Profiles citizen collectives and public officials

In collaboration with the NWO Smart Governance programme and the Netherlands School of Public Administration (NSOB), RePolis has developed statements on the ideal governance relationship between local governments and citizen collectives. As the relation between collectives and local governments is far from crystalized, we wonder which form of governance is appropriate and desired by the involved actors. The statements are based on four different theoretical perspectives. While the first perspective emphasizes the rule of law, the second perspective emphasizes performance measurement. The third perspective focusses on collaboration and the fourth perspective on support. From the sorting of these statements by municipal officials and initiators of civic collectives a number of profiles arise that show, for example, that officials who are positively skewed towards supporting collectives are outright negative about performance measurement. We will apply this Q-Sorting procedure in different domains to see the similarities and differences.

Right to Challenge Rotterdam

In the UK, Right to Challenge is a way to give citizens the opportunity to challenge a public task. Rotterdam is one of the Dutch cities who applied this approach. The Right to Challenge Rotterdam is being evaluated at this moment and the Erasmus University participates in this evaluation. We participate in the process evaluation of the municipality and we enrich the results by scientific knowledge on bottom-up initiatives and by comparing Rotterdam with other Dutch cities. During the evaluation, the preliminary results are used to adapt the arrangement Right to Challenge Rotterdam.

 

Evaluation Area Committees City of Rotterdam

In 2016 the Governance model of the City of Rotterdam was evaluated by researchers of the RePolis program, together with reserachers from DRIFT and the University of Groningen. Some of the questions in this evaluation were: how do the area committees stimulate and facilitate citizen initiatives? What do they contribute to the relation between citizen and city? Based upon the report, the city council decided to adjust the model quite significantly to give citizens more opportunities to organize themselves and to influence the agenda of the city government.

Read more: Download PDF (Dutch)

Link: https://www.drift.eur.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Een-kwestie-van-kiezen-EBMR_def_digitaal.pdf

Panel IRSPM

The 2017 International Research Society for Public Management (IRSPM) conference will be held in Budapest, Hungary from the 19th to the 21st of April. The Repolis team is well represented, with at least five papers and a panel on how community self-organization can be explained by means of comparing different political-administrative traditions in different countries (led by Astrid Molenveld, Jurian Edelenbos and Yannis Papadopoulos).

 

BEGIN project

The overall objective of the Blue Green Infrastructure through Social Innovation project (BEGIN) is to demonstrate climate change adaptation solutions through blue-green infrastructure (BGI) in cities. Besides that it aims to capture and sustain BGI’s benefits by using social innovation, and to mainstream BGI into urban planning and operation by developing attractive business cases and overcoming governance barriers. The BEGIN project will bring together 10 cities (Antwerp, Ghent, Aberdeen, London Enfield, Bradford, Kent, Dordrecht, Hamburg, Gothenburg, Bergen) with 6 leading research institutes (CIRIA, UNESCO-IHE, University of Sheffield, TUHH, Royal College of Arts and Erasmus University), which are either frontrunners on the topic, or planning large investments during the project’s timeframe.

The approach of BEGIN is to demonstrate the effectiveness of BGI and implement viable BGI solutions at the target sites in partner cities. BEGIN uniquely combines BGI and social innovation for the first time to deliver climate change adaptation solutions. Social innovation will help mobilize problem-solving capacity of a wide range of stakeholders. In comparison to traditional planning processes that often merely inform or consult stakeholders, social innovation in this project also concerns involvement of the stakeholders in the implementation and maintenance phase. The Repolis team will study co-creation and governance in the cities, and will compile best practices and tools for social innovation processes. During the course of three and a half years the Repolis team will assist, monitor and evaluate the cities and their projects, particularly on the topic of social innovation.

Launch of the BEGIN project

At the end of January a new project started, the BEGIN project (http://northsearegion.eu/begin/about-us/). In this Interreg project 10 European cities and 6 research institutes are involved. The working title of this project is: “Blue-green infrastructure through social innovation”.

Because of climate change rainfall is more frequent and voluminous. Cities can’t cope with that amount of rainwater, because their sewage systems are unable to handle that amount. A possible solution to cope with this problem is to invest in blue-green infrastructures, like rainwater harvesting and green corridors. During the next 4 years the cities are going to create blue-green infrastructures and during this process they will be guided by various research institutes. Erasmus University, together with the Royal College of Art, is responsible for the social innovation part of this project. By establishing partnerships between stakeholders, like citizens and municipalities they share the responsibility for implementing and maintaining blue-green infrastructures. By doing so, their long-term existence could be ensured.

This project will be a part of the Repolis programme during the next few years. As part of the BEGIN project the research will focus on (sustainable) partnership between the government and other stakeholders.

Contact

Please translate in en_us: Contact

Partners

Please translate in en_us: Partners

Links

Please translate in en_us: Links

Publications

2019

Van Buuren, A., Van Meerkerk, I., Tortajada, C. (2019). Understanding emergent participation practices in water governance. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 35(3), 367-382.

Duijn, M., Van Buuren, A., Edelenbos, J., Van Popering-Verkerk, J., & Van Meerkerk, I. (2019). Community-based initiatives in the Dutch water domain: the challenge of double helix alignment. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 35(3), 383-403.

2018

Custers, G. (2018).Neighbourhood ties and employment: a test of different hypotheses across neighbourhoods.  Housing Studies, 1-23. doi: 10.1080/02673037.2018.1527020

Snel, G.J. Custers & G. Engbersen (2018). Ongelijkheid in de participatiestad: Stadsbuurten en burgerparticipatie. Mens en Maatschappij, 93 (1), 31-58. doi: 10.5117/MEM2018.1.SNEL

Duijn, M., & Popering-Verkerk, J. (2018). Integrated Public Value Creation through Community Initiatives—Evidence from Dutch Water Management. Social Sciences7(12), 261.

P.M. Karré, (2018). Navigating between Opportunities and Risks: The Effects of Hybridity for Social Enterprises Engaged in Social Innovation. Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, 7 (1), 37-60. doi: 10.5947/jeod.2018.003

Meerkerk, I. van and J. Edelenbos (2018) Facilitating conditions for boundary-spanning behaviour in governance networks, Public Management Review, 20(4): 503-524.

Van Meerkerk, I., Kleinhans, R., & Molenveld, A. (2018). Exploring the durability of community enterprises: A qualitative comparative analysis. Public Administration, 96(4), 651-667.

Nederhand, J., E.H. Klijn, M. van der Steen and M. van Twist (2018) The governance of self-organization: Which governance strategy do policy officials and citizens prefer? Policy Sciences, online first.

Nederhand, J. and I. van Meerkerk (2018) Activating citizens in Dutch care reforms: Framing new co-production roles and competences for citizens and professionals, Policy & Politics, 46(4): 533-550.

Nederhand, J., M. van der Steen and M. van Twist (2018) Boundary-spanning strategies for aligning institutional logistics: A typology, Local Government Studies, online first.

E. Puerari, J. De Koning, T. Von Wirth, P.M. Karré, I.J. Mulder & D. Loorbach (2018). Co-Creation Dynamics in Urban Living Labs. Sustainability, 10 (6), 1-18. doi: 10.3390/su10061893

2017

Edelenbos, J., M.W. van Buuren, D. Roth and M. Winnubst (2017) Stakeholder initiatives in flood risk management: Exploring the role and impact of bottom-up initiatives in three ‘Room for the River projects in the Netherlands, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60(1): 47-66.

Edelenbos, J., I. van Meerkerk and J. Koppenjan (2017a) The challenge of innovating politics in community self-organization: The case of Broekpolder, Public Management Review, 19(1): 55-73.

Igalla, M & Meerkerk, I. van. Burgerinitiatieven hebben baat bij professionalisering. Sociale Vraagstukken. Verschenen op: 5 mei 2017. [http://www.socialevraagstukken.nl/burgerinitiatieven-hebben-baat-bij-professionalisering/].

Voorberg, W., Bekkers, V., Flemig, S., Timeus, K., Tonurist, P. & Tummers, L. (2017) Does co-creation impact public service delivery? The importance of state and governance traditions, Public Money and Management

Voorberg, W., Bekkers, V., Timeus, K., Tonurist, P. & Tummers, L. (2017) Changing public service delivery: Learning in co-creation Policy and Society

2016

Edelenbos, J., Van Meerkerk, I. & Schenk, T. (2016).  The Evolution of Community Self-Organization in Interaction With Government Institutions: Cross-Case Insights From Three Countries. The American Review of Public Administration, 0275074016651142. 

Edelenbos, J., Van Meerkerk, I. & Koppenjan, J. (2016).  The challenge of innovating politics in community self-organization: the case of Broekpolder. Public Management Review, DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2016.1200663

Nederhand, J., Bekkers, V., & Voorberg, W. (2016). Self-organization and the role of government: how and why does self-organization evolve in the shadow of hierarchy? Public Management Review, 18(7), 1063-1084.

Voorberg, W., & Bekkers, V. (2016). Interactive governance and the social construction of citizens as co-creators. Critical Reflections on Interactive Governance: Self-organization and Participation in Public Governance, 278.

 2015

Bekkers, V.J.J.M., Edelenbos, J., Nederhand, M.J., Steijn, B., Tummers, L.G. & Voorberg, W.H. (2015). The Social Innovation Perspective in the Public Sector: Co-Creation, Self-Organization and Meta-Governance. In: Edelenbos, J., Bekkers, V.J.J.M. & Steijn, B. (Eds.), Innovation in the public sector: linking capacity and leadership (governance and public management). Palgrave McMillan.

Bokhorst, M. & Edelenbos, J. (2015). De opkomst van wooncoöperaties in Nederland? Bestuurskunde, 24(2), 51-57.

Bokhorst, M., Edelenbos, J., Koppenjan, J. & Oude Vrielink, M. (2015). Burgercoöperaties. Speler of speelbal in de nieuwe verhoudingen tussen overheid, markt en samenleving, Bestuurskunde, 24(2), 3-16.

Edelenbos, J. & Meerkerk, I.F. van (2015). Connective capacity in water governance practices: the meaning of trust and boundary spanning for integrated performance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, 25-29.

Hufen, J.M., & Koppenjan, J.F.M. (2015). Local renewable energy cooperatives: revolution in disguise? Energy, Sustainability and Society, 5(1), 1-14.

Igalla, M. & Meerkerk, I. van. (2015). De duurzaamheid van burgerinitiatieven een empirische verkenning, Bestuurswetenschappen, 69(3), 25-53.

Kullberg, J., Noije, L. van., Berg, E. van. den., Mensink, W., Igalla, M. (m.m.v. Posthumus, H). (2015). Betrokken wijken. Ervaringen van bewoners en professionals met wijkverbetering in vier (voormalige) aandachtswijken, Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.

Meerkerk, I. van, Koppenjan, J. & Keast, R. (2015). New citizen collectives, their democratic and their implications for public management, IRSPM conference.

Rijshouwer, E. & Uitermark, J. (2015). Veel Amsterdamse buurtinitiatieven volgen de grillen van sponsoren. [http://www.socialevraagstukken.nl/site/2015/10/29/veel-amsterdamse-buurtinitiatieven-volgen-de-grillen-van-sponsoren/].

Voorberg, W.H., Bekkers, V.J.J.M., & Tummers, L.G. (2015). A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey, Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333-1357.

2014

Van Meerkerk, I.F. & Edelenbos, J. (2014). The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands. Policy Sciences, 47 (1), 3-24

Van Meerkerk, I.F. (2014). Boundary Spanning in Governance Networks – A study about the role of boundary spanners and their effects on democratic throughput legitimacy and performance of governance networks. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam

2013

Van Meerkerk, I.F., Boonstra, B. & Edelenbos, J. (2013). Self-Organization in Urban Regeneration: A Two-Case Comparative Research. European Planning Studies, 21: 1630-1652

Edelenbos, J. & Van Meerkerk, I.F. (2011). Institutional Evolution within Local Democracy – Local Self-Governance Meets Local Government. In J. Torfing & P. Triantafillou (Eds.), Interactive policy making, metagovernance and democracy (pp. 169-186). Colchester: ECPR Press

2009

Dam, R. van., Eshuis, J. & Aarts, N. (2009). Transition starts with people: self-organising communities ADM and Golf Residence Dronten. In: Poppe, K.J., Termeer, C.J.A.M., & Slingerland, M. (Eds.), Transitions: towards sustainable agriculture and food chains in peri-urban areas (pp. 81-92). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Eshuis, J., Dam, R. van. & Aarts, M.N.C. (2009). Governance vanuit gemeenschappen. In: Breeman, G., Goverde, H. & Termeer, C.J.A.M. (Eds.), Governance in de groen-blauwe ruimte (pp. 188-203). Assen: Van Gorcum.

2008

Dam, R. van., Eshuis, J. & Aarts, N. (2008). Zelforganisatie. Een studie naar gemeenschapsvorming in de Amsterdamse Doe-Het-Zelf Maatschappij en de Golfresidentie Dronten. Wageningen: Wageningen UR.

2007

Eshuis, J. (2007). Trust and control in farmer-government partnerships: a Dutch case study. In: Cheshire, L., Higgins, V. & Lawrence, G. (Eds.), Rural governance: international perspectives (pp. 21-36). Abingdon: Routledge.

2003

Eshuis, J. & Woerkum, C.M.J. van. (2003). Trust and monitoring in governance processes: lessons from landscape management by farmers in a Dutch municipality, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 5(4), 379-396.