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.

De Nederlandse rijksoverheid maakt steeds meer gebruik van DBFM(O)-contracten om grootschalige bouw- en infraprojecten te ontwikkelen en te realiseren (DBFM(O) staat voor Design, Build, Finance, Maintain en eventueel Operate). De organisatie en inrichting van deze contracten en projecten zijn ‘als vanzelfsprekend’ gegroeid en gestandaardiseerd, veelal gebaseerd op de internationale praktijk en buitenlandse voorbeelden. Dit artikel zet uiteen hoe DBFM(O)-projecten georganiseerd en gestructureerd worden door publieke en private partijen. Uit internationaal onderzoek blijkt dat de resultaten wisselend zijn, maar de potentiële voordelen van DBFM(O) zijn groot. Deze potentie blijkt uit de eerste praktijkervaringen in Nederland, maar we kennen inmiddels ook de eerste negatieve gevolgen voor betrokken risicodragende partijen. We onderscheiden bij DBFM(O) zes ‘conventies’ met onderliggende spanningen waar praktijk en wetenschap, in de Nederlandse verhoudingen, kritisch op zullen moeten reflecteren.

Since the summer of 2013, the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) are negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Especially for the EU, this is one of the policy priorities for the present term. TTIP is supposed to bring much-needed growth and jobs and to enable the EU to remain a global standardsetter, all without lowering EU levels of regulatory protection. Opponents of the agreement, however, fear that TTIP would lead to a regulatory race-to-the-bottom. This article scrutinizes these claims through a detailed document analysis complemented with a number of interviews. It is embedded in the political-economic literature on the trade-regulation nexus as well as on exporting standards and secondary literature on past EU-US regulatory cooperation attempts. We argue that the effects of TTIP are dependent on the concrete mode of regulatory convergence chosen in the agreement. If, as seems presently most plausible, the negotiators opt for bilateral mutual recognition as their preferred mode for regulatory convergence, the plausibility that TTIP would lead to global standards is reduced. The risk of running into a regulatory race-to-the-bottom increases in that case, but will ultimately depend on the number of sectors where this mode is applicable and under which conditions this is applied. We conclude that the probability is low that the TTIP agreement being negotiated will lead either to a significant increase in global standards or to a direct large-scale race-to-the-bottom.

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.

The central argument according to Eric Corijn in the book of Benjamin Barber is that a legitimate political authority should be created that can add some governance, some regulation to the world system. Within the world system a democratic deficit has emerged that is caused by the process of globalization, in which international political and economic decisions are taken without reference to a global constituency, civil society, citizenship or global public opinion. Eric Corijn sees four strong arguments for an increased political role of mayors through a Global Parliament of Mayors. He also discusses three structural global challenges that can better be dealt with by cities than by dysfunctional nations: a) our relationship with nature, b) the growing social inequality, c) superdiversity resulting from migration and socio-cultural diversification. In dealing with these issues (the political agenda) the Global Parliament of Mayors should act in a pragmatic way.

Worldwide, cities are becoming increasingly important in global networks. The rise of cities and urban regions is widely described in academic literature. Cities are becoming essential players in networks on three scales: on an international scale as a hub in global networks, on a regional scale in partnerships as a consequence of the necessity of upscaling and on a local scale, in cooperation with citizens. This article addresses what this rise of the city, operating in complex networks on different scales, means for the position and tasks of the mayor, as a representative of the city. The article describes the modern challenges for the mayoral function and role in an emerging network society and addresses the growing importance of strong personal and transactional leadership while operating in networks both inside and outside the municipality.