Zoekresultaat: 20 artikelen

x
Jaar 2020 x
Artikel

Access_open Inzet op omgevingsbewust en kwaliteitsbewust werken in beleidsonderzoek

Illustraties uit de lerende evaluatie van het Natuurpact van het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving

Tijdschrift Beleidsonderzoek Online, november 2020
Auteurs Eva Kunseler, Lisa Verwoerd en Femke Verwest
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Een reflexieve kijk op beleidsonderzoek gaat uit van continue dynamiek tussen kennisontwikkeling en beleids- en uitvoeringspraktijken. Beleidsonderzoekers zoeken naar houvast om gedegen en relevant onderzoek te blijven doen, onderwijl inspelend op onzekerheden, onvoorspelbaarheid en kritische geluiden die kenmerkend zijn voor de huidige kennissamenleving. Via omgevingsbewust werken kunnen zij hun onderzoeksaanpak leren afstemmen op de kenmerken en maatschappelijke context van beleidsdossiers. Via kwaliteitsbewust werken kunnen zij leren inspelen op de verwachtingen rondom een bepaalde expertrol en onderzoeksaanpak binnen de eigen contexten van onafhankelijkheid en wetenschappelijke verantwoording.
    Aan de hand van een casus – de lerende evaluatie van het Natuurpact, een innovatieve evaluatiestudie bij het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving – laten we zien hoe een reflexieve aanpak helpt om onderzoek in de nabijheid van de dynamische beleidspraktijk uit te voeren. Doordat deze aanpak buiten de comfortzone van onderzoekers ligt, is omgevingsbewust en kwaliteitsbewust werken voor onderzoekers geen vanzelfsprekendheid. We roepen beleidsonderzoekers zelf, de organisaties waar ze werkzaam zijn en beleidsmedewerkers op om hun reflexieve vaardigheden verder te ontwikkelen via het inrichten van lerende processen, effectieve kennisdeling via Communities of Practice en leerwerktrajecten, en open en adaptieve kennis-beleidsarrangementen.


Eva Kunseler
Eva Kunseler is wetenschappelijk medewerker bij het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving.

Lisa Verwoerd
Lisa Verwoerd is wetenschappelijk medewerker bij het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving en onderzoeker bij het Athena Instituut, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Femke Verwest
Femke Verwest is plaatsvervangend sectorhoofd Natuur en Landelijk Gebied bij het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving.

    Nederland staat voor forse en complexe beleidsopgaven. Deze opgaven vragen om een bijzondere beleidsaanpak met een aansluitende wijze van beleidsevaluatie – namelijk één die leren ondersteunt om iteratief de kwaliteit van het beleid te verbeteren en de weg naar de beleidsambities te vinden. Beleidsonderzoekers en beleidsbetrokkenen werken in lerende evaluaties samen om kennis te produceren voor het gelijktijdig verantwoorden en leren van beleid. Verondersteld wordt dat de kwaliteit en bruikbaarheid van de geproduceerde kennis met deze benadering groter zijn dan bij reguliere, op verantwoording georiënteerde, evaluatiemethoden. Als gevolg daarvan zou lerend evalueren meer impact hebben op beleid voor complexe opgaven. In dit artikel wordt aandacht besteed aan de waarde van lerend evalueren vanuit het perspectief van beleidsbetrokkenen en beleidsonderzoekers van de lerende evaluatie van het Natuurpact (2014-2017), uitgevoerd door het PBL en de WUR. Geconcludeerd wordt dat lerend evalueren de kwaliteit, bruikbaarheid en impact (minder aantoonbaar) van de geproduceerde kennis vergroot, maar onder specifieke voorwaarden: namelijk wanneer onderzoekers erin slagen om leren en verantwoorden, met de bijbehorende rollen en kwaliteitsstandaarden, te benaderen als wederzijds versterkend in plaats van tegenstrijdig. Onderzoekers hebben voelsprieten nodig voor de wisselwerking tussen het proces van kennisproductie en de politiek-bestuurlijke context waarin deze kennis wordt gebruikt. Zowel in de beleids- als onderzoekspraktijk is ruimte nodig voor een verbrede kijk op de functie van beleidsevaluatie om lerend evalueren toe te kunnen passen.


Lisa Verwoerd
Lisa Verwoerd is werkzaam bij het Athena Instituut, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, en het Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving te Den Haag.

Pim Klaassen
Pim Klaassen is werkzaam bij het Athena Instituut, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Barbara J. Regeer
Barbara J. Regeer is werkzaam bij het Athena Instituut, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Article

Political Sophistication and Populist Party Support

The Case of PTB-PVDA and VB in the 2019 Belgian Elections

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden populist voters, political sophistication, voting motivations, Belgium, elections
Auteurs Marta Gallina, Pierre Baudewyns en Jonas Lefevere
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, we investigate the moderating role of political sophistication on the vote for populist parties in Belgium. Building on the literature about the diverse determinants of populist party support, we investigate whether issue considerations and populism-related motivations play a bigger role in the electoral calculus of politically sophisticated voters.
    Using data from the 2019 general elections in Belgium, we focus on the cases of Vlaams Belang (VB) and Parti du Travail de Belgique- Partij van de Arbeid (PTB-PVDA). We find evidence suggesting that political sophistication enhances the impact of populism-related motivations on populist party support, although the effects are contingent on the party. Moreover, we show that, for issue considerations, the moderation effect only comes into play for VB voters: the impact of anti-immigrant considerations is greater at increasing levels of political sophistication.


Marta Gallina
Marta Gallina is a PhD Student at the Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium. She obtained her BA and MA in Social Sciences at the University of Milan. Her research interests regard the study of political behaviour, political sophistication, issue dimensionality, populism and Voting Advice Applications. Her work appeared in scientific journals such as Statistics, Politics and Policy, Environmental Politics and Italian Political Science.

Pierre Baudewyns
Pierre Baudewyns is Professor of political behaviour at UCLouvain. He is involved in different projects (voters, candidates) related to National Election Study. Results of his research have been published in Electoral Studies, European Political Science, Regional & Federal Studies, West European Politics and Comparative European Politics.

Jonas Lefevere
Jonas Lefevere is research professor of political communication at the Institute for European Studies and assistant professor of communication at Vesalius College. Since 2018, he is also vice-chair of the ECPR Standing Group on Political Communication. His research interests deal with the communication strategies of political parties, and the effects of election campaigns on voters’ electoral behaviour. He has published on these topics in, amongst others, Electoral Studies, Public Opinion Quarterly, Political Communication and International Journal of Public Opinion Research.
Article

Drivers of Support for the Populist Radical Left and Populist Radical Right in Belgium

An Analysis of the VB and the PVDA-PTB Vote at the 2019 Elections

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden populism, voting, behaviour, Belgium, elections
Auteurs Ine Goovaerts, Anna Kern, Emilie van Haute e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This study investigates how protest attitudes and ideological considerations affected the 2019 election results in Belgium, and particularly the vote for the radical right-wing populist party Vlaams Belang (VB) and for the radical left-wing populist party Partij van de Arbeid-Parti du Travail de Belgique (PVDA-PTB). Our results confirm that both protest attitudes and ideological considerations play a role to distinguish radical populist voters from mainstream party voters in general. However, when opposed to their second-best choice, we show that particularly protest attitudes matter. Moreover, in comparing radical right- and left-wing populist voters, the article disentangles the respective weight of these drivers on the two ends of the political spectrum. Being able to portray itself as an alternative to mainstream can give these parties an edge among a certain category of voters, albeit this position is also difficult to hold in the long run.


Ine Goovaerts
Ine Goovaerts is a Doctoral Candidate of the Democratic Innovations and Legitimacy Research Group at the University of Leuven. Her research focuses on the quality of political discourse, with a specific focus on incivility and argumentation quality.

Anna Kern
Anna Kern is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science of Ghent University. Her research focuses on political participation, political equality and political legitimacy. Her work has been published in journals such as West European Politics, Local Government Studies, Social Science Research and Political Behavior.

Emilie van Haute
Emilie van Haute is Chair of the Department of Political Science at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB) and researcher at the Centre d’étude de la vie politique (Cevipol). Her research interests focus on party membership, intra-party dynamics, elections and voting behaviour. Her research has appeared in West European Politics, Party Politics, Electoral Studies, Political Studies, European Political Science and Acta Politica. She is co-editor of Acta Politica.

Sofie Marien
Sofie Marien is Associate Professor at the University of Leuven, where she is director of the Democratic Innovations and Legitimacy Research Group. Her research has appeared in journals such as Political Behavior, European Journal of Political Research, European Sociological Review and Political Research Quarterly.
Article

Emotions and Vote Choice

An Analysis of the 2019 Belgian Elections

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Belgium, elections, emotions, voting behaviour
Auteurs Caroline Close en Emilie van Haute
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article digs into the relationship between voters’ political resentment and their electoral choice in 2019 by focusing on the respondents’ emotions towards politics. Using the RepResent 2019 voter survey, eight emotions are analysed in their relation to voting behaviour: four negative (anger, bitterness, worry and fear) and four positive (hope, relief, joy and satisfaction). We confirm that voters’ emotional register is at least two-dimensional, with one positive and one negative dimension, opening the possibility for different combinations of emotions towards politics. We also find different emotional patterns across party choices, and more crucially, we uncover a significant effect of emotions (especially negative ones) on vote choice, even when controlling for other determinants. Finally, we look at the effect of election results on emotions and we observe a potential winner vs. loser effect with distinctive dynamics in Flanders and in Wallonia.


Caroline Close
Caroline Close is Assistant Professor at the Université libre de Bruxelles (Charleroi campus). Her research and teaching interests include party politics, representation and political participation from a comparative perspective. She has published her work in Party Politics, Political Studies, Parliamentary Affairs, The Journal of Legislative Studies, Representation, Acta Politica and the Journal of European Integration. She regularly contributes to research and publications on Belgian politics.

Emilie van Haute
Emilie van Haute is Chair of the Department of Political Science at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB) and researcher at the Centre d’étude de la vie politique (Cevipol). Her research interests focus on party membership, intra-party dynamics, elections, and voting behaviour. Her research has appeared in West European Politics, Party Politics, Electoral Studies, Political Studies, European Political Science and Acta Politica. She is co-editor of Acta Politica.
Artikel

Kleine teksten, grootse verwachtingen

De toename van eisen aan bestuurders in non-profitorganisaties

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 4 2020
Auteurs Dr. Morris Oosterling en Prof. dr. Theo Camps
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Changes in views on the management of non-profit organizations have implications for the role expected of administrators. This also has an important influence on the requirements placed on these administrators. In the Dutch context, it has not previously been investigated whether and how the requirements for administrators change, and to what extent this occurs in conjunction with changes in the views on the management of non-profit organizations. This is central to this study. By means of a content analysis, in which 363 recruitment texts from the period 1980-2010 were analyzed, the authors show that more and more divergent demands are made on administrators in non-profit organizations. With our study we also show that this accumulation is closely related to views on management. Regulators are advised to focus on optimizing requirements, rather than maximizing them. This allows for more targeted and more adequate recruitment. The study also shows that accountability has not previously been a specific requirement in recruitment texts, whereas this is desirable in the light of previous incidents. Our recommendation to supervisors is to pay more specific attention to this when drawing up job profiles. The relevance for practitioners is (a) that the study provides insight into the relationship between views on the management of non-profit organizations and the demands placed on directors by supervisors; (b) this also clarifies that there are or may be blind spots, as becomes clear with regard to accountability requirements; and finally (c) our study provides food for thought about the role of recruitment texts in the selection process, and whether the requirements set are really relevant to the organization.


Dr. Morris Oosterling
Dr. M. Oosterling is onderzoeker, adviseur en coach bij Aizen Wetenschap in Bedrijf en adviseur werving, selectie en onderwijs bij BeteoR, Mens en Organisatie. Hij promoveerde in juli 2019 in Tilburg op het proefschrift Op zoek naar leiderschap. De top in non-profit organisaties bezien vanuit selectie.

Prof. dr. Theo Camps
Prof. dr. T.W.A. Camps is geassocieerd consultant bij de Berenschot Groep BV en hoogleraar Organisatiekunde en Bestuurskunde aan de TIAS School for Business and Society.

    Onder redactie van B. Guy Peters en Guillaume Fontaine verscheen in 2020 bij EE Publishers een handboek over vergelijkende beleidsanalyse. Dit terrein van onderzoek heeft stevige raakvlakken met beleidsevaluatie en beleidsanalyses (als die niet-vergelijkend zijn). Een breed en interessant spectrum van onderwerpen komt aan de orde, onder andere over methodologie(en), de rol van theorieën, diverse inhoudelijke onderwerpen en – voor wie het breed wil interpreteren – zelfs de groei van kennis op dit specialisme.


Frans L. Leeuw
Frans L. Leeuw is emeritus hoogleraar Recht, Openbaar Bestuur en Sociaalwetenschappelijk Onderzoek aan Maastricht University.
Thema-artikel

Niet toegeven maar teruggeven bij protest

Effecten van beleid bij vestiging van een asielzoekerscentrum in Utrecht

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden asylum seeker centres, local opposition, policy effects, inter-group contact, Utrecht
Auteurs Dr. Rianne Dekker, Dr. Karin Geuijen en Dr. Caroline Oliver
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The refugee crisis of 2015-2016 prompted European governments to quickly institute new asylum seeker centres. Often however, plans for opening new reception centres are met with protest in surrounding localities. Gaining public support for new ASCs has become a pressing governance issue facing local governments. This research looks at whether a policy strategy of ‘giving back’ to the neighbourhood rather than ‘giving in’ to the demands of protesters can minimise local opposition and alleviate negative attitudes . A door-to-door survey of N = 511 neighbourhood residents is combined with semi-structured interview data of N = 31 neighbourhood residents. We find that attitudes were already neutral to fairly positive shortly after the centre opened and fears of nuisance and crime did not materialise. Those who became involved in the ASCs’ courses and activities are a small and selective group who were already fairly accepting of the centre. Contact between asylum seekers and neighbours developing within and beyond the ASC was valued but did not develop into stronger ties due to frequent moves of asylum seekers and early closure of the ASC.


Dr. Rianne Dekker
Dr. R. Dekker is universitair docent en onderzoeker bij het departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij doet onderzoek naar de invloed van nieuwe media in verschillende beleidsterreinen waaronder integratie en veiligheid.

Dr. Karin Geuijen
Dr. K. Geuijen is universitair docent en onderzoeker bij het departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap van de Universiteit Utrecht. Zij doet onderzoek naar multi-sector en multi-level governance, voornamelijk op het terrein van asielmigratie.

Dr. Caroline Oliver
Dr. C. Oliver is universitair hoofddocent aan het Institute of Education van University College London. Zij doet onderzoek naar de gevolgen van migratiebeleid en instituties voor sociale rechtvaardigheid.
Article

Access_open The Feminisation of Belgian Local Party Politics

Tijdschrift Politics of the Low Countries, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden local politics, local party branches, local elections, gender quotas, Belgium
Auteurs Robin Devroe, Silvia Erzeel en Petra Meier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article investigates the feminisation of local politics. Starting from the observation that the representation of women in local electoral politics lags behind the regional and federal level, and taking into account the relevance of local party branches in the recruitment and selection of candidates for elections, we examine the extent to which there is an ‘internal’ feminisation of local party branches and how this links to the ‘external’ feminisation of local electoral politics. Based on surveys among local party chairs, the article maps patterns of feminisation over time and across parties, investigates problems local branches encounter in the recruitment of candidates for local elections, and analyses the (attitudes towards the) measures taken to further the integration of women in local electoral politics. We conclude that internal and external feminisation do not always go hand in hand and that local politics continues to be a male-dominated political biotope.


Robin Devroe
Robin Devroe is a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Political Sciences of Ghent University and member of the research group GASPAR. Her main research interest is the study of the political representation of diverse social groups and voting behaviour, with a specific focus on the descriptive representation of women, and she has a fascination for experimental methods. Her doctoral work (2019, Ghent University) focused on the prevalence of political gender stereotypes among Flemish voters. In the past, Robin was a visiting scholar at Texas A&M University (2018, US). Since 2020, she has been co-convenor of the European Consortium for Political Research’s (ECPR’s) Group on Gender and Politics.

Silvia Erzeel
Silvia Erzeel is Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Her research interests include party politics, political representation, gender and intersectionality, and comparative politics. Her current research focuses on three main areas: the integration of gender equality in political parties, intersectionality and political representation in Europe, and the consequences of economic and social inequality for representative democracy. Since 2018, she has been co-convenor of the European Consortium for Political Research’s (ECPR’s) Standing Group on Gender and Politics.

Petra Meier
Petra Meier is Professor of Politics at the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Antwerp. Her research focuses on the (re)presentation of gender+ in politics and policies. Late work focused on the conceptualisation of symbolic representation, how it operates and the issues at stake from an inclusive perspective. Recently, she turned to study democratic deficits in federal systems, especially Belgium, and processes of de-democratisation in general. She is particularly interested in understanding how such processes affect the demos, more particularly from a gender, an LGBTQI or an ethnic perspective, and what dynamics of marginalisation and exclusion they generate.
Artikel

Access_open Ethics work for good participatory action research

Engaging in a commitment to epistemic justice

Tijdschrift Beleidsonderzoek Online, september 2020
Auteurs Tineke Abma
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Participatory and responsive approaches to research strive to be democratic, inclusive and impactful. Participatory researchers share a commitment to epistemic justice and actively engage citizens and users as well as other stakeholders in the co-creation of knowledge for social change. While more and more researchers and policymakers feel attracted to these approaches in practice, the normative ideals of social inclusion and justice are sometimes hard to realize, because of established interests, power relations and system requirements. In this article I argue that participatory researchers and evaluators have a moral responsibility to do ‘ethics work’. This is more than just following ethical principles and codes of conduct. ‘Ethics work’ entails the labour and effort one puts into recognizing ethically salient aspects of situations, developing oneself as a reflexive practitioner, paying attention to emotions and relationships, collaboratively working out the right course of action and reflecting in the company of critical friends. In this article I present the theory and ethics of participatory approaches, illustrate ethical issues and ethics work related to collaboration, politics and power, and share lessons based on ten years of practice in the field of health and social well-being.


Tineke Abma
Tineke A. Abma is Professor Participation & Diversity Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Amsterdam, and Executive Director of Leyden Academy on Vitality and Ageing, Leiden.
Artikel

Het prestatievoordeel van publiek-private samenwerking

Een analyse van transportinfrastructuurprojecten in Nederland

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 3 2020
Trefwoorden Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), Cost Performance, Time Performance, Netherlands, Principal-Agent Relationships
Auteurs Dr. Stefan Verweij, Dr. Ingmar van Meerkerk en Prof. dr. ir. Wim Leendertse
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Compared to regular contracts, infrastructure development and management through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) is expected to lead to better cost and time performance. However, the evidence for this performance advantage of PPPs is lacking. This article analyzes the performance differences of projects with a Design-Build-Finance-Maintain (DBFM) contract (a type of PPP) and a Design-and-Construct (D&C) contract. Project performance data were collected (N = 65) from the Project Database of Rijkswaterstaat and analyzed using non-parametric tests. Rijkswaterstaat is the executive agency of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. The results show that DBFM-projects have a significantly higher cost performance than D&C-projects. In particular, DBFM-projects have less additional costs related to technical necessities in the implementation phase. Regarding time performance, DBFM-projects seem to perform better although the difference with D&C-projects is not statistically significant. The article discusses explanations for the performance advantage of PPPs, rooted in principal-agent theory. From this discussion, an agenda is presented for further research into the performance advantage of Public-Private Partnerships.


Dr. Stefan Verweij
Dr. Stefan Verweij is universitair docent infrastructuurplanning, governance en methodologie aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, faculteit Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen, basiseenheid Planologie.

Dr. Ingmar van Meerkerk
Dr. Ingmar van Meerkerk is universitair docent bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, afdeling Bestuurskunde.

Prof. dr. ir. Wim Leendertse
Prof. dr. ir. Wim Leendertse is bijzonder hoogleraar management in infrastructuurontwikkeling aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, faculteit Ruimtelijke Wetenschappen, basiseenheid Planologie. Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat, Rijkswaterstaat, Grote Projecten en Onderhoud.
Vrij artikel

Evalueren en leren van ICT-projecten

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden evaluation, evaluation methods, IT-projects, learning, content analysis
Auteurs Dr. Wouter Bronsgeest en Prof. dr. ir. Rex Arendsen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Governmental IT-projects regularly make the news due to issues about the quality of end results, planning or costs. The Elias report, which is based upon a Parliamentary Inquiry, recommends to evaluate more and learn from the outcomes of these evaluations. However, the report does not give guidance on how to evaluate. The question thus remains: what constitutes a good evaluation of governmental ICT-projects, and what characteristics should be addresses in evaluation research. After careful study of various scientific disciplines, the researchers developed an extensive reference model, including additional suggestions for defining methods, the evaluation process, and criteria on how to evaluate an evaluation. After using this reference model in a content-analytical document analysis, it became clear that many evaluation reports are not being shared with other professionals or practitioners, that reports often lack a specifically formulated research question, and that conclusions and additional reflections are limited. There is room for considerable improvement in the evaluation of ICT-projects.


Dr. Wouter Bronsgeest
Dr. W.L. Bronsgeest is verbonden aan het Center for eGovernment Studies (CFES) van de Universiteit Twente, en duovoorzitter van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Vereniging van ICT- en Informatieprofessionals (KNVI). Hij is tevens werkzaam als lid van het managementteam van de Directie IV van de Belastingdienst.

Prof. dr. ir. Rex Arendsen
Prof. dr. ir. R. Arendsen is als hoogleraar Maatschappelijke en historische context van belastingrecht verbonden aan de Universiteit Leiden. Hij is tevens werkzaam als adviseur bij het Centre for Tax Policy and Administration bij de OESO in Parijs.
Thema-artikel

Open (de) deuren

Bestuurskundig onderzoek naar de succesfactoren van de werkrelatie burgemeester-gemeentesecretaris

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden political, administrative, collaborative, relationship, success factors
Auteurs Drs. Frans-Willem van Gils MSc
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The collaborative relationship between the appointed mayor and the non-political highest administrative official is a crucial one in Dutch local government. It aligns two different domains or spheres: the political, decision making domain on one hand, and the administrative, executive domain on the other. Since research points out that 25% of these collaborative relations fail, the need for insight in the factors that shape the relations and the success of it emerges. Non-successful collaboration between public top-officials usually results in financial, societal or personal costs or damage. In this research, 17 factors were indicated that influence the (perceived) collaborative success, divided in three levels: external factors, functional factors and personal factors. Within the success factors, several ‘critical’ factors were determined, without which a successful collaborative relationship never is possible. On the functional level the critical factors are trust, role convergence and shared understanding, and on the personal level consistency and integrity. Best guaranty for a successful collaborative relationship is when both actors adapt their roles to each other’s liking, reciprocally building trust and shared understanding by using open communication, while being consistent and maintaining their integrity.
    Finally, officials are being called upon to open their doors, and share valuable experiences.


Drs. Frans-Willem van Gils MSc
Drs. F.W. van Gils behaalde in 2019 de graad van Master of Science in Public Administration aan de Erasmus University Rotterdam met een onderzoek naar de succesfactoren van de werkrelatie tussen burgemeester en gemeentesecretaris. Hij is oud-burgemeester en thans directeur van Archon Consultancy. Hij adviseert en coacht topwerkrelaties in het openbaar bestuur, doet onderzoek naar politiek-ambtelijke samenwerkingsrelaties, en draagt met trainingen, lezingen en onderwijs bij aan deskundigheidsbevordering.
Thema-artikel

Succesvol wethouderschap onder de loep

Bronnen van legitimiteit in de ogen van inwoners, raadsleden en wethouders

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Aldermen, Local government, Success, Politics, Legitimacy
Auteurs Drs. Peter Verheij
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Research into successful alderman is scarce. Scientifically less is known about the perspective of residents and council members on (successful) aldermen. A recent study investigated the sources of legitimacy that successful aldermen draw on. In addition, the contribution of characteristics of local political leadership to successful alderman has been examined. Based on a survey of residents, councilors and aldermen, differences in opinions about aldermen, aspects and indicators of legitimacy and personal characteristics were uncovered. There are clear differences in judgment, indicators and personal characteristics that are considered important and another source on which the judgment is based. This provides interesting and new research material for public administration literature as well as for administrative practice. The view of residents learns us that the distance to aldermen must be reduced, more connection must be made, a more outside view must be taken and an addition to the management style of councilors with responsive qualities is required.


Drs. Peter Verheij
Drs. P.J. Verheij RA is wethouder in de gemeente Alblasserdam en lid van de Raad voor het Openbaar Bestuur. Hij rondde recent een executive Master Bestuur en Beleid af aan de Universiteit Utrecht (USBO) met een onderzoek over succesvol wethouderschap. Dit artikel is een samenvatting van het betreffende onderzoek.
Artikel

Het spel en de knikkers: ervaren rechtvaardigheid in vier lokale participatieprocessen

Tijdschrift Bestuurs­wetenschappen, Aflevering 2 2020
Auteurs Drs. Christine Bleijenberg, Dr. Reint Jan Renes, Prof. dr. Noëlle Aarts e.a.
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Designing and implementing participation processes that are perceived as meaningful by both municipalities and citizens requires insight into the assessment by participants. In this study the theory of experienced procedural justice is applied in the context of citizen participation. To gain insight into the importance of the outcome and the course of the process in the assessment by participants, the authors have used survey research to collect data from four different participation processes in a Dutch municipality (Delft). The results of this explorative study show that the respondents rate the participation processes in which they have participated as reasonably fair. There is a fair process effect when respondents experienced the process as fair and their confidence in the municipality increases, even if the outcome is unfavourable for them. For practitioners, this study shows that the dimensions of procedural justice, namely respect, having a voice and explanation, are guiding principles for the design and implementation of participation processes. There is still much to be achieved, especially when it comes to being given an explanation, so information about the decision-making process and accountability for the substantive choices that have been made. Finally, regular evaluation research is needed to set up participation processes that tie in with what participants think is important.


Drs. Christine Bleijenberg
Drs. C. Bleijenberg is als onderzoeker en docent verbonden aan het lectoraat Crossmediale Communicatie in het Publieke Domein van de Hogeschool Utrecht en als promovendus aan de Radboud Universiteit in Nijmegen.

Dr. Reint Jan Renes
Dr. R.J. Renes is lector Psychologie voor een Duurzame Stad aan het Amsterdams Kenniscentrum voor Maatschappelijke Innovatie van de Hogeschool van Amsterdam.

Prof. dr. Noëlle Aarts
Prof. dr. M.N.C. Aarts is hoogleraar Socio-Ecologische Interacties aan het Instituut for Science in Society (ISiS) van de Radboud Universiteit in Nijmegen.

Jonas Moons MSc
J. Moons MSc is als onderzoeker en docent verbonden aan het lectoraat Crossmediale Communicatie in het Publieke Domein van de Hogeschool Utrecht.
Artikel

Access_open Nudging in perspectief

De verbreding van gedragsinzichten in beleid

Tijdschrift Beleidsonderzoek Online, juni 2020
Auteurs Pieter Raymaekers en Marleen Brans
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Theorieën en methoden uit de gedragswetenschappen betreden steeds nadrukkelijker de beleidsscene. Gedragsinzichten en nudging beloven beleid te verrijken en te versterken. Het begin van deze gedragswetenschappelijke omslag of behavioural turn laat men doorgaans samenvallen met de publicatie van het boek Nudge van Richard Thaler en Cass Sunstein in 2008. In dit artikel plaatsen we nudging in perspectief en argumenteren we dat het concept zowel een zegen als een vloek betekent, en zowel een katalysator als een rem is voor de bredere toepassing en verankering van gedragsinzichten in beleid. Ondanks het aantrekkelijke narratief botst nudging op functionele limieten en ethische bezwaren. Om de gedragswetenschappelijke, experimentele en evidence-based beleidsbeloften alsnog in te lossen, zien we een strategie van steeds verdere verbreding. Het programma van de Behavioural Insights-beweging op basis van vijf pijlers leek in eerste instantie een oplossing te bieden, maar kampt door een eendimensionale interpretatie met interne spanningen. De nog bredere en ambitieuzere Behavioural Public Policy-agenda biedt nieuwe perspectieven, maar moet op functioneel en ethisch vlak nog verder onderbouwd worden.


Pieter Raymaekers
Pieter Raymaekers is onderzoeker en vormingscoördinator bij het KU Leuven Instituut voor de Overheid. Zijn onderzoek focust op de toepassing van gedragsinzichten en nudging in beleid.

Marleen Brans
Marleen Brans is gewoon hoogleraar aan het KU Leuven Instituut voor de Overheid en schatbewaarder van de International Public Policy Association. Ze verricht voornamelijk onderzoek over de productie en consumptie van beleidsadvies.
Dossier

Access_open Waarde van werk in Nederland: de rol van de organisatie

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Employers, job quality, Organisations, Satisfaction, value of work
Auteurs Dr. Wieteke Conen en Prof. dr. Paul de Beer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent scientific and policy discourses, the centre of attention is increasingly geared towards the value and quality of work – as opposed to a prior occupation with the quantity of work. Whereas the dominant focus seems to be on (aspects of) the individual job, this contribution aims to embed the worker into the organisational context and highlight the (potential) role of organisations. We examine whether the value of work – beyond individual and job characteristics – is affected by (a) characteristics of the organisation, (b) mutual investments or the relation between employees and employers and (c) the extent to which employees can realise their values within an organisation. To that end, we analyse survey data from the Value of Work Monitor 2019. Our findings show that not only the characteristics of the employment relationship, but also the organisational context and realisation of workers’ values have a significant effect on the evaluation of one’s job. Amongst others, the composition of the workforce, autonomy and intensity, facilities for lifelong learning and workers’ embeddedness in the organisation all have a significant effect on outcomes. We conclude that the discussion on value and quality of work deserves a more active role from the side of employers.


Dr. Wieteke Conen
Dr. Wieteke Conen is werkzaam als onderzoeker bij AIAS-HSI, Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Prof. dr. Paul de Beer
Prof. dr. Paul de Beer is hoogleraar arbeidsverhoudingen bij AIAS-HSI, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Artikel

Sturing op toeristische gentrificatie in stadscentra

Lessen uit Amsterdamse stadsstraten

Tijdschrift Beleid en Maatschappij, Aflevering 2 2020
Trefwoorden Urban governance, policy fit, tourism gentrification, city centre, Amsterdam
Auteurs Ir. Simon van Zoest en Dr. Wouter Jan Verheul
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The extensive growth of urban tourism has influenced the living environment of urban citizens worldwide, which is among others due to changes in the range of commercial amenities. As a manifestation of this development, the existing supply of retail and hospitality services gradually changes from a focus on inhabitants to the tourist. As a result, the call for municipal intervention grows. However, little is known about the steerability of this development. In this article we therefore asses how tourism affects the range of commercial amenities in city streets, and what local policy responses are most suitable. The research builds on the concepts of tourism gentrification and different types of ‘policy-instrument fit’. Our case study of the city centre of Amsterdam, including a media and policy document analysis, as well as in-depth interviews with stakeholders, show that some problems caused by mass tourism require ‘hard’ forms of government control, while others require a ‘softer’ process approach, linking local parties to jointly improve a city street. The presented steering perspectives are not only relevant for the city of Amsterdam, but also for many other towns within, and beyond, the Netherlands, that have been struggling with the growth of tourism. The open attitude towards urban mass tourism has come up for discussion and urban (tourism) policy calls for reconsideration.


Ir. Simon van Zoest
Ir. Simon van Zoest is promovendus aan de Technische Universiteit Delft.

Dr. Wouter Jan Verheul
Dr. Wouter Jan Verheul is universitair docent en onderzoeker aan de Technische Universiteit Delft. Beide zijn verbonden aan de afdeling Urban Development Management.
Vrij artikel

20 jaar Verantwoordingsdag: Inzicht voor Kamercommissies

Hoe inhoudsanalyse inzicht geeft in prestatiegegevensgebruik door Kamerleden

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden performance information, accountability, Parliament, annual reports, Performance-based Budgeting
Auteurs Dr. Sjoerd Keulen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The 20th Accountability Day of the Netherlands House of Representatives is a fitting occasion to investigate whether Dutch Members of Parliament use performance information (PI). Performance information used by managers and politicians is a basic assumption for managing and guiding Performance-based Budgeting. Ironically, based on a literature review on performance use, we know that politicians and especially parliamentarians do not use performance information for decision making or scrutiny. This is specifically so when PI reports are long. Using the framework of accountability of Bovens (2007) and using content analysis of the questions, motions and debates of the Standing Committees on the annual reports, this article shows that MPs use performance information in all phases (informing, debating, sanctions). Contradicting earlier research on parliamentarians, we found that they use annual reports and reports of the Court of Audit as their main sources in the debates. This article shows that the use of PI in parliament is steadily rising. The growing importance of performance information for accountability is further illustrated by the strengthening of the accountability forum.


Dr. Sjoerd Keulen
Dr. S.J. Keulen is onderzoeker bij de Algemene Rekenkamer en universitair docent Bestuurskunde aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Thema-artikel

Een kritisch-pragmatische bestuurskunde

Oxymoron of gelukkig huwelijk?

Tijdschrift Bestuurskunde, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden critical pragmatism, public administration, energy justice, governance arrangements, regional energy strategies
Auteurs Dr. Tamara Metze
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A pragmatic criticaster or a critical pragmatist is considered a schizophrenic in daily life: it seems impossible to be solution oriented and critical at the same time. You are either an optimist or a pessimist. This schism also seems to run between public administration and political scientists. Public administration is focused on (positive) problem solving, whereas political scientists – especially in a tradition of critical theory – examine the exertion of power. This essay proposes a combination of the two extremes: a critical-pragmatist approach for public administration.
    In this approach, critical political theory goes hand in hand with pragmatist reconstruction and design. This design is impossible without normative and procedural principles, for example ideas about sustainability, justice and democracy. This is illustrated with an example for designing just governance arrangements in the Dutch regional energy strategies. The article shows that public administration that is relevant, reflective and democratic builds on a critical-pragmatist approach.


Dr. Tamara Metze
Dr. T. Metze is universitair hoofddocent Bestuur en beleid aan de universiteit van Wageningen.
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.