The effectiveness and legitimacy of action strategies in the realm of spatial decision making Increasing spatial claims require careful decision-making. The question is where, from an institutional point of view, decision-making can best take place. Traditionally, balancing interests takes place in the political arena. Our legal system also guarantees legally anchored interests. In addition, we have expected for decades that participation processes stimulate participation, creativity and co-creation of citizens and entrepreneurs. Moreover, the arrival of the new Environment Act in the Netherlands gives participation a more compelling character: for private initiators, such as project developers, the organization of participation is even a hard requirement in a number of cases. Under the new Environment Act, policymakers, administrators, citizens and companies must constantly make a choice between participating, legalizing or politicizing in decision-making processes. This article analyses this choice from the perspectives of effectiveness and legitimacy. Is decision-making through participation more effective, or are parties better off in the courtroom, or the local council for effective and legitimate decisions? Theoretically, this question is interesting because the answer teaches us about effective and legitimate governance. For the practice of environmental decision-making, we consider when the participatory, legal or political route can best be followed to create both effective and legitimate decisions.

The housing crisis is a social, political and policy issue that has not been as topical in recent decades as it is today. Over the past 25 years, the housing crisis has grown from an orphaned dossier to a problem that even has people taking to the streets. Starting from the issue attention cycle, after the alarm phase we are now in the contemplation phase of this cycle. Although the diagnosis of the problem is shared in this phase and agreement begins to emerge about the solutions, we also see the beginning of reflections on the effectiveness of the intended policy instruments and doubts about the feasibility of the objectives. Nowadays, the question is regularly asked whether major institutional changes should not be made to tackle the housing crisis. This article uses the current contemplation phase to address important institutional issues. The conclusion is that without thinking about institutional transitions, no major breakthroughs can be expected in the housing crisis and related spatial issues.