In Western Europe, cities that host International Organizations (IOs) have to deal with more and more competition. The last decade many IOs settled in Eastern European and Asian countries. Distributing IOs over several cities in Europe for reasons of political balance and give-and-take among governments play a role in these decisions. However, public policy networks are more and more operational in these negotiations. Apart from the political and administrative actors, others – as private actors and external lobbyists – play a role as well. This often leads to increased complexity and ineffective decisions. This paper examines four cases in which political gameplay influenced the location decision-making of IOs in The Hague and Geneva. First, I will introduce the subject, research method and the four cases. Second, I will discuss how public policy networks are increasingly complicating factors to the settling processes of IOs. Third, a reconstruction of the settlement processes of four IOs will illustrate this.
Social enterprises and government share the ultimate goal of solving societal problems, which provides a lot of potential for collaboration between the two parties. While the local government level is the most relevant for social enterprises, little research has been done on the relationship between social entrepreneurs and local government officials. However, in the Netherlands, social enterprises experience these relations as far from optimal, evidenced by the fact that they named ‘regulations and government policy’ as the most important obstacle for increasing their impact in a 2015 sector survey. Therefore, a pilot project was started with social entrepreneurs in an Amsterdam neighbourhood, forming a learning network aiming to improve relations with local government. In the network, an innovative tool was developed in the form of a set of five illustrated stereotypes of social entrepreneurs with certain views towards local government. These stereotypes serve both as a reflection tool for social entrepreneurs and as a communication tool to open dialogue between social entrepreneurs and local government. We conclude that in an applied research project, it is crucial to place focus on the final phases in which results are reformulated into practical tools to match target groups, and resulting tools are distributed through targeted events and publications.
This paper focuses on the specifics of the relationships between social entrepreneurs and local civil servants and politicians in The Netherlands. Policy frameworks for social enterprises (SE) are relatively underdeveloped here, as the central government took little initiative in policy development, and a legal definition for SE is lacking. This poses problems, but it also opens up possibilities to develop dialogue between local government and social entrepreneurs “bottom-up”.Both parties’ views of each other are explored, a practical tool to open dialogue is introduced and eight examples of collaboration are discussed.Through the collected experiences at local and regional levels, policy makers at the national level now also increasingly recognize the importance of SEs in the Dutch economy, and realize that the lack of national policy and legal frameworks has proven limiting and increased vulnerability of the sector. For the coming years, there are signs that policy support for SEs will become more structured and national policy action is likely.
MULTIFILE
There's a growing recognition that the mainstream economic system contributes to environmental degradation and climate change. This jeopardizes human prosperity and poses existential risks for all life forms. Not waiting for global politics to solve the problems, Regenerative Placemakers show that we can organize ourselves differently. They engage with realigning human systems to work within planetary boundaries as a well-being economy. However, they face challenges, such as incorporating non-human voices and embracing the complexity of co-creation. Our transdisciplinary, exploratory research project aims to incorporate a lifecentric worldview in the collective transformation process when investigating: What tools, methods, and approaches the Stewards of Place could use to embody the ecosystems thinking and be able to integrate the needs and perspectives of nature in a process of decision-making, such that it is understandable and fitting for different types of contexts? Our research focuses on fostering a post-anthropocentric outlook, where human identity merges with broader ecosystems. Through the development of methodologies, we seek pathways to coexist harmoniously within diverse natural habitats, prioritizing ecosystem health. This perspective fundamentally shifts worldviews, placing ecosystem well-being at the forefront. Our goal is to cultivate an integrated approach to living that acknowledges and respects the interconnectedness of all life forms. Consortium Partners: Practice Partners are Regenerative Placemakers, referred to as Stewards of Place: Impact033's, IMPACT024's, and Oosterhout SDG's Local. Together with WEAllNL, they are optimizing conditions for innovative, regenerative leadership in the "Plekathon” pilot project, which will serve as a Living Lab for this participatory research. Changemaker: Stichting Wellbeing Economy Alliance Nederland (WEAllNL)- Bas Poppel leading development of a learning community of practice. Knowledge Partners: Avans’ Economy in Common Research Group: Lector Dr. Godelieve Spaas and researcher Ewelina Schraven, Miranda van Gendt (Plekmakers_), Luea Ritter (World Ethic Forum), and Nature as an Advisor, Inspiration, and Stakeholder.
