Zoekresultaat: 345 artikelen

x

    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.


Prof. dr. Koenraad De Ceuninck
Prof. dr. K. De Ceuninck is politicoloog en hoogleraar bij het Centrum voor Lokale Politiek aan de Universiteit Gent.

Dr. Klaas Abma
Dr. K. Abma is programmamanager bij de gemeente Súdwest-Fryslân (Zuidwest-Friesland). In 2012 promoveerde hij aan de Open Universiteit bij Arno Korsten op een onderzoek naar het beoordelen van gemeenten.
Artikel

Non-participatie in de doe-democratie

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2017
Auteurs Gideon Broekhuizen MSc LLB en Dr. Ank Michels
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.


Gideon Broekhuizen MSc LLB
G.R. Broekhuizen MSc LLB deed een onderzoeksmaster bestuurskunde en organisatiewetenschap aan de Universiteit Utrecht en een bachelor bestuurskunde en recht aan de Universiteit Leiden. Hij schreef zijn scriptie over non-participatie in de doe-democratie.

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

Campagneactiviteiten en -financiering van lokale partijen in Nederland

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2017
Trefwoorden electoral campaigns, campaign financing, independent local lists, party subsidies, local elections
Auteurs Justin Bergwerff MSc en Dr. Hans Vollaard
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Electoral campaigning and its financing at the local level have been hardly studied in spite of the growing political significance of municipalities in the Netherlands. Local parties have been barely studied either, even though they gained more than 30 percent of the seats in the local elections of 2014. They have done so without any public subsidy, whereas subsidized national parties can and do support their local branches. This article examines which campaign activities local parties used to attract voters, how these activities were funded, and whether local parties perceived subsidies necessary and desirable. A survey among local parties held just after the local elections of 2014, indicates that their campaigns are by and large a traditional, low-cost affair. They are often not labor-intensive nor technology-intensive, despite the electoral effectiveness of micro-targeting and canvassing. Contributions from local councilors constitute the main source of finance. The survey also shows that transparency of campaign financing can count on widespread support among local parties. They also prefer a level playing field between local parties and local branches of national parties by providing both public subsidies or none, which is an important contribution to the discussion on the current legislative proposals on party financing at the local level.


Justin Bergwerff MSc
Justin Bergwerff MSc is financieel beleidsmedewerker aan het ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap.

Dr. Hans Vollaard
Dr. Hans Vollaard is universitair docent Nederlandse en Europese politiek, Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap, Universiteit Utrecht.

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


Professor Dr. Tom van der Meer
Professor Dr. Tom van der Meer is Professor of Political Science and Co-Director of the Dutch Parliamentary Election Survey at the University of Amsterdam

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


Dr. Caelesta Braun
Caelesta Braun is redactielid van Beleid en Maatschappij en associate professor van het Institute of Public Administration van de Universiteit Leiden.
Artikel

Staat van de bestuurskunde

Samenvattend én persoonlijk slotakkoord

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Dr. Thomas Schillemans

Dr. Thomas Schillemans
Artikel

Een gezamenlijke rekening?

Over digitale innovatie en samenwerking in een institutional void

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden collaboration, digital security, institutional void, collaborative governance, financial cyber fraud
Auteurs Dr. ing. Bram Klievink, Rolf van Wegberg MSc. en Prof. dr. Michel van Eeten
Samenvatting

    The speed and disruptive character of digital innovations affect social structures and practices faster than institutions can keep up with them. This results in an ‘institutional void’, i.e. a gap between the rules and institutions and their ability and the effectiveness of their measures. It also affects the institutional stability that is the basis for the paradigm of collaboration-based types of governance. In this paper, we explore how parties are able to set up collaboration for digital security, which is inherently a topic that transcends organisational boundaries. Yet digital innovations constantly enable new challengers that might not share the same incentives for collaboration. Life in an institutional void is convenient for them and enables new business models. Hence, a key question is whether (institutionalised) collaboration is a sustainable model for addressing shared problems like digital security. We explore this question in the domain of financial cyber fraud. The new (regulatory) space currently being created for innovators suggests that the answer is ‘no’. It is too early to say how this will play out specifically and we argue for further research into the antecedents for collaboration in institutional voids.


Dr. ing. Bram Klievink

Rolf van Wegberg MSc.

Prof. dr. Michel van Eeten

Dr. Rik Reussing
Dr. G.H. Reussing is onderwijscoördinator van de opleiding European Public Administration aan de Universiteit Twente en redactiesecretaris van Bestuurswetenschappen.

    The often gloomy analyses of democratic representation at the local level are frequently directed at the problems with parties and elections. Direct participation is not a good alternative because only certain people who are already politically active use it. However, with the help of the concept ‘representative claim’ and based on two qualitative case studies of decentralizations in the social domain, the authors show that there are other representative people besides elected politicians. These self-appointed, non-elected representatives may advocate on behalf of vulnerable groups who themselves do not have a strong voice in politics. In addition this study shows that elected representatives, like political parties and local counselors, can strengthen their representative role by: (1) cooperating better with the non-elected representatives, (2) highlighting their representational claims and the basis of these claims, and (3) strengthening their responsiveness towards their support base through authorization and other accountability structures other than elections. In this way the democratic representation in municipalities is reinforced and may be stronger than the often gloomy analyses suggest.


Dr. Hester van de Bovenkamp
Dr. H.M. van de Bovenkamp is universitair hoofddocent aan het instituut Beleid & Management Gezondheidszorg (iBMG) aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

Dr. Hans Vollaard
Dr. J.P. Vollaard is universitair docent Nederlandse en Europese politiek binnen het Instituut Politieke Wetenschap van de Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. Bas Denters
Prof. dr. S.A.H. Denters is hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit Twente, wetenschappelijk directeur van de Nederlandse Onderzoeksschool Bestuurskunde (NOB) en hoofdredacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.
Artikel

Deliberatieve democratie: ervaringen met diversiteit in burgertop Amsterdam

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Democracy, Summit, Dialogue, Diversity, Homogeneity
Auteurs Dr. Peer Smets en Marloes Vlind MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper will show how citizens’ summits in the Netherlands cope with diversity of participants and the impact of this on those initiatives. This provides insight in why diversity is hard to reach and what can be done to improve it. Presently, dissatisfaction about the Dutch democratic system is widespread. Solutions are being sought to strengthen Dutch participatory democracy. For this objective, citizens’ summits develop different kind of initiatives. However, citizens participating in these summits are a homogeneous group, namely mainly white, middle aged and highly educated. Mechanisms of exclusion, selection of candidates, homogeneous composition of the organization, and a dominating intellectual/rational way of debating are playing a role here. Citizens with different backgrounds need to be included in these initiatives to obtain a better representation of society’s voices. This notion has been strengthened by theory, which shows that diversity enables more creativity and innovation.


Dr. Peer Smets
Dr. Peer Smets is universitair docent aan de Vrije Universiteit.

Marloes Vlind MSc
Marloes Vlind MSc is docent en onderzoeker aan de Vrije Universiteit.

    In recent decades, the Dutch labour market has become more flexible. Flexible labour contracts enable firms to adjust employment to a changing market environment and to competitive pressures. Almost without exception, academic studies on the drivers behind the use of flexible labour contracts at the company level, are motivated by competitive pressures. However, companies may be susceptible to institutional pressures as well. Based on a survey among more than 650 managers in the Netherlands, we conclude that firms are vulnerable to institutional (mimetic) forces. This finding has several implications for policy-making and labour flexibility research.


Fabian Dekker

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


Dr. Joost Berkhout
Dr. Joost Berkhout is universitair docent politieke wetenschappen aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

    In this feature authors discuss recent research findings that are of interest to readers of Beleid en Maatschappij.
    ‘Fact free politics’ and ‘post-truth politics’ are considered to pose a severe threat to democracies as they seem to ruin shared perceptions of reality and render it impossible to distinguish opinion from fact. However, it is questionable whether fueling public and political debates with scientific facts offers a counterweight. First, scientific facts are not free from interpretation and can be regarded as ‘theory-laden’. Second, scientific research may determine facts but it may not claim the monopoly to determine the public meaning attached to these facts. Third, facts not only function to explain or to describe reality, they also affect reality. Given these considerations, the ‘science versus fact free politics’ debate could profit from a more realistic view on the status of facts.


Prof. dr. Huub Dijstelbloem
Prof. dr. Huub Dijstelbloem is werkzaam bij de faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen, capaciteitsgroep Philosophical Tradition in Context, Filosofie van Wetenschap en Politiek.

Dr. Alexandre Afonso
Dr. Alexandre Afonso is assistant professor aan de Universiteit van Leiden.

    In recent years, there has been a strong diffusion of the concept of the G1000 in the Low countries. Yet, empirical research that concerns the democratic value of these mini-publics is sparse. This raises the question as to how democratic the G1000 initiatives in Belgium and the Netherlands are. To answer this question, we compare the Belgian and the Dutch G1000’s and assess these against a set of deliberative democratic criteria. We conclude that the G1000’s to a large extent meet the process criteria of deliberation. At the same time, the connection with the formal decision-making process appears to be weak. Another lesson to be drawn is that deliberative democratic criteria often seem to conflict with each other, which points to continuing tensions within the ideal of deliberative democracy.


Ank Michels
Ank Michels is politicoloog en als universitair docent verbonden aan het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht. In haar onderzoek houdt zij zich bezig met nieuwe vormen van besturen en democratie, burgerparticipatie en deliberatie. Ze is mede-auteur van het boek G1000. Ervaringen met burgertoppen (2016) en auteur van onder meer ‘Innovations in democratic governance. How does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy’ (2011) en ‘Participation in citizens’ summits and public engagement’ (2017), beide in International Review of Administrative Sciences.

Didier Caluwaerts
Didier Caluwaerts is als docent verbonden aan de Vakgroep Politieke Wetenschappen van de Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Zijn onderzoek handelt over democratische innovatie, met een specifieke focus op deliberatieve democratie. In 2011 was hij mede-organisator van de G1000 Burgertop in België. Hij is ook mede-auteur van Democratic deliberation in deeply divided societies: From conflict to common ground (Palgrave, 2014) en publiceerde onlangs ‘Generating democratic legitimacy through deliberative innovations: The role of embeddedness and disruptiveness (2016, Representation) en ‘Coproduction in health planning: Challenging the need for “open” policy-making processes’ (2016, International Journal of Public Administration).
Article

Democratische politiek: ‘minder, minder, minder’ of anders?

Tijdschrift Res Publica, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Frank Hendriks, Koen van der Krieken en Sabine van Zuydam
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article looks at indications and counterindications in Dutch democracy for the popular claim that citizens, while still valuing representative democracy, are fed up with representative politics. Using available large-scale surveys, citizen attitudes are analysed at the levels of specific political actors (politicians, officials), central political institutions (political parties, parliament, government) and the general system of representative democratic politics (the way it works in the Netherlands, with multiparty coalitions, etc). While specific legitimacy problems exist, the evidence for a general legitimacy crisis in Dutch democracy is comparatively weak and highly mixed. More specifically, the evidence suggests that Dutch citizens do not so much want less representative politics, but rather representative politics of a somewhat different kind: less exclusively organized via party-political channels; more geared at recognizable and accountable political authority. Dutch citizens want to seriously influence but not supplant selectionistic representative politics, the evidence suggests.


Frank Hendriks
Frank Hendriks is als hoogleraar comparative governance verbonden aan Tilburg University. Hij is gespecialiseerd in de vergelijkende analyse van democratische modellen en hervormingen. Hierover publiceerde hij onder meer Vital Democracy (Oxford University Press, 2010) en, meer toegespitst op Nederland, Democratie onder druk (Van Gennep, 2012).

Koen van der Krieken
Koen van der Krieken is als promovendus en onderzoeker verbonden aan Tilburg School of Governance (TSG). Hij werkt aan een dissertatie over het lokale referendum in Nederland. In 2015 schreef hij, in opdracht van het Ministerie van BZK, een rapport over heden, verleden en toekomst van de lokale referendumpraktijk in Nederland.

Sabine van Zuydam
Sabine van Zuydam is onderzoeker bij Tilburg School of Governance (TSG). In haar proefschrift onderzoekt zij wat lijsttrekkers in verkiezingen, ministers en fractieleiders geloofwaardig maakt in de ogen van burgers. Ze deed mede-onderzoek naar het Nederlandse burgemeestersambt, de vermaatschappelijking van overheidstaken en de rol van de raad bij controversiële besluitvorming.
Article

Het zou zomaar een zootje kunnen worden

Een Q-methodologisch onderzoek naar de ideeën van non-participanten over de relatie tussen representatieve en participatieve democratie op lokaal niveau

Tijdschrift Res Publica, Aflevering 1 2017
Auteurs Jante Schmidt en Margo Trappenburg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    New forms of participatory and deliberative democracy gain popularity alongside traditional representative democracy at the local level in the Netherlands. In this article we look at passive citizens defined as citizens who do not participate in any of the new practices. How do they perceive the shift from traditional to new forms of democracy (defined as stakeholder democracy, deliberative polling and associative or ‘do’ democracy)? We performed a Q-methodological study to find patterns of opinion among passive citizens. We found three patterns. Critical citizens are critical about both traditional representative democracy and new forms of democracy. Loyal citizens support traditional local democracy and do not think the shift to other forms is a change for the better. Distant citizens find that politicians should first and foremost uphold the law and act as referees when citizens disagree. This task has been neglected over the years but this deficiency cannot be remedied by new forms of democracy. All three patterns of opinion are cause for concern for the advocates of more participatory and deliberative democracy. While these new forms may restore faith in politics among active citizens they may simultaneously alienate passive citizens.


Jante Schmidt
Jante Schmidt is socioloog en promovenda aan de Universiteit voor Humanistiek. Haar onderzoek gaat over menselijke waardigheid in de ‘participatiesamenleving’: de effecten van de hervorming van de verzorgingsstaat op morele emoties in de context van zorg en ondersteuning.

Margo Trappenburg
Margo Trappenburg is universitair hoofddocent bestuurs- en organisatiewetenschappen aan de Universiteit Utrecht en bijzonder hoogleraar aan de Universiteit voor Humanistiek. Haar onderzoek gaat over veranderingen in de verzorgingsstaat en de gevolgen daarvan voor kwetsbare groepen, andere burgers en professionals.
Toont 81 - 100 van 345 gevonden teksten
1 2 3 5 7 8 9 17 18
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.