Zoekresultaat: 19 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen x Jaar 2014 x

    This contribution gives an overview of the results of recent research into the role perception and the role behaviour of councillors. The research is the MAELG-survey (Municipal Assemblies in European Local Governance) carried out in 2007 and 2008 in 15 European countries and Israel. A special issue of Local Government Studies has been dedicated to this research. Three articles of this special issue are discussed intensively. These articles look at the role perception and the role behaviour of local councillors from the perspective of the tension between representative and participative democracy, the relation between participative democracy (also called citizen democracy) and the responsiveness of councillors and the influence of informal institutions on the representation style of local councils. Another recent article in Acta Politica looks specifically at the situation in Belgium. It is interesting that the authors do not apply the classic typology of representation styles (trustee and delegate), but an alternative typology (with delegation, responsiveness, authorization and accountability as four styles of representation) developed by the Dutch political scientists Andeweg and Thomassen.


Dr. Rik Reussing
Dr. G.H. Reussing is redactiesecretaris van Bestuurswetenschappen en onderwijscoördinator van de opleiding European Public Administration aan de Universiteit Twente.

Dr. Rik Reussing
Dr. G.H. Reussing is redactiesecretaris van Bestuurswetenschappen en onderwijscoördinator van de opleiding European Public Administration aan de Universiteit Twente.

    The focus of the diversity policy in the Dutch public sector has moved during the past decennia. In the eighties offering equal chances for the different target groups was the central policy goal, after the millennium this became the effective and efficient management of a diverse work force in order to arrive at a better performing public sector, also called the business case of diversity. This article investigates the question how far the Dutch cabinet has influenced the diversity policy of public organizations. The answer to the question is that there was limited influence from the Dutch cabinet on the arguments for diversity of public organizations, but there was greater influence on the diversity interventions, especially in three sectors: central government, municipalities and police. This influence on interventions of other (‘fellow’) governments is caused by the strong steering of the cabinet. The interventions undertaken therefore reflect to a more limited extent the business case of diversity and remain stuck in the old target group policy. However, public organizations with a longer history in diversity policy, that operate closer to society and see the necessity for diversity, are more inclined to embrace the business case and start interventions that are related to this new approach.


Drs. Saniye Celik
Drs. S. Celik is accountmanager voor de decentralisaties in het sociaal domein bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties en buitenpromovenda aan het Instituut Bestuurskunde van de Universiteit Leiden, Campus Den Haag.

    Dutch Ministries differ in the manner in which they design and manage their steering relations with independent governing bodies. Based on six cases at four Dutch ministries the authors show these differences. They use two theoretical models (the principal-agent approach and the principal-steward approach) to clarify the kind of relationship. Ministries not only differ in their approach, they also differ in how far they have advanced in the development of their steering relations with independent governing bodies. Because there is no coordination or exchange of knowledge between ministries, ministries that are ‘lagging behind’ cannot learn from the experiences of ministries that have more experience. The authors do not propose one form of central coordination or one model, but they do propose more exchange of knowledge within and between Dutch ministries.


Prof. dr. Sandra van Thiel
Prof. dr. S. van Thiel is redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen en hoogleraar bestuurskunde aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Prof. dr. Ron van Hendriks
R.H.P. Hendriks MPA studeerde bestuurskunde aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen en deed als stagiaire bij het ministerie van BZK onderzoek naar de aansturingsrelaties tussen departementen en zelfstandige bestuursorganen. Hij is sinds kort trainee bij AP Support.

    According to the policy makers of the Dutch police the more complex society for years requires a police organization that can operate as a network player, or even network director, in ever increasing local safety networks to fulfil the police functions of criminal investigation and maintenance of public order in an effective manner. This claim hardly seems to validated by empirical evidence. Validation is important because research shows that a lot of time is spent on the police network function within community based policing. The question is if this time is spent in an effective manner. Therefore this article addresses the question of the revenues of the police network function within community based policing for the core tasks maintenance of political order and criminal investigation. Based on a policy analysis, interviews and five weeks of participatory research in one police force in the Netherlands, the authors conclude that the policy of the police is only to ‘take’ out and not ‘give’ to local safety networks, although according to the practice and the network literature networkers from the police should give to be able to achieve results. Because the police network function does contribute to the quality of life and the social safety in the community, the authors believe that the community is best served by police officers that have a broad network function.


Jelle Groenendaal MSc
J. Groenendaal MSc is senior onderzoeker en promovendus bij Crisislab, dat het onderzoek van de leeropdracht Besturen van Veiligheid aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen ondersteunt.

Prof. dr. Ira Helsloot
Prof. dr. I. Helsloot is hoogleraar Besturen van Veiligheid aan de faculteit Managementwetenschappen van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Dr. Frans de Vijlder
Dr. F.J. de Vijlder is lector Goed Bestuur en Innovatiedynamiek in Maatschappelijke Organisaties aan de Hogeschool van Arnhem en Nijmegen, Leading lector Kenniscentrum Publieke Zaak.

    The Dutch government aims at a participatory society, for example by striving for a larger amount of self-responsibility in providing social care, since the introduction of the Societal Support Law (in Dutch called ‘Wet maatschappelijke ondersteuning’ or in short Wmo). Does public opinion in the Netherlands reflect this change of mentality? This article investigates (a) how far public opinion on responsibility for social care for the elderly has changed between 2003 and 2010, (b) which factors explain why some people put most responsibility on the government and others on the family and (c) which factors explain intra-individual changes of attitude. This research has used survey data from the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study (2003, 2006/07, 2010). A shift in public opinion appears to have taken place in line with government policy: less responsibility for the government and more for the family. However, a majority of the Dutch population still puts most responsibility on the government. Attitudes appear to be connected with normative motives rather than with utilitarian motives. Intra-individual changes in attitudes in the direction of less government responsibility are mainly explained by normative factors and not by factors related to self-interest.


Mevr. dr. Ellen Verbakel
Mevr. dr. C.M.C. Verbakel is universitair docent bij de opleiding Sociologie van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Artikel

Krachtig en kwetsbaar

De Nederlandse burgemeester en de staat van een hybride ambt

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 3 2014
Auteurs Dr. Niels Karsten, Dr. Linze Schaap en Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article describes, on the basis of a broad empirical research, the development of the office of mayor since 2002 (the year of the introduction of a dualist local system in the Netherlands) and the present state of the office. It shows a fundamental change in the office during the last decade and how the already existing hybrid nature of the office has continued to grow since 2002. The article describes the effects of this hybridization and identifies, on the basis of this description, eight power lines and vulnerabilities of the office of mayor. The authors relativize a number of issues that are frequently problematized in relation to the office of mayor, but they also point to new concerns amongst mayors. According to the mayors for example the presidency of the council and the presidency of the board of mayor and aldermen can be combined quite easily in practice. Mayors however, and with good reason, are concerned about the vulnerability of their authority and the sustainability of their neutral position ‘above the parties’, their most important source of authority. For this reason a reorientation of the office of mayor in the Netherlands is needed. This reorientation should start with an answer to the question which roles the mayor has to play in Dutch local government.


Dr. Niels Karsten
Dr. N. Karsten MA is universitair docent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Tilburg University.

Dr. Linze Schaap
Dr. L. Schaap is universitair hoofddocent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Tilburg University.

Prof. dr. Frank Hendriks
Prof. dr. F. Hendriks is hoogleraar en onderzoeksdirecteur aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Tilburg University.

    More often it has been supposed that pride has important positive effects on the functioning of civil servants (performance) and the provision of services to citizens. To stimulate civil servants to be proud of their profession and regain their professional pride it is necessary to know what causes civil servants to be proud of their work. Little quantitative research has been done into the determinants of professional pride in the public sector and the research that has been carried out is characterized by a diversity of definitions and operationalizations of pride. This research analyses to what extent civil servants are proud and which factors determine the amount of professional pride. The data have been gathered in 2010 by the Dutch Department of Home Affairs in the Personnel and Mobility Monitor. The monitor shows that three out of ten Dutch civil servants are not proud of their own profession. This is not caused by personal characteristics like gender, age and education that cannot be influenced, but intrinsic characteristics of the relation between civil servant and work that have the largest effect on the amount of professional pride amongst civil servants. Those civil servants that feel attached to the organization, are satisfied with the organization, are satisfied with their work and are motivated, are much prouder than those civil servants which lack these characteristics.


Rick Borst
R.T. Borst is als student-assistent verbonden aan de opleiding Bestuurskunde van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Dr. Christiaan Lako
Dr. C.J. Lako is als universitair docent verbonden aan de opleiding Bestuurskunde van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Prof. dr. Michiel de Vries
Prof. dr. M.S. de Vries is als hoogleraar verbonden aan de opleiding Bestuurskunde van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Praktijk

Navigeren op waarden: nieuw gereedschap voor complexe opgaven

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2014
Auteurs Léon Klinkers, Frank Bosboom, Maarten Königs e.a.
Auteursinformatie

Léon Klinkers
Drs. L. Klinkers MSc MBA is programmamanager bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties.

Frank Bosboom
F. Bosboom MSc is adviseur en partner bij Holland Branding Group en werkt voor (allianties van) de overheid, maatschappelijke organisaties en bedrijven.

Maarten Königs
Drs. M.H.J.S. Königs is adviseur en partner bij Holland Branding Group en werkt voor (allianties van) de overheid, maatschappelijke organisaties en bedrijven.

Hans Robertus
H. Robertus is adviseur en partner bij Holland Branding Group en werkt voor (allianties van) de overheid, maatschappelijke organisaties en bedrijven.
Artikel

Hoe word je wethouder? Een onderzoek naar de transparantie en het democratisch gehalte van de wethoudersvoordracht

Een onderzoek naar de transparantie en het democratisch gehalte van de wethoudersvoordracht

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2014
Auteurs Julien van Ostaaijen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article addresses the question how aldermen are selected and nominated and how this process is related to a number of democratic values like popular influence and transparency. The central question is how one becomes an alderman in the Netherlands. To answer this central question a document analysis has been carried out and 137 interviews with aldermen have been held in 77 municipalities that were selected on geographical dispersion and number of inhabitants. The research shows that the process until the appointment of aldermen is little transparent and democratic for the outside world. In the large majority of the cases aldermen are asked an nominated from within a political party. The road to becoming an alderman is not closed, in principle everyone can become an alderman, but it is also not transparent and accessible for everyone. For this the selection and nomination is too much tied up to and decided in political party networks. However, gradually changes occur in this closed party bastion, because now parties more often are forced to look for suitable candidates outside the party.


Julien van Ostaaijen
Dr. J.J.C. van Ostaaijen is werkzaam als onderzoeker en docent aan de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur (Tilburg University).

    Nowadays municipalities in the Netherlands work together more intensively with other municipalities in the region. Also cooperation with companies, institutions and societal organizations is more often looked for at the regional level. In practice this brings along many problems and difficulties. For several reasons it appears not to be easy to combine the implementation strengths of municipalities and societal partners. This article presents a new approach (based on the theory of ‘new regionalism’) to regional implementation strength. This approach is not only about designing regional administrations, but is mainly about the factors that induce administrations as well as companies and institutions to commit themselves jointly for the region. To increase the regional implementation strength more is needed than the formation of a regional administrative structure in which municipalities do not cooperate in a non-committal manner. To induce municipalities and societal partners to commit themselves jointly to handling new tasks or new challenges it is also necessary to have a clear strategic vision on these issues that binds parties and makes them enthusiastic and that regional cooperation is rooted in a societal breeding ground. It also asks for an administrative structure that does justice to the contribution every municipality and societal partner makes to the realization of the strategy and for a democratic involvement of municipal councils and sector-based interest groups.


Marcel Boogers
Prof. dr. M.J.G.J.A. Boogers is hoogleraar Innovatie en Regionaal Bestuur bij de vakgroep Bestuurskunde van de faculteit Management en Bestuur aan de Universiteit Twente en senior adviseur Openbaar Bestuur bij BMC.

Vincent van Stipdonk
Drs. V.P. van Stipdonk is zelfstandig Raadgever & Redacteur en redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.
Artikel

De zoektocht naar goed bestuur

Een analyse van botsende waarden in de publieke sector

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2014
Auteurs Remco Smulders, Gjalt de Graaf en Leo Huberts
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In the public as well as the semi-public sector numerous codes of good governance have been written. Although theses codes clearly lay down which public values must be the foundation of our administration, our newspapers often show examples of bad governance. It is striking that these codes mostly just picture an ideal, but do not give insight in tough considerations. In this article the authors show that different public values mentioned in codes are all worth pursuing as such, but that they in practice collide with each other. The manner in which administrators, managers and executives cope with such dilemmas, determines public opinion on good governance. Two cases have been researched: a municipality and a hospital. Through a Q-research six value patterns are demonstrated to exist in these cases. In addition (through interviews) the authors have discovered which values exactly collide in the cases, and which strategies are used to cope with collisions of values.


Remco Smulders
R.G. Smulders MSc deed bij de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam onderzoek naar publieke waarden in opdracht van het Ministerie van Binnenlandse zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties en is nu als junior onderzoeker/adviseur verbonden aan Partners +Pröpper.

Gjalt de Graaf
Dr. G. de Graaf is universiteit hoofddocent Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam en redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen.

Leo Huberts
Prof. dr. L.W.J.C. Huberts is hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam.

Karin Geuijen
Dr. C.H.M. Geijen is werkzaam als universitair docent aan de Universiteit Utrecht bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap (USBO).

    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.


Vincent van Stipdonk
Drs. V.P. van Stipdonk is redacteur van Bestuurswetenschappen. Hij was als zelfstandig Raadgever & Redacteur penvoerder van de kabinetsnota ‘De doe-democratie’.

    In policy practice sometimes organizational arrangements appear that at first glance manifest itself as cooperative relations between private organizations, but about which on second thoughts the question can be asked if after all there is an active input from the side of the government. This is for instance the case in the construction of biogas infrastructures. In this article the authors discuss if we can talk about PPC after all. In the debate on governance this question is important because in the design of PPC the public interest involved must be sufficiently guaranteed in terms of control and accountability. On the basis of a confrontation between the results of a literature review and an empirical study of the case of a Green Gas pipeline in North-East Friesland (‘Biogasleiding Noordoost Fryslân’) in the Netherlands, the authors conclude that public steering in practice can take a form in disguise. Using ‘intermediate’ civil law legal persons, governmental influence indeed can be and is exercised during the cooperation. Especially law poses specific demands on control and accountability to take care of public interests, like the promotion of the use of renewable energy. Likewise in this kind of projects, especially in comparison with pure private-private cooperation, the public and if possible even the public law regulation must be safeguarded, for instance by transparency of form and content of steering. Of course this has to be done with preservation of the cooperative nature that is typical of PPC.


Maurits Sanders
Dr. M.P.T. Sanders is hoofddocent Bestuurskunde bij Saxion Hogescholen, zakelijk directeur van het Netherlands Institute of Government (NIG) en onlangs gepromoveerd aan de Faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente.

Michiel Heldeweg
Prof. mr. dr. M.A. Heldeweg is hoogleraar Public Governance Law aan de Faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente.
Artikel

In dienst van beleid of in dienst van de democratie?

Een studie naar de waarden achter overheidscommunicatie

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 1 2014
Auteurs Harrie van Rooij en Noelle Aarts
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    More than twelve years after the appearance of the report of the Dutch Committee on the Future of Government Communication (‘Commissie Toekomst Overheidscommunicatie’) communication as the responsibility of the government is an important issue of debate and a discipline that is alive and kicking. We may even conclude that communication – in the terminology of this report – has conquered a place in the heart of policy. A lot is still unclear about the communicative function of government. On the normative question ‘why should the government communicate’ diverging answers are possible. However, the question is hardly discussed in practice and in science. For this reason the positioning of government communication as a separate discipline is also unclear. Reflection on the elementary values behind the discipline can reveal themes that have been invisible so far. The article investigates which values and motives are attached in theory and in practice to communication as a governmental function. For this reason a content analysis has been carried out of a number of volumes of five Dutch magazines (practical and scientific). The authors conclude that for professionals communication mainly is an instrument to support policy goals. The possibility to make a purposeful contribution with government communication to democratic values hardly is brought about, not so much in Communication Science as in Public Administration.


Harrie van Rooij
Drs. H.J.M. van Rooij is werkzaam bij het Ministerie van Financiën als beleidsadviseur op het gebied van strategische overheidscommunicatie.

Noelle Aarts
Prof. dr. M.N.C. Aarts is verbonden als bijzonder hoogleraar strategische communicatie aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en als universitair hoofddocent aan de Universiteit Wageningen.

    This article presents the effects of an evaluation study of different municipal amalgamations in the past ten years in the Dutch provinces Gelderland, Limburg and Overijssel. It is an evaluation that passes through two tracks; we investigate by written sources and evaluation studies of specific amalgamations its gains, but we also by the method of a survey-feedback have asked the opinions on the amalgamation of a considerable group of people involved in the amalgamation. Would they do it again this way years after the amalgamation and they do have a positive or negative assessment of the amalgamation as a whole afterwards? The answer to this question is surprising: a lot of people involved are quite positive on a municipal amalgamation and would choose for it again in the same circumstances. They also think it is an alternative to be preferred over piling up arrangements of municipal cooperation. There is also a remarkable small difference between the assessment afterwards of a voluntary or a ‘forced’ amalgamation. That difference of assessment can be felt intensively in the process before and during the amalgamation, but afterwards the respondents are also positive about amalgamations that have been imposed ‘top-down’. This result suggests that the proverb of a ‘bottom-up amalgamation’ needs relativisation and the provinces and the central government can play a more active part in the process of amalgamation.


Jony Ferket
Mevr. J. Ferket MA was tot november 2013 leermanager en medewerker onderzoek bij de Nederlandse School voor Openbaar Bestuur (NSOB) te Den Haag. Nu is zij projectmedewerker bij Schoolinfo, een initiatief van de PO-raad en de VO-raad.

Martin Schulz
Dr. J.M. Schulz is senioronderzoeker bij de NSOB en de Tilburgse School voor Politiek en Bestuur van de Universiteit van Tilburg.

Mark van Twist
Prof. dr. M.J.W. van Twist is decaan en bestuurder van de NSOB en hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR).

Martijn van der Steen
Dr. M.A. van der Steen is co-decaan van de (NSOB).
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.