Civil servants at the Dutch authorities increasingly make use of behavioural insights in the policy process. These insights are primarily put on the agenda at the level of the national government in the Netherlands. However, they also seem to be particularly useful at the local level. After all, behaviour-conscious policy focuses on behavioural change through the redesign of the direct environments of citizens, and local authorities have a clear view and control over these environments. In the light of this potential, this article explores the current rise and institutionalization of behavioural expertise in local government. The work practices of local behavioural experts are examined on the basis of three dimensions of local government: positioning, practices and politics. The findings show that local behavioural experts are still in an experimental and start-up phase, but at the same time are already working with a wealth of behavioural assignments. In doing so, they deal tactically with scarce resources, resistance and abrasive institutional logics. The article shows that behavioural insights and designs are also promising in local government, that a local administrative landscape of behavioural expertise is already being developed; and that making meters in the field of behavioural expertise calls for several forms of coordination.

With the term ‘system responsibility’ the authors (both working for the Dutch Scientific Council for Governmental Policy) mean the responsibility for the functioning of complex ‘administrative systems’. In these complex administrative systems supervision can have different roles: to assess the functioning one-sided from the perspective of the government, but also to put on reflective glasses (‘from afar glasses’) that aim at the bigger picture of divergent rationalities of the actors involved. In the second case, there is ‘system responsible supervision’. This essay explores the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of the desirability of system responsible supervision in a society with complex, compound administrative systems. Such supervision can contribute to a somewhat better understanding of these systems and a somewhat better ability to adjust these complex systems. These supervisors can be seen as a necessary complement of the withdrawal of the government and the rise of ‘horizontal administration’, in which the hierarchical decision-power of the central government has gradually shifted to other actors. As unelected and as relatively independent actors they occupy a new, hybrid place in the ‘trias politica’, because on the one hand they have taken over functions of elected politicians and administrators and on the other hand they function in many respects as a quasi-judicial power.

The Netherlands enjoys a long-standing reputation in the field of road safety. Following the ‘Sustainable Road Safety’ program of the 1990s, the infrastructural layout considerably reduces the risk of accidents while at the same time many measures are in place to improve road user behavior. In recent years, however, there have been several developments that may affect the success of the approach. In addition to an ageing population, urbanization, and the rise of new technologies, there is a combination of decentralization, policy integration, and budgetary restraints.
This contribution presents the philosophy behind the sustainable road safety program and describes its key elements. It discusses policy and societal developments, and the continuing need to improve road safety, especially at a decentralized level. The article argues in favor of a continued systematic approach towards safer road traffic, also in periods of decentralization and limited budgets. It presents a concrete perspective of the role of policy analysis and policy evaluation to develop a proactive approach to road safety under the new conditions. In this, evidence-based interventions, an active use of safety performance indicators, and a focus on success are key elements.

Many authors have claimed that the role of the Dutch government, and other governments, is changing. The overarching consensus is that states are now retreating after decades of expansion. This paper investigates, on the basis of a secondary analysis of existing data, whether, where and how the Dutch state can be said to be retreating. This leads to mixed findings: four different analyses of the ‘state of the state’. The first tale, focusing on macro financial indicators, suggests ‘stability’. The second tale, focusing on net changes in expenses, depicts further expansion, particularly in the domain of health care. The third tale, focusing on policy intentions, sees a retreat indeed. And the fourth tale would suggest that it is merely about a reorganization of the state itself.

The Dutch Minister for the Interior Ronald Plasterk has proposed far-reaching reforms for the structuring of the Dutch nation state. These reforms include decentralising tasks to municipalities and merging several provinces. So far, these plans have met with criticism and derision. This article discusses the tensions included in Plasterk’s plans and proposes several strategies for how change could still be possible.

The Netherlands is engaged in reforming several of its public service provision sectors by limiting their hybrid (mixed public/private) character. This special issue deals with these reforms. We have a closer look at the systems of transport, education and housing, and also discuss reforms of the Dutch nation state. Each article poses three basic questions: why has the sector evolved as it has? Why is change seen as necessary? And how does this process take place? By doing so, we draw general lessons on how the Netherlands deals with system change and public management reform.

This concluding article of our special issue on public management reform in the Netherlands summarizes the information presented in the individual articles. We conclude that reform is often an incremental process, aimed at streamlining existing governance arrangements rather than creating and rolling out grand new designs.

This text provides a summary of an interview we conducted with Roel in ’t Veld, who (as an academic, advisor and civil servant) is a veteran of public management reform in the Netherlands. In ’t Veld criticizes the approach often taken by these reforms, as they are often not based on an in-depth study of the problem in question and its historic background. Scholars in public administration should not only provide critical assessments of reforms from the side-lines but should also get their hands dirty and participate in them.

Interview with Hugo Backx, director public health, municipal health service Hart voor Brabant.

In this issue of Bestuurskunde we deal with the claim that municipalities should be first port of call for citizens when it comes to the provision of public services. We discuss what this position means for municipalities and which challenges and dangers it brings.

This concluding article provides several suggestions on how municipalities can perform best in their role as ‘first governments’ and how they can deal with the tensions that this position produces.