2004
Volume 96, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0025-9454
  • E-ISSN: 1876-2816

Abstract

Abstract

In the Netherlands, citizens’ initiatives have received a lot of praise and are increasingly made responsible for providing public services. If they are to fulfil this role, they must be able to weather a crisis, as during a crisis public services should remain reliable. Literature on the durability of citizens’ initiatives suggests that large initiatives, with a close-knit core group and strong government support are the most durable. However, our research indicates that this was not the case during the COVID-19 crisis. Flexibility and freedom to function independently from the municipal government were found to be more decisive for durability. This suggests that despite public value of citizens’ initiatives, they cannot be expected to take much responsibility for durable public service provision.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.3.007.SPIT
2021-09-01
2021-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/00259454/96/3/07_MEM2021.3_SPIT.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.3.007.SPIT&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Boin, A., McConnel, A. & ’t Hart, P.(2021). Governing the pandemic. The politics of navigating a mega-crisis. Londen: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Hurenkamp, M., Tonkens, E. & Duyvendak, J.W.(2006). Wat Burgers Bezielt: een onderzoek naar burgerinitiatieven. Universiteit van Amsterdam/NICIS Kenniscentrum Grote Steden.
  3. Hurenkamp, M.(2017). Met opgeheven hoofd: Sociaal burgerschap aan het begin van de 21e eeuw. Van Gennep.
  4. Hurenkamp, M. & Tonkens, E.(2020). Ontwerpprincipes voor Betere Burgerparticipatie. Bestuurskunde, 16(1) 54-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Igalla, M., Edelenbos, J. & Meerkerk, I.F. van(2019). Citizens in Action, What Do They Accomplish? A Systematic Literature Review of Citizen Initiatives, Their Main Characteristics, Outcomes, and Factors. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(5) 1176-1194.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Igalla, M., Edelenbos, J. & Meerkerk, I.F. van(2020). What explains the performance of community-based initiatives? Testing the impact of leadership, social capital, organizational capacity, and government support. Public Management Review, 22(4) 602-632.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Kleinhans, R.(2017). False promises of co-production in neighbourhood regeneration: the case of Dutch community enterprise. Public Management Review, 19(10) 1500-1518.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lo Iacono, V., Symonds, P., & Brown, D. H.(2016). Skype as a tool for qualitative research interviews. Sociological Research Online, 21(2), 1-15. 
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Meerkerk, I. van, Kleinhans, R. & Molenveld, A.(2018). Exploring the durability of community enterprises: A qualitative comparative analysis. Public Administration, 96(1) 651-667.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Newman, L., Waldron, L., Dale, A. & Carriere, K.(2008). Sustainable urban community development from the grassroots: Challenges and opportunities in a pedestrian street initiative. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 13(2) 129-139.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Putnam, R.D.(2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  12. Rotmans, J.(2017). Change of era: our world in transition. Amsterdam: Boom.
  13. Rutte, M., Haersma Buma, S, van, Pechtold, A. & Segers, G.(2017). Vertrouwen in de toekomst. Regeerakkoord voor de periode. 2017-2021.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sader, N. Al, Kleinhans, R. & Ham, M. van(2019). Entrepeneurial Citizenship in Urban Regeneration in the Netherlands. Citizenship Studies, 23(5) 442-459.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Tonkens, E. & Verhoeven, I.(2018). The civic support paradox: Fighting unequal participation in deprived neighbourhoods. Urban Studies, 56(8) 1595-1610.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Torfing, J., & Triantafillou, P.(2013). What’s in a name? Grasping new public governance as a political-administrative system. International Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 9-25.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Ubels, H.(2020). Novel forms of governance with high levels of civic self-reliance. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.111587565
  18. Van der Lans, J.(2013). Sociaal doe-het-zelven: de idealen en de politieke praktijk. Amsterdam/Antwerpen: Atlas Contact.
  19. Verhijde, M. & Bosman, M.(2013). Regel die burgerinitiatieven: hoe gemeenten en maatschappelijke initiatieven in de openbare ruimte en publiektoegankelijke gebouwen omgaan met aansprakelijkheid. Den Haag: Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties (BZK).
  20. Wilde, M. de, Hurenkamp, M. & Tonkens, E.(2014). Flexible relations, frail contacts and failing demands: How community groups and local institutions interact in local governance in the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 51(16) 3365-3382.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.3.007.SPIT
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2021.3.007.SPIT
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): citizens’ initiatives; COVID-19 crisis; durability; social work; welfare state

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error