Zoekresultaat: 21 artikelen

x
Article

Still Consociational? Belgian Democracy, 50 Years After ‘The Politics of Accommodation’

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Belgium, consociational democracy, Lijphart, federalism, ethnolinguistic conflict
Auteurs Didier Caluwaerts en Min Reuchamps
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Despite the enduring importance of Lijphart’s work for understanding democracy in Belgium, the consociational model has come under increasing threat. Owing to deep political crises, decreasing levels of trust in elites, increasing levels of ethnic outbidding and rising demands for democratic reform, it seems as if Lijphart’s model is under siege. Even though the consociational solution proved to be very capable of transforming conflict into cooperation in Belgian politics in the past, the question we raise in this article is whether and to what extent the ‘politics of accommodation’ is still applicable to Belgian democracy. Based on an in-depth analysis of the four institutional (grand coalition, proportionality, mutual veto rights and segmental autonomy) and one cultural (public passivity) criteria, we argue that consociational democracy’s very nature and institutional set-up has largely hollowed out its potential for future conflict management.


Didier Caluwaerts
Didier Caluwaerts is professor of political science at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. His research deals with democratic governance and innovation in deeply divided societies. With Min Reuchamps, he has recently published “The Legitimacy of Citizen-led Deliberative Democracy: The G1000 in Belgium” (Routledge, 2018).

Min Reuchamps
Min Reuchamps is professor of political science at the Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain). His teaching and research interests are federalism and multi-level governance, democracy and its different dimensions, relations between language(s) and politics and in particular the role of metaphors, as well as participatory and deliberative methods.
Article

Access_open What Is Left of the Radical Right?

The Economic Agenda of the Dutch Freedom Party 2006-2017

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden radical right-wing populist parties, economic policies, welfare chauvinism, populism, deserving poor
Auteurs Simon Otjes
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article examines the economic agenda of the Dutch Freedom Party. It finds that this party mixes left-wing and right-wing policy positions. This inconsistency can be understood through the group-based account of Ennser-Jedenastik (2016), which proposes that the welfare state agenda of radical right-wing populist parties can be understood in terms of populism, nativism and authoritarianism. Each of these elements is linked to a particular economic policy: economic nativism, which sees the economic interest of natives and foreigners as opposed; economic populism, which seeks to limit economic privileges for the elite; and economic authoritarianism, which sees the interests of deserving and undeserving poor as opposed. By using these different oppositions, radical right-wing populist parties can reconcile left-wing and right-wing positions.


Simon Otjes
Assistant professor of political science at Leiden University and researcher at the Documentation Centre Dutch Political Parties of Groningen University.
Thema-artikel ‘Uitgesproken Bestuurskunde’

Toezicht en governance in de open samenleving

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2019
Trefwoorden corporate crime, Governance, Enforcement, Regulation, public administration
Auteurs Prof. dr. Judith van Erp
Samenvatting

    Regulation and markets have become central steering mechanisms in modern states, but have received relatively little attention in public administration. This contribution argues that questions around regulation, monitoring and enforcement deserve more attention in public administration scholarship. It sketches the development of ‘Regulatory Governance’ as a scholarly field, and discusses the added value of a criminological perspective on relations between state and market. A research agenda on ‘naming and shaming’ brings these perspectives together.


Prof. dr. Judith van Erp
Dossier

De Europese vakbeweging en de vormgeving van sociaal beleid

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Social Europe, European Union, Social policy, Trade unions, ETUC
Auteurs Drs. Saskia Boumans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The European project currently faces not only an economic crisis, but a moral one as well. The economic growth model of social justice combined with market-oriented policies, also referred to as the European social model has lost much of its meaning after ten years of austerity and financial calamities. In 2012 ECB President Draghi says in the Wall Street Journal that the European social model is “gone”, a thing of the past. While only a couple of years later the European Pillar of Social Rights is put in place. What is happening with ‘Social Europe’? And how do trade unions, as a historical motor of social policy in the member states, relate to the European social model, especially since the financial crisis. This article deals with the position of trade unions vis-à-vis European social policy and the European institutions. The European social model, economic governance and the collective bargaining system are discussed as examples of post-crisis European social policy. It will be argued that although the European Commission gives institutional space to social policy and to a role for trade unions, it has always been subordinate to economic integration. And moreover that the recent economic crisis is used at the European level to obtain almost complete control over social policy in the member states.


Drs. Saskia Boumans
Drs. Saskia Boumans werkt als promovendus bij AIAS-HSI (UvA) aan een onderzoek naar werkgeversorganisaties in collectieve onderhandelingen, en heeft de afgelopen vijftien jaar voor de vakbeweging gewerkt.
Dossier

De schuldencrisis in de eurozone: oorzaken, aanpak en implicaties

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Eurozone crisis, Financialization, Bail-outs, Austerity, Banking union, Quantitative easing
Auteurs Dr. Henk Overbeek
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Ten years ago, now, the Eurozone began to shake on its foundations. This article traces the genesis of the crisis and the present state of affairs. As to the causes of the global financial crisis in 2008, I argue that contrary to common understanding, the financial crisis had its deeper causes in a decades old tendency towards crisis in the real economy, produced by the continuous overaccumulation of capital which can only return profits by undertaking speculative short-term investments (a phenomenon known as ‘financialisation’). I then trace how the global financial crisis morphed into a crisis of public deficits and debt in 2010-2011, particularly in the Eurozone. Three factors are shown to be responsible: financialization, design faults in the European monetary union, and the neo-mercantilist strategy of especially Germany and the Netherlands. The paper next looks at the five main traits of the policy responses in the Eurozone: bailing out governments and banks through creating emergency funds; imposition of austerity and budget discipline for member state governments; attempting to create and complete a Eurozone banking union; subsequently the European Central Bank engaged on an unprecedented scale in ‘quantitative easing’; and finally, institutional reform in an attempt to repair the most pressing design faults of the EMU. The paper concludes that the underlying structural factors leading up to the crisis have only been addressed incompletely: the overaccumulation of capital continues, the completion of the banking union is in an impasse, quantitative easing has mostly just intensified financialization by pushing up asset prizes, and institutional reform has taken the form of a fundamentally undemocratic attempt at monetary and political union by stealth. The broader legitimacy of the European project has been substantially undermined, and Europe is not in a better position than eight years ago in case of a new global crisis.


Dr. Henk Overbeek
Henk Overbeek is Emeritus Hoogleraar Internationale betrekkingen aan de afdeling Bestuurswetenschap en Politicologie van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Article

Consensus Democracy and Bureaucracy in the Low Countries

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden consensus democracy, bureaucracy, governance system, Lijphart, policymaking
Auteurs Frits van der Meer, Caspar van den Berg, Charlotte van Dijck e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Taking Lijphart’s work on consensus democracies as our point of departure, we signal a major shortcoming in Lijphart’s focus being almost exclusively on the political hardware of the state structure, leaving little attention for the administrative and bureaucratic characteristics of governance systems. We propose to expand the Lijphart’s model which overviews structural aspects of the executive and the state with seven additional features of the bureaucratic system. We argue that these features are critical for understanding the processes of policymaking and service delivery. Next, in order to better understand the functioning of the Netherlands and Belgium as consensus democracies, we provide a short analysis of the historical context and current characteristics of the political-administrative systems in both countries.


Frits van der Meer
Frits van der Meer, Professor Institute Public Administration, Leiden University.

Caspar van den Berg
Caspar van den Berg, Campus Fryslân, University of Groningen.

Charlotte van Dijck
Charlotte van Dijck, PhD Fellow Research Foundation Flanders (FWO), KU Leuven Public Governance Institute.

Gerrit Dijkstra
Gerrit Dijkstra, Senior Lecturer, Leiden University.

Trui Steen
Trui Steen, Professor, KU Leuven Public Governance Institute.
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.
Dossier

Access_open De politiek van buy-to-let

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden Housing, Financialization, Private investors, Buy-to-let, Private rent
Auteurs Jelke Bosma MSc, Dr. Cody Hochstenbach, Dr. Rodrigo Fernandez e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this feature authors discuss recent research findings that are of interest to readers of Beleid en Maatschappij.
    Mounting concerns exist that small private investors exacerbate the urban housing crisis, by purchasing dwellings to rent out so-called ‘buy-to-let’ purchases. By buying up property, they may drive up house prices and exclude regular house-seekers. In this paper, we show that buy-to-let purchases constitute an increasing share of all purchases on the Dutch housing market, and especially so in larger cities and university cities. We argue these local trends do not emerge out of thin air and are not a ‘natural’ market process but should be considered the product of both global economic developments and national policies supporting these changes. Global developments include the increased mobility and ample availability of capital, exemplified by a prolonged low interest environment and a growing scarcity of high quality collateral and investment opportunities, making housing attractive for storing capital. Dutch housing policies have increasingly restricted access to social rent to low-income groups, while blowing up house prices fuelled with mortgage debts. As a consequence, a growing number of households falls in-between these two tenures: they have to resort to private rent. Private investors respond to and accommodate this demand through buy-to-let investments. Furthermore, the Dutch national government has made steps to relax regulation on the private-rental market and weakened tenant rights. In so doing, it sets the scene for amplifying social and spatial inequalities between the property rich and the property poor.


Jelke Bosma MSc
Jelke Bosma MSc is junior onderzoeker aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Dr. Cody Hochstenbach
Dr. Cody Hochstenbach is postdoctoraal onderzoeker stadsgeografie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, en redactielid van Beleid en Maatschappij.

Dr. Rodrigo Fernandez
Dr. Rodrigo Fernandez is postdoc aan de KU Leuven en onderzoeker bij SOMO.

Prof. dr. Manuel Aalbers
Prof. dr. Manuel Aalbers is hoogleraar sociale en economische geografie aan de KU Leuven.

    In the last few years, platform work and the so-called ‘gig economy’ have been growing across countries. While policy makers are debating the gig economy, there is no single agreed definition of this new type of work and systematic academic reviews are missing. This literature review provides main findings of relevant papers on working in the gig economy. The article shows that the growth of the gig economy fits well into the increasing hybridisation of work, which raises some political questions.


Fabian Dekker
Fabian Dekker is als arbeidssocioloog verbonden aan Regioplan Beleidsonderzoek en lid van de redactie van Beleid en Maatschappij.
Artikel

Slanker maar topzwaar, meer vrouwen maar vergrijsd: het veranderende gezicht van de rijksoverheid 2002-2015

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Cutbacks, Government spending, Civil servants, Public service, Open data
Auteurs Dr. Dimiter Toshkov, Eduard Schmidt MSc en Prof. dr. Caspar van den Berg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article analyses the transformations of the Dutch civil service over the last 15 years, during which numerous cutbacks and reorganizations took place. While existing research predominantly focused on changes in the total number of civil servants, we examine how the distribution of civil servants changed in terms of rank, gender and age. We theorize four methods for shrinking the government apparatus, and for each method, we identify the possible consequences for the composition of the central civil service in terms of hierarchical make-up and of age. Our results indicate that the total number of civil servants only slightly decreased, but the decrease affected differentially the various ranks of the civil service. While at the lower ranks the number of civil servants decreased strongly, at the upper ranks the number actually increased slightly. The number of women in the civil service increased, also in the higher echelons. Regarding the age distribution, we found considerable changes, with the modal age shifting upwards with up to ten years. Altogether, the civil service has become slightly smaller, more gender-balanced, and significantly more senior (both in terms of ranks and age). The results of this study show that it is important for researchers and practitioners to look beyond the trends in the total number of civil servants and explore the deeper changes within the civil service.


Dr. Dimiter Toshkov
Dr. Dimiter Toshkov is werkzaam bij het Instituut Bestuurskunde, Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs, Universiteit Leiden.

Eduard Schmidt MSc
Eduard Schmidt MSc is werkzaam bij het Instituut Bestuurskunde, Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs, Universiteit Leiden.

Prof. dr. Caspar van den Berg
Prof. dr. Caspar van den Berg is werkzaam bij de Campus Fryslan, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

Dr. Alexandre Afonso
Dr. Alexandre Afonso is assistant professor aan de Universiteit van Leiden.

    The central argument according to Eric Corijn in the book of Benjamin Barber is that a legitimate political authority should be created that can add some governance, some regulation to the world system. Within the world system a democratic deficit has emerged that is caused by the process of globalization, in which international political and economic decisions are taken without reference to a global constituency, civil society, citizenship or global public opinion. Eric Corijn sees four strong arguments for an increased political role of mayors through a Global Parliament of Mayors. He also discusses three structural global challenges that can better be dealt with by cities than by dysfunctional nations: a) our relationship with nature, b) the growing social inequality, c) superdiversity resulting from migration and socio-cultural diversification. In dealing with these issues (the political agenda) the Global Parliament of Mayors should act in a pragmatic way.


Prof. dr. Eric Corijn
Prof. dr. E. Corijn is cultuurfilosoof, sociaal wetenschapper en hoogleraar Stadsgeografie aan de Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Hij is oprichter van Cosmopolis, Centre for Urban Research (http://www.cosmopolis.be).
Artikel

Borging van het publiek belang in samenwerkingsverbanden

De rol van intermediairs bij de verlaging van de implementatiekosten van overheidsbeleid

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden public interest,, transaction costs, public private partnership, government information, intermediation
Auteurs Prof. dr. Frank Den Butter en Sjoerd Ten Wolde MSc S.A.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A public interest implies that government intervention is needed in order to enhance societal welfare. After the character of the public interest has been determined from the theoretical perspective of public economics, the government has the responsibility to safeguard the public interest at lowest societal costs. This article discusses the supportive role of intermediaries (or ‘middlemen’), using prescriptions from transaction management. A discussion of three case studies shows how in public private partnerships the knowledge of such intermediaries can be used in order to safeguard the public interest in an efficient manner.


Prof. dr. Frank Den Butter
Frank den Butter is hoogleraar Algemene Economie aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, f.a.g.den.butter@vu.nl.

Sjoerd Ten Wolde MSc S.A.
Sjoerd ten Wolde is onderzoeker aan het Research Institute for Trade and Transaction Management, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, sjoerdtenwolde@gmail.com.

    In a column a journal editor or an author expresses his or her opinion on a particular subject.


Dr. Rodrigo Fernandez
Rodrigo Fernandez is postdoc onderzoeker aan het Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research van de Universiteit van Amsterdam en werkzaam voor de Stichting Onderzoek Multinationale Ondernemingen (SOMO). Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. R. Fernandez, University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Social & Behavioral Sciences, Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR), Plantage Muidergracht 14, 1018 VZ Amsterdam, r.fernandez@uva.nl.
Artikel

Morele verantwoordelijkheid te midden van meervoudigheid

De toegevoegde waarde van het kritische individu in complexe omgevingen met meervoudige belangen

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden financial markets, financial regulation, lobbying, financial crisis, policy paradigms
Auteurs Dr. Liesbeth Noordegraaf-Eelens en Lotte van Vliet MA
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The lessons learned from the financial crisis are not necessarily limited to the financial sector. Both the financial sector and the public sector have to deal with perverse effects. The effects can be related to a reduction of complexity and plurality through introducing (oversimplified and one dimensional) models and financial incentives. However, in doing this, complexity and plurality are often lost: the neglect of multiple interests, goal replacement and too much focus on short term results. As a consequence perverse effects arise.
    Public sectors and organizations face internal and external pressure to act as they do. At the level of organizations or groups this may involve groupthink; at institutional level uniformity is promoted by the dynamics of isomorphism. This article is a critique on simplification and a plea for the (re)introduction of plurality. More specifically, we stress the importance of individual moral responsibility as a resource for and a way to preserve plurality. Not because that is the only option, but because it is an option that we believe deserves more attention. Other options such as changing regulations and changing the structure of supervision are already broadly discussed. We want to draw attention to the individual as parts of multiple organizations and systems. Individuals are therefore a natural carrier of multiplicity and plurality. Taking moral responsibility serious is not an easy task, but a meaningful step towards awareness of perverse effects due to reduction of complexity and plurality.


Dr. Liesbeth Noordegraaf-Eelens
Liesbeth Noordegraaf-Eelens is als universitair docent verbonden aan de Erasmus School of Economics. Eerder verschenen van haar De overspelige bankier (2004) en Op naar de volgende crisis (2009). In 2010 promoveerde zij op het proefschrift Contested Communication. A Critical Analysis of Central Bank Speech. Liesbeth Noordegraaf-Eelens is een van de auteurs van het RMO-advies Tegenkracht organiseren. Lessen uit de kredietcrisis. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. Liesbeth Noordegraaf-Eelens, Erasmus School of Economics, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3000 DR Rotterdam, noordegraaf@ese.eur.nl.

Lotte van Vliet MA
Lotte van Vliet MA werkt als senior adviseur bij de Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling (RMO). Zij is een van de auteurs van het RMO-advies Tegenkracht organiseren. Lessen uit de kredietcrisis. Correspondentiegegevens: l.vliet@adviesorgaan-rmo.nl.
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

Laveren tussen belanghebbenden

Reële autonomie en financieel toezicht

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2012
Trefwoorden regulatory governance, de facto autonomy, financial supervision, bureaucracy, institutional reform
Auteurs Dr. Caelesta Braun
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De facto autonomy, the actual potential of regulatory agencies to go about their daily work, is often conceived to be more important to explain regulatory capacity than its formal autonomy and responsibilities. In this article we investigate whether external context factors, such as the financial and economic crisis have an impact on de facto autonomy. More specifically, we investigate whether the de facto autonomy varies after the crisis and distinctively so for specific subsets of employees within regulatory agencies. According to literature, mid-level managers of agencies are key to de facto autonomy and building a secure reputation for the agency in question. We test these external and internal effects on de facto autonomy with a survey among employees of the Dutch Financial Market Authority (N = 248). The findings show that the perceived influence of stakeholders is relatively constant, but that it is more dynamic for European stakeholders. Both middle managers and employees working at strategic and policy departments of the agency conceive the impact of European stakeholders as increasing in nature. The findings have important implications for our studies of de facto autonomy of regulatory agencies as well as reform potential after major institutional crises.


Dr. Caelesta Braun
Caelesta Braun is universitair docent aan het Department of Governance Studies, Vu University en als gastonderzoeker verbonden aan Antwerp Centre for Institutions and Multilevel Politics (ACIM), University of Antwerp. Correspondentiegegevens: Dr. Caelesta Braun, afdeling Bestuurswetenschappen, faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, De Boelelaan 1081, 1081 HV Amsterdam, c.braun@vu.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

Coördinatie en wederzijdse afhankelijkheid in europese reguleringsnetwerken

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden regulation, European Union, networks
Auteurs Karin van Boetzelaer en Sebastiaan Princen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, European networks of national regulators and supervisors have emerged in a variety of policy fields. These networks are seen as a way to coordinate national implementation and enforcement of EU legislation in situations where centralization of these activities at European level is undesirable or politically infeasible. This article explores whether such networks indeed lead to a higher level of coordination between the member states. The authors do so by comparing four directives (two in the field of financial market supervision and two in the field of environmental policy) the implementation of which was coordinated within European networks. The results of this study show that coordination is strongest for those directives where the interdependence between national supervisors is greatest and national supervisors thus have a direct interest in coordination. This implies that European regulatory networks are only an effective form of coordination for issues involving strong interdependencies between national supervisors.


Karin van Boetzelaer
K.G. van Boetzelaer MSc werkt bij het ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties.

Sebastiaan Princen
Dr S.B.M. Princen is universitair hoofddocent bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht.
Artikel

Bedreigt economische openheid de verzorgingsstaat, of niet?

Een synthese van internationaal vergelijkend onderzoek

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2007
Auteurs Ferry Koster
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    It has been claimed by politicians as well as researchers that economic openness poses a threat to the welfare state. This article investigates whether there is such a threat. Based on the literature four different hypotheses are distinguished; economic openness is negatively, positively, curvilinear or not related to the welfare state. The first and the third hypothesis state that economic openness does threaten the welfare state, whereas the other two hypotheses argue that this is not the case. The empirical studies investigating the relationship between economic openness and the welfare state are systematically reviewed in this article. The analysis shows that economic openness does not threaten the welfare state.


Ferry Koster
Ferry Koster is postdoc bij het Amsterdams Instituut voor ArbeidsStudies (AIAS) en het Henri Polak Instituut van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Recente publicaties: 'Globalization, Social Structure and the Willingness to Help Others. A Multilevel Analysis Across 26 Countries'. European Sociological Review, 23 (4), en Voor elkaar of uit elkaar? Individualisering, globalisering en solidariteit, Amsterdam: Aksant, 2007, met P. de Beer. Correspondentiegegevens: AIAS Plantage Muidergracht 4 1018 TV Amsterdam
Toont 1 - 20 van 21 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.