Summary (English):Current planning policies place great expectations on citizen participation to resolve complex societal and spatial challenges such as urban renewal and housing development. This essay explores what transitions in citizen participation have taken place on this issue in the Netherlands and to what extent citizen participation in its current form can address the complex socio-spatial challenge of providing affordable housing in cities.The essay introduces a paradox of the transition in participation in housing development in the Netherlands as part of broader transformations in Dutch spatial planning and development: in spite of increased institutionalization of participation, the actual citizens seem to have been served less and less. There is potential for the inclusion of citizen participation in the planning processes to encourage acceptance where resource distribution creates conflicts (i.e. affordable housing markets and lack of supply) for more effective cooperation during implementation. However, giving citizens more say in small parcels of spatial development does not disguise and overrule the structural forces in policy and real estate market trends that have grown in the last decades and push out lower and middle income groups from the city.This essay reviews state-of-the-art literature on the evolution of citizen participation, co-creation, and decision-making structures and processes in spatial planning and housing, and discusses participation trajectories in urban developments with housing functions in Amsterdam (Havenstraatterrein, Marineterrein) and Groningen (Suikerunie, Ebbinge), and Almere (Oosterwold) to showcase the paradoxical transition.__Summary (Dutch):Participatie krijgt een steeds prominentere rol in het oplossen van complexe maatschappelijke en ruimtelijke uitdagingen, zoals stedelijke vernieuwing en de ontwikkeling van woningen. Dit essay verkent welke veranderingen zich hebben voorgedaan in de rol die burgers spelen in woningontwikkeling in Nederland en in hoeverre participatie in de huidige vorm helpt om voldoende betaalbare woonruimte te ontwikkelen in de stad.Het essay schetst een paradoxale transitie op het gebied van participatie in de woningbouw in Nederland. De transitie is onderdeel is van grotere veranderingen in ruimtelijke ordening en ruimtelijke ontwikkeling in Nederland. Ondanks toenemende aandacht voor en institutionalisering van participatie in plan- en ontwikkelingsprocessen, lijkt het erop dat de burger die het meest de hulp van de overheid nodig heeft om passende woonruimte te vinden, steeds meer het nakijken heeft gekregen. Burgers een grotere rol geven in de planprocesen en planuitvoering kan helpen de acceptatie van plannen waarin schaarse middelen worden verdeeld, te vergroten. Tot nu toe echter blijft de inspraak van burgers beperkt tot kleine, specifieke gebieden. Deze uitzonderingen bieden onvoldoende tegenwicht aan de structurele krachten in beleid, grond- en vastgoedmarkten die midden- en lagere inkomens de afgelopen jaren steeds verder de stad uit hebben gedreven.Dit essay schetst op basis van literatuurstudie de grote lijnen in de ontwikkeling van woningontwikkeling en participatie sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Op basis daarvan beschouwt het essay de ontwikkeling van participatie, co-creatie en besluitvorming in gebiedsontwikkeling in Amsterdam (Havenstraatterrein, Marineterrein), Groningen (Suikerunie, Ebbinge) en Almere (Oosterwold) om de paradoxale transitie die plaatsvindt in participatie in gebiedsontwikkeling en woningbouw te illustreren.
DOCUMENT
Citizen science – the active participation of lay people in research – may yield crucial local knowledge and increase research capacity. Recently, there is growing interest to understand benefits for citizen scientists themselves. We studied the perceived impacts of participation in a public health citizen science project on citizen scientists in a disadvantaged neighbourhood in the Netherlands. Local citizen scientists, characterised by low income and low educational level – many of whom were of migrant origin – were trained to interview fellow residents about health-enhancing and health-damaging neighbourhood features. Experiences of these citizen scientists were collected through focus groups and interviews and analysed using a theoretical model of potential citizen science benefits. The results show that the citizen scientists perceived participation in the project as a positive experience. They acquired a broader understanding of health and its determinants and knowledge about healthy lifestyles, and took action to change their own health behaviour. They reported improved self confidence and social skills, and expanded their network across cultural boundaries. Health was perceived as a topic that helped people with different backgrounds to relate to one another. The project also induced joint action to improve the neighbourhood’s health. We conclude that citizen science benefits participants with low educational or literacy level. Moreover, it seems to be a promising approach that can help promote health in underprivileged communities by strengthening personal skills and social capital. However, embedding projects in broader health promotion strategies and long-term engagement of citizen scientists should be pursued to accomplish this.
DOCUMENT
The climate crisis is an urgent and complex global challenge, requiring transformative action from diverse stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and grassroots movements. Conventional top-down approaches to climate governance have proven insufficient (e.g. UNFCCC, COP events), necessitating a shift towards more inclusive and polycentric models that incorporate the perspectives and needs of diverse communities (Bliznetskaya, 2023; Dorsch & Flachsland, 2017). The independent, multidisciplinary approach of citizen-led activist groups can provide new insights and redefine challenges and opportunities for climate governance and regulation. Despite their important role in developing effective climate action, these citizen-led groups often face significant barriers to decision-making participation, including structural, practical, and legal challenges (Berry et al., 2019; Colli, 2021; Marquardt et al., 2022; Tayler & Schulte, 2019).
DOCUMENT
Citizen participation in local renewable energy projects is often promoted as many suppose it to be a panacea for the difficulties that are involved in the energy transition process. Quite evidently, it is not; there is a wide variety of visions, ideologies and interests related to an ‘energy transition’. Such a variety is actually a precondition for a stakeholder participation process, as stakeholder participation only makes sense if there is ‘something at stake’. Conflicting viewpoints, interests and debates are the essence of participation. The success of stakeholder participation implies that these differences are acknowledged, and discussed, and that this has created mutual understanding among stakeholders. It does not necessarily create ‘acceptance’. Renewable energy projects often give rise to local conflict. The successful implementation of local renewable energy systems depends on the support of the local social fabric. While at one hand decisions to construct wind turbines in specific regions trigger local resistance, the opposite also occurs! Solar parks sometimes create a similar variation: Various communities try to prevent the construction of solar parks in their vicinity, while other communities proudly present their parks. Altogether, local renewable energy initiatives create a rather chaotic picture, if regarded from the perspective of government planning. However, if we regard the successes, it appears the top down initiatives are most successful in areas with a weak social fabric, like industrial areas, or rather recently reclaimed land. Deeply rooted communities, virtually only have successful renewable energy projects that are more or less bottom up initiatives. This paper will first sketch why participation is important, and present a categorisation of processes and procedures that could be applied. It also sketches a number of myths and paradoxes that might occur in participation processes. ‘Compensating’ individuals and/or communities to accept wind turbines or solar parks is not sufficient to gain ‘acceptance’. A basic feature of many debates on local renewable energy projects is about ‘fairness’. The implication is that decision-making is neither on pros and cons of various renewable energy technologies as such, nor on what citizens are obliged to accept, but on a fair distribution of costs and benefits. Such discussions on fairness cannot be short cut by referring to legal rules, scientific evidence, or to standard financial compensations. History plays a role as old feelings of being disadvantaged, both at individual and at group level, might re-emerge in such debates. The paper will provide an overview of various local controversies on renewable energy initiatives in the Netherlands. It will argue that an open citizen participation process can be organized to work towards fair decisions, and that citizens should not be addressed as greedy subjects, trying to optimise their own private interests, but as responsible persons.
DOCUMENT
Parental involvement is a crucial force in children’s development, learning and success at school and in life [1]. Participation, defined by the World Health Organization as ‘a person’s involvement in life situations’ [2] for children means involvement in everyday activities, such as recreational, leisure, school and household activities [3]. Several authors use the term social participation emphasising the importance of engagement in social situations [4, 5]. Children’s participation in daily life is vital for healthy development, social and physical competencies, social-emotional well-being, sense of meaning and purpose in life [6]. Through participation in different social contexts, children gather the knowledge and skills needed to interact, play, work, and live with other people [4, 7, 8]. Unfortunately, research shows that children with a physical disability are at risk of lower participation in everyday activities [9]; they participate less frequently in almost all activities compared with children without physical disabilities [10, 11], have fewer friends and often feel socially isolated [12-14]. Parents, in particular, positively influence the participation of their children with a physical disability at school, at home and in the community [15]. They undertake many actions to improve their child’s participation in daily life [15, 16]. However, little information is available about what parents of children with a physical disability do to enable their child’s participation, what they come across and what kind of needs they have. The overall aim of this thesis was to investigate parents’ actions, challenges, and needs while enhancing the participation of their school-aged child with a physical disability. In order to achieve this aim, two steps have been made. In the first step, the literature has been examined to explore the topic of this thesis (actions, challenges and needs) and to clarify definitions for the concepts of participation and social participation. Second, for the purposes of giving breadth and depth of understanding of the topic of this thesis a mixed methods approach using three different empirical research methods [17-19], was applied to gather information from parents regarding their actions, challenges and needs.
DOCUMENT
BackgroundStroke is a major cause of disability globally, with high recurrence rates despite the implementation of secondary prevention strategies. Promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour are critical to mitigate these risks. Collaborative research approaches, including citizen science, offer promising methods for developing more effective and sustainable interventions by leveraging patient insights and lived experiences across different research stages.ObjectivesThis scoping review explored the application of citizen science approaches in developing interventions targeting physical activity and sedentary behaviour for people with stroke.MethodsFollowing Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and the PRISMA-ScR checklist, five databases were searched. We included empirical studies involving stroke patients in research on physical activity or sedentary behaviour interventions. Data was extracted on terminology, collaboration methods, and participant roles and analysed using the Participation Matrix framework. Methodological rigor was assessed using the CASP qualitative checklist.ResultsFourteen studies were included, most published after 2020 and originating from diverse countries. Terms like “co-design,” “co-creation,” and “patient and public involvement” were prevalent, but “citizen science” was not explicitly mentioned. Methods for active involvement of stroke patients included focus groups, workshops, and advisory panels. Stroke patients primarily participated as advisors or partners during intervention design, with minimal involvement in early research stages, data analysis, or dissemination. Researchers predominantly held decision-making roles.ConclusionsCitizen science in stroke research is still developing, with limited patient involvement across research phases. Expanding the depth and scope of patient involvement could enhance the relevance and long-term impact of interventions.
DOCUMENT
This article describes a European project which was aimed at improving the situation of persons with psychiatric or learning disabilities with regard to social participation and citizenship. The project took place in three countries (Estonia, Hungary and the Netherlands) and four cities (Tallinn, Budapest, Amersfoort and Maastricht). The project included research and actions at the policy level, the organizational level and the practice level. At the policy level, the framework of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, 2006) and the European Disability Strategy (European Commission, 2010) were used to look at national and local policies, at the reality of the lives of those with disabilities and at the support that professional services offer with regard to participation and inclusion. The project generated a number of insights, recommendations and methods by which to improve the quality of services and increase the number of opportunities for community engagement. In this article, we present some of the lessons learned from the meta-analysis. Although the circumstances in each country are quite different with regard to policy, culture and service systems, it is remarkable that people with disabilities face many of the same problems. The study shows that in all three countries, access to services could be improved. Barriers include bureaucratic procedures and a lack of services. The research identified that in every country and city there are considerable barriers regarding equal participation in the field of housing, work and leisure activities. In addition to financial barriers, there are the barriers of stigma and self-stigmatization. Marginalization keeps people in an unequal position and hinders their recovery and participation. In all countries, professionals need to develop a stronger focus on supporting the participation of their clients in public life and in the development of different roles pertaining to citizenship
DOCUMENT
Background: On two Care Innovation Units in the Netherlands, staff, students and Lecturer Practitioners work intensively together to provide care, create a rich learning environment, and to foster innovation and research. In striving to advance the quality of care and to develop person centred cultures a preference is given to participative forms of research in which diverse experiences and different types of knowledge are valued. Aims and Objectives: The research described here had two overarching aims: the improvement of practice situations and the encouragement of the integration of work and learning. This article focuses on our actions and learning with respect to fostering participation during this project. Design and methods: Within the action research methodology used, participative work-forms and research methods were chosen. For example, a responsive approach to evaluation of practice, use of narratives and the stimulation and use of creativity to help in exploring and sharing feelings, values and different forms of knowledge. In this article we use Arnstein's ladder of citizen participation to frame our reflection on enabling participation within this project. Results Participation took various forms and vacillated throughout the project. In addition to particular facilitation strategies, four factors emerged as influential in enabling or inhibiting aspects of participation among stakeholders: individual motivations and interests, the make-up of and atmosphere within the group, and the time made available to engage in research activities. Conclusions Participation in research is both more complex and dynamic than Arnstein's typology suggests. Moving 'up' the ladder may not be appropriate as a goal in and of itself. Instead, meeting and responding to each other's situations, as stakeholders, seems a more appropriate focus. Taking responsibility, as facilitator, for certain research activities, can free other participants to focus on elements which interest them and from which they derive satisfaction.
LINK
In the Netherlands, there is a growing need for collective housing for older people to bridge the gap between ageing-in-place and institutional care facilities. Participation of older people in the concept and design phases is important to tune the market supply to the needs of (future) residents, yet social entrepreneurs find it challenging to involve older people. This commentary explores various ways older people can participate in the development of new housing initiatives. The ladder of citizen participation is applied to explore different roles that (future) residents could play with levels of influence varying from non-participation to citizen power. Considerations for meaningful participation are discussed, in order to show how collaborations can be formed between (future) residents and decision makers. Original article at: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9030301 © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI.
MULTIFILE
Citizen participation is booming, especially the number of urban bottom-up initiatives where information and communication technologies (ICT) are deployed is increasing rapidly. This growth is good news for society as recent historical research shows that the more citizens actively and persistently interfere with public issues, the more likely a society will be resilient. And yet, at the same time, a growing number of scholars argue that due to the unprecedented impact of ICT, the public sphere is at stake. How to understand both trends? How do the anti-‘public sphere’ developments relate to the growing number of citizens’ initiatives using ICT? And if these citizen initiatives can indeed be understood as manifestations of public spheres, how can ICT foster or hinder the development of these public spheres? These questions will be explored by analyzing a Dutch citizen initiative called ‘Buuv’ (an online ‘market’ place for and by local residents) from a ‘public sphere’ perspective. The author will turn to The human condition (1958) of Hannah Arendt in order to elaborate a ‘public sphere’ perspective. An Arendtian perspective (as any perspective) highlights, however, some aspects and underexposes other aspects. Furthermore, chances are that Arendt’s thoughts are somewhat outdated, in the sense that we now live in a world where the online and the offline life intertwine — an experience that is referred to with the term ‘onlife’. Bearing these remarks in mind, the author will elaborate on the value of Arendt’s ideas to 1) the endeavor of understanding current trends in society—more urban bottom-up initiatives and anti-‘public sphere’ developments due to the broad uptake of ICT—and 2) the endeavor of revitalizing the public sphere in an onlife world. IEEE copyright
MULTIFILE
