This article examines the impact of European integration on the Dutch constitutional order. It argues that within this constitutional order, the roles of the executive and the judiciary have been strengthened at the expense of the role of parliament. Although these shifts are partly the outcome of domestic developments, they have also been caused by the process of European integration. Within the Netherlands, there has hardly been any debate on the role of the EU and EU law in the Dutch constitutional order and no formal changes to the written constitution have been made. This can be explained, on the one hand, by the openness of the Dutch legal order for international law and, on the other hand, by the fact that many constitutional practices have not been codified in the formal constitution.

The EU is transforming the function and power of the Dutch parliament as an institution, and the way in which its principal actors, the governing and opposition parliamentary party groups, interact with each other and the government. This article seeks to address the question: How does parliamentary scrutiny over EU decision-making function in the Netherlands and how has this new role for parliament changed both parliamentary and executive relations in the country and the interaction of parties in parliament? For the purposes of this research, this paper uses the typology of King. The author has conducted a number of in-depth interviews with Dutch MPs. Overall, this article concludes the process of parliamentary scrutiny over EU matters in the Netherlands is no longer exclusively about finding a national consensus towards the outside world, but increasingly mirrors the rough and tumble of normal, domestic politics.

This article examines the impact of the EU on the content of policy. It analyses two cases in which the EU affected Dutch policies in different ways: in the case of packaging waste policy the EU exerted direct influence through EU legislation, whereas in the case of railway policy, the EU only had an indirect impact through policy models. Nevertheless, the impact of the EU was greater in the railway policy case than in the packaging waste case. This suggests that domestic political processes are more important in explaining the impact of the EU on policy content, than the degree of legal adaptation pressure. In addition, the article shows that the EU has affected the policy networks in the area of packaging waste policy, even though Dutch corporatist structures have shown remarkable resilience and have even been strengthened by the implementation requirements of EU legislation in this field.

This article is the introduction to this special issue in which the Europeanisation of Dutch polity, politics and policy forms the central focus of attention. The main question we address in this special issue is to what extent the Netherlands has changed under the influence of processes of Europeanisation. This article first discusses the state-of-the-art Europeanisation literature; then it sets out to discuss four problems with this literature. Based on the insights generated by the contributors to this special issue, the authors conclude that for a better understanding of processes of Europeanisation, the EU should no longer be seen as an actor, but rather as an (cluster of) arena(s) in which a variety of actors (member states, EU institutions, interest groups, et cetera) are trying to achieve their political goals.

Child labor evokes deep emotions and is cause for growing international concern. What, if anything, should governments of liberal-democratic societies do to combat child labor?

This paper discusses the possibilities and pitfalls of Western policies that seek to curb child labor abroad. Since such policies aim to combat practices in another society, policy makers should be aware of the many relevant differences between developing and developed countries. We discuss three issues that are central to this debate: socioeconomic causes of child labor, different conceptions of childhood, and the distinction between child work and child labor. Studying the historical example of the emergence and disappearance of child labor in nineteenth-century Netherlands broadens our analysis. We then evaluate the implications of these investigations and conclude the paper by suggesting five recommendations for Western policy makers that would avoid the pitfalls discussed.

Member states must transpose European directives into national rules. This process, however, is not without problems. The Netherlands regularly transposes directives too late. Moreover, very often the content of the national transposition rules does not match the adaptations required by the directives. This article examines whether political resistance or administrative and legal weaknesses cause these problems. The author concludes that problems regarding transposition are caused by a culture of neglect and lack of priority for EU policies. Improving coordination procedures, formal legislative processes, and information facilities will not solve transposition problems as long as the cultural aspect of the problem isn't adequately addressed.

In December 2004, the report of the Dutch Parliamentary Investigation Committee on Infrastructural Projects was published. This committee investigated the budgets overruns of two large rail projects currently under construction in the Netherlands: the Betuwe Line and the High Speed Line (HSL)-South. The committee also looked at how mistakes that were made in the earlier projects had been avoided in the construction of the Zuiderzee Line, a project currently under preparation. The report provides a look inside the struggle of the Dutch national government from the beginning of the 1990s in their public-private partnership (PPP) efforts. In this contribution, we provide an analysis of the motives, approach and results of privatisation of these three projects on the bases of the detailed empirical analysis provided by the Committee. We seek explanations of how privatisation with these three projects evolved and what lessons can be drawn. It appears that practices have so far been far from good and instead of committing to the obligation to apply PPP in every large infrastructural project, the government should first find out how PPP in such projects should actually be carried out.

This article poses the question whether the Dutch system of organized interest representation faces a transformation from neo-corporatist mediation to lobbyism similar to Scandinavian countries. Its main claim is that this has so far not been the case, because two essential features of neo-corporatist interest mediation have remained prominent in the Netherlands. First, policies regarding labour conditions continue to be determined within a network of employers' organisations, trade unions, and the government that is essentially closed to outsiders. Second, the system continues to be hierarchical in nature: the government, often below the surface, demonstrates a considerable capacity to steer the participants in its preferred direction. Such a closed network still allows for lobbying the parliament by both network members and outsiders. Lobbying may thus be complementary to closed neo-corporatist networks rather than a substitute. The article offers a research agenda exploring the latter suggestion.

This paper offers an introduction to the research theme of 'lobbyism'. Recent Scandinavian research shows that lobbyism is a modern mirror view of corporatism, which develops through changes in the structure of decision-making and implementation by interest groups and government. Three questions are put forward: (a) what is the empirical evidence for the phenomenon of lobbyism? (b) what potential contribution could the concept of lobbyism make to a better understanding of corporatism in the Netherlands? (c) what are, according to the theory of collective decision-making, the most important differences between influence strategies in corporatist negotiation structures, and those in lobby networks?

This paper offers an introduction to the research theme of 'lobbyism'. Recent Scandinavian research shows that lobbyism is a modern mirror view of corporatism, which develops through changes in the structure of decision-making and implementation by interest groups and government. Three questions are put forward: (a) what is the empirical evidence for the phenomenon of lobbyism? (b) what potential contribution could the concept of lobbyism make to a better understanding of corporatism in the Netherlands? (c) what are, according to the theory of collective decision-making, the most important differences between influence strategies in corporatist negotiation structures, and those in lobby networks?

This article discusses the degree to which Dutch environmental policy exhibits a shift from corporatism to lobbyism. Based on a general analysis of environmental policy making in the Netherlands and two specific cases of environmental decision making, the author draws the conclusion that such a shift has not happened. At the level of policymaking it is rather the opposite: in the 1980s the Ministry of the Environment introduced a certain level of corporatism. This was possible because of a clear framework of environmental policy goals shaped by the National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM), because the environmental movement began to see the Ministry as an ally and because business interests preferred self-regulation (one element of corporatism) to government regulations. In two concrete case of environmental decision-making that are discussed here, environmental goals are being discussed once more. During such discussion, it appears that Dutch ministries have close connection to 'their' target groups. For the coming years, environmental policy will 'Europeanize' further and Dutch economic interest groups, although being remarkably late in responding to this shift, will start to influence the Brussels policymaking game instead of the Dutch implementation game.

Across Europe, urban education systems are struggling with the process of integration of immigrants in its schools. This article explores the most important aspects of this new urban phenomenon and its impact on urban school systems in the Netherlands. It clearly shows that ethnic segregation in elementary and secondary schools is widespread in Dutch cities. This ethnic segregation is caused by a combination of residential segregation, and, as our own studies prove, of parental choice. The article also deals with recent Dutch studies on the effects of segregation. Finally, it treats the question how schools and authorities, in a long-standing tradition of parental choice, are dealing with this segregation.

Recently in The Netherlands, as in other countries, many have called for administrative and democratic reform. The perspectives implicated in the arguments for change differ, however. Some argue for a strengthening of mechanisms of control and accountability. Others opt for more – and more direct – citizen participation in governance. In effect, these perspectives often contradict. In this article we will look into J.S. Mill's effort to combine such different perspectives. It is shown that in his considerations on good government a third principle is active: administrative competence or quality. Mill, thus, makes us aware of a deficiency in many contemporary evaluations of administrative and democratic renewal.