Dutch housing policy has been reformed dramatically over the last fifteen years. The reforms were preceded by an equally dramatic policy crisis during the 1970s and 1980s. This article attempts to explain the development of both the crisis and the subsequent reforms. An important explanatory variable is the logic of provision, relating to the fact that housing comes in the shape of stock and capital. However, the institutional logic of Dutch housing policy, notably the fact that most social housing providers are traditionally private nonprofits, has also proved of vital significance in determining the outcome of the reform process. Distinguishing the effects of the logic of provision and the institutional logic enables an analysis of how policy feedback, the inheritance from previous policies, may cause both policy crisis and policy reform.

This article discusses the changes in the safety policy in the Netherlands over about the last fifteen years. These changes are analysed as reactions to the problems that the police and other criminal justice agencies face and which result from the shift from a modern to a late modern society. Five main changes are distinguished: in the organisational and managerial arrangements of the police; in the relation between the state (police) and other (both public and private) agencies; the rise of extra-judicial instruments and the growing attention for the position of victims; the increasing use of technological instruments for surveillance and crime prevention; and a harsher and more punitive policy. These changes create new fundamental questions for a future safety policy.

There is probably no other sector of the welfare state where the gap between citizen's expectations and government's opportunities is deepening so intensely and has such a complex and politicized reform agenda as the health care sector. Health care is a critical case par excellence to study the relation between efficiency and legitimization of welfare state reform. The leading question of this special issue of Beleid & Maatschappij is: how does the Dutch health care system and the connected public policymaking accommodate the different and often conflicting goals (input), organizing concepts (throughput) and outcomes (output)? With these questions in mind the dominant governance principles of Dutch health care, especially the system of regulated competition, are scrutinized. One of the findings is, that 'second best' solutions are the highest achievable in this field, a notion that reform policies should take into account.

There is probably no other sector of the welfare state where the gap between citizen's expectations and government's opportunities is deepening so intensely and has such a complex and politicized reform agenda as the health care sector. Health care is a critical case par excellence to study the relation between efficiency and legitimization of welfare state reform. The leading question of this special issue of Beleid & Maatschappij is: how does the Dutch health care system and the connected public policymaking accommodate the different and often conflicting goals (input), organizing concepts (throughput) and outcomes (output)? With these questions in mind the dominant governance principles of Dutch health care, especially the system of regulated competition, are scrutinized. One of the findings is, that 'second best' solutions are the highest achievable in this field, a notion that reform policies should take into account.