The factor time is an often neglected issue in the literature on network governance. In this article we analyze the differences in perceptions on time between actors involved in water governance and describe the managerial interventions aimed at synchronizing time horizons, managing the available amount of time and the tempo of the governance process. Two case studies of governance processes in the district of Water Board Delfland are included to provide insight in the question how the factor time influences the governance processes and how aspects of time are managed. The case studies show that different perceptions of time may cause tensions in collaborative relationships, and even cause the end of collaborations. This underscores the importance of time-sensitive governance.

The problem of climate change is high on the various political-administrative agendas, both national and international. At the same time the problem is full of uncertainties and controversies. Adaptation to climate change asks for adjustments in our spatial planning, but can also necessitate changes in the distribution of public and private responsibilities. A crucial question is how the legitimacy of adaptation measures can be organized in a context surrounded with uncertainties, controversies and conflicting interests. In this paper we introduce the central theme of this special issue and the various contributions.

The problem of climate change is high on the various political-administrative agendas, both national and international. At the same time the problem is full of uncertainties and controversies. Adaptation to climate change asks for adjustments in our spatial planning, but can also necessitate changes in the distribution of public and private responsibilities. A crucial question is how the legitimacy of adaptation measures can be organized in a context surrounded with uncertainties, controversies and conflicting interests. In this paper we introduce the central theme of this special issue and the various contributions.

The problem of climate change is high on the various political-administrative agendas, both national and international. At the same time the problem is full of uncertainties and controversies. Adaptation to climate change asks for adjustments in our spatial planning, but can also necessitate changes in the distribution of public and private responsibilities. A crucial question is how the legitimacy of adaptation measures can be organized in a context surrounded with uncertainties, controversies and conflicting interests. In this paper we introduce the central theme of this special issue and the various contributions.

Evaluatiestudies zijn in het openbaar bestuur aan de orde van de dag. Ze zijn er in alle soorten en maten. Recent wordt nagedacht over ‘lerende’ evaluaties: evaluatiestudies waarbij de nadruk niet zozeer wordt gelegd op het inventariseren van successen en mislukkingen, maar waarbij het vooral gaat om het gezamenlijk door evaluatoren en geëvalueerde te komen tot verbeteringen van het betreffende project. Beoordelen is een element van deze evaluatie, maar daarnaast gaat het er vooral ook om een leerproces te organiseren. Deze evaluatiemethode stelt uiteenlopende eisen aan evaluatoren en genereert veel rolconflicten voor hen. Genoeg reden om bij dit fenomeen stil te staan. Dit artikel wil in de eerste plaats licht werpen op de plaats van de lerende evaluatie te midden van de stortvloed aan wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar evaluatiestudies. Aan de hand van een analyse van een door onszelf uitgevoerd lerend evaluatieproject komen wij tot een nadere plaatsbepaling van de lerende evaluatie. Onze ervaringen kunnen de theorievorming rond de lerende evaluatie, maar ook de praktijk van dergelijke evaluatiestudies verder brengen.