a) what is the empirical evidence for the phenomenon of lobbyism? (b) what potential contribution could the concept of lobbyism make to a better understanding of corporatism in the Netherlands? (c) what are, according to the theory of collective decision-making, the most important differences between influence strategies in corporatist negotiation structures, and those in lobby networks?


René Torenvlied
René Torenvlied is als universitair hoofddocent verbonden aan de capaciteitsgroep Sociologie van de Universiteit Utrecht en het Interuniversitair Centrum voor Sociaal-wetenschappelijke theorievorming en methodenontwikkeling aldaar. Enkele recente publicaties zijn: 'When will they ever make up their minds? The social structure of unstable decision-making.' Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 28(3): 171-196 en 'Polarization and Policy Conflict.' Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming. Adres: Heidelberglaan 2, 3884 CS Utrecht.
Artikel

Afsluiting

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs René Torenvlied
Samenvatting

    This paper offers an introduction to the research theme of 'lobbyism'. Recent Scandinavian research shows that lobbyism is a modern mirror view of corporatism, which develops through changes in the structure of decision-making and implementation by interest groups and government. Three questions are put forward: (a) what is the empirical evidence for the phenomenon of lobbyism? (b) what potential contribution could the concept of lobbyism make to a better understanding of corporatism in the Netherlands? (c) what are, according to the theory of collective decision-making, the most important differences between influence strategies in corporatist negotiation structures, and those in lobby networks?


René Torenvlied

    This article distinguished between three fundamental processes of collective decision-making as collective production in social systems: (1) persuasion; (2) exchange and (3) coercion. The conditions under which these processes are dominant are described, as well as the type of network that is central to each of the processes. Corporatism and lobbyism appear to be two polarities of collective decision-making. In corporatism interest groups are directly involved in final decision making through formal and informal institutions whereas in lobbyism final decision making is delegated to independent persons. In corporatist decision-making, mutual interests dominate conflicting interests. Thus, a failure of reaching consensus becomes unattractive and consensus is guaranteed through the formal norm of majority decision-making and the informal norm of unanimity. When mutual interests dominate over conflicting interests, lobbyism is reflected by the interactions between lobby activists and civil servants and politicians who share the same position. Ad hoc lobbyism will arise when conflicts of interests dominate and a non-cooperative game exists in which (temporal) coalitions must be built.


Frans N. Stokman
Frans Stokman is als hoogleraar verbonden aan de capaciteitsgroep Sociologie van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en het Interuniversitair Centrum voor Sociaal-wetenschappelijke theorievorming en Methodenontwikkeling (ICS). Daarnaast is hij directeur van DECIDE B.V. Recente publicaties van zijn hand zijn: co-editor van The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (met Robert Thomson, Christopher Achen en Thomas König, te verschijnen in 2006), co-editor van Winners and Losers in the European Union, Special issue van European Union Politics Vol 5(1) (2004) en 'Frame Dependent Modeling of Influence Processes', in: Andreas Diekmann en Thomas Voss (Red.), Rational-Choice-Theorie in den Sozialwissenschaften. Anwendungen und Probleme. Festschrift für Rolf Ziegler, München: Oldenbourg (pp.113-127). Adres: Grote Rozenstraat 31, 9712 TG Groningen.
Artikel

In een groen, groen polderland

De mix tussen corporatisme en lobbyisme in het Nederlandse milieu-beleid

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs Dave Huitema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article discusses the degree to which Dutch environmental policy exhibits a shift from corporatism to lobbyism. Based on a general analysis of environmental policy making in the Netherlands and two specific cases of environmental decision making, the author draws the conclusion that such a shift has not happened. At the level of policymaking it is rather the opposite: in the 1980s the Ministry of the Environment introduced a certain level of corporatism. This was possible because of a clear framework of environmental policy goals shaped by the National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM), because the environmental movement began to see the Ministry as an ally and because business interests preferred self-regulation (one element of corporatism) to government regulations. In two concrete case of environmental decision-making that are discussed here, environmental goals are being discussed once more. During such discussion, it appears that Dutch ministries have close connection to 'their' target groups. For the coming years, environmental policy will 'Europeanize' further and Dutch economic interest groups, although being remarkably late in responding to this shift, will start to influence the Brussels policymaking game instead of the Dutch implementation game.


Dave Huitema
Dave Huitema is als senior-bestuurskundig onderzoeker verbonden aan het Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken (IVM) van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Huitema is docent en modulecoördinator bij de masteropleiding 'Environment and Resource Management' (ERM) aan de VU en leidt het onderzoekscluster 'Water Governance and Economics' van het IVM. Recente publicaties zijn: Calculating the Political: Election Manifestoes as a Meeting Point for Experts and Politicians. The case of the RIVM (Amsterdam: Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken) en Hazardous Decisions: Hazardous Waste Facility Siting in the UK, Netherlands and Canada: Institutions and Discourses (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers). Adres: Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, e-mail: dave.huitema@ivm.vu.nl
Toont 641 - 660 van 672 gevonden teksten
1 2 26 27 28 29 30 31 33
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.