Zoekresultaat: 4 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde x Jaar 2011 x
Boekbespreking

De rechtsstaat: Terug op de bestuurskundige agenda

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 4 2011
Trefwoorden rule of law, constitutionalism, administrative law
Auteurs Stavros Zouridis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    There seems to be a contradiction between what is happening in public administration discipline and public administration practice. Whereas public administration discipline and law largely separated during the past decades public administration practice and law have converged. Recently three books have been published which emphasize the importance of the rule of law as an explanatory variable for public administration's design and behavior. In this review essay these books are discussed from a public administration theory perspective. The point of departure of the authors substantially differs. Beckett (‘Public Management and the Rule of Law’, 2010) focuses on the rule of law, Cooper (‘Public Law & Public Administration’, 2007) and Rosenbloom, O'Leary & Chanin (‘Public Administration and Law’, 2010) aim at constitutionalizing public administration. The rule of law and the constitution prove to be shaky grounds for a public administration theory. In general constitutional competence may be important for public managers and professionals, but what it means for everyday practices is not easy to establish. The authors therefore extensively describe American public law, emphasizing the constitutional constraints and general administrative law. With these books the authors provide excellent building blocks for a comparative approach of the rule of law from a public administration perspective. The aim of such an approach would be to discover patterns between legal and constitutional designs on the one hand and everyday administrative practices on the other hand.


Stavros Zouridis
Prof. mr. dr S. Zouridis is hoogleraar Bestuurskunde aan de Universiteit van Tilburg.
Artikel

Botsende publieke waarden bij publiek-private samenwerking

Dimensies en dilemma's van juridisch-bestuurskundige legitimiteit, in het bijzonder bij openbaar gezag

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public-private partnerships, legitimacy
Auteurs Michiel Heldeweg en Maurits Sanders
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Public Private Partnerships (PPP), especially those geared to exercise public legal powers (‘Authoritative PPP’), are suggestive of tensions between private party involvement and public legitimacy. Hence, public legitimacy is analyzed primarily on the basis of work done by David Beetham, and complemented with Public Law legitimacy considerations concerning the exercise of legal powers and law on public organizations. The findings project that there is room to convincingly frame legitimate PPP involving public authority, but that the scope is restricted both in terms of legal constraints and of political sensitivity.As a result of this, truly wicked policy projects, which in theory stand to gain most by PPP, in practice seem to be considered less suited for Authoritative PPP (and probably more for Network PPP).


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

Maurits Sanders
Drs M.Ph.Th. Sanders is hoofddocent Bestuurskunde bij Saxion en promovendus aan de Faculteit Management en Bestuur van de Universiteit Twente.
Artikel

Goed bestuur: Kiezen of delen?

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Good governance, public values, public management
Auteurs Leo Huberts en Eelco van Hout
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Good governance is a contested concept in public administration theory and practice. This concluding article builds on the presented contributions as well as on additional research. First, we summarize the diversity, leading to a sketch of two basic approaches towards good governance (organizational and value oriented). Additionally questions concerning the normativity, the pluralism of values and the object of good governance (process or policy) are addressed. Second, attention is paid to strategies to cope with values in governance, acknowledging the tensions between those values. Basic strategies aim at ‘choosing’ between values, ‘accommodating’ (in time, project, context) and ‘connecting’ values (through institutions or hybridization).


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

Eelco van Hout
Dr E.J.Th. van Hout is verbonden aan BMC Advies en Management en het Centrum voor het Bestuur van de Maatschappelijke Onderneming (CBMO) van de Universiteit van Tilburg (TiasNimbas Business School). Beide auteurs nemen deel aan het colloquium Goed Bestuur/Good Governance van het Netherlands Institute of Government, van waaruit dit themanummer gestalte kreeg.
Artikel

De democratische waarde van burgerparticipatie: Interactief bestuur en deliberatieve fora1

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden Citizen participation, democracy, democratic innovations, participatory governance, deliberative forums
Auteurs Ank Michels
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Whilst embedding democratic innovations that increase and deepen citizen participation in decision making now is a common policy of governments in many countries, and theorists in democratic theory also tend to emphasize how good citizen participation is to democracy, the empirical evaluation of democratic innovations is still a rather unexplored area of research.

    This article evaluates two types of democratic innovations, participatory governance and deliberative forums in the Netherlands and a large number of other Western countries. The findings show, for both types of innovation, that citizen participation contributes to the quality of democracy in several ways. The analysis also makes it clear that different designs produce different democratic effects, which also reflects tensions between democratic values; participatory governance projects are better at giving citizens influence, whereas deliberative forums appear to be better at promoting the exchange of arguments. Also, whereas cases of participatory governance are more open than deliberative forums, representation is higher for the deliberative type of cases. As a consequence politicians and policy makers can have a major impact on democracy; by choosing for a specific design of citizen participation they may encourage certain aspects of democracy more than others.


Ank Michels
Dr A.M.B. Michels is universitair docent bij het Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht.
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.