Reflection and Debate initiates academically inspired discussions on issues that are on the current policy agenda. |
Discussie |
Onderwijs: met wie en waarvoor meten wij ons eigenlijk? |
Tijdschrift | Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2014 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Sjoerd Karsten |
Auteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Geen bestuurlijke verandering, maar de huidige middelen gericht investeren in innovatie |
Tijdschrift | Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2014 |
Auteurs | Dr. Evert-Jan Velzing |
Auteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Hoe verdienen we in de toekomst ons brood? |
Tijdschrift | Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2014 |
Auteurs | Monique Kremer |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Naar een lerende economie |
Tijdschrift | Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 1 2014 |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Peter van Lieshout en Dr. Robert Went |
Auteursinformatie |
Discussie |
Gewoon doen! Een beschouwing over vier kritieken op de doe-democratie |
Tijdschrift | Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 1 2014 |
Auteurs | Vincent van Stipdonk |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
The (changing) relations between citizens and administration are in the middle of attention and therefore the Dutch cabinet indicated in a white paper on ‘do-democracy’ (that is a literal translation of the Dutch word “Doe-democratie”) its willingness to contribute actively to the transition to more ‘do-democracy’ (a form of co-decision making of citizens by handling societal issues themselves). In a number of examples the cabinet showed which possibilities it sees to support civilian forces, but also mentioned several dilemmas, risks and objections it brings about. The white paper received praising as well as critical reactions. Especially from the critical reactions we can learn in which respects further action or reflection is necessary. To stimulate thinking and especially doing this article treats four criticisms not enough dealt with in the white paper itself: 1) ‘do-democracy’ is just a cover-up for expenditure cuts; 2) ‘do-democracy’ does a moral appeal on (affective) citizenship; 3) ‘do-democracy’ is reserved for the wealthy and the high-educated: a ‘do-aristocracy’; 4) it not a real form of democracy, because no control is handed over. To help our government every criticism is accompanied by a reply. In a short conclusion the author (himself secretary of the white paper) calls the government to make a start with the actual implementation of the ideas of the white paper. |