Suchergebnisse

Nowadays all kinds of processes of citizen involvement can be observed in practice. We label them as interactive governance in this article. Interactive governance brings with it new proto-institutions that can conflict with existing institutions of decision making. We analyze these institutional tensions in several Dutch local governments through comparative research. Our main conclusion is that there is a "missing institutional link" between the interactive process & the formal municipal decision-making process. Interactive governance needs better institutional embeddedness in order to prevent the interactive process from becoming meaningless & useless in formal decision making. 2 Tables, 49 References. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractGovernments seem to be trapped in a legitimacy paradox. While politicians and public managers, especially on the local level, increasingly initiate public participation to enhance the legitimacy of public decisions, the actual impact of citizens' input on political decision‐making is often low, contributing to a loss of legitimacy. To solve this paradox, this article unravels the views of local politicians in the Netherlands on the democratic legitimacy of public participation via Q‐methodology. Despite the large PA‐scholarship on public participation, empirical research into how politicians view and value public participation remains scarce. The findings reveal politicians either prefer participation that is conditioned by government or participation that empowers citizens to speak up. Taking the views of politicians into account in designing public participation processes improves the chance that politicians will do justice to its outcomes and hence contributes to public participation that is not symbolical but meaningfully informs political decision‐making.

Previous research has extensively analyzed the role, and indicated the importance, of network management for the functioning and performance of public or governance networks. In this article, we focus on the influence of boundary spanning actors in such networks-an aspect less examined in the governance network literature. Boundary spanners are considered to be important for governance network performance. Building on the literature, we expect a mediating role of trust in this relationship. To empirically test these relationships, we conducted survey research (N = 141) among project managers involved in urban governance networks: networks around complex urban projects that include the organizations involved in the governance process (the formulation of policies, decision making, and implementation) in these complex projects. We found a strong positive relationship between the presence of boundary spanners and trust and governance network performance. The results indicate a partially mediating role of trust in this relationship. Furthermore, we found that these boundary spanners originated mainly from private and societal organizations, and less from governmental organizations. Adapted from the source document.

In this article we study the reciprocal relationship, the coevolution, between different forms of trust and control. We conduct comparative case study of two spatial planning projects in The Netherlands. We find that trust and control are related through contingent causation, resulting in divergent paths of coevolution. Our research shows that not only - and often stated in other research - that informal control can contribute to trust, but also formal control can lead to increasing trust. The coevolution of trust and control depends on the specific initial situation in which the relationship between trust and control unfolds.

Boundary spanning behavior is important for both public, non-profit and private organizations to 'survive': to stay relevant in relation to the environment, to innovate, to improve performance and to collaborate in an effective manner, especially in multi-organizational settings. Providing an assessment of factors influencing the work and effectiveness of boundary spanners, and discussing the impact of boundary spanners on different types of outcomes (collaboration, trust, organizational innovation), this book offers a coherent overview of the evolution of boundary spanning in an interactive governance context.

Introduction: three reflecting perspectives on interactive governance -- Interactive governance and governability -- Forms of governance and policy problems: coping with complexity -- Interactive governance: a challenge to institutionalism -- Democratic transfer: everyday neoliberalism, hegemony and the prospects for democratic renewal -- Interactive -- or counteractive -- governance? Lessons learned about citizen participation and political leadership -- Interactive governance: authorization, representation and accountability -- Making good citizens: power and empowerment in community development programmes in Nepal -- What do public officials think about citizens? The role of public officials' trust and their perceptions of citizens' trustworthiness in interactive governance -- Governance in flux: a study of irrigator compliance in South Australia -- Community self-organization: potentials and pitfalls -- What has co-production ever done for interactive governance? -- Interactive governance and the social construction of citizens as co-creators -- Social enterprises in rura lcommunity governance: evidence from Tasmania -- Public engagement, governance and the pursuit of equity in contemporary urban revitalization: community benefits agreements (CBAs) with public versus nonprofit developers -- Governments and self-organization: a hedgehog's dilemma -- Doing what's necessary: how encounters in practice shape and improve interactive governance -- Joint fact-finding: an approach for advancing interactive governance when scientific and technical information is in question -- Interactive governance and the limits of knowledge co-production -- The managerial aspect of interactive governance -- Political leadership in the age of interactive governance: reflections on the political aspects of metagovernance -- Complementary boundary-spanning leadership: making civic-induced interactive governance work -- Conclusions: synthesizing key reflections and exploring new avenues for research and debate on interactive governance.

This article describes the results of a comparative case study of two competence development trajectories within Dutch public administration organizations. These two trajectories are rather different: One can be seen as a more theory-driven training approach whereas the other can be seen as practice-driven coaching. Their theoretical distinctions are elaborated upon, and the ways in which these differences impact upon their contributions to individual and organizational learning processes are analyzed. The article concludes with some observations on the relative value of both approaches as well as some conclusions about the ways in which the two approaches can strengthen each other and enhance individual and organizational learning.