Zoekresultaat: 11 artikelen

x
Article

Opening an Absolute Majority A Typology of Motivations for Opening and Selecting Coalition Partners

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering Online First 2021
Trefwoorden negotiation, absolute majority, oversized coalition, motivations, local election
Auteurs Geoffrey Grandjean en Valentine Meens
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Following the municipal elections in the Walloon Region (Belgium) on 14 October 2018, 189 political groups won an absolute majority. Twenty-two of these decided not to exercise power alone, but favoured the formation of an oversized coalition by integrating a minority partner. The aim of this article is to identify the motivations behind the formation of a local coalition when one of the partners has an absolute majority. Semi-structured interviews with mayors and leaders of political groups in these municipalities make it possible to identify the motivations for, first, the choice to open and, second, the choice of a minority partner. By distinguishing between necessary and supporting motivations, this article shows that the search for greater representation is a necessary motivation for the choice to open, whereas personal affinities and memories of the past are necessary motivations for choosing minority partners. By prioritising motivations, this article shows that.


Geoffrey Grandjean
Geoffrey Grandjean is Professor of Political Science at the Faculty of Law, Political Science and Criminology of the University of Liege and Director of the Institut de la decision publique.

Valentine Meens
Valentine Meens holds a master's degree in political science from the University of Liege.
Vrij artikel

Duwtjes of druk?

De percepties van zorgprofessionals aangaande ‘nudging’ in ziekenhuizen

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 4 2020
Trefwoorden nudging, ethics, autonomy, healthcare, professionals
Auteurs Nienke Maria Huis in ’t Veld MSc, Rosanna Nagtegaal MSc en Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    ‘Nudging’ has been introduced as a policy and management tool as a way to influence behaviour without limiting choice. Nudging is mainly used to influence citizens’ behaviour but can also be used to influence the behavior of healthcare professionals. Examples include posters used to improve hand-hygiene compliance, or ‘default’ options in systems to reduce excessive prescriptions of specific medication. However, using nudges raises major worries and ethical issues, also in relation to the independence of healthcare professionals. While the scientific discussion about the desirability of nudges is extensive, the voices of healthcare professionals, who are the subjects of nudges, remain unheard. In this qualitative research we explore the perceptions of nudging held by various healthcare professionals. The interviews reveal that healthcare professionals are generally unfamiliar with the concept of nudging, but they do recognize nudges in their own field of practice. Furthermore, while they are predominantly positive about nudging, they also express concerns about the pressure on their autonomy. These concerns are related to changing professionalism and regulatory pressures in healthcare.


Nienke Maria Huis in ’t Veld MSc
N.M. Huis in ’t Veld, MSc is alumna aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.

Rosanna Nagtegaal MSc
R. Nagtegaal, MSc is promovenda aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.

Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
Prof. dr. M. Noordegraaf is hoogleraar Publiek Management aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.
Article

Access_open Voters of Populist Parties and Support for Reforms of Representative Democracy in Belgium

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Belgian politics, democratic reforms, elections, populist voters, representative democracy
Auteurs Lisa van Dijk, Thomas Legein, Jean-Benoit Pilet e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Recently, studies have burgeoned on the link between populism and demands for democratic reforms. In particular, scholars have been debating the link between populist citizens or voters and support for referendums. In this article, we examine voters of populist parties (Vlaams Belang (VB) and Parti du Travail de Belgique-Partij van de Arbeid (PTB-PVDA)) in Belgium in 2019 and we look at their attitudes towards various types of democratic reforms. We find that voters of populist parties differ from the non-populist electorate in their support for different kinds of reforms of representative democracy. Voters of VB and PTB-PVDA have in common stronger demands for limiting politicians’ prerogatives, for introducing binding referendums and for participatory budgeting. While Vlaams Belang voters are not significantly different from the non-populist electorate on advisory referendums, citizens’ forums or technocratic reform, PVDA-PTB voters seem more enthusiastic.


Lisa van Dijk
Lisa van Dijk (corresponding author), KU Leuven.

Thomas Legein
Thomas Legein, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB).

Jean-Benoit Pilet
Jean-Benoit Pilet, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB).

Sofie Marien
Sofie Marien, KU Leuven.
Article

Fiscal Consolidation in Federal Belgium

Collective Action Problem and Solutions

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden fiscal consolidation, fiscal policy, federalism, intergovernmental relations, High Council of Finance
Auteurs Johanna Schnabel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Fiscal consolidation confronts federal states with a collective action problem, especially in federations with a tightly coupled fiscal regime such as Belgium. However, the Belgian federation has successfully solved this collective action problem even though it lacks the political institutions that the literature on dynamic federalism has identified as the main mechanisms through which federal states achieve cooperation across levels of government. This article argues that the regionalization of the party system, on the one hand, and the rationalization of the deficit problem by the High Council of Finance, on the other, are crucial to understand how Belgium was able to solve the collective action problem despite its tightly coupled fiscal regime and particularly high levels of deficits and debts. The article thus emphasizes the importance of compromise and consensus in reducing deficits and debts in federal states.


Johanna Schnabel
School of Politics and International Relations, University of Kent, Rutherford College, Canterbury CT2 7NX, United Kingdom.
Article

Transformative Welfare Reform in Consensus Democracies

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden consensus democracy, welfare state, social investment, transformative reform, Belgium and the Netherlands
Auteurs Anton Hemerijck en Kees van Kersbergen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article takes up Lijphart’s claim that consensus democracy is a ‘kinder, gentler’ form of democracy than majoritarian democracy. We zoom in on contemporary welfare state change, particularly the shift towards social investment, and argue that the kinder, gentler hypothesis remains relevant. Consensus democracies stand out in regard to the extent to which their political institutions help to overcome the politically delicate intricacies of governing for the long term. We theorize the features that can help to solve the problem of temporal commitment in democracy through processual mechanisms and illustrate these with short case studies of the contrasting welfare state reform experiences in the Netherlands and Belgium.


Anton Hemerijck
Anton Hemerijck is Professor of Political Science and Sociology at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, Italy.

Kees van Kersbergen
Kees van Kersbergen is Professor of Comparative Politics at the Department of Political Science of Aarhus University, Denmark.
Artikel

Beleid voor de irrationele mens

Hoe gedragswetenschap de bestuurskunde zou kunnen versterken

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden public administration, psychology, decisions, (ir)rationality
Auteurs Dr. Marijke van Putten, Prof. dr. Wilco van Dijk en Prof. dr. Eric van Dijk
Samenvatting

    Policy is often based on the assumption that people are rational decision makers. Rational decision makers search all relevant information before they make a decision. They list the pros and cons of relevant options and make a well thought choice that best fits their fixed preferences. However, research from amongst others psychology and behavioral economics shows that people decide differently and that they are irrational, emotional decision makers instead. Policy therefore fits people’s decision making strategies worse than expected. It is important for policy makers to gain insight into situational influences on decisions and the influence of the so-called choice architecture on decisions. In this article we discuss research that tested when policy was more efficient, based on behavioral insights and the view of man as an irrational, emotional being.


Dr. Marijke van Putten

Prof. dr. Wilco van Dijk

Prof. dr. Eric van Dijk
Artikel

Meer dan een nudge

Gedragsexperts bij de Nederlandse overheid

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2016
Trefwoorden nudging, behavioral insights, behavior experts, practices, choice architecture
Auteurs Joram Feitsma Msc
Samenvatting

    Policymakers are increasingly taking notice of behavioural scientific insights to improve their policies. New occupational practices, such as ‘Behavioral Insights Teams’, are emerging within government. This article explores this emergence, based on an ethnographic study on the practices of pioneering behaviour experts in Dutch central government. It argues that the work of these behavior experts is richer and more complex than standard role models, which tend to portray policymakers as direct and standalone choice architects, assume. Three key practices of behavior experts are identified: (1) choice architecture, in various forms; (2) behaviour analysis; and (3) capacity building.


Joram Feitsma Msc
Artikel

Een duwtje om over na te denken

De belofte van nudging voor de terugtredende overheid

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2014
Trefwoorden nudge, choice architecture, libertarian paternalism, autonomy, decision-making
Auteurs Jasper Zuure MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Nudging is currently high on the political agenda. The idea behind nudging is that the government can gently push citizens in the ‘good’ direction by anticipating their predictable irrational behaviour. In the Dutch discussion nudging often is seen as an instrument to influence citizens more. Therefore critics fear paternalism, manipulation and technocracy. However, we could also see nudging as a replacement of more coercive instruments. Then nudges might even offer chances for a state that is withdrawing under the condition that citizens have both the opportunity and the capability to make alternative choices in practice than the choices to which nudges aim. Therefore nudges by the government should not avoid reflective and conscious thinking processes, but rather stimulate deliberation and make citizens more aware of their decisions.


Jasper Zuure MSc
J. Zuure, MSc is sociaal psycholoog en adviseur bij de Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling (RMO). Tevens schrijft hij een proefschrift in de politieke filosofie over massapsychologie en politieke theorieën.
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

Handelingsperspectieven in het politiek-financieel complex

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden financial crisis, action logics, decision-making theories, regulatory bodies, financial institutions
Auteurs Dr. Kutsal Yesilkagit
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The world-wide meltdown of financial markets is one of the largest human-made crises in modern times. The question that trembles on the lips of many researcher is why the main actors, all considered as rational, have displayed such self-destructing behaviour. Answers have been sought and partially found in theories as varied as ‘regulatory capture’, ‘failed regulation’, and inadequate crisis management. In this special issue, an alternative view is suggested. The financial sector, like any other complex sector, is made up of loosely coupled actors and actor settings (i.e. financial institutions, regulatory bodies, political actors), each driven by different action logics. The studies in this special issue each deeply examine the action logic of one actor group. The purpose of this issue is hence to parcel out the various action logics and suggest directions for further research to combine better the various actors and their differing action logics.


Dr. Kutsal Yesilkagit
Kutsal Yesilkagit is universitair hoofddocent bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit Utrecht. Correspondentiegegevens: A.K.Yesilkagit@uu.nl.
Artikel

Verantwoordelijke vrijheid: responsabilisering van burgers op voorwaarden van de staat

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden governance, responsibilisation, political discourse, politics, public administration
Auteurs Rik Peeters en Gerard Drosterij
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Behind many notions of ‘governance’, there lies the image of a ‘modest’ or ‘retreating’ state. The assumption is that local and national authorities can only perform effectively if in cooperation with other public and private actors. Generally, it is said, governments increasingly lack the legitimacy for top-down interventions and hence the need of including participative citizen involvement in policy making and implementation. In recent years this democratic image has been disputed in scientific debates because of its lack of attention for new forms of interventionism by the state in societal processes, e.g. crime, youth care, immigration and integration. In this article, we aim to contribute to this other understanding of modern governance by analysing Dutch political discourse between 2001 and 2010 on (implicit) notions of the role and responsibility of the state. We show how the idea of ‘responsibilisation’ of citizens is turned into an argument for more instead of less state involvement in societal processes and citizens’ lives. By emphasizing ‘shared responsibilities’ between government and society, a tricky picture of parity is sketched of this relation. Dutch government presents itself as ‘an ally’ of citizens in fighting pressing social problems, but in the meantime an ideal of ‘responsible behaviour’ is constructed, namely, citizen behaviour in concordance with government’s policy ambitions. Within this political discourse, the socio-liberal idea of ‘responsibility’ turns into ‘responsibilisation on government’s terms’ and ‘irresponsible’ behaviour becomes a legitimate focal point for deep state interventions through techniques of governance.


Rik Peeters
Rik Peeters is onderzoeker en promovendus bij de Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur. Correspondentiegegevens: drs. R. Peeters, Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur, Lange Voorhout 17, 2514 EB Den Haag, peeters@nsob.nl.

Gerard Drosterij
Gerard Drosterij is onderzoeker bij de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur.
Interface Showing Amount
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.