Zoekresultaten

Balanceren tussen veiligheid en zorg

De rol van het personeel in penitentiaire inrichtingen (PI) is de laatste decennia drastisch gewijzigd. Waar voorheen het waarborgen van veiligheid voorop stond, is er gaandeweg – mede door een veranderende populatie – meer aandacht gekomen voor zorgaspecten in het werk van inrichtingswerkers. Werken met aandacht voor zowel zorg als veiligheid noemen we hybride werken. Om met coaching en scholing goed aan te sluiten op hybride werken is het belangrijk te weten hoe penitentiair inrichtingswerkers (piw’ers en zbiw’ers) denken over hun werk en over de omgang met gedetineerden. In deze rapportage worden de resultaten van dit onderzoek, de opvattingen van piw’ers en zbiw’ers, in kaart gebracht.

Zero carbon, some nuisance: Exploring the viewpoints of heat pump owners and their neighbors in Groningen, Netherlands

The domestic use of natural gas for heating is the prevalent option in the Netherlands. However, heat pumps will be mandatory in most Dutch households by 2026. Therefore, insights are needed in how citizens perceive this technology, by taking into account various societal, technological, economic, environmental, and political aspects. Our research offers a systematic investigation of the multiple viewpoints of heat pump users and their neighbors in Groningen, northern Netherlands. Using Q-methodology, we identified three distinct but interrelated and shared viewpoints: the realistic users, the hesitant neighbors and the enthusiastic advocates. All three shared viewpoints incorporate social influence and cognitive considerations, with the positive environmental impacts of heat pumps being highlighted in unison. Cognitive considerations relate mainly to technical and economic concerns. Social influence considerations often hint at the necessity of making prior agreements with the neighbors. We argue that the findings of this study can support policymakers toward the development of an integrated heat transition strategy.

Exploring residents’ perspectives on local energy transition in Northern Netherlands

Given the urgency of global energy transition, small- and medium-sized cities often undergo rapid changes. What is often missing, however, is a better understanding of how residents of those places perceive, and relate to the various aspects of local energy transition process and spatial outcomes. This study focuses on the Hoogkerk district of Groningen in the Northern Netherlands, where we used Q-Methodology to identify shared viewpoints. Our findings reveal three main viewpoints: a) the importance of protecting local spatial and environmental values, b) prioritising energy-saving approaches notably for the vulnerable segments of the society, and finally c) the need for comprehensive district-level planning led by the municipality. These findings underscore the importance of integrated approaches that address both spatial and process aspects of local energy transition. We argue that these insights can support policymakers and the local citizen initiative towards the development of an integrated local energy vision.

Myths and fallacies in the Groningen earthquake problem

I was somewhat surprized with the fog in Groningen upon my arrival. This is notthe fog that covers the beautiful landscapes of the northern Netherlands in theevening and in the early morning. No… It is the fog that obscures the real aspectsof the earthquake problem in the region and is crystallised in the phrase “Groningen earthquakes are different”, which I have encountered numerous times whenever I raised a question of the type “But why..?”. A sentence taken out of the quiver as the absolute technical argument which mysteriously overshadows the whole earthquake discussion.Q: Why do we not use Eurocode 8 for seismic design, instead of NPR?A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different!Q: Why do we not monitor our structures like the rest of the world does?A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different!Q: Why does NPR, the Dutch seismic guidelines, dictate some unusual rules?A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different!Q: Why are the hazard levels incredibly high, even higher than most Europeanseismic countries?A: Because the Groningen earthquakes are different!and so it keeps going…This statement is very common, but on the contrary, I have not seen a single piece of research that proves it or even discusses it. In essence, it would be a difficult task to prove that the Groningen earthquakes are different. In any case it barricades a healthy technical discussion because most of the times the arguments converge to one single statement, independent of the content of the discussion. This is the reason why our first research activities were dedicated to study if the Groningen earthquakes are really different. Up until today, we have not found any major differences between the Groningen induced seismicity events and natural seismic events with similar conditions (magnitude, distance, depth, soil etc…) that would affect the structures significantly in a different way.Since my arrival in Groningen, I have been amazed to learn how differently theearthquake issue has been treated in this part of the world. There will always bedifferences among different cultures, that is understandable. I have been exposed to several earthquake engineers from different countries, and I can expect a natural variation in opinions, approaches and definitions. But the feeling in Groningen is different. I soon realized that, due to several factors, a parallel path, which I call “an augmented reality” below, was created. What I mean by an augmented reality is a view of the real-world, whose elements are augmented and modified. In our example, I refer to the engineering concepts used for solving the earthquake problem, but in an augmented and modified way. This augmented reality is covered in the fog I described above. The whole thing is made so complicated that one is often tempted to rewind the tape to the hot August days of 2012, right after the Huizinge Earthquake, and replay it to today but this time by making the correct steps. We would wake up to a different Groningen today. I was instructed to keep the text as well as the inauguration speech as simple aspossible, and preferably, as non-technical as it goes. I thus listed the most common myths and fallacies I have faced since I arrived in Groningen. In this book and in the presentation, I may seem to take a critical view. This is because I try to tell a different part of the story, without repeating things that have already been said several times before. I think this is the very reason why my research group would like to make an effort in helping to solve the problem by providing different views. This book is one of such efforts.The quote given at the beginning of this book reads “How quick are we to learn: that is, to imitate what others have done or thought before. And how slow are we to understand: that is, to see the deeper connections.” is from Frits Zernike, the Nobel winning professor from the University of Groningen, who gave his name to the campus I work at. Applying this quotation to our problem would mean that we should learn from the seismic countries by imitating them, by using the existing state-of-the-art earthquake engineering knowledge, and by forgetting the dogma of “the Groningen earthquakes are different” at least for a while. We should then pass to the next level of looking deeperinto the Groningen earthquake problem for a better understanding, and alsodiscover the potential differences.

Digital Urban Brabant: Making (common) sense of urban digital twins.

Gedeelde concepten, verschillende concepties