In this feature authors discuss recent research findings that are of interest to readers of Beleid en Maatschappij.

Municipalities play an important role in the Dutch energy transition. Therefore, they are expected to deal both sufficiently and timely with their tasks. The question is whether they have the capacity to do so (governing capacity). This study aims to assess whether improving governing capacity can be used to improve the policy performance. We operationalized governing capacity and built a model to assess the relation between several conditions for governing capacity and policy performance for three domains of the energy transition: built environment, mobility and renewables. We found no direct relationship between perceived governing capacity and energy transition policy output. However, we found relationships between conditions for governing capacity, and the policy output. About 25 percent of the total variance in policy performance could be attributed to population size. This percentage levels up to 55 to 60 percent if the motivation of the local administration, cooperation between municipalities and other governmental organisations and the participation of citizens and businesses are also taken into account. This contradicts the idea that enlarging municipalities is the most important way to achieve a higher policy performance.

In this article we discuss the role and position of different types of low income households in Dutch renewable energy transition processes using the concept of energy poverty. We explore which benefits and/or (dis)advantages (unintentionally) result from energy policies and regulations. And to what extent the distribution of these (dis)advantages benefit the position of different types of households. To this end we present an analytical perspective that enables us to evaluate renewable energy transition policies and governance on procedural and distributional aspects: paying attention to issues of recognition, equity and justice. The perspective draws on ideas in environmental justice literature and on ideas in social resilience literature. Combining these ideas in a new analytical framework proved to be useful in articulating some major policy challenges in relation to energy poverty in the Netherlands today.

The refugee crisis of 2015-2016 prompted European governments to quickly institute new asylum seeker centres. Often however, plans for opening new reception centres are met with protest in surrounding localities. Gaining public support for new ASCs has become a pressing governance issue facing local governments. This research looks at whether a policy strategy of ‘giving back’ to the neighbourhood rather than ‘giving in’ to the demands of protesters can minimise local opposition and alleviate negative attitudes . A door-to-door survey of N = 511 neighbourhood residents is combined with semi-structured interview data of N = 31 neighbourhood residents. We find that attitudes were already neutral to fairly positive shortly after the centre opened and fears of nuisance and crime did not materialise. Those who became involved in the ASCs’ courses and activities are a small and selective group who were already fairly accepting of the centre. Contact between asylum seekers and neighbours developing within and beyond the ASC was valued but did not develop into stronger ties due to frequent moves of asylum seekers and early closure of the ASC.

After the European refugee crisis of 2015-2016, many Dutch municipalities took initiative in (re)shaping policies of asylum seeker reception and refugee integration in their own ways. We are witnessing a ‘local turn’ of integration policies with decentralization of responsibilities to the local level of governance. Besides civic integration and socioeconomic integration, social integration of asylum seekers and refugees has been a concern as these groups are often housed in superdiverse and vulnerable neighborhoods. How can municipalities best address the specific problems in their cities? This editorial introduces the four articles that are part of this special issue. We discuss three overarching topics. First, we argue that aside from targeting specific groups and issues, cities should develop mainstreamed policies and provisions to be able to handle future fluctuations and changes in their populations. Second, we observe that in policies aimed at enhancing inter-group contact, earlier immigrant groups are often overlooked. They can play a bridging role in establishing social connections. Third, we highlight the role of urban experiments and living labs in transfer and upscaling of innovative policies.

The Netherlands has been struggling with the question of how to facilitate the integration of refugees who crossed into Europe during the 2015/2016 ‘refugee crisis’. Dutch municipalities aim for the dispersion of refugees over various neighborhoods under the assumption that the ethnic composition of the neighborhood is conducive to integration. In the current study, I test this assumption using a new and representative survey (N = 768 predominantly Syrian refugees living in 45 neighborhoods, response rate 85%) linked to neighborhood data situated in the most ethnically diverse city in the Netherlands; Rotterdam. Multilevel analyses revealed that, generally, a larger share of people without a migration background in the neighborhood was related to more frequent contact with neighbors without a migration background. A larger share of people with a Moroccan background was related to more frequent contact with people with a Moroccan background, but predominantly for Syrian refugees. The neighborhood was not related to contact with people from the same background of with people with a Turkish background. Hence, meeting opportunities in the neighborhood only appear to facilitate social integration if they coincide with refugees’ social preferences.

This paper investigates the effects of neighbourhood change caused by the inflow of new residents in the still existing social rental stock in a post-World War II district next to the effects of the changing population as the result of urban restructuring. All residents, native Dutch and residents that belong to an ethnic minority, are critical about the occurring concentration of the latter in the existing rental housing stock. Loss of respectability and of shared norms and values of how to live in the neighbourhood play an important role in the critical stance of mostly older Dutch native residents. Residents with a migrant background criticize the concentration as a negative influence for their integration in Dutch society. Most residents support the idea of a mixed neighbourhood based on income and ethnicity. Restructuring by demolition of old social rental dwellings and new housing development for owner-occupiers is supported by most residents, based on the positive impact on the liveability. Urban restructuring has however not decreased the share of non-Dutch-native residents but it did bring more middle-class households. In the view of the residents these are ‘decent people’ as they have to work in daytime and do not linger at night in the streets.

The labour market participation of recent female refugees in the Netherlands is very low. This is caused not only by the fact that a large proportion of the female refugee population has a greater distance to the labour market (than male refugees), but also because municipalities – for various reasons – offer more support to male refugees seeking to enter the Dutch labour market. This article is based on an explorative study we carried out into the labour market opportunities of recent female refugees and job guidance policies of Dutch municipalities. First, we explore how background characteristics of the group of female refugees and the municipal focus on supporting male refugees to quickly join the workforce, influence each other negatively and greatly limit the chances of female refugees at finding paid work. We then discuss the consequences for the participation and integration of these newcomers and their families, both for the short and long term. Finally, we discuss how female refugees can be supported more effectively towards labour market participation.

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

Municipalities have increasingly adjusted their policies in order to better respond to the problematic social and economic participation of permit holders. The core elements within the chosen policies seem to consist of an early activation, combining language and professional training, and providing customization in the support of these newcomers. In this article, this policy change has been studied in the municipalities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht. It becomes clear that a more successful approach only succeeds when permit holders are offered additional and tailored support. For all three municipalities, this means that more permit holders are reached by the available support measures and that local policy makers can better respond to individual needs and possibilities. In addition, these municipalities pay more attention for sustainable labour market participation. At the same time, it is evident that no rapid successes are being made with this new course. In particular, more vulnerable permit holders, including those with low levels of education and women, are not always reached by municipalities. We also see that many of these newcomers must be supported for a long time, even if after have found a place on the labour market. Therefore, evidence suggests that without additional measures there is a good chance that the perspective on social and economic participation for many permit holders in the Netherlands will be extremely limited.

In this feature authors discuss recent research findings that are of interest to readers of Beleid en Maatschappij.

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.

In the private sector, user innovation is used to develop innovations that better fit the needs of customers. In the public sector, interest for citizen innovation is also on the rise and new information and communication technologies seem to offer a great potential for accessing the power of citizens. At the same time these technologies offer another potential value: they can turn citizens into data sources. This data can offer governments crucial insights and may form the basis for datadriven innovation. Innovating with citizens in both different ways seems to offer great potential for broadly supported issues such as urban sustainability. This article develops a framework for studying these new developments and presents explorative research in three cities (Curitiba, Glasgow en Utrecht). The research shows that cities make different choices in their use of new technologies to innovate with or for citizens.

This essay review discusses three publications on co-creation: ‘We, the government’ by Davied van Berlo (2012), ‘Co-creation of innovation’ by Corry Ehlen (2015), and ‘New Business Models’ by Jan Jonker et al. (2014). The theme of this essay is the specific character of co-creation compared to other buzzwords (e.g. participation, co-production, social responsibility) that can be heard in the search for a new balance between the state and civil society. We suggest that the distinctive character of co-creation lies in the active engagement of parties who work together to co-create. Co-creation means raising the bar of collaboration and dialogue. Openness, trust, equality and reciprocity are emphasised as essential elements in the process. It is literally about collectively creating multiple values in which there should be plenty of room for creativity and sharing ideas. Following on the publications of Ehlen and Jonker a dual vision on co-creation arises. In general terms, the potential of co-creation depends on the know-how, commitment and values of the actors involved (microscopic perspective) and on the social capital in the wider environment that they can draw upon to bolster the co-creation process (macroscopic perspective).

Onderzoek van Bureau Onderzoek en Statistiek van de gemeente Amsterdam en het Verwey-Jonker Instituut wijst uit dat het ervaren van overlast door kinderen en jongeren een van de belangrijkste oorzaken van spanningen tussen bevolkingsgroepen in buurten is. De mate van publieke familiariteit is bepalend voor de mate waarin deze overlast voor spanningen zorgt. In buurten met weinig publieke familiariteit (her)kennen bewoners elkaar niet en voelen ze zich niet vertrouwd. Ze durven jongeren en hun ouders niet aan te spreken, waardoor het ervaren van jeugdoverlast kan leiden tot opgekropte irritaties en spanningen. Hetzelfde geldt voor buurten waar bewoners weinig ruggensteun ervaren van instanties. Bewoners hebben het gevoel dat hun meldingen van overlast niet serieus genomen worden en dat ze er alleen voor staan, wat leidt tot frustraties en spanningen.

Putnam (2007) claims that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods, residents of all ethnic groups tend to ‘hunker down’. Solidarity and trust are lower, mutual help and cooperation rarer, friends fewer. Various studies in the United States found a clear correlation between diversity and cohesion, and also for many different dimensions of social cohesion. Whether this finding also holds in other (European) settings is the subject of hot and unresolved debate. Specifically, this article addresses the question whether living in an ethnically diverse setting has negative consequences for social cohesion in the Netherlands as well. To further the debate, this article pulls apart various contexts and various dimensions of social cohesion. This article examines the relationship between ethnic diversity (in socio-graphically defined neighbourhoods) and four dimensions of social cohesion (trust, informal help, voluntary work and neighbourhood contacts) for the 50 largest cities in the Netherlands. We conclude that the Putnam hypothesis holds only to a limited extent in the Dutch context. The only aspect on which ethnic diversity has a negative effect is the degree of contact in the neighbourhood.