This thesis describes the deductive research concerning the role of stakeholders in the policy process of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). It aims to answer the following research question: what...Show moreThis thesis describes the deductive research concerning the role of stakeholders in the policy process of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). It aims to answer the following research question: what is the role of stakeholders in the policy failures regarding the sustainability of the Common Fisheries Policy? To that end, interviews and a document analysis are completed. The case of the 2013 CFP reform is chosen because it is innovative in the contribution of stakeholders. The growing participation of environmental NGOs led to the adoption of new environmental measures such as Maximum Sustainable Yield and the landing obligation (Orach et al., 2017). Hence, the 2013 CFP should have led to a sustainable management of fisheries. However, in reality the CFP has not been able to achieve the results it set out to do. In spite of progress in the Atlantic seas, the CFP has not prevented overfishing of stocks in the Mediterranean and Black Sea (COM, 2018). For this reason this thesis treats the CFP as policy failure. In order to explain policy failure, the mechanistic approach is used. When the policy process is regarded as a system of mechanisms, it becomes possible to identify causal relations (Van der Heijden, 2021). Within this approach, first-order mechanisms directly alter stakeholder behaviour during the decision making process. In a second-order mechanism, the effects of this behaviour achieve a particular policy outcome (Capano, 2020). Specifically, certain first-order mechanisms such as competition and blame avoidance behaviour are connected to certain second-order mechanisms, negative framing and countermobilization, resulting in a negative feedback loop, thus failure (Compton & ‘t Hart, 2019). However, it turns out to be difficult to fit the mechanisms at work in the CFP policy process in one feedback loop. Mechanisms from different feedback loops occur at the same time, rendering it impractical to find a straightforward cause of policy failure. Moreover, in reality the difference between first and second-order mechanisms is ambiguous. Therefore, it is concluded the mechanistic approach has limited explanatory value concerning the role of stakeholders in a policy failure. Nevertheless, it is indicated the behaviour of stakeholders during the policy process impacts their evaluation of policy. In this case, the environmental NGOs displayed willingness to reform, whereas the fisheries representatives were more reluctant. Environmental NGOs consider the CFP failed because the implementation is deficient and compliance is low, although the policy itself is sufficient. On the contrary, fisheries representatives explain the fault is in the policy design. That is why it is argued reluctance corresponds with policy failure and willingness with programmatic failure. Second, stakeholders engage in image building. Throughout the process, actors create perceptions about each other, which clash with their own perspectives. The divergent expectations limit the capacity to collaborate because actors feel they can never live up to expectations. As this impacts compliance negatively, this might be another reason why the CFP has not succeeded.Show less
Low socioeconomic position (SEP) individuals are more likely to develop chronic illnesses and to have poorer health outcomes than the general population. One promising approach to reduce this...Show moreLow socioeconomic position (SEP) individuals are more likely to develop chronic illnesses and to have poorer health outcomes than the general population. One promising approach to reduce this incidence rate of chronical illnesses is through eHealth interventions. Even so, the uptake of eHealth amongst low SEP individuals is low, and there is a lack of understanding how to best connect eHealth interventions to low SEP individuals. This study therefore aimed to gain insights into the main barriers and facilitators in eHealth for low SEP individuals, by consulting stakeholders (i.e., health professionals and policy makers). In addition, the present study was interested in possible differences between health professionals and policy makers. To assess these research questions, an online Delphi study was conducted. The present study analyzed the ratings of 12 Dutch stakeholders regarding 86 statements on barriers and facilitators in different phases of eHealth (i.e., development, reach, evaluation and implementation). Moreover, a Mann Whitney U test was conducted to assess possible differences in the ratings between health professionals and policy makers. Results revealed that time and financial resources as well as the eHealth intervention content and the involvement of low SEP individuals are key factors in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Additional main factors included the involvement of the social environment of low SEP individuals and the involvement of professionals. Finally, it was found that the employment of continuous evaluation cycles throughout all phases forms a major factor in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Additionally, the results indicated that one statement regarding the importance of user privacy in the development phase received a significantly higher score from policy makers than health professionals. No additional significant differences in scores between health professionals and policy makers were found. This study provides an overview of key barriers in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Understanding these barriers and facilitators may generate insights on how to optimize eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP, and therefore help professionals to connect eHealth to low SEP individuals. Furthermore, the present study could be considered as a building block on which future studies can be conducted.Show less
Low socioeconomic position (SEP) individuals are more likely to develop chronic illnesses and to have poorer health outcomes than the general population. One promising approach to reduce this...Show moreLow socioeconomic position (SEP) individuals are more likely to develop chronic illnesses and to have poorer health outcomes than the general population. One promising approach to reduce this incidence rate of chronical illnesses is through eHealth interventions. Even so, the uptake of eHealth amongst low SEP individuals is low, and there is a lack of understanding how to best connect eHealth interventions to low SEP individuals. This study therefore aimed to gain insights into the main barriers and facilitators in eHealth for low SEP individuals, by consulting stakeholders (i.e., health professionals and policy makers). In addition, the present study was interested in possible differences between health professionals and policy makers. To assess these research questions, an online Delphi study was conducted. The present study analyzed the ratings of 12 Dutch stakeholders regarding 86 statements on barriers and facilitators in different phases of eHealth (i.e., development, reach, evaluation and implementation). Moreover, a Mann Whitney U test was conducted to assess possible differences in the ratings between health professionals and policy makers. Results revealed that time and financial resources as well as the eHealth intervention content and the involvement of low SEP individuals are key factors in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Additional main factors included the involvement of the social environment of low SEP individuals and the involvement of professionals. Finally, it was found that the employment of continuous evaluation cycles throughout all phases forms a major factor in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Additionally, the results indicated that one statement regarding the importance of user privacy in the development phase received a significantly higher score from policy makers than health professionals. No additional significant differences in scores between health professionals and policy makers were found. This study provides an overview of key barriers in eHealth for low SEP individuals. Understanding these barriers and facilitators may generate insights on how to optimize eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP, and therefore help professionals to connect eHealth to low SEP individuals. Furthermore, the present study could be considered as a building block on which future studies can be conducted.Show less
De beleidscyclus is toenemend complex, zeker daar beleid vaak van belang is voor een groot speelveld aan actoren. Zo ook met het klimaatbeleid. Er wordt daarom steeds vaker gekozen voor een...Show moreDe beleidscyclus is toenemend complex, zeker daar beleid vaak van belang is voor een groot speelveld aan actoren. Zo ook met het klimaatbeleid. Er wordt daarom steeds vaker gekozen voor een bestuursvorm op basis van samenwerking, ook wel collaborative governance genoemd, waarbij overheids- en niet overheidsorganisaties samenwerken om complexe beleidsvraagstukken op te lossen. Echter is de opkomst en het gebruik van collaborative governance sneller verlopen dan het wetenschappelijke onderzoek naar deze bestuursvorm. Hierdoor is er sprake van kennistekort, onder andere over de voorwaarden voor een goed samenwerkingsproces. Daarom is dit onderzoek uitgevoerd aan de hand van een enkele casestudie om meer inzicht te verschaffen met betrekking tot welke aspecten zorgen voor een effectief samenwerkingsproces. Dit is gedaan aan de hand van de klimaattafel elektriciteit, die als één van de vijf klimaattafels verantwoordelijk is geweest voor de inhoud van het Klimaatakkoord van 2019. De onderzoeksvraag luidt dan ook: “In hoeverre heeft het samenwerkingsproces van de Klimaattafel Elektriciteit geleidt tot een effectieve samenwerking?”. Deze onderzoeksvraag is beantwoord door het contingentiemodel van collaborative governance van Ansell en Gash (2008) toe te passen op de klimaattafel elektriciteit. Aan de hand van dit model is gekeken of de vastgestelde voorwaarden en verhoudingen voor een effectieve samenwerking aanwezig waren in het samenwerkingsproces aan de klimaattafel elektriciteit, en of dit resulteerde in een effectieve samenwerking. De analyse is uitgevoerd aan de hand van een verscheidenheid aan documenten en drie semigestructureerde interviews. Uit het onderzoek is gebleken dat er bij de klimaattafel elektriciteit sprake was van een effectief en soepel samenwerkingsproces, waarbij weinig echte problemen aanwezig waren. Een mogelijke verklaring hiervoor is dat de actoren in de Nederlandse energiesector al een lange tijd samenwerken waardoor hier sprake is van meer overeenkomende belangen en een gezamenlijk einddoel. Daarom wordt aanbevolen om dit onderzoek ook toe te passen op de overige vier klimaattafels om te achterhalen of de samenwerkingsprocessen hier ook zonder problemen verliepen, of dat hier wellicht meer spanningen zoals omschreven in het theoretische model zaten. Aangezien het onderzochte samenwerkingsproces zeer soepel verliep is het lastig om een praktijkaanbeveling te formuleren. Als enkele aanbeveling wordt er echter aanbevolen om een meer concrete en duidelijke koppeling te leggen tussen de beleidsfase en uitvoeringsfase om zo het uitvoeringstempo te verhogen.Show less
Master thesis | Crisis and Security Management (MSc)
open access
This study conducts research to unravel the influence of crisis response strategies applied by public leaders on the stances taken on by stakeholders, anticipating on their future process of...Show moreThis study conducts research to unravel the influence of crisis response strategies applied by public leaders on the stances taken on by stakeholders, anticipating on their future process of political accountability. Anticipating on dynamic crisis communication efforts, this study conducts research to crises in which Dutch public leaders experience a significant crisis aftermath in the form of an official inquiry. Findings confirm the key argument within the SCCT-theory by Coombs (2007), that stresses the importance to formulate the response strategy, during and in the aftermath of a crisis, by means of the perceived initial responsibility. Remarkably, findings from the case of Utrecht may suggest that consistency positively contributes to the stakeholder stances taken on towards the crisis handling of the mayor. In addition, inconsistency during and in the aftermath of a crisis, present in the response strategy by Pauline Krikke in the case of The Hague, seems to negatively affect stakeholders stances towards the mayor’s handling of the crisis. Finally, findings of this study reveal the importance of incorporating the findings from the inquiry report in the response strategy during the aftermath of the crisis. When anticipating on the findings of the inquiry report, the mayor takes on political accountability for their crisis efforts.Show less
Hoe draagt leiderschap bij aan de samenwerking tussen stakeholders in een context van een wicked problem. Samenwerking heeft betrekking op publiek-privaat of publiek-publiek samenwerking.
A values-based approach is able to indicate heritage values attributed to the cultural resource of heritage by stakeholder groups. This study examines three stakeholders of heritage who share the...Show moreA values-based approach is able to indicate heritage values attributed to the cultural resource of heritage by stakeholder groups. This study examines three stakeholders of heritage who share the characteristic of being distributors of news. State, local community and general public are examined for the meanings they attach to heritage via the news messages they publish. The case study of the research provides an interesting case when all the aforementioned stakeholder groups contributed to the spread of knowledge and information upon the excavation of the Kastas tumulus at Amphipolis in Greece. The examination of the content based on the variables of time and the values resulted in the identification of patterns. Time served as an alteration factor for the attribution of meaning at the site by the involved stakeholders. In addition, differences exist in the way the stakeholders attribute values and in the frequency of the values per stakeholder.Show less
