Zoekresultaat: 30 artikelen

x
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.
Serie

Ambitieuze en ambivalente vernieuwing van de lokale democratie in Nederland

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2019
Auteurs Dr. Linze Schaap, Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks, Dr. Niels Karsten MA e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article in the series on the local democratic audit, the authors argue that municipal democracy in the Netherlands has become a multiple democracy. Within the formal framework of representative democracy, numerous democratic arrangements have emerged that may be referred to as participatory, direct and also what the authors call ‘do-democracy’. Additions to representative democracy did not come without reason: representative democracy is not a perfect system, either in theory or in practice. Efforts have been made to improve the functioning of representative democracy in a number of ways. Three of these are discussed in this article. The authors note that these three reforms do not solve the problems in representative democracy. So the Dutch municipalities have started looking for additions to representative democracy. In this article various forms of participatory, do-it-yourself and direct democracy are discussed. Many effects of these reforms are still unknown and knowledge about them has crumbled, but one conclusion can be drawn: people with a low education are not inclined to take part, even with arrangements that are easily accessible. Striving for a more vital local democracy seems meaningful; the authors formulate a number of ways of thinking about this.


Dr. Linze Schaap
Dr. L. Schaap is universitair hoofddocent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks
Prof. dr. F. Hendriks is hoogleraar bestuurskunde aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Dr. Niels Karsten MA
Dr. N. Karsten MA is universitair docent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Dr. Julien van Ostaaijen
Dr. J.J.C. van Ostaaijen is universitair docent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg en voorzitter van de Rekenkamercommissie in de gemeente Zundert.

Charlotte Wagenaar MSc.
C.C.L. Wagenaar MSc is onderzoeker bij de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

De interactielogica van verzet: een dramaturgische analyse van escalatie tijdens een informatieavond

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden Protest, Governance, Participation, Dramaturgy, Interaction logic
Auteurs Sander van Haperen MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Theory about participation has long moved beyond merely informing citizens, arguing for more influential and effective instruments. Nevertheless, ‘inspraak’ remains widely implemented in Dutch practice, with mixed results. This article argues that the deliberative quality of the instrument is closely related to the performance of power. Dramaturgical concepts are employed to analyze resistance against the siting of a homeless facility in an Amsterdam neighborhood. One particular evening sets the stage for escalation, which ultimately frustrates the policy process. The analysis shows how the performance of the meeting invokes specific kinds of resistance. A different performance of ‘informing’ could potentially improve the quality of the public sphere.


Sander van Haperen MSc
Sander van Haperen MSc is promovendus Political sociology aan the Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Artikel

Waarderen of veroordelen?

De betekenis van kritische burgers die niet meepraten voor lokale participatieprocessen

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2018
Auteurs Drs. Christine Bleijenberg, Prof. dr. Noëlle Aarts en Dr. Reint Jan Renes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    To be able to realize the ambitions of citizen participation, diversity of participants is a crucial condition. At the same time excluding groups of citizens, amongst them critical citizens, is inextricably linked with citizen participation. In this article in the series ‘Local democratic audit’, the authors wonder what the exclusion of critical citizens means for the process and outcome of citizen participation. Through two empirical studies during a spatial intervention in different municipalities in the Netherlands, they investigated how people involved in a participation process spoke about critical citizens and their manifestations. The results show that the way these critical citizens are discussed either legitimizes exclusion or questions it critically. The legitimization of exclusion is detrimental to the support for spatial intervention. The problematization of exclusion results in a responsive approach to critical citizens, which is beneficial for both the course of the participation process and for the support for the spatial intervention.


Drs. Christine Bleijenberg
Drs. C. Bleijenberg is promovendus aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen en is verbonden aan het lectoraat Crossmediale Communicatie in het Publieke Domein van de Hogeschool Utrecht.

Prof. dr. Noëlle Aarts
Prof. dr. M.N.C. Aarts is hoogleraar Socio-Ecological Interactions aan het Institute for Science in Society (ISiS) van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Dr. Reint Jan Renes
Dr. R.J. Renes is lector Crossmediale Communicatie in het Publieke Domein aan de Hogeschool Utrecht en universitair hoofddocent aan de Wageningen Universiteit.
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 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

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.

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

Hoe divers, invloedrijk en deliberatief is een G1000?

Het ontwerp van een burgertop en de verwezenlijking van democratische waarden

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 1 2016
Auteurs Dr. Ank Michels en Dr. Harmen Binnema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In imitation of the G1000 in Belgium in the Netherlands G1000-meetings were held in Amersfoort, Kruiskamp, Uden and Groningen and a citizens summit in Amsterdam with a similar design. In this article the authors investigate the design of these citizens summits and their contribution to a number of important democratic values. What is the diversity of the participants, the influence on policies and the quality of the discussions during the citizen summit? Their research shows that the diversity of the group of participants is rather limited. The selection method that is chosen, whether a lottery selection or an open invitation, doesn’t make much difference for the diversity of the group of participants. In addition the influence of citizens summits on policies and politics is nearly absent. The subjects that come forward at citizens summits hardly ever come back in the local policies, not even at the citizens summit in Uden, where the municipal council has taken the initiative to organize a G1000. Finally, in general the participants qualify the discussions at the table during citizens summits as constructive and inspiring. The specific form of the dialogue has only little influence on the extent to which the participants feel themselves heard and feel free to say whatever they want.


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

Dr. Harmen Binnema
Dr. H. Binnema is universitair docent aan de Universiteit Utrecht bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO). Hij is ook programmacoördinator van de masteropleiding Bestuur en Beleid voor professionals.
Artikel

Leerproces voor planologisch wetenschappelijk onderzoek en de praktijk

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 4 2015
Trefwoorden practice-oriented research, practice-academic divide, learning cycle, cost benefiet analysis, transit-oriented development
Auteurs Dr. Els Beukers en Dr. Wendy Tan
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Planning research is increasingly focused on bridging the gap between practice and academia. However, this requires much effort and is not as commonplace as it seems. To ensure success, innovative research approaches, practitioners and academics are required. The experiential learning cycle of Kolb and Fry (1974) offers a research framework for the authors to reflect on their practice-oriented research on Cost Benefit Analysis processes (CBA) and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) respectively. Both research projects are compared using the learning cycle. The cycle was completed in the CBA project but only partially resolved in the TOD project. Reflecting on their experiences with applying the learning cycle, the authors conclude on the possibilities and limitations of this application and offer insight into how the interaction between theory and practice can occur.


Dr. Els Beukers
Dr. E. Beukers is als adviseur Impact Analyse en Dialoogmanagement werkzaam bij Balance.

Dr. Wendy Tan
Dr. ir. W.G.Z. Tan is als universitair docent infrastructuur en verkeer- en vervoersplanning werkzaam bij de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Faculteit Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen.

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

Spanningsvolle verbindingen tussen verticale en horizontale sturing

Een empirische analyse van de Dialoogtafel in Groningen

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 3 2015
Auteurs Drs. Arnout Ponsioen, Drs. Mildo van Staden en Prof. dr. Albert Meijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article analyses the Dialogue Table (‘Dialoogtafel’ in Dutch) in Groningen, the most northern province in the Netherlands, as an example of connecting vertical and horizontal steering. The Dialogue Table was set up to supervise the spending of compensation money for the damage from the earthquakes caused by gas extraction in this province. The Dialogue Table combines vertical forms of governance, such as a unilateral imposition of the budget and the presidency of the Dialogue Table, and more horizontal forms such as equal deliberation between administrative bodies and stakeholders. The central questions are which tensions will occur in these two different logics of steering, how one deals with these tensions and which competences this requires from civil servants. An exploratory analysis of the case shows that tensions occur around (1) the starting conditions (costs, presidency, selection and representation), (2) the progress of the process (desired results, openness, inequality) and (3) the outcomes of the process (influence). On the basis of their research, the authors offer recommendations about the organization of such hybrid steering processes and indicate which competences are required in this respect from civil servants.


Drs. Arnout Ponsioen
Drs. A. Ponsioen heeft bijna twintig jaar ervaring in het advieswerk. Hij is sinds 2014 eigenaar van bureau DuiDT, dat advies, onderzoek en inspiratie biedt voor organisaties in de publieke sector die aansluiting zoeken bij de (online) netwerksamenleving.

Drs. Mildo van Staden
Drs. M. van Staden is senior-adviseur op het terrein van sturing, ICT en sociale media bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken.

Prof. dr. Albert Meijer
Prof. dr. A.J. Meijer is hoogleraar Publieke Innovatie aan de Universiteit Utrecht en redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.

    The first contribution to this special issue on local democracy in the Netherlands is the inaugural speech of Job Cohen (the former mayor of Amsterdam) held on January 9th 2015 at the University of Leiden as extraordinary professor at the prestigious Thorbecke-chair. His field is the theory of the municipality as an administrative, political and legal system. The title of his inaugural speech was ‘The fourth D’, in which the first three D’s stand for three different decentralizations of tasks to the Dutch municipalities and the fourth D for democracy. In his speech Cohen advocates a deliberative form of democracy, because it doesn’t emphasize differences and the exaggeration of differences, but emphasizes what the members of a community have in common. Deliberative democracy wants to create space for this common interest through the establishment of an arena for dialogue. Job Cohen is particularly taken by the ideas of the Belgian writer David Van Reybrouck about lottery selection and citizen participation and corresponding initiatives like G1000: a civic-summit, a form of deliberative democracy that generates new ideas, opens new perspectives and increases trust in the democratic process. The element of lottery selection (that was previously put on the agenda by the American professor James Fishkin) is essential for these results, because it creates a maximum of diversity and real involvement of all layers of the population: full citizen participation.


Prof. mr. dr. Job Cohen
Prof. mr. dr. M.J. Cohen is bijzonder hoogleraar decentrale overheden (Thorbecke-leerstoel) aan de Universiteit Leiden en redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.

    This article is about local referenda in the Netherlands. Based on extensive empirical research the authors make clear how the local referendum in the Dutch democracy has developed not only in time and practice, but also how we can interpret the referendum theoretically. They show how in scientific literature, but also in practice, they are still looking for the meaning of the local referendum for Dutch local democracy. The authors also show that the practice of Dutch local referenda is searching, varied and in continuous development. Since 1906 193 local referenda are organized in the Netherlands. By far most referenda took place after the nineties of the last century. Local referenda are a local democratic ‘domain’, that will be explored in the Netherlands in the coming years. Last year a lot of attention has been given to the (local) referendum in the domain of legislation. The process of legislation has not been finished yet. The authors believe this offers an unique opportunity to share the available knowledge and experience about referenda and debate the adequate filling in and anchoring of the (local) referendum. This is a task for scientists, administrators and politicians alike.


Koen van der Krieken Msc
K.H.J. van der Krieken MSc MA is promovendus aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Dr. Laurens de Graaf
Dr. L.J. de Graaf is werkzaam als universitair docent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

    The focus of the diversity policy in the Dutch public sector has moved during the past decennia. In the eighties offering equal chances for the different target groups was the central policy goal, after the millennium this became the effective and efficient management of a diverse work force in order to arrive at a better performing public sector, also called the business case of diversity. This article investigates the question how far the Dutch cabinet has influenced the diversity policy of public organizations. The answer to the question is that there was limited influence from the Dutch cabinet on the arguments for diversity of public organizations, but there was greater influence on the diversity interventions, especially in three sectors: central government, municipalities and police. This influence on interventions of other (‘fellow’) governments is caused by the strong steering of the cabinet. The interventions undertaken therefore reflect to a more limited extent the business case of diversity and remain stuck in the old target group policy. However, public organizations with a longer history in diversity policy, that operate closer to society and see the necessity for diversity, are more inclined to embrace the business case and start interventions that are related to this new approach.


Drs. Saniye Celik
Drs. S. Celik is accountmanager voor de decentralisaties in het sociaal domein bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties en buitenpromovenda aan het Instituut Bestuurskunde van de Universiteit Leiden, Campus Den Haag.
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

What the frack?

Politiserende deliberatie in de besluitvorming over schaliegas

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2014
Trefwoorden wicked problems, shale gas, hydraulic fracturing, deliberation
Auteurs Tamara Metze
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Within the past two years, hydraulic fracturing for shale gas became a highly contested technology in the Netherlands. Possible negative environmental impacts are at strained terms with possible economic, energy and geo-political benefits. In addition, there are many scientific uncertainties about, for example water contamination, methane emissions, the amounts of gas to extract and the risk of earth quakes. Societal conflict and scientific uncertainties make fracking for shale gas a wicked problem for decision makers. This article demonstrates that the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs has implemented several instruments for deliberation, such as a consultation round with stakeholders and a sound board for an independent research. These failed to lead to the desired support for fracking. In this contribution, I demonstrate that these instruments led to reason giving but not to structuring of the problem. They were used by governmental actors and protest groups as a political platform that was fuel for the political conflict.


Tamara Metze
Dr. T. Metze is verbonden aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Politiek, participatie en experts in de besluitvorming over super wicked problems

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2014
Trefwoorden wicked problems, scientific knowledge, social engineering, deliberative democracy
Auteurs Tamara Metze en Esther Turnhout
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This special issue focusses on deliberative elements in deciding over wicked problems. We present four case studies in which some form of deliberation was organized: the placement of mobile phone masts, hydraulic fracturing for shale gas, the failed HPV vaccination campaign and climate dialogues organized to enhance deliberative knowledge production over climate change. The case studies demonstrate how each of the deliberative processes has become politicized and that deliberative governance runs the risk of turning into a technocratic policy approach.


Tamara Metze
Dr. T.A.P. Metze is verbonden aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Esther Turnhout
Dr. E. Turnhout is verbonden aan de Universiteit van Wageningen.
Boekbespreking

De nieuwe netwerksamenleving en openbaar bestuur

Wat Landsmeer ons leert over onze bestuurlijke toekomst

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2013
Auteurs Gjalt de Graaf en Albert Meijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the Chronicle of a recent policy trend Gjalt de Graaf and Albert Meijer discuss how the new network society influences public administration by exploring a specific case of how citizens are aiming to bring their resigned mayor back in office by a social media campaign.


Gjalt de Graaf
Dr. G. de Graaf is universitair hoofddocent aan de Vrije Universiteit.

Albert Meijer
Dr. A.J. Meijer is universitair hoofddocent aan de Universiteit Utrecht.
Toont 1 - 20 van 30 gevonden teksten
« 1
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.