Internationaal stijgt de aandacht voor evidence-based policy (EBP); de term duikt steeds vaker op in het beleidsdiscours. Het empirisch onderzoek naar kennisgebruik en doorwerking van wetenschappelijk onderzoek is evenwel eerder gelimiteerd, al bestaat er consensus dat de doorwerking van sociaalwetenschappelijk onderzoek beperkt is. De vraag stelt zich of het recente EBP-discours hierin verandering kan brengen. Kan EBP leiden tot meer doorwerking van sociaalwetenschappelijk onderzoek, gelet op de inherente kenmerken van beleid en wetenschappelijk onderzoek die belangrijke obstakels blijken te vormen voor kennisgebruik en doorwerking? Kunnen we in Vlaanderen reeds spreken over een EBP? Wat verstaan beleidsmakers onder ‘evidence-based’? Is een EBP überhaupt mogelijk? Wat zijn de belangrijkste obstakels voor kennisgebruik volgens beleidsmakers en wat zijn de belangrijkste gebruiksverhogende factoren? In dit artikel wordt aan de hand van een literatuurstudie, een bevraging van (Vlaamse) beleidsmakers en een citaats- en inhoudsanalyse van Vlaamse parlementaire bronnen gepoogd een antwoord te bieden op deze vragen.

Because of the blurring of the European internal borders, combating crime is demanding closer cross-border collaboration between police forces. For that reason, the Dutch police have expressed the objective that dealing with cases with an international component should be an integral part of the job for every police officer. This study focuses on the attitudes of Dutch police officers regarding cross-border policing, and seeks to determine which factors have the greatest effect on those attitudes. This attitude approach contrasts with more traditional, top-down approaches, by shifting the focus to micro dynamics on the individual level. The methods chosen for addressing this research objective consist of semi-structured interviews and observations. The results show that the current attitude of Dutch police officers is mainly determined by the extent to which they have had to deal with international issues in their daily work. Although strong organization-wide attitudes towards cross-border policing are not likely to arise, much could still be gained by facilitating cross-border experiences and making more coherent efforts at socialization.

Amidst the turbulence of recent crises, governments’ capacity to govern and to deliver public value is under serious pressure. Public institutions are working hard to come up with new and improved schemes for dealing with complex and wicked policy issues that have emerged or just wont go away. But government alone cannot solve most of these issues. Governments already attempted to make ‘better, smarter policy’ in the hopes of raising performance. They also invested heavily in ‘participation’ of citizens, by inviting them to ‘co-create’ policy or ‘join-up’ with government agencies. However, this image of collaboration is one-sided. Besides the efforts initiated by governments themselves, there is a wide array of emerging activities. In these practices, it is not the government that takes action, but society takes ‘public matters’ into its own hands. Just as in many other countries, in The Netherlands groups of citizens have started to organize certain services, tasks or activities that used to be provided by the central or decentralized governmental institutions by themselves (and in most cases, for themselves). This article conceptualizes these emerging practices and analyses how they affect the world of policy making and what they may mean for public administration research.