The research programme Urban Regions in the Delta (URD) wielded an approach worthy of emulation. Create ‘vital’ project consortia, crosslink the research project with on-going planning and policy making processes, give senior scientists a major role and engage expert process managers. These are four key success factors for knowledge co-creation in the field of area development, according to the programme (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research; URD, 2010-2014 http://urd.verdus.nl). Within URD scientists and practitioners were cooperating from the very beginning. The scientific insight and innovations generated are considered not very visible in traditional scientific publications, but the knowledge that was developed provides considerable added value to society.

On a regular basis, the funding of football stadiums is an issue for large cities. Since football clubs appeal to the municipality for financial support, this is a public matter. Why should a municipality invest in a private project, such as a football stadium? What are the opportunities and risks? What is the public value of a stadium for the city? Based on literature reviews and case studies in Eindhoven and Amsterdam, this article examines what government involvement in stadium projects means, and what the outcomes of this involvement are. The cases show that stadiums may have social and economic spin-off effects on their surroundings, but one cannot take that for granted. Careful processes and elaborate strategies are needed for public investment in stadiums to really add value to the city. Based on the analyses, an assessment framework is presented for the benefit of new stadium project initiatives.

When scientific values like objectivity, validity and reliability are inadequate for designing research that enables society’s capacity for dealing with unstructured problems, which values or criteria should we use for designing adequate knowledge practices? Based on the articles in this special issue we answer this question by analysing the methods researchers have used for selecting stakeholders, knowledges, synthesis, context and outcome in new knowledge practices. Although a common language for comparison and documentation is lacking, the analysis provides recommendations for better designing interaction between scientific and other practices. The most important message however is that we need a designated platform for exchanging and evaluating experiences and discussing methods and the outcomes they yield.

The discussion on how to resolve mass disputes stemming from faulty financial products among banks, insurance companies and other stakeholders in the Netherlands ended in deadlock. While diligent action is considered imperative, parties shy away from discussing options for settling damages suffered by consumers for fear of triggering mass claims themselves. To contribute to a new framework for resolving mass disputes, a responsive evaluation was conducted between 2011 and 2015. In such evaluation, the way stakeholders make sense of the situation serves as an organizing principle in knowledge production. This article discusses the methodical challenges implied in adapting the methodological guidelines for such inquiry to fit the ill-structured, controversial and complex legal issue and its highly politicized context. Because of a careful handling of confidentiality in the inquiry and a focused selection of participants on the basis of their proximity to the issue, the evaluation resulted in insight in options for resolving mass disputes that are supported by various parties. Furthermore, the evaluation itself served, it is argued, as a vehicle to overcome the deadlock by sensitizing stakeholders to the fact that they all aspire similar practical objectives and all acknowledge the need for cooperation on the issue.

There is a growing interest for cooperatives in housing. Recently a new housing law was signed that stimulates the rise and creation of citizen cooperatives in this sector. It is argued that in this way people, especially in the low- and middle-income category, get more opportunities to influence their own living situation. Some housing cooperatives have existed for years, but recently we have seen the rise of dozens of cooperatives. The knowledge network Platform31 has initiated an experimental program to facilitate the implementation of cooperatives in housing in the Netherlands. An important condition is that the cooperatives need to develop a strong business case. Cooperation with established housing corporations in the sector is also of vital importance. Moreover, a helping hand from municipalities is needed and some local governments have already developed policies and undertaken actions. Yet there are still bottlenecks in policy and law that needs to be solved. A paradigm shift is needed to make cooperatives in housing feasible.