After a year’s delay, the new Dutch Environmental Act will enter into force on January 1, 2022. Within this new legal framework, municipalities are expected to develop an environmental vision through policy integration and citizen participation. This new working method raises some questions. This article focuses on the quality of policy considerations with regard to vulnerable spatial domains and in particular religious heritage. It answers the question about the quality of policy considerations in municipal environmental visions and then examines whether policy integration and participation have contributed to this. An analysis of 33 municipal environmental visions shows that the quality of policy considerations for religious heritage is low in almost all municipalities. Interviews with nine municipalities provide a more complete picture and make it clear that the real quality of the policy considerations is higher than what can ultimately be found in the visions. However, these findings raise doubts about the future protection of the religious heritage in the further elaboration of the environmental vision in the environmental plan. In connection with this, two calls are made: (a) as a municipality, ensure that the subject of cultural heritage is on the political-administrative agenda; (b) ensure that cultural heritage is not only part of history, but also of the future.

This issue of Bestuurswetenschappen is devoted to the theme of ‘religious heritage’, more specifically to what is called the ‘church problem’. Nobody will have missed the fact that quite a few churches have been withdrawn as places of worship in recent years. While there was still a shortage of churches a generation ago, today the problem is the other way around: there is a surplus. There is great agreement about the causes of this: secularization and church leaving have left deep marks. Churches have been demolished, used for multiple purposes and churches have become vacant. However, the majority of the empty churches have been given a new destination. Those who think that this solves the problem are mistaken. As a result, a new problem has arisen that raises the following questions: which designated purposes are ‘appropriate’, what is absolutely not possible and how does it work in practice if the religious function is combined with a cultural and/or commercial function? The versatility of the ‘church problem’ is evident from the contributions in this special issue. It opens with a column written by the King’s Commissioner in the province of North-Brabant, Wim van de Donk. In his column he emphasizes the value of religious heritage and the commitment of local communities to finding creative solutions.

While many new churches were built in the Netherlands sixty years ago to meet the demands of religious communities for space for their worship, the situation in 2020 is completely different. It is true that a church is sometimes built here and there in the Netherlands, but the general picture is that many churches have been withdrawn as places of worship in recent years, that a number have been demolished and that many have been given a new designated purpose. The fate of a church building often evokes many emotions in people. For example, we experienced this when we, together with the Parisians, watched in disbelief as fire destroyed parts of Notre Dame. This is related to the fact that for many people churches are more than just ‘beautifully stacked stones’. They are directly linked to the highs and lows of people’s individual and collective lives. People were baptized and married in that church, funeral services of loved ones were held there and the church is still a familiar part of the image of city or village. Rightly so that churches are also seen as ‘affective monuments’. The central question, however, is how to deal with religious heritage (policy related) now that churches are emptying? In this article the authors first give a brief outline of the background, nature and scope of what they call the ‘church problem’. Then they discuss the ‘battle for churches’ associated with this problem, which they subsequently try to interpret from a number of Public Administration theories. The role of certain individuals and organizations in the ‘battle for churches’, the so-called ‘entrepreneurs’, is further explored. They pay specific attention to the role of the municipality in this as a whole and call on all parties involved to deal (politically) with the ‘church problem’ rather than ‘spasmodically’.

This article provides insight into the way in which various city churches that are national monuments fulfill their various, sometimes contradictory, functions. All of these are church buildings that determine the city view. These five church buildings are dependent on commercial rental by a foundation or manager for their maintenance, but they also explicitly fulfill a religious and cultural-historical function. How do ecclesiastical and management organizations deal with this area of tension, what administrative forms do we find and where and why do tensions arise? The author sketches the results of a comparative case study of five churches, supplemented with data collected through focus groups with administrators of 20 church communities associated with city churches that are national monuments. It appears that tensions between the various functions of the church building occur in all these churches, regardless of the chosen administrative model. These tensions seem to be concentrated mainly around the ‘iconic’ meaning of the church building. For the church community, the church building not only fulfills the function of ‘meeting place’; it is also the building through which the church community is visible and recognizable in the city. In addition, the church building also appears to represent certain values with which church communities identify themselves. It is therefore important for administrators and foundations to answer a ‘cardinal’ question: can the current ecclesiastical function of the building be part of the commercial and cultural-historical function of the building, or should it remain strictly separate from it?

In this contribution, three entrepreneurs indicate how they are actively involved in the processes of re-designation of churches. Based on a number of tools, they try to offer prospects for the future of churches in close consultation with the parties involved. This is by no means easy and requires strategic, tactical and open action to bridge existing contradictions and guarantee a future for the religious heritage.

This essay discusses the book L’archipel français: naissance d’une nation multiple et divisée. In addition, the French author Jérôme Fourquet is discussed, what the central thesis of the book is, what research methods the author uses, how the book is structured and what conclusions he comes to. Subsequently, the second part of the essay raises the question of the extent to which (in the opinion of the author of the essay) there is also a metamorphosis of society in the Netherlands, as is seen in France. This enables him, among other things, to report on a longitudinal research project at Radboud University Nijmegen, which is known as ‘Socio-cultural Developments in the Netherlands’ (SOCON). The central proposition of the bestseller is that France was once a nation that could be seen as ‘one and indivisible’ (and was experienced as such), but that France has changed fundamentally over the past decades and is now a ‘multiform and divided’ country: an ‘archipelisation’ process has occurred. Fourquet derives the term ‘archipelago’ from geology and uses it as a metaphor for the sub-worlds that have emerged: largely autonomous ‘islands’ with a limited joint bond. The Dutch SOCON study and other evidence supports Fourquet’s notion that there is also a huge shift in society in the Netherlands and that here too (perhaps less than in France) there are indications for ‘archipelisation’.

The author of this contribution asks whether and, if so, in which specific cases, the principle of the separation of church and state applies to situations related to the emptying of churches. As a result of the closure, restoration and re-designation of church buildings, governments may be confronted with issues that touch on this principle. The principle of the separation between church and state prescribes that the government must be neutral. This contribution explains that this neutral attitude differs according to the social domain in which the issue arises. Using a contextual approach, he makes clear which interests (religious, general, private and the interests of others) should be decisive in government policy in this area in the various domains.

The care for religious heritage is no recent phenomenon in the Netherlands. King Willem I (1813-1840) was the first king of the Netherlands personally committed to the preservation of churches. But striving for conservation does not mean that a building is frozen in time; on the contrary. Many a church is made smaller, rebuilt or expanded in the course of its existence. The use of churches for other than religious purposes is also nothing new in the Netherlands, as is the re-designation of churches. The ‘Grote Kerk’ of Veere has been re-designated many times since 1600. Of the current approximately 7,100 buildings in the Netherlands that were built for a religious function, some 1,700 have already been re-designated. It is said that around 1,000 church buildings have been closed since the 1960s, hundreds of which have been demolished. As far as religious buildings are concerned, change is not an exception, but a constant. So desperately wanting to keep everything as it is – or was – seems impossible. But all this does not alter the fact that church buildings are dear to Dutch society. For example, churches make up only 4% of the total stock of national monuments in the Netherlands, but together they receive about 40% of all maintenance funds. Church buildings apparantly offer something extra and lift us up as people. And from that perspective alone, the recommendation is to keep these buildings as much as possible for the future.

Participatory and responsive approaches to research strive to be democratic, inclusive and impactful. Participatory researchers share a commitment to epistemic justice and actively engage citizens and users as well as other stakeholders in the co-creation of knowledge for social change. While more and more researchers and policymakers feel attracted to these approaches in practice, the normative ideals of social inclusion and justice are sometimes hard to realize, because of established interests, power relations and system requirements. In this article I argue that participatory researchers and evaluators have a moral responsibility to do ‘ethics work’. This is more than just following ethical principles and codes of conduct. ‘Ethics work’ entails the labour and effort one puts into recognizing ethically salient aspects of situations, developing oneself as a reflexive practitioner, paying attention to emotions and relationships, collaboratively working out the right course of action and reflecting in the company of critical friends. In this article I present the theory and ethics of participatory approaches, illustrate ethical issues and ethics work related to collaboration, politics and power, and share lessons based on ten years of practice in the field of health and social well-being.

In maart 2020 verscheen het boek Beleidsevaluatie in theorie en praktijk van Peter van der Knaap, Valérie Pattyn en Dick Hanemaayer. Joost Fledderus bespreekt de inhoud van het boek en geeft aan welke meerwaarde het biedt voor (aankomende) beleidsonderzoekers.

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

Predictive tools as instruments for understanding and responding to risky behaviour as early as possible are increasingly becoming a normal feature in local and state agencies. A risk that arises from the implementation of these predictive tools is the problem of dirty data. The input of incorrect or illegally obtained information (‘dirty data’) can influence the quality of the predictions used by local and state agencies, such as the police. The article focuses on the risks of dirty data in predictive policing by the Dutch Police. It describes the possibilities to prevent dirty data from being used in predictive policing tools, such as the Criminality Anticipation System (CAS). It concludes by emphasizing the importance of transparency for any serious solution looking to eliminate the use of dirty data in predictive policing.

The most relevant part of a discussion is not what is discussed but what cannot be spoken of. The real taboos are those for which it is taboo to call them taboos. The status quo defines itself as non-ideological while denouncing any challenge to itself as radical.
Therefore the column ‘De blinde vlek’ frames the framers, politicizes the status quo and articulates what is not heard of.

Two petitions on the internet strive to include ‘animal rights’ in the Dutch Constitution. Jeremy Bentham stipulated that animals should not be denied the right to happiness, because they suffer. The Dutch philosopher Eskens made a plea to grant animals the same fundamental rights as humans. Theoretically, this leads to special, bizarre and sometimes paradoxical situations. This indicates that the logic in this theory is missing.
In the past fifty years, ethological science made enormous progress and we have learned much more about the emotions and the behaviour of animals. Animals travel consciously through ‘time’ and hurt their brains in the search for knowledge and experiences. But this does not yet make humans and animals equal. Within the legal discourse there is no place for universal rights for animals because these must always be asserted through human intervention. The energy to maintain the bureaucracy Eskens proposes should be used to formulate animal protection as a human obligation.

The General Equal Treatment Law – adopted in 1994 – is a landmark in the history of homosexual emancipation in the Netherlands. It took two decades before the first proposals for a legal ban of discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation would be transformed into law. Background of this controversy is the clash between the equalityprinciple and the freedom of education. The compromise reached – the so-called single fact-construction – however sent a double message: being gay was not a justified reason for unequal treatment, but some forms of behaviour were incorporated as a legal exception. It took another twenty years before this flaw in the law would be changed.
This article analyses the political debates behind these legal developments. What was the problem that the various drafts for this new legislation were supposed to solve? Which definitions of discrimination on the basis of homosexuality were used and how did they change over time? The adoption of the law and its ‘reparation’ twenty years later are mainly a question of symbolic politics. They reflect the development of the growing acceptance of homosexuality in Dutch society and have stimulated its further growth. Their actual legal effects seem far less important.

Animals Rights are sometimes seen as unpractical. Some critics expect they will result in an overwhelming bureaucracy. Furthermore, critics point out, it is impossible to make legal arrangements that are coherent and non-contradictory. Most of these concerns are exaggerated. We do not have to devise a whole new legal system. We just need a couple of court cases to get legal clarity and many laws originally meant for humans are easily applicable to other living beings. Keeping animals out of our legal systems meanwhile goes against the constitution. In most democratic countries the constitution states that we may not discriminate on irrelevant factors as race, gender, birth, ‘or on any other ground’. This implies, in my view, that discrimination based on species is not allowed. Equal interests simply should be weighed equal, regardless of the bearer of these interests.

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

Compared to regular contracts, infrastructure development and management through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) is expected to lead to better cost and time performance. However, the evidence for this performance advantage of PPPs is lacking. This article analyzes the performance differences of projects with a Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM) contract (a type of PPP) and a Design-and-Construct (D&C) contract. Project performance data were collected (N = 65) from the Project Database of Rijkswaterstaat and analyzed using non-parametric tests. Rijkswaterstaat is the executive agency of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. The results show that DBFM-projects have a significantly higher cost performance than D&C-projects. In particular, DBFM-projects have less additional costs related to technical necessities in the implementation phase. Regarding time performance, DBFM-projects seem to perform better although the difference with D&C-projects is not statistically significant. The article discusses explanations for the performance advantage of PPPs, rooted in principal-agent theory. From this discussion, an agenda is presented for further research into the performance advantage of Public-Private Partnerships.