Zoekresultaat: 8 artikelen

x
Jaar 2005 x

    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.


Ronald Holzhacker
Ronald Holzhacker is werkzaam bij de Universiteit Twente.

    The displacement of political decision making from the classic bodies of representative democracy to non democratically legitimised arenas is a major threat to contemporary representative democracy. In this essay, three displacements are discussed: from parliamentary to deliberative processes, from political to professional decision making, and from national to international arenas. Several of the safeguards that have been developed in parliamentary democracy over the past centuries, such as representation, transparency, majority voting, and public accountability, are missing or are underdeveloped in these new arenas. The essay explores how these safeguards could be introduced into these new arenas and concludes that the displacement of politics should be attended by a dissemination of democracy.


Mark Bovens
Prof. dr Mark Bovens is als hoogleraar bestuurskunde verbonden aan de Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zijn meest recente boek is: De digitale republiek: Democratie en rechtsstaat in de informatiemaatschappij (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2003). Dit essay markeert zijn afscheid als redactievoorzitter van B en M. Adres: Bijlhouwerstraat 6, 3511 ZC Utrecht, e-mail: m.bovens@usg.uu.nl

    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.


Agnes Akkerman
Agnes Akkerman is als universitair docent verbonden aan de Faculteit der Management Wetenschappen van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Recente publicaties van haar hand zijn 'Identifying Latent Conflict in Collective Bargaining', Rationality and Society 15(1): 15-43; 'A theory of soft policy implementation in multilevel systems with an application to Dutch social partnership', Acta Politica 39(1): 31-58. Adres: Thomas van Aquinostraat 5, Postbus 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen,
Artikel

'Lobbyisme' in de Scandinavische landen

Een overzicht aan de hand van trends in Denemarken en Noorwegen

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs René Torenvlied
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This paper provides an overview of the results of Scandinavian research into the lobbying activities of interest organisations. The paper is based on the reports of Danish and Norwegian scholars. These studies suppose that an association exists between the downfall of corporatist decision-making and policy implementation (among others observed in the decreasing number of boards, councils, and commissions), the increasing influence of parliament, and the increase in lobbying by interest organisations. The most important empirical evidence for this association is presented and discussed.


René Torenvlied
René Torenvlied is als universitair hoofddocent verbonden aan de capaciteitsgroep Sociologie van de Universiteit Utrecht en het Interuniversitair Centrum voor Sociaal-wetenschappelijke theorievorming en methodenontwikkeling aldaar. Enkele recente publicaties zijn: 'When will they ever make up their minds? The social structure of unstable decision-making.' Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 28(3): 171-196 en 'Polarization and Policy Conflict.' Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming. Adres: Heidelberglaan 2, 3884 CS Utrecht.

    This article distinguished between three fundamental processes of collective decision-making as collective production in social systems: (1) persuasion; (2) exchange and (3) coercion. The conditions under which these processes are dominant are described, as well as the type of network that is central to each of the processes. Corporatism and lobbyism appear to be two polarities of collective decision-making. In corporatism interest groups are directly involved in final decision making through formal and informal institutions whereas in lobbyism final decision making is delegated to independent persons. In corporatist decision-making, mutual interests dominate conflicting interests. Thus, a failure of reaching consensus becomes unattractive and consensus is guaranteed through the formal norm of majority decision-making and the informal norm of unanimity. When mutual interests dominate over conflicting interests, lobbyism is reflected by the interactions between lobby activists and civil servants and politicians who share the same position. Ad hoc lobbyism will arise when conflicts of interests dominate and a non-cooperative game exists in which (temporal) coalitions must be built.


Frans N. Stokman
Frans Stokman is als hoogleraar verbonden aan de capaciteitsgroep Sociologie van de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen en het Interuniversitair Centrum voor Sociaal-wetenschappelijke theorievorming en Methodenontwikkeling (ICS). Daarnaast is hij directeur van DECIDE B.V. Recente publicaties van zijn hand zijn: co-editor van The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (met Robert Thomson, Christopher Achen en Thomas König, te verschijnen in 2006), co-editor van Winners and Losers in the European Union, Special issue van European Union Politics Vol 5(1) (2004) en 'Frame Dependent Modeling of Influence Processes', in: Andreas Diekmann en Thomas Voss (Red.), Rational-Choice-Theorie in den Sozialwissenschaften. Anwendungen und Probleme. Festschrift für Rolf Ziegler, München: Oldenbourg (pp.113-127). Adres: Grote Rozenstraat 31, 9712 TG Groningen.
Artikel

In een groen, groen polderland

De mix tussen corporatisme en lobbyisme in het Nederlandse milieu-beleid

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs Dave Huitema
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    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.


Dave Huitema
Dave Huitema is als senior-bestuurskundig onderzoeker verbonden aan het Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken (IVM) van de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Huitema is docent en modulecoördinator bij de masteropleiding 'Environment and Resource Management' (ERM) aan de VU en leidt het onderzoekscluster 'Water Governance and Economics' van het IVM. Recente publicaties zijn: Calculating the Political: Election Manifestoes as a Meeting Point for Experts and Politicians. The case of the RIVM (Amsterdam: Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken) en Hazardous Decisions: Hazardous Waste Facility Siting in the UK, Netherlands and Canada: Institutions and Discourses (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers). Adres: Instituut voor Milieuvraagstukken, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, e-mail: dave.huitema@ivm.vu.nl
Discussie

Doing better, feeling worse

Over de erosie van het overheidsgezag

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 4 2005
Auteurs Paul 't Hart
Auteursinformatie

Paul 't Hart
Prof dr. P. 't Hart is verbonden aan de Australian National University in Canberra en de Utrechtse School voor Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschappen, Universiteit Utrecht. Correspondentie: p.thart@usg.uu.nl

    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.


Berry Tholen
Dr. Berry Tholen is als bestuurskundige verbonden aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zijn onderwijs omvat de cursussen 'Binnenlands Bestuur' en 'Bestuurlijke Ethiek'. In zijn onderzoek concentreert hij zich op vragen van rechtvaardigheid en legitimiteit in bestuur en beleid. Hij publiceerde recentelijk onder meer in International Review of Administrative Sciences en in European Journal of Migration and Law. Adres: Afd. Bestuurskunde, Faculteit der Managementwetenschappen, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Postbus 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, email: b.tholen@fm.ru.nl
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.