© 2025 SURF
Bij ‘Tolling Agreements’ blijven overheden eigenaar van energie-infrastructuur en wordt de capaciteit verhuurd. Deze oplossing uit de Verenigde Staten biedt volgens Martien Visser efficiency en zekerheid aan marktpartijen in een onzekere energiemarkt.
LINK
Lange tijd heeft Martien Visser geredeneerd dat Nederland prima zonder kernenergie zou kunnen. We hebben immers de Noordzee. Hij is daar sterk aan gaan twijfelen, omdat het domweg te riskant is teveel ballen in één mandje te leggen en erop te vertrouwen dat het wel goed komt.
LINK
This qualitative study examined how the complex institutional context of gas extraction in Groningen affects relations and processes of trust, and seeks to better understand what is necessary for restoring trust. In the Groningen gas case, responsibilities for dealing with multiple negative consequences of gas extraction are shared by many different organizations who together form a complex institutional system. Numerous professionals are doing their best to help solve the problems. As individuals, case managers and other professionals are seen as benevolent and hard-working people. But as representatives of (large) institutions these professionals struggle to be seen as trustworthy because of persistent problems with institutional performance, with professionals themselves feeling they have insufficient discretionary power. More than interpersonal trust, a different form of trust appears to be at stake here: confidence in the system itself. According to many respondents, confidence in the system is low because the perceived interests of the institutions that shaped this system are not aligned with those of residents and the region. In addition, the positions of power and responsibility within this system are opaque to both residents and professionals. Moreover, the institutional system is perceived to be based on a distrustful attitude toward citizens in general, resulting in elaborate procedures for accountability, control and monitoring. These factors have become obstacles to restoring confidence in the system, no matter how well residents and professionals get along as individuals.
DOCUMENT
Distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) such as blockchain have in recent years been presented as a new general-purpose technology that could underlie many aspects of social and economic life, including civics and urban governance. In an urban context, over the past few years, a number of actors have started to explore the application of distributed ledgers in amongst others smart city services as well as in blockchain for good and urban commons-projects. DLTs could become the administrative backbones of such projects, as the technology can be set-up as an administration, management and allocation tool for urban resources. With the addition of smart contracts, DLTs can further automate the processing of data and execution of decisions in urban resource management through algorithmic governance. This means that the technological set-up and design of such DLT based systems could have large implications for the ways urban resources are governed. Positive contributions are expected to be made toward (local) democracy, transparent governance, decentralization, and citizen empowerment. We argue that to fully scrutinize the implications for urban governance, a critical analysis of distributed ledger technologies is necessary. In this contribution, we explore the lens of “the city as a license” for such a critical analysis. Through this lens, the city is framed as a “rights-management-system,” operated through DLT technology. Building upon Lefebvrian a right to the city-discourses, such an approach allows to ask important questions about the implications of DLTs for the democratic governance of cities in an open, inclusive urban culture. Through a technological exploration combined with a speculative approach, and guided by our interest in the rights management and agency that blockchains have been claimed to provide to their users, we trace six important issues: quantification; blockchain as a normative apparatus; the complicated relationship between transparency and accountability; the centralizing forces that act on blockchains; the degrees to which algorithmic rules can embed democratic law-making and enforcing; and finally, the limits of blockchain's trustlessness.
MULTIFILE
Far from being negligible in quantity, decentralized energy production delivers a considerable part of the renewable energy production in the Netherlands. Decentralized production takes place by individual households, companies as well as citizen groups. Grassroots initiatives have sprung up in the Netherlands in the last 5 years, in a recent inventory 313 formally instituted local energy cooperatives were found. Cooperatives’ aims are sustainability, strengthening local economy and promoting a democratic governance structure for energy production.The energy industry in the Netherlands has traditionally been dominated by large energy companies, and the Groningen gas field has resulted in a very high dependency on natural gas for both consumer and business households. The climate for grassroots initiatives has improved since the so-called Energy Covenant in 2013. This covenant pertains to an agreement between government, industry representatives, labor unions and non-governmental organizations to arrive at a substantial reduction of energy use, ambitious increase in the production of renewable energy, and new jobs in the renewable energy sector.The covenant also announced new policies to stimulate community energy activities, such as the Zip-code-rose policy . The governmental interest in new forms of energy transition, is also demonstrated by the ‘Experiments Electricity Law’ facility, which gives local business and community initiatives an opportunity to experiment with a local energy system. This policy is meant as a ‘learning facility’; experiences are expected to lead to adaptations in Dutch electricity law and regulation.
DOCUMENT
This open access book states that the endemic societal faultlines of our times are deeply intertwined and that they confront us with challenges affecting the security and sustainability of our societies. It states that new ways of inhabiting and cultivating our planet are needed to keep it healthy for future generations. This requires a fundamental shift from the current anthropocentric and economic growth-oriented social contract to a more ecocentric and regenerative natural social contract. The author posits that in a natural social contract, society cannot rely on the market or state alone for solutions to grand societal challenges, nor leave them to individual responsibility. Rather, these problems need to be solved through transformative social-ecological innovation (TSEI), which involves systemic changes that affect sustainability, health and justice. The TSEI framework presented in this book helps to diagnose and advance innovation and change across sectors and disciplines, and at different levels of governance. It identifies intervention points and helps formulate sustainable solutions for policymakers, administrators, concerned citizens and professionals in moving towards a more just and equitable society.
MULTIFILE
In het winternummer van 2005, met het thema: Social Emergency and Crisis Intervention in Large European Cities, beschrijft Lia van Doorn de onderzoeksresultaten van een follow-up studie onder (voormalige) daklozen in Utrecht. Het betreft een kwalitatief onderzoek. In dit artikel worden drie fasen in het ontwikkelingsproces van de daklozen beschreven: Recente, langdurige en voormalige dakloosheid. De omstandigheden in deze fasen verschillen en daardoor ook de zorgbehoefte.
DOCUMENT
The field of city logistics can be characterized by its many local demonstrations and trials, that are quite often not lasting longer than the trial period. The number of demonstrations that continued and were implemented in daily practice is limited. Freight partnerships proved to be a good first step to engage stakeholders. This contribution proposes a new way to develop a more action-driven form of these partnerships that follows from a solution approach, which has proved successful worldwide in fostering innovation deployment, but has not yet been applied explicitly in the domain of City Logistics: Living Labs. The living lab approach ensures that the stakeholders are involved much earlier in the in planning and implementation processes, and that the proposed city logistics implementation is revised and continuously improved to meet stakeholder needs and obtain maximum impact for a long time. This contribution summarizes the steps that have to be taken to set-up and work in a city logistics living lab (CLLL). A CLLL can be defined as a dynamic test environment where complex city logistics innovations can be implemented, following a cyclical approach, where several solutions can be experimented and re-adjusted or improved to fit the real-life city challenges. In the Horizon 2020 project CITYLAB, we developed practical guidelines for establishing and running a city logistics living lab based on several living lab- and field test methodologies that enables stakeholders to set-up and run a CLLL. This contribution discusses the most important CLLL phases, roles, and characteristics, as well as the tools that are available. Next, this contribution shows the first results of cities in which CLLLs are actually set up, or already running. © 2016 The Authors.
MULTIFILE
