The use and value of hierarchical governance and modeling in infrastructure network planning

This paper discusses the seemingly inespacable tension between two dominant approaches to governance that are implemented with regard to the planning, design and development of infrastructure networks, such as roads and railways. Roughly, these approaches can be framed in two styles of governance, the hierarchical and the consensual style (Smits, 1995). In today’s (western) societies, hierarchical approaches to governance seem to become more and more obsolete. This is especially the case with regard to ´problematic situations´ that have a large spatial and environmental impact. For example, the planning, design and development of infrastructure networks have such a widespread, trans-sectoral impact, that a top down approach is considered to be no longer viable. The impact of large scale projects (such as the Betuwelijn, the development of the Tweede Maasvlakte or the High Speed Train Network) spreads into spatial, environmental, financial, legal, economic (with regard to exploitation and maintenance) and social aspects of everyday life. As a consequence, it is more and more to be considered as ´a normal procedure´ to at least consult the stakeholders concerned. The almost inevitable involvement of large groups of stakeholders with different characteristics cannot be achieved with hierarchical approaches to governance. Top down is assumed to be inappropriate and thus, un-called for in these types of policy processes. Following this widely accepted assumption, consensual approaches are designed and implemented, under various appealing banners, such as co-production, open planning processes and participatory policy making. These appealing names lead to innovative forms of interaction and participation of stakeholders. Stakeholders are enticed to participate in design workshops, brainstorms, coffee table talks, internet based discussions and surveys and market consultations. Stakeholders are invited to information centres and travelling exhibitions. All these efforts are undertaken based on the assumption that (this time) ´government will really listen and make effective use of all ideas, concerns and energy´. The question arises how effective and efficient these participatory efforts have been thus far. Is a consensual style of governance a solution for the ever increasing complexity of the impact of large scale infrastructural projects? Or has the hierarchical style still have some value for this type of policy processes? And if so, what kind value is this? And in addition, can hierarchical and consensual styles of governance simultaneously be helpful in planning, design and development of infrastructural networks, and if so, how and to what extend? Or must they be considered to be ´natural enemies´ with regard to designing and implementing policy processes? In this paper these questions will be addressed by assessing a (virtual) case study, the further advancement of the road infrastructure network around the city of Rotterdam (also known as the Rotterdamse Ruit). Subsequently we will discuss the two dominant styles of governance, the hierarchical and consensual style. Second, we will describe the role and value of hierarchical (top down) and consensual (bottom up) approaches in planning, designing and development of (road) infrastructural networks and projects. Third, we will make an attempt to combine both approaches, into a hybrid, cross over like, approach that incorporates both hierarchical and consensual approaches in governance. And fourth, we will apply (test) our hybrid, cross over approach to our (virtual) case study, thus proposing an approach for future governance to support the further advancement of the (road) infrastructure network in and around Rotterdam.

Participatory SWOT-analysis for the spatial impact study Railway Zone Breda - a case study

This paper on the spatial impact study Railway Zone Breda describes a participatory SWOT-analysis for assessing the impact of a large scale innercity infrastructural project on adjacent residential neighborhoods in which residents and other stakeholders, policy officials of the municipality of Breda and researchers participated. This large infrastructural project includes the transformation of the present railway station into a shuttle station for the high speed train Amsterdam – Paris. The redevelopment of the Breda railway station will have undeniable impacts on the adjacent neighborhoods Belcrum and Spoorbuurt. For this reason the municipality of Breda decided to let the stakeholders in the neighbourhoods participate in the impact analysis. In the research process the emphasis was directed to the question what impacts the renewal could have for these neighborhoods. The inhabitants and businesses of those neighborhoods were divided in their opinions and expectations. Some of them mainly saw the positive side - they expected to gain by the new situation - but others stressed the potential dangers of the intended project, pointing at. Hence, the main research objectives were 1) to identify and analyze the current strengths and weaknesses of the neighborhoods, 2) to foresee / estimate the potential impacts of the large infrastructural transformation and the transformation (building) process on the adjacent neighborhoods, and 3) to identify the actions were needed to maximze the positive effects and minimize the negatieve effects. This case study narrates on a participatory policy analysis process (cf. Geurts & Mayer, 1996; Mayer, 1997) in which knowledge generation, exchange and application by the stakeholders mentioned, is combined with expert and practitioner’s knowledge to generate new insights (situated cognition, cf. Bredo, 1994) with a focus on future implementation on behalf of the policy making process that takes place in a local community network.

Public participation in flood control areas - approaches to ‘sustainable’ communication strategies

Global warming causes heavy rainfall and rising sea levels. These climate effects prove to be a strong motivation for looking differently at issues of water management and safety in estuaries. For decades, the only answer to hazardous situations (e.g. flooding by increased river discharges or by incoming storm water) was to strengthens dikes and dams. This led to damage in the natural water system, a declining biodiversity and destruction of the unique estuary and river landscapes. Nowadays, different approaches are more frequently implemented, with creating more space for the rivers as a guiding principle. Instead of stemming and rapid discharge, water is contained in estuary and catchment areas. The alternative approach to water management contributes to a more sustainable development of the estuary, protecting the natural and ecological values. However, estuaries are often densely populated areas, accommodating several (conflicting) spatial and economical functions, such as residential areas, ports and harbors, industrial zones, farming and recreational facilities. Creating more space for water management (i.e. retention areas, flood planes and wash lands) leaves less space available for other spatial developments. As a consequence, stakeholders will be affected in their interests; e.g. cities cannot grow unrestrained and farming will have to be downsized. Concepts as ‘multiple land use’ and ‘societal cost – benefit evaluation’ come to mind to characterize the challenge for transforming the designated areas into more sustainable, multi-functional retention basins. Governmental agencies are often acting as project executives in these transformations. They are faced with various stakeholders who are all trying to defend or strengthen their specific interests. A vital question is how to communicate with these stakeholders in the different stages of the transformation process. What communication strategy applies to what situation? And equally important, if a communication strategy is developed, how should it be instrumented? What will the message be, how are the target groups identified and addresses, which mediums should be applied? And, more important, what kind of public participation is required to enable cooperation and avoid opposition to the transformation process? In general, four basic communication strategies can be identified: co-knowing, co-thinking, co-working and co-deciding. Each of these strategies apply to different situations, following the cultural and historic context in the area, the established relationship between the ‘governor and the governed’, and of course, the preferred style of governance. In a research assignment from four governmental agencies in The Netherlands, the UK and Belgium we have evaluated the applied communication strategies in six flood control areas in the EU. For this assignment, an evaluative framework was developed. The evaluation shows the suitability of the applied communication strategy in each of the reviewed areas. Moreover, lessons are drawn on the question in what situation, which type of communication strategy is most suitable. Also, the review gives examples of good practice and inspiration for ‘sustainable’ communication efforts in future transformation processes.

Applications of incidence bounds in point covering problems

In the Line Cover problem a set of n points is given and the task is to cover the points using either the minimum number of lines or at most k lines. In Curve Cover, a generalization of Line Cover, the task is to cover the points using curves with d degrees of freedom. Another generalization is the Hyperplane Cover problem where points in d-dimensional space are to be covered by hyperplanes. All these problems have kernels of polynomial size, where the parameter is the minimum number of lines, curves, or hyperplanes needed. First we give a non-parameterized algorithm for both problems in O*(2^n) (where the O*(.) notation hides polynomial factors of n) time and polynomial space, beating a previous exponential-space result. Combining this with incidence bounds similar to the famous Szemeredi-Trotter bound, we present a Curve Cover algorithm with running time O*((Ck/log k)^((d-1)k)), where C is some constant. Our result improves the previous best times O*((k/1.35)^k) for Line Cover (where d=2), O*(k^(dk)) for general Curve Cover, as well as a few other bounds for covering points by parabolas or conics. We also present an algorithm for Hyperplane Cover in R^3 with running time O*((Ck^2/log^(1/5) k)^k), improving on the previous time of O*((k^2/1.3)^k).Comment: SoCG 201

Pension plans and the retirement replacement rates in the Netherlands

This study compares the expected retirement replacement rates of several cohorts of Dutch employees at the time of their planned retirement with the 'actual' replacement rates based on available pension records. We find that using reasonable indexation rates, the expected replacement rates�are higher than the one we compute. Larger discrepancies are found for younger cohorts. We decompose the difference between the expected and 'actual' replacement rates and find that the mismatch is related to poor institutional knowledge for the whole sample. We also show the role of assumptions on institutions and on wage profiles in determining our results.

Motives of Socially Responsible Business Conduct

The social and ecological challenges that governments face have raised their interest in socially responsible business conduct (SRBC). In this article we analyze the motives of executives to perform SRBC. We distinguish three types of motives: financial, ethical and altruistic motives. We test the hypotheses on a sample of 473 executives. The estimation results show that SRBC is driven by a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motives, but that the intrinsic motives are stronger than the extrinsic motive.intrinsic motivation;extrinsic motivation;corporate social responsibility;socially responsible business conduct