We study the role division between public and private actors in their search for sustainable innovation of industrial clusters. This search unfolds as a two-phase process. In the first phase, private parties develop different projects for sustainable innovation independently from each other. Without coordination, a common ground for the projects emerges. Through their involvement in several of these projects, public actors are able to take up a central place between the projects and their associated actor coalitions. From this position, they are able to act on the common ground, and mobilize other actors for collaboration. The common ground is translated to a vision, and the private projects are assembled into a program, in which synergetic connections between the different projects are established. This starts the second phase of the process, in which a regional collaboration unfolds, coordinated by the public actors. Thus, the crucial role of private actors is to create the building blocks for sustainable innovation in the early stages of the process. The public actors are crucial in acting on these private initiatives, assembling the building blocks into programmatic effort towards sustainable innovation of industrial clusters. The main strength of public actors lies in their betweenness centrality.

Transparency is a token of modern governance and is said to serve many different goals. Earlier research has shown that the disclosure of information will only be seen by the public and serve its goals if ‘transparators’, such as news media, pay attention to the information. The news media cannot be expected to be uncritical implementers of transparency policies; they will only do so when the policy and ensuing story fit their criteria for newsworthiness. This paper analyzes when and how news media pay attention to different types of policies serving different types of goals. It does so on the basis of quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 8 important cases of transparency-policies in the Netherlands in the past decade. The analysis shows that, even for these high profile cases, the amount of media attention for disclosed information is limited. The analysis also suggests that the media primarily tend to treat items in neutral or critical frames. Particularly in cases where the disclosed information is about the government itself, media stories seem to be primarily negative. These results suggest, in line with prior research, that transparency-policies may easily fail to be effective.

This contribution contains a summary and a conclusion of the special issue ‘Innovation and government: a bad marriage or a fertile relation’. Innovation is said to be not the core quality of government. However, we found that government is actually good in innovation, albeit not in an obvious way. Government has a complex position when it comes to innovation. Sometimes innovation may be seen as a public value. However, innovation usually also involves conflict with other public values that civilians expect government to secure. This the innovation dilemma is that government ought to be both favour and innovation and fight its negative consequences to other public values. The four contributions show how governments deal with this dilemma. They first move along with the innovation and then redefine their positions by for instance developing new instruments, bundling private initiatives or framing private initiatives to large programmes.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) have attracted considerable attention in the Netherlands and Flanders, as witnessed by the recent wave of doctoral theses on this topic. This article presents a review of fourteen Dutch and Flemish doctoral theses, published in the period 2012-2015. The main purpose of the review was to examine what the theses’ most important findings and conclusions are. We found that they mainly focus on themes related to effectiveness, transaction costs, and legitimacy. However, although PPPs are often part of a debate between opponents and proponents, none of the studies found convincing arguments for or against the use of PPPs. Instead, most studies stressed the importance of contextual factors for the success of PPPs. The doctoral theses provided various valuable recommendations for practitioners regarding, e.g., the optimization of PPP procurement and the importance of soft management aspects such as collaborative working and process management. We observed that most theses studied PPPs by applying traditional theories and methods and that the majority focused on the early project phases of planning, procurement, and contracting. More research is needed into the later project phases. Finally, since the generalizability of the theses is limited, more programmatic, quantitative, and (international) comparative research is required.

In this article, we explore how evaluations are managed by Dutch policy departments in terms of six aspects of evaluation capacity: institutions, programming, budgeting, evaluation process and content, and finally, evaluation use. We also sketch how international organisations and a number of larger countries deal with these issues of evaluation capacity. Internationally, a variety of norms, checklists and procedures demonstrate that the commissioning party is considered to play a key role in the realisation of evaluations as well as their use. Here, evaluation and evaluation knowledge are often viewed as part of the policy process rather than as a separate exercise. Our description of evaluation practices in Dutch policy departments reveals that several capacity-enhancing initiatives were developed in the past few years, such as new evaluation institutions or structures and programs to promote the commissioning of effectiveness evaluations. It also suggests, however, that accountability is an important driving force behind evaluation, perhaps more powerful than learning.

Big data is a well-known phenomenon, even a buzzword nowadays. It refers to an abundance of data and new possibilities to process and use them. Big data is subject of many publications. Some pay attention to the many possibilities of big data, others warn us for their consequences. This special issue goes beyond the hype. It contains accessible contributions about opportunities and threats of big data. The authors have put special emphasize on big data institutions. Many publications about big data seem relatively poor on institutions, reflecting a more technocratic approach. In this first contribution we will introduce core concepts around big data. Additionally, we will specify the need to delve into institutions of big data.

The Internet of Things might have a high impact on privacy. However, privacy is a rather ambiguous concept in the world of big data. There is no unambiguous villain, no unambiguous victim, privacy is just one value in a set of other values and the ‘right’ tradeoff cannot be determined ex ante. Instruments to protect privacy prove to have ambiguous effects. They have there pros and cons and we often do not know what these pros and cons will be. The governance challenge will therefor be to develop a variety of new governance arrangements that will have to go through a process of trial and error. The question how to design such a process might be as important as the question what governance arrangements will work.

In 2015, Dutch local governments have become responsible for youth care, social welfare, employment and income assistance programs, as a result of decentralization. Many municipalities have set up service delivery networks and community teams, in which they collaborate with healthcare providers and civic organizations to build integrated care services. It is assumed that these networks will improve outcomes in terms of enhanced people’s self-reliance and healthcare cost control; by operating close to citizens they are in a position to know the client, activate a client’s social network and mobilize specialized professional expertise if necessary. However, a comparative case study of 26 emerging local networks in the Arnhem area indicates that healthcare providers use the networks mainly for presentation purposes in an effort to secure business continuity, that the role of local governments is fuzzy, and that citizen participation only thrives when actively encouraged in a climate of trust.