Zoekresultaat: 132 artikelen

x
Artikel

Kroniek: bespreking van ‘Vertrouwen in burgers’, rapport 88 van de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden citizen participation, civil society, governance arrangements
Auteurs Hans de Bruijn
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The report Confidence in Citizens by the Dutch Scientific Council for Government Policy dominantly supports increased room for citizen participation. Based on many examples, the report shows how society benefits from the many citizens’ initiatives and how government interference can hamper or even obstruct these initiatives, which do not fit the logic of civil servants. The report gives four, rather general suggestions of how policy makers could respond to these citizens’ initiatives. The generic character of these recommendations can be ascribed to a weak problem analysis and a biased understanding of how government actions negatively interfere with citizens’ initiatives. The Council could have asked more critical questions with regards to citizens initiatives and how they should respond to the logic of government.


Hans de Bruijn
Prof. mr. dr. J.A. de Bruijn is hoogleraar bestuurskunde aan de TU Delft.
Artikel

Ontbrekende alternatieven en gevestigde belangen

Een studie naar de posities van overheden in hervormingsdebatten tijdens de financiële crisis

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2012
Auteurs Daniel Mügge PhD en Bart Stellinga MA MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The credit crisis that began in the summer of 2007 has fundamentally challenged much financial regulation and the political institutions that produced it. Measured against the criticisms that have been brought forth against previous financial governance, the extent of governments’ overall reform ambitions has been disappointing. Starting from this observation, this article asks: what explains governments’ reform choices, and thus also their limited ambitions? To explore this question, this article focuses on the positions that four governments central to global financial regulation (the USA, the UK, Germany and France) have taken in advance of the G20 meetings in 2009 across four key issue areas: accounting standards, derivatives trading, credit ratings agencies and banking rules. It evaluates both the overlap between positions across domains and governments as well as the differences between them. Such variation, we argue, provides key clues to the overall drivers behind reforms – as well as their limits. The overall picture that emerges can be summarized as follows: governments have been staunch defenders of their national firms’ competitive interests in regulatory reforms. That has not necessarily meant that they followed industry preferences across the board. It has been the relative impact, compared to foreign competitors, that counted in reform positions, not the absolute impact. These differences of opinion have played out within the context and the limits of the overall debates about thinkable policy alternatives. In spite of fundamental criticisms of pre-crisis regulatory orthodoxy, convincing and coherent alternatives have been forthcoming slowly at best. This has made reform proposals less radical than criticisms, seen on their own, might suggest.


Daniel Mügge PhD
Daniel Mügge is universitair docent politicologie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Correspondentiegegevens: D. Mügge, PhD, afdeling Politicologie, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Oudezijds Achterburgwal 237, 1012 DL Amsterdam, d.k.muegge@uva.nl.

Bart Stellinga MA MSc
Bart Stellinga is medior wetenschappelijk medewerker bij de Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid. Correspondentiegegevens: B. Stellinga, MA MSc, Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid, Lange Vijverberg 4-5, 2500 EA Den Haag, stellinga@wrr.nl.
Artikel

Framing en reframing in het klimaatdebat

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden framing, climate change, values
Auteurs Hans de Bruijn, Ellen van Bueren en Floris Kreiken
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Why is there an on-going debate about climate change? We analyse this question from a framing point of view. We analyse four well-known frames in the climate change debate, and see what kind of reactions and reframing they invoke. The analysis shows that simple frames with an inherent logic, which activates underlying values and which are easy to communicate strongly resonate. It is difficult to counter such a frame. Opponents of the frame are often seduced to counter the frame by using the same wording. In this way, they step into the frame of their opponents and thus confirm the frame. To conclude, the article discusses two possible strategies for reframing: to couple the frame with other frames, and to suggest an alternative frame without stepping into the opposed frame.


Hans de Bruijn
Prof. mr dr J.A. de Bruijn is werkzaam bij de Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management van de TU Delft.

Ellen van Bueren
Dr E.M. van Bueren is werkzaam bij de Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management van de TU Delft.

Floris Kreiken
Mr F.H. Kreiken is werkzaam bij de Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management van de TU Delft.
Artikel

Voor en na Fortuyn. Veranderingen en continuïteiten in het burgeroordeel over het democratisch bestuur in Nederland

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2012
Trefwoorden Fortuyn, democratic governance, legitimacy, support, satisfaction
Auteurs Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks, Dr. Julien van Ostaaijen en Marcel Boogers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    For several years, Dutch and international survey research programmes, such as the European Values Studies, the Eurobarometer, and the Dutch Parliamentary Elections Studies, have registered the judgements of (Dutch) citizens regarding a wide variety of topics. The Legitimacy-monitor Democratic Governance (Hendriks, Van Ostaaijen & Boogers, 2011) assembles those statistics that together present a layered picture of the legitimacy of democratic governance in the eyes of Dutch citizens. For this article, we review those statistics and take the ‘Fortuyn-year 2002’, the year in which Fortuyn shook up Dutch politics, as a demarcation point. Among the many continuities in pre- and post-Fortuyn statistics, we register a number of marked changes in the judgements of citizens regarding democratic governance in the Netherlands. The most salient, we conclude, is the growing thirst for vigorous ‘leadership’, which not only breaks with the trend of several decades (ever weaker preference for strong leadership), but also the logic of Dutch consensus democracy (many hands and not one head).


Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks
Frank Hendriks is hoogleraar bestuurskunde aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur,Tilburg University. Correspondentiegegevens: Prof. dr. F. Hendriks, Tilburg School of Politics and Public Administration, Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, 5037 AB Tiburg. F.Hendriks@uvt.nl.

Dr. Julien van Ostaaijen
Julien van Ostaaijen is als onderzoeker en docent werkzaam aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur, Tilburg University. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. J. van Ostaaijen, Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur, http://rechten.uvt.nl/ostaaijen. J.J.C.vanOstaaijen@uvt.nl.

Marcel Boogers
Marcel Boogers is universitair hoofddocent bestuurskunde aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur, Tilburg University. m.boogers@uvt.nl.

Rob Hoppe
Hoogleraar kennis en beleid Universiteit van Twente, Faculteit Management en Bestuur (MB), Vakgroep Science, Technology and Policy Studies (STePS)

    Urban government is expected to contribute to the solution of major urban problems. At the same time, urban government is riddled with problems itself, often denoted in terms of governing and democratic deficits. In this article, options for governance reform in the urban realm are being explored along five lines, following up on recent research in the Netherlands and abroad. Both more aggregative arrangements (electronic ‘straw polls’, knowledge polls, prediction markets, ‘dot gov’ competitions for ‘best solutions’) and more collaborative arrangements (electronic co-creation, wiki governance, vital coalitions, urban regimes) are being assessed. The conclusions is that there are good arguments for, at least, more experimentation along these lines - not only from a functionalistic, but also from a democratic and social-psychological point of view.


Frank Hendriks
Prof. dr F. Hendriks is hoogleraar Vergelijkende Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Vluchten in bureaucratie

Bureaucratische gehechtheid onder professionals in de jeugdhulpverlening

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden professionalism, youth care, accountability, bureaucracy, marketization
Auteurs Drs. Daniel van Hassel, Prof. dr. Evelien Tonkens en Drs. Marc Hoijtink
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent decades, professionals in the public sector have been faced with increasingly detailed demands concerning accountability and performance. It is often argued that this increased accountability and its bureaucratic pressures limit professionals’ discretionary space and autonomy. However, this critique is hardly based on empirical research on the experiences and perceptions of professionals themselves. In this article we present an investigation into these perceptions and experiences with accountability in one particular brand of the public sector, namely youth care.
    Our research indicates that professionals in youth care are hardly interested in greater autonomy or discretion. They rather want clarity, security and options for learning. Moreover, we found ‘bureaucratic attachment’: attachment to bureaucratic procedures particularly as a reaction to increased fears to be sued when something goes wrong with clients. In the recurrent arguments for reduction of bureaucracy, this other face of bureaucracy is often disregarded.
    Regarding working conditions however, the professionals we interviewed do want more discretion. Especially concerning occupation of beds, as the requirement for permanent occupation is viewed to augment risk. We therefore argue for better backing of professionals in youth, for a more precise battle against unnecessary bureaucracy, and for professionalization in order to handle more discretion.


Drs. Daniel van Hassel
Daniel van Hassel is socioloog en als onderzoeker verbonden aan het Nederlands instituut voor onderzoek van de gezondheidszorg (NIVEL), waar hij zich bezighoudt met het thema beroepen in de gezondheidszorg, d.hassel@nivel.nl.

Prof. dr. Evelien Tonkens
Evelien Tonkens is bijzonder hoogleraar actief burgerschap bij de afdeling Sociologie en Antropologie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en toezichthouder van Meander Medisch Centrum te Amersfoort, e.h.tonkens@uva.nl.

Drs. Marc Hoijtink
Marc Hoijtink is socioloog en onderzoeker aan Kenniscentrum Maatschappij en Recht van de Hogeschool van Amsterdam, waar hij zich bezighoudt met de thema’s sociaal beleid en professionaliseringsvraagstukken, m.a.hoijtink@uva.nl.
Artikel

Overlappende waarden, wederzijdse vooroordelen

Empirisch onderzoek naar de mores van politieagenten en particuliere beveiligers

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2012
Trefwoorden policing, security, public-private values, professional motivation
Auteurs Dr. Zeger van der Wal, Dr. Ronald van Steden en Dr. Karin Lasthuizen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The private security sector is rapidly growing and their operations more and more comprise policing and public order maintenance, tasks which to date have been government’s primary responsibility. Some fear this development because the private sector is characterized by market values as profitability and efficiency instead of public sector values such as lawfulness and impartiality, putting the quality of public safety at risk. In this article the professional values, norms and motivations of police officers and private security employees in the Netherlands are compared on the basis of a standardized survey. The main conclusion is that there are large differences in how both groups perceive each other, however the underlying professional morale is actually more similar than different.


Dr. Zeger van der Wal
Zeger van der Wal is universitair docent bestuurswetenschappen aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, z.vander.wal@vu.nl.

Dr. Ronald van Steden
Ronald van Steden is universitair docent bestuurswetenschappen aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Dr. Karin Lasthuizen
Karin Lasthuizen is universitair hoofddocent bestuurswetenschappen aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Artikel

Deugdelijk bestuur in curaçao

Maatschappelijke barrires voor goed bestuur in het nieuwe land curaçao

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2011
Trefwoorden good governance, Netherlands Antilles, Curaçao, political culture
Auteurs Oberon Nauta
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Before 2010, the Netherlands Antilles were an autonomous country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This structure was often cited as a barrier to effective governance and led to calls for the ablishment of the Netherlands Antilles. This article examines whether this step has led to good governance in the case of the new country of Curaçao. The author comes to the conclusion that political culture has a bigger effect on good governance than institutional arrangements.


Oberon Nauta
Dr O. Nauta is senior onderzoeker en aanvoerder van het team Veiligheid & Justitie bij de DSP groep.

    Dutch housing policy has been reformed dramatically over the last fifteen years. The reforms were preceded by an equally dramatic policy crisis during the 1970s and 1980s. This article attempts to explain the development of both the crisis and the subsequent reforms. An important explanatory variable is the logic of provision, relating to the fact that housing comes in the shape of stock and capital. However, the institutional logic of Dutch housing policy, notably the fact that most social housing providers are traditionally private nonprofits, has also proved of vital significance in determining the outcome of the reform process. Distinguishing the effects of the logic of provision and the institutional logic enables an analysis of how policy feedback, the inheritance from previous policies, may cause both policy crisis and policy reform.


Jan-Kees Helderman
Jan-Kees Helderman is als universitair docent bestuurs- en beleidswetenschappen verbonden aan het Instituut Beleid en Management Gezondheidszorg, Erasmus Medisch Centrum, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam. Hij werkt op dit moment aan de afronding van zijn dissertatie Bringing the market back in? A comparative analysis of the politics and policies of market-oriented reforms in Dutch housing and health care. Adres Jan-Kees Helderman: Instituut Beleid en Management Gezondheidszorg, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, Postbus 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, tel.: 010-4088544, e-mail: helderman@bmg.eur.nl

Taco Brandsen
Taco Brandsen is universitair docent bij de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur, Faculteit Rechten, Universiteit van Tilburg. Hij promoveerde in 2001 aan de Universiteit Twente op een proefschrift over de Nederlandse volkshuisvesting als 'quasie markt' en is de auteur van het in 2004 verschenen boek Quasi-Market Governance: An anatomy of Innovation, uitgegeven bij Lemma bv, Utrecht. Adres: Taco Brandsen, Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur, Faculteit Rechten, Universiteit van Tilburg, Postbus 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, tel.: 013-4662156, e-mail: t.brandsen@uvt.nl
Artikel

Borgen van publieke waarden: Behoorlijk of goed bestuur?

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Legitimate governance, good governance
Auteurs Henk Addink
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this contribution we introduce the principles of proper administration and the principles of good administration as public values and the definitions of these terms including the concept of good governance. Two main developments in relation to these principles are described here. The first line is from unwritten principles (developed by the judiciary) to written principles of proper administration by which there is in addition to the classical legal protection function, the instrumental function of these principles that has become more important. The second line is from the starting point of the principles of good administration - which can be found more in the legislation and the (policy)regulation but in a fragmentary way - to the application. This application is checked by the National Ombudsman, the Court of Audit and - more recent - also the European judiciary are working with these principles. For guaranteeing the public values there is - from the concept of good governance - now a need for integration of these principles of good administration in the Netherlands General Administrative Law Act and in the case law of the Netherlands judiciary.


Henk Addink
Prof. dr G.H. Addink is hoogleraar Bestuursrechtelijke aspecten van Goed Bestuur aan de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Botsende publieke waarden bij publiek-private samenwerking

Dimensies en dilemma's van juridisch-bestuurskundige legitimiteit, in het bijzonder bij openbaar gezag

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public-private partnerships, legitimacy
Auteurs Michiel Heldeweg en Maurits Sanders
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public Private Partnerships (PPP), especially those geared to exercise public legal powers (‘Authoritative PPP’), are suggestive of tensions between private party involvement and public legitimacy. Hence, public legitimacy is analyzed primarily on the basis of work done by David Beetham, and complemented with Public Law legitimacy considerations concerning the exercise of legal powers and law on public organizations. The findings project that there is room to convincingly frame legitimate PPP involving public authority, but that the scope is restricted both in terms of legal constraints and of political sensitivity.As a result of this, truly wicked policy projects, which in theory stand to gain most by PPP, in practice seem to be considered less suited for Authoritative PPP (and probably more for Network PPP).


Michiel Heldeweg
Prof. mr. dr M.A. Heldeweg is hoogleraar Public Governance Law aan de Faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente.

Maurits Sanders
Drs M.Ph.Th. Sanders is hoofddocent Bestuurskunde bij Saxion en promovendus aan de Faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente.
Artikel

Good governance en ontwikkelingsbeleid: Spijkerhard of boterzacht?

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, development aid
Auteurs Geske Dijkstra en Steven Van de Walle
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Good governance takes a central role in development policy. A considerable amount of development aid is used to support anti-corruption initiatives, democratisation, or the improvement of public administration. The number of governance indicators has grown tremendously, and these indicators appear to play an ever more important role in aid allocation. These indicators, however, are not value-free and reflect a certain view of good governance, one that is furthermore changing continuously. In this article, we first use the ever-expanding literature to explore how donors define ‘good governance’, and how it is measured. We subsequently analyse whether good governance really matters for development. Finally, we look at international experiences with good governance promotion, and the value tensions inherent to this process.


Geske Dijkstra
Dr A.G. Dijkstra en dr S. Van de Walle zijn respectievelijk universitair hoofddocent Economie en Bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Steven Van de Walle
Dr A.G. Dijkstra en dr S. Van de Walle zijn respectievelijk universitair hoofddocent Economie en Bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Goed bestuur: Kiezen of delen?

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public values, public management
Auteurs Leo Huberts en Eelco van Hout
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Good governance is a contested concept in public administration theory and practice. This concluding article builds on the presented contributions as well as on additional research. First, we summarize the diversity, leading to a sketch of two basic approaches towards good governance (organizational and value oriented). Additionally questions concerning the normativity, the pluralism of values and the object of good governance (process or policy) are addressed. Second, attention is paid to strategies to cope with values in governance, acknowledging the tensions between those values. Basic strategies aim at ‘choosing’ between values, ‘accommodating’ (in time, project, context) and ‘connecting’ values (through institutions or hybridization).


Leo Huberts
Prof. dr L.W.J.C. Huberts is hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Eelco van Hout
Dr E.J.Th. van Hout is verbonden aan BMC Advies en Management en het Centrum voor het Bestuur van de Maatschappelijke Onderneming (CBMO) van de Universiteit van Tilburg (TiasNimbas Business School). Beide auteurs nemen deel aan het colloquium Goed Bestuur/Good Governance van het Netherlands Institute of Government, van waaruit dit themanummer gestalte kreeg.
Artikel

Goed bestuur als management van spanningen tussen verschillende publieke waarden

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public values, principles of proper administration, principles of good administration, principles of good governance
Auteurs Gjalt de Graaf, Veerle van Doeveren, Anne-Marie Reynaers e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this literature review we present and discuss the key concepts of this symposium issue: (good) governance, (public) values, and the management of tensions between public values. The article concludes with an overview of strategies on how to deal with public values as a prelude to the remainder of the symposium, and discusses the implications of the distinguished strategies for public administration practice.


Gjalt de Graaf
Dr G. de Graaf, drs A. Reynaers en dr Z. van der Wal zijn verbonden aan de vakgroep Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, respectievelijk als universitair hoofddocent, promovenda en universitair docent.

Veerle van Doeveren
Drs V. van Doeveren is als promovenda verbonden aan de Universiteit Leiden.

Anne-Marie Reynaers
Dr G. de Graaf, drs A. Reynaers en dr Z. van der Wal zijn verbonden aan de vakgroep Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, respectievelijk als universitair hoofddocent, promovenda en universitair docent.

Zeger van der Wal
Dr G. de Graaf, drs A. Reynaers en dr Z. van der Wal zijn verbonden aan de vakgroep Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, respectievelijk als universitair hoofddocent, promovenda en universitair docent.
Artikel

Botsende waarden in de corporatiesector

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, Public Value Management, hybridity, social housing associations
Auteurs Philip Karré en Cor van Montfort
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article we present the results of research on how five hybrid social housing associations tried to create public value. We link Moore's Public Value Management framework to theories on good governance and discuss the tensions that arise when hybrid organizations create public values and how they are dealt with. Based on this, we describe several recommendations for Dutch social housing associations.


Philip Karré
Dr P.M. Karré is senior onderzoeker en leermanager aan de Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur (NSOB) en docent/programmamanager aan de Hogeschool van Amsterdam.

Cor van Montfort
Prof. dr C.J. van Montfort is sectormanager publiek-private sector bij de Algemene Rekenkamer (ARK), bijzonder hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit van Tilburg en verbonden aan het Centrum voor het Bestuur van de Maatschappelijke Onderneming (CBMO).
Artikel

De democratische waarde van burgerparticipatie: Interactief bestuur en deliberatieve fora1

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Citizen participation, democracy, democratic innovations, participatory governance, deliberative forums
Auteurs Ank Michels
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Whilst embedding democratic innovations that increase and deepen citizen participation in decision making now is a common policy of governments in many countries, and theorists in democratic theory also tend to emphasize how good citizen participation is to democracy, the empirical evaluation of democratic innovations is still a rather unexplored area of research.

    This article evaluates two types of democratic innovations, participatory governance and deliberative forums in the Netherlands and a large number of other Western countries. The findings show, for both types of innovation, that citizen participation contributes to the quality of democracy in several ways. The analysis also makes it clear that different designs produce different democratic effects, which also reflects tensions between democratic values; participatory governance projects are better at giving citizens influence, whereas deliberative forums appear to be better at promoting the exchange of arguments. Also, whereas cases of participatory governance are more open than deliberative forums, representation is higher for the deliberative type of cases. As a consequence politicians and policy makers can have a major impact on democracy; by choosing for a specific design of citizen participation they may encourage certain aspects of democracy more than others.


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

Introductie themanummer goed bestuur

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public values, public management
Auteurs Zeger van der Wal, Gjalt de Graaf en Cor van Montfort
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this introduction to the special issue of Bestuurskunde on Good Governance, we first introduce the central theme of this issue. We notice that many laudable values are usually included in codes of good governance, but that these values conflict in the context of public governance - conflicts that need to be managed. How this could be done and in which way values clash in (semi-)public organizations, is the main theme of this special issue


Zeger van der Wal
Dr Z. van der Wal en dr G. de Graaf zijn respectievelijk universitair docent en universitair hoofddocent Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Gjalt de Graaf
Dr Z. van der Wal en dr G. de Graaf zijn respectievelijk universitair docent en universitair hoofddocent Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Cor van Montfort
Prof. dr C. van Montfort is sectormanager publiek-private sector bij de Algemene Rekenkamer (ARK), bijzonder hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit van Tilburg en verbonden aan het Centrum voor het Bestuur van de Maatschappelijke Onderneming (CBMO).
Artikel

Het falende veld van ondersteuning bij ongelijke behandeling

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden equal treatment, work, social protection, retaliation, interorganizational field
Auteurs Marieke van Genugten en Jörgen Svensson
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    There are many different ways in which employees may choose to address unequal treatment at work. They may do so themselves, in an informal or formal manner on the work floor. They may also, at some stage in the dispute, decide to involve specialized advisers such as legal advisers, anti-discrimination officers, health and safety executives and labour unions. It is generally assumed that consulting such specialized advisers will help the employee to address unequal treatment more successfully. In this paper, the effectiveness of the interorganizational field of specialized advisers is analyzed on the basis of an elaborate study among different types of respondents. The main finding is that fear of retaliation plays a crucial role in seeking and receiving specialized advice and that the existing interorganizational field broadly fails to cope with this fear. To resolve this issue, the field needs an improved governance structure with better co-ordination between different types of advisers.


Marieke van Genugten
Marieke van Genugten is universitair docent bestuurskunde aan het Institute for Management Research, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Correspondentiegegevens: dr. M.L. van Genugten, Institute for Management Research, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Thomas van Aquinostraat 5, 6525 GD Nijmegen, Postbus 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, m.vangenugten@fm.ru.nl.

Jörgen Svensson
Jörgen Svensson is universitair docent sociologie aan het Institute for Innovation and Governance Studies, Universiteit Twente.
Toont 81 - 100 van 132 gevonden teksten
1 2 3 5 7
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.