Trust and Participation: the ability to accept local governmental
decisions.
The influence of citizens trust and citizens participation in the support for the local government’ decisions in particular during the refugee crisis of 2015-2016.
Sonja de Vries
Supervisor: Dhr. Dr. J.M.J. Doomernik Januari 2017
2 List of contents 1. Introduction………...3 2. Theoretical Framework………...5 3. Methodology……….13
3.1 Definition of the main question and hypotheses……… 14
3.1 Why these particular local governments?...15
3.3 Relevance and gap in the Literature………16
3.4 Social relevance………...17
4. Results………...17
4.1 Citizens participation policy………..17
4.1.1 National participation policy………...18
4.1.2 Provincial participation policy………..18
4.1.3 Local participation policy……….20
4.1.3.1 Steenbergen participation policy………...21
4.1.3.2 Valkenswaard participation policy………..22
4.2 Citizens trust………..23
4.2.1 Citizens trust closely linked with citizens participation………24
4.3 Social Reliance………25
4.4 Difference between Southeast and West Brabant………...27
5. Case..……….30
5.1 Introduction to the refugee problems of 2015-2016………...30
5.2 Provincial actions during the refugee crisis………31
5.2.1 Difference between the Eastern and Western municipalities in cooperation with the Province………...33
5.3 Steenbergen and the refugee crisis………..33
5.4 Valkenswaard and the warm welcome………35
5.5 Reasons for the difference in the "vicious" course of events at the time of the meeting in comparison with the warm welcome………..36
5.5.1 Reasons for Steenbergen………36
5.5.2 Reasons for Valkenswaard….………38
6. Conclusion………40
7. Research reflection an recommendations for further research.………...43
Sources………..44
3
1. Introduction
In 2013 participation of the citizens in governing a country was the major issue of the King Alexanders’ speech. He spoke of a participative society and asked the citizens to take responsibility for their own lives and environment. He claimed citizens’ participation to be essential for the improvement of certain some aspects in current society (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). One of these aspects is the decreasing trust and dissatisfaction in most levels of government, which may can lead to restlessness in society.
Fung claims in his article ‘Putting the Public Back into Governance: the Challenges of Citizen Participation and Its Future’ that faith in legislative and administrative organizations and political parties has declined in many well-developed democracies. Due to these
perceptions citizens are under the impression that political parties have lost touch with them; that they are ineffective and that they do not represent citizens’ interest (2015). On the other hand the government claims that this development is necessary due to the 2008 crisis and the cutbacks on public services (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). On both sides there are motives to introduce citizens participation. Furthermore the government is withdrawing in many public areas. This creates more space to develop citizens’ initiatives on a local level (Dam, Duineveld, During and Salverda, 2014). Professional literature also maintains that civil participation; more influence and autonomy of citizens will increase or restore the confidence in politics (Edelenbos, 2006). In addition, when the government involves citizens in the decision making process this will result in more support for certain decisions (Albeda, 2010).
After the Kings’ speech both civil participation and faith in the government have become an important topic in government policy. As a result the participation policy has been implemented in different levels of government with the aim to increase the trust
(Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). In recent years, several municipalities have intended to actively involve citizens in their local activities. This will enable citizens to have a greater on policy and take on more responsibility for their environment (SCP, 2014). So there is a shift in responsibilities and competences of both the local government and the citizens. Moreover this created new situations and opportunities for both (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2011). Consequently with the increasing participation and trust citizens should increasing support decisions of the (local) government, but does this really occur in reality?
This thesis will investigate the influence of a high degree of citizens’ participation and citizens’ trust in creating support for the local government’s decisions. This thesis will use the example of the welcoming of refugees in two municipalities. This case will be used because
4
of the contrastive reactions within these municipalities. The case is also an interesting one because it is complexity and the time pressure. Hence the decision was an emotional one. According to the literature citizens’ participation and citizens’ trust will lead to increasing support of the decisions of local government. Does this hold good in these cases?
Definitions of terms
Professional literature included different definitions to explain the concept of participation of citizens. I applied the definition of the Instituut voor Publiek en Politiek in this research. The definition is the following: Burgerparticipatie is een manier van
beleidsvoering waarbij burgers (al dan niet georganiseerd in maatschappelijke organisaties) direct of indirect bij het lokale beleid betrokken worden om door middel van samenwerking tot de ontwikkeling, uitvoering en/of evaluatie van beleid te komen (Dinjens, 2010, p.6). It emphasized that participation of citizens constitutes an addition to representative
democracy in which citizens are enabled to increase their influence on the policy of the local government (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). However, there are also other forms of citizens’ participation. Thus another concept that needs to be clearly defined is the concept of initiatives of citizens. The definition that will be used is: Een burgerinitiatief is een vorm van zelforganisatie van burgers, gericht op de verbetering van de eigen levenssituatie en/of de samenleving waarbij een aantal mensen betrokken is in een al dan niet tijdelijke
initiatiefgroep, actiegroep of projectgroep. Burgerinitiatieven worden gerund door vrijwilligers, zijn hoogstens semiprofessioneel, kleinschalig en niet of weinig geïnstitutionaliseerd (Müjde and Daru, 2005, p.11).
The definitions emphasize two aspects of citizens participation; political participation and social or civil participation. Political participation is characterized by citizens
participation in political activities; civil participation is related to activities organised by citizens for other citizens. In practise however, the distinction between the two aspects is not always clear. Similarly the distinction between activities related to participation of the citizens and a reciprocal service is at times hard to distinguish (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). The definitions did not give strict rules for their respective application. Hence this research will comprise both concepts: participation and initiatives of citizens in a broad perspective.
Another concept that needs to be clearly defined is the concept of citizens’ trust. Trust is a difficult term to define since it is a question of feeling. Often, reference is made to ‘believing someone because of his trustworthiness and honesty’. You may trust someone
5 where you expect this person to do what is right, which is also the best for you as a person (Dale, 2016). This applies in the same way to citizen trust. Citizens have faith in the administration that represents them. When this trust is betrayed because, for example, the representatives are dishonest, trust will decrease. 2. Theoretical Framework
The participation of citizens is the active and voluntary involvement of individuals and/or groups either in the local government or in social institutions of the society.
Participation is highlighted in the current policy of both local government and national government. The Law of Participation budget and the Social Support Act (WMO) has been introduced on the principle that ‘Everybody should join’. As a result the local government has new responsibilities. It has increased financial powers to encourage people to participate in employment, education, volunteering and social contracts. Both citizens and the local government have to cope with shifting competences in society (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2011). Vogels emphasized that citizens’ participation is substantially different from participation by interest groups. The cooperation and negotiation between different parties take place in an institutional setting. This fits the traditional Dutch polder model (Vogels, 2008). Thus participation is a broad concept and involves different aspects (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2011).
Which factors will induce mobilisation of citizens?
A substantial number of citizens mistrust the government and other comprehensive institutions. They consider them being bureaucratic, non-individual and not taking into consideration citizens’ (local) needs. That is why citizens organized themselves in small groups and developed initiatives to meet the demands or to represent the interest of the (local) community. It is often taken for granted that when groups of individuals have common
interests they will cooperate. The same expectation applies when an individual has an interest. However, Olson maintains that even if individuals were to share the same interest this does not automatically result in cooperation. They will still not voluntarily act to achieve that common or group interest. In his work ‘the logic of the Collective Action’ he discusses the functioning of groups and the motives that will stimulate individuals (Olson, 1993).
Marshall claims that the traditional professional literature of citizens’ participation originally focussed on individuals. The neighbourhood and other contextual variables were not discussed in professional literature (Marshall, 1964). Vogel also maintains that citizens’ participation has an individual approach. However, he claims, similarly to Marshall, that the
6
interest of all and equality of participants is the main point (Vogel, 2008). Olson did not discuss the contextual variables either, but he focussed on the group size. He claimed that people are rational and will only act out of self-interest (Hindmoor, 2006). Moreover individuals by nature non-participants and due to this they do not spontaneously mobilize. According to Olson people will only participate if they appreciate the benefits (Jordan and Malony, 2006). Hence selective incentives are necessary to mobilize individuals in big groups. As in small group members have strong interests and are more supportive to realize the common interest, the costs of mobilization will be low (Olson, 1993).
Truman claims in the disturbance theory that individuals tend to join groups and will participate. People will tend to mobilize whenever changes in their environment occur. This maybe a response to threats or opposition to other dominate groups. Thus disturbances may lead to a wave of mobilization until a social equilibrium has been established (Lowery and Brasher, 2003). In this theory the contextual variables are discussed as being opposed to Marshall’s assertion.
What is the point of citizens’ participation?
The supporters of citizens’ participation believe that participation will improve the different aspects of democracy and the citizens’ living conditions. Firstly it is possible for citizens to improve their civic skills and become more competent in the public processes (Michels and Graaf, 2010). In addition the government claims that self-reliant citizens’
participation may lead to an increasing self-reliance, independence and personal responsibility (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). Secondly citizens will be encouraged to listen to a diversity of opinions of other citizens and interest groups. As a result of this they are required to promote mutual understanding (Michels and Graaf, 2010).
In the third place participation may result in citizens feeling of being part of their community and will increase their notion of responsibly for public decisions according to Michels and de Graaf (2010). This also applies to citizens’ initiatives and local governments’ projects in which citizens play an important role. Whenever (a group of) citizens create something independent of or in corporation with the local government they feel more
responsible (Dam et al., 2014). Putnam described in his book Bowling Alone how Americans have been disconnected from social structures over the last few years (2000). He claims that participating in social networks and voluntary organizations can lead to a renewed
involvement into social structures. Moreover the feeling of being part of a community is important for life satisfaction (Putnam, 200).
7
Fourthly participatory democracy increases the legitimacy of the chosen leaders and decisions of the (local) government (Michels and Graaf, 2010). Presently citizens are able to select their representatives. Fung claims that citizens should be able to select the rules according to which legislators are selected; this is also their democratic right. As political parties and the sitting legislators have a self-interest in establishing the rules of political competition, they tend to favor their own electoral prospects or those of their party and allies. However, citizens may have other priorities, for example the quality of the relationships between them and their representatives (Fung, 2015). So there are no conflicting interests according to Fung. With the introduction of citizens’ participation the conflict of interest will decrease and legitimacy will enhance (Fung, 2015). Moreover citizens’ participation leads to greater legitimacy of decisions, because it allows citizens to express their interests and demands to the government. Individuals and citizens’ groups can make their (quiet) voices heard, which may lead to greater inclusion (Michels and Graaf, 2010).
Another point is that, participation has increased the effectively of governance. Fung describes two types of participation that aim to increase effective governance: multisectoral problem solving and individualized engagement. Multisectoral problem solving does not create a substantial role for citizens, but it acknowledges that citizens may make several important contributions to solving serious problems (Fung, 2015). Fung gives three reasons for this; first citizens are able to frame the problem in an understandable and viable way which is more close to their values, needs and preferences. A professional will uphold different values. The starting point is totally different from the starting point of the citizens (Fung, 2006). Secondly, whenever a decision includes ethical or material aspects citizens may be the best in suggesting the best solution (Fung, 2015). This will lead to increasing of
citizens’ support (Dam et al., 2014). Thirdly, participating citizens are well placed to provide relevant information to construct solutions and evaluate implementation (Fung, 2015). The other aspect of participation is individualized engagement. For the effectiveness of
governance it is also important to involve an individual. Because of that some social problems are the result of individual problems. These social problems are easier to solve when the affected individuals can be actively involved in solving them (Fung, 2015).
Finally citizens’ participation may improve social justice. This has not been a priority of citizens’ participation for a long time, but Fung highlight this point in his article. Injustice is a consequence of political inequality (2006). This injustice may be due to the influence of some dominant groups for example lobbyists, big companies or wealthy people. Generally these dominant groups comprise minorities groups, but with both a great and common interest
8
they dominate the majority interest. Increasing the participation of citizens can shift the balance of influence away from the dominant minority groups (Fung, 2015). However, it is necessary for the local government to take into consideration the potential negative effects of citizens’ participation. In the first place not all (minority) groups are represented. Moreover in addition people who are more interested in and informed about civil affairs are more likely to be politically active (Marshall, 1964). Generally they are highly educated individuals. Hence citizens’ participation may result in an exclusion of for example low educated individuals. This could lead to a loss of confidence in the local government (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014). In the second place it is difficult for the citizens to compete with professionals in terms of their expertise about a certain subject. In some cases there may be a controversy between the citizens’ interest and the professionals’ perspectives. The local government should find a balance in this and meet the demands of both groups (Roberts, 2004). Moreover time is running out. A majority of the local government’s
decisions have to be taken quickly. Whenever a large number of people are involved it takes longer to discuss subjects and to take decisions. So it is up to the local government to decide when citizens participation is possible and when it is not such a good idea.
Finally, citizens are generally focused on short time solutions and take decisions in accordance with their own interests or in accordance with those whom they represent. Hence, it is likely that citizens will not be able to take long-term decisions with the focus on the next generations’ priority (Roberts, 2004). In his article Marshall also pointed out that citizens are limited in time, attention, and energy. However, when public services are felt to be
unsatisfactory, they are likely to have greater incentives to involve themselves in
participation. This also works visa versa, whenever citizens are satisfied about public services they have fewer incentives to become actively involved. A risk of citizens’ participation is that when a project fails this can lead to distrust and dissatisfaction in the local government and in participation of the citizens (Fung, 2015).
Who are participating?
Citizens’ participation is executed via programmes that will affect the quality of the citizens’ lives. However, the mechanisms of participation are complex and are difficult to execute in a proper way. Furthermore for the proper execution it is necessary to involve and mobilize the right citizens (Fung, 2006). Fung develops a framework in his article ‘varieties of participation in complex governance’ of several institutional possibilities related to
9
citizens’ participation programmes (2006). He claims that forms of direct participation introduce three important dimensions.
One of the dimensions concern; who are going to participate in the programmes? For example in some cases only a particular group is invited whereas other categories are open for every one. Fung describes five different possibilities of participant selection. Firstly, the majority of public participation mechanisms use the method of self-selecting participation. So the programmes are open to everyone who wishes to attend (Fung, 2006). Marien, Hooghe and Quintelier have investigated who are actually participating. Their starting point was the self-selecting participant. Their research has pointed out that highly educated individuals were more inclined to participate than lower educated individuals. They claim that persons with more education are in a better position to represent themselves. Consequently there is an inequality based on education (Marien, Hooghe and Quintelier, 2010)
The second option is selective recruitment form a subgroup that is less likely to engage in participation programmes. The subgroup obtains certain benefits for participating in a programme. Hence participation in politics will be attractive for that particular group (Fung, 2006). Thirdly, Fung said that a random selection is the guarantee of descriptive
representativeness of the general population. Another mechanism of participation selecting is lay stakeholders and professional stakeholders. Lay stakeholders are unpaid citizens with a high interest in public issues. Hence lay stakeholders are willing to invest time and energy to represent a particular group and non-participants with similar interests or perspectives. Professional stakeholders do the same job, but they are paid representatives of public officials.
Fung claims that these mechanisms have been conceived as ‘mini-publics’. They have the intention to mobilize citizens to discuss and decide matters of public interest. Opposed to what was said earlier there are different mechanisms of selection according to Fung.
Competitive elections are an example of the selection of individual and professional
politicians. He also describes the mechanism that selects the technical expert administration. The last two forms of selection are not relevant for this research (Fung, 2006).
Participation Ladders
In 1969 Arnstein introduced the first ladder of citizens participation to analyse the extent of citizens’ power in determining the end product. The ladder is related to the aspect of political participation and the power of citizens (Arnstein, 1969). The bottom rungs of the ladder are Manipulation and Therapy. These two rungs describe the degrees of
non-10
participation. The middle rungs Informing, Consultation and Placation are leading up to the degrees of tokenism. In these levels citizens are allowed to listen to both sides. However, in these conditions they lack the power to ensure that the current leaders will heed their views. The last rungs Partnership, Delegated power and Citizens power are degrees of citizens power. Whenever citizens have climbed to the upper rungs of Partnership they are able to negotiate with the current leaders. In the last two rungs citizens have a dominant decision-making role in the negotiation processes. The ladder of citizens participation of Arnstein emphasized the self-reliance of citizens and the absence of the relation with the government (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014).
At this moment there are a substantial number of citizens participation ladders introduced in professional literature by different scientists and from different disciplines. Consequently the ladders may have different focus points (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2011). One of the ladders is the ladder of Edelenbos and Monninkhof. This ladder focuses on the
cooperation between citizens and government and hence on the equal relation between them. It consists of six steps. Most of them are similar to the rungs of Arnstein (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014).
Furthermore in 2008 the Vereniging voor Nederlandse Gemeenten (VNG) also developed a citizens’ participation ladder for the local government. This ladder was designed as a reaction on new policy. This new policy involved for example the Law of Participation budget and the Social Support Act. Besides it is more transparent about the results of the using of resources. Moreover the local governments claimed that a good overview can lead to an efficient and effective way to realize (more) participation (Terpsta, 2011). From the bottom up to the top the steps are: isolation, social contacts, participation in organized activities, unpaid work, paid work with support, paid work (Terpsta, 2011). The development from social participation on the bottom to the workers’ participation at the top is a striking one. Jager-Vreugdenhil claims that the decision of the ‘the highest step’ is a normative decision and is determined by the purpose of the ladder. The diversity of ladders with
different steps supports the idea that participation has normative aspects (Jager-Vreugdenhil, 2011). So there is not one participation ladder or highest step, it is depending upon the aim. Hence it depends on what the participation ladder claims to illustrate, which ladder is the best choice.
11
Communication in participation
Communication is a major issue in the cooperation between citizens and the government. Van den Peppel claims that communication in citizens’ participation is characterized by multilateral dialogue, equality of power and the participation of groups (2001). Also Jager-Vreugdenhil analyses recommendations about communication between citizens and other interest groups. He claims that policy makers or scientists use different concepts of words and language. Thus it is important to take this into consideration. Jager-Vreugdenhil maintains that the professional worker is obliged to use the proper language, which she calls the living language, and to make sure that both sides speak a similar language (2011). Another point is that all interest groups should point out their interests, preferences and principles concerning the subject right from the beginning. Whenever all the interest groups are clear about this the cooperation trends to be easier and miscommunication will be less likely.
Fung describes in the second aspect of the mechanism of participation how
participants interact within a public discussion or decision-making. He gives six examples of main methods of communication and decision-making in participation settings. In the first place there are citizens who communicate as a spectator, there is no interaction. They receive information, but do not participate actively in the discussion. The second case citizens are allowed to participate in the discussion. There are possibilities for asking questions or
venturing an opinion. In the last method of communication participants are strongly involved in the discussion and want to learn something about the issue. The discussion is often
organized in small groups (Fung, 2006).
Fung also describes three methods of decision-making. The most common method is aggregation and bargaining. In this method the citizens’ preferences have the attention and they are clear about what they want or need from the government. It is often illustrated in the influence and power they of the social choices. By means of bargaining participants are allowed to find the best solution for both parties (Fung, 2006). Deliberation and negotiation is the second method. In this method participants and the government developed their interests, priorities and views during the decision making process. The decision making process is individual based as well as on group level. Thus the interaction between participants and the exchange of expertise, arguments and principals is highlighted. During the process they develop a solution together. In the last method citizens are not involved. Professionals make the decisions based on their knowledge and expertise (Fung, 2006).
12
Citizens’ trust
Professional literature makes a distinction in the term trust. The Centraal bureau voor de statistiek (CBS) distinguishes social trust and institutional trust. The term social trust is related to social cohesion and the amount of trust individuals have in their fellow men. Institutional trust is related to the trust in social institutions, political institutions and organisations (Arends and Schmeets, 2015). Schmeets and Riele also use social trust, but distinguish between political trust and institutional trust. Political trust refers to politics and political institutions such as parliament and government. Institutional trust refers to
organisations an systems such as the judicial system and the police (Schmeets and Riele, 2014).
Social capital
Putnam described in his book Bowling alone (2000) the conception of: social capital. This concept combines three notions: trust, networks and common standards. Trust is the most essential feature of social capital, because this facilitates cooperation between people (Korsten and Goede, 2006). He claims that increasing social capital induced more citizens’ participation in for example political parties and civil initiatives (WRR, 2005). However, social capital is subject to erosion claims Putnam. Individuals prioritize their own interests and therefore social cohesion is affected. Thus little trust in other people and little social participation in networks is the main explanation of the lack of political trust and hence the lack of trust in public administration. So if solidarity decreases trust in political institution will also decrease claims Putnam (Korsten and Goede, 2006).
The WRR survey also discussed Putnam’s theory. They maintain that promoting social capital is not enough to recover citizens’ trust in both government and politics (2005). Korsten and Goede claim that both social and political participation and the political trust have decreased (2006). However the connection is small-scale, so apart from Putnam’s theory the WRR also focused on other explanations (2005). Other professionals are critical about Putnam’s theory. Boggs maintains that the decline of participation, in particular, in its
traditional form is the result of the shifting focus as I mentioned earlier. So it is not a result of declining trust (Korsten and Goede, 2006).
Citrin also gives an explanation in his article to illustrate Miller’s point about the decline of citizens’ trust. Miller claims that this decline has been a result of widespread, basic discontent, political alienation and the hostility towards political and social leaders, the institutions of government, and the regime (Citrun, 1974). The sociologist Russel Hochschild
13
describes in her book Stranger in their own land how individuals feel disconnected from their governments. She claims that a substantial number of citizens do not feel represented by the president. In their opinion the president represents the foreigner such as immigrants and refugees. They are under the impression that the ‘stranger’ receives more benefits from the government than they do. Mostly this concerns poor American families who struggle for a better future themselves. As a result of this they also have lost their trust in governmental and other democratic institutions (Russel Hochschild, 2016). Putnam claims that the basis of a representative democracy is the trust and confidence that citizens have in their representatives (Korsten and Goede, 2006).
Level of trust
It is important to establish which political level is most suitable for influencing trust and participation. Roosbroek claims that it will be more probable to increase the citizens’ trust in local government than in a regional, federal or supranational government due to the
assumption that local authorities are better informed about the needs of their community. Apart from citizens being more satisfied with their municipality, they are more able to meet the demands (Roosbroek, 2006). Others, Hoogland de Hoog, Lowery and Lyons claim that in small municipalities the trust and satisfaction will be higher because of greater psychological involvement and increased contact (1990). There is no clear link between satisfaction, trust and performance maintain van de Walle and Bouckaert (2003). So that does not clearly demonstrate why there is more trust in one local government than in another.
3. Methodology
The nature of this research thesis is a qualitative comparative case study in which the local government of Steenbergen will be compared with the local government of
Valkenswaard. Professional literature of citizens’ participation an citizens’ trust will be used to give a theoretical framework. It will also be used in order to understand which aspects affect the policy of citizens’ participation and citizens’ trust and why it is more in one local government than in another. The information will be found in different online academic libraries, online policy documents of the local government, of provincial and national
government and in interviews with experts. Online academic libraries, which have been used for this literature, are JSTOR and Google Scholar. This thesis will focus on the relation between citizens’ participation and the attitude towards the arrival of refugees. Documents of both local government and national institutions will be analysed and discussed. In this
14
research I intend to use semi-structured interviews. These interviews will be held with the policy makers related to citizens’ participation, the mayor of the local government and other policy makers involved in the arrival of the refugees.
The citizens’ participation ladder of the Institute for Public and Politics (Appendix A) will be used to indicate the stadium of participation (Houwelingen, Boele and Dekker, 2014) of Steenbergen and Valkenswaard. In addition the interviews concerning citizens’
participation, the results of the projects and the number of the projects will be used to decide in which stadium the local governments are.
3.1 Definition of the main question
This research will focus on the question whether a high degree of citizen participation and trust leads to an increasing support for the local government and it decisions.
So the main question is:
To what extent do citizen participation and trust have a conclusive influence on local decisions and policy and which response do we notice from residents? .
The main question arises from a couple of hypothess that has been mentioned and they will be examined in this research. This leads to the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: participation of citizens leads to trust increasing in (local) government. By involving citizens in making decisions, solving problems and other activities they will feel involved and taken serious by local government. This will lead to more trust in (local)
governments.
Hypothesis 2: participation of citizens and trust will lead to support amongst residents for the decisions of the local government
With the participation of citizens governments will have better knowledge about the developments and issues that citizens have. This will ensure that they can respond better to the will of citizens and use this knowledge when they are taking decisions. Vice versa, participation will help citizens to be better informed about the issues that the local
government has so they will be more capable to understand certain decisions they have to make. Trust ensures that citizens will assume that the local government wants what is best for their citizens and will make decisions that will benefit them.
15
Hypothesis 3: the citizen participation and trust factors explains the difference in the responses of citizens about the arrival of refugees.
Citizen participation and trust were supposed to lead to more support among citizens in their local government when they are taking decisions. On this basis, the same applies to the decisions they have to make regarding granting shelter to refugees. In the communities where citizen trust and participation are at a high level, they will notice little to no resistance. While the communities where citizen trust and participation are at a low level, the decision about the arrival of refugees will experience high resistance from the citizens.
In order to test this hypothesis, this study will first check the policy of citizen participation on a national, provincial and local scale. It is of importance to look into the points the 2 communities in question have made and check on which points they agree and which points they disagree. On the basis of these findings, the two communities will be placed in the ladder of participation from the Institute of Public and Politics. The second thing they check is the trust that citizens have. Within this they will establish a connection between citizen trust and participation. Besides that, I will check the social resilient policy of Noord-Brabant where the terms trust and participation are most important. This knowledge will be applied to the case: the refugee crisis that took place in the Netherlands in 2015-2016. Whether a difference in resistance with regard to the arrival of refugees will be examined by using trust and participation. During this research, there will also be space to check other statements thoroughly regarding the resistance of citizens.
3.2 Why these particular local governments?
The first selection motive is the attitude towards welcoming the refugees and AZC in their respective municipalities. In Steenbergen there were violent protests of local citizens against the arrival of them and the construction of an AZC (Volkskrant, 2015). However, in Valkenswaard locals were warmly welcoming the refugees. The refugees became part of the society, so when the refugees were required to leave to a different AZC, the local people felt pity for them. Valkenswaard has been identified as an example of a municipality which welcomed the refugees (Pennings, 2016). The second motive for my selection is the similarity of demographic aspects, the number of refugees that get shelter in a municipality and the voting behaviour. However, there is a wide difference in trust in the respective local
16
governments (see table 1). The final motive is that municipalities share the provincial policy of North Brabant. Valkenswaard Steenbergen Number of Citizens 30,262 23,477 Crimes (by 1,000 inhabitants) 49.7 36.5
The four major political
parties (%) CDA (21.9) PvdA (8.9) VVD (7.1) D66 (5.4) VVD (16.8) PvdA (14,6) CDA (13.0) D66 (12.3) Trust in de local government
(%)
27 7
Low incomes (%) 7.3 7.9
High incomes (%) 8.8 9.9
Average disposable income x 1,000
20.2 20.3
Unemployment (%) 6.3 6.4
Low educated working population (by 1,000 inhabitants)
265 195.2
Monitoring compliance with the rules (% agree with the statement)
38 22
The local government comply the appointments (% agree with the statement)
27 14
Listen to public’ opinion (%agree with the statement)
29 13
Flexible approaches of the local government (% agree with the statement)
27 17
The local government involve citizens in plans, activities and facilities (% agree with the statement)
29 20
Room for citizens’ initiatives (% agree with the statement)
31 18
Bron: Waarstaatjegemeente.nl
3.3 Relevance and gap in the Literature
In the professional literature of citizens’ participation there is al lot of research pointing out how this mechanism should work. Hence it is important to investigate which policy is effective and why it is more effective in one local government than in another. Moreover there is a gap in professional literature discussing the effects of citizens’ participation concerning in what way local people deal with important decisions of local
17
government. A good illustration of this is the arrival of refugees. Due to this it is interesting to investigate the reaction of individuals to major changes in their environment.
3.4 Social relevance
Both citizens’ participation and shelter of refugees are highly topical at this moment. Hence it is socially relevant to investigate, which policy aspects and methods ensure
activating citizens’ participation in a community. Moreover it is relevant to see note its influence on major environmental changes for instance how refugees were welcomed.
4. Results 4.1 Citizens’ participation policy
In this chapter I intent to discuss the outline of the participation policy on three different levels. Citizens’ participation is not a new topic in politics. In the publication ‘help een burgerinitiatief’ of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (IKR) a
governmental development from a welfare state to a connecting and facilitating government was noticed in the last decades. So this gives a short overview of the development of citizens’ participation. Until the early seventies the governments’ role had consisted of regulating and problem solving. The government made the decisions and there was no room for
participation. At the end of in the seventies participation was introduced by the government. This was after a period of democratic movements during the sixties and seventies. The first generation of participation focussed on the citizens’ right to participate.
In the last decades of the twentieth century the governmental role changed as a result of cutbacks, no-nonsense policy (Blom, Bosdriesz, Heijden, Zuylen and Scnamp, 2010) and the privatisation of different state companies. Due to this the second generation citizens’ participation arose. Self-reliance and responsibility became important concepts in the relation between citizens and their governments. Citizens were allowed to participate in proposals issued by the government. The interactive way of policy making came into being.
In the beginning of this century governmental withdrawal induced an inequality in society maintains the IKR publication. Hence the government was compelled to find a division of roles with shared responsibilities including the government, citizens and
organizations. This implied an active role of the government involving citizens, organisations and companies in the processes of decision making. So the third generation of participation arose. Moreover whenever a citizen has an idea for an initiative it is up to the government to
18
support this. Thus the new role of the government is to support, connect and stimulate all parties into participation (Blom et al., 2010).
In 2010 the term ‘doe-democratie’ was introduced as a fourth generation of citizens’ participation. This term refers to citizens willing to contribute to public issues by means of concrete actions. Besides, this form also emphasized the ‘do’ as an active form of decision making. Therefore this generation shows the active ‘do’ citizenship, which with their
activities and initiatives will create a better society. It is the basis of participation democracy. In the current situation the three or four generations exist side by side and not mutually exclusive (Wijdeven, Graaf and Frank, 2013).
4.1.1 National participation policy
The fourth participation generation is an outline of the national participation policy. In the eighties the national government initiated the sociale vernieuwingsbeleid to tone down the welfare state. Later in the nineties the national policy introduced the grotestedenbeleid. This policy focussed on activating the underprivileged, the vulnerable groups and the newcomers (Wijdeven, Graaf and Frank, 2013). In the last decades the Vereniging Gemeenten Nederland (VNG) and IKZ have cooperated closely to create more room and support for citizens’ participation and (informal) initiatives in their immediate environment (Dekker, Hart and Faulk, 2007). Moreover decentralization and self-reliance of individuals are also features of the national governments’ policy today. The Law of Participation budget, the Social Support Act (WMO) and the childhood regulation are examples of this policy, which was introduced in 2015. As a consequence of this policy local governments obtain more operational tasks and responsibility for their citizens. Due to the relationship between the local government and its citizens their involvement intensified.
At this moment the national policy focusses on bottom-up initiatives in different areas such as in the social, economic and ecological domains. Besides, the policy also highlights citizens’ trust in both their neighbourhood and government. In the publication ‘Vertrouwen in de buurt’, which I have mentioned earlier, citizens’ power to empower the neighbourhood has been stressed (WRR, 2015).
4.1.2 Provincial participation policy
This part focusses on the policy of the Province of Brabant. In order to collect additional information I have interviewed a policy maker whose domain is participation. In the beginning of this century the participation policy began by introducing the policy to
19
stimulate the development and support the implementation of Integrale Dorps en Ontwikkelingsplannen (IDOPs). The policy’s main issue was stimulating the local
government and the community to cooperate in shared improvement and provide what they both need to carry out plans (Herpen, 2016).
In this project citizens and the local government cooperate to assess an IDOP which stand for an integral analysis of the economic, environmental, ecological, social and cultural factors. Some of the local governments lacked the capacity, knowledge and quality to organize this analysis or were not able to carry out the plans. Due to this it is the task of the Province to support the municipalities and to give them the impulses they need for example expertise, funding and a substantial network (Gedeputeerde Staten, Directieraad,
Kwartiermakers and Concernstaf, 2007). In accordance with the result both the local government and citizens are able to create a development plan to improve the village. The plans had to be the result of initiatives devised by citizens in cooperation with the local government to include in the IDOP to obtain the provincial support (Herpen, 2016). At the same time as IDOPs were introducing the policy of IWOPs which stand for Integrale wijkontwikkelingsplannen. It was the community’s responsibility to decide what should be done in its neighbourhood and what they needed to realize it (Gedeputeerde Staten et al., 2007). IWOPs had the same method of working as IDOPs. Whenever a specific need arose the community had the possibly to request provincial support. In these two projects the focus was on improving the liveability of the villages and neighbourhoods in the Province of Brabant. The Province was to act as a linking unit. Notable is that in the beginning of the IDOPs project especially the regions Southeast and Northeast Brabant were active. Later there was an increasing of IDOPs in Central and West Brabant (Derks, Kuijk and Waard, 2009).
Before the introducing of IDOPs the citizens and directors of the villages often had the feeling that they were not reckoned with by neither the local governments nor the Province. Due to this trust in and support for the government was fragile and with the project the
governments showed that villages were an issue. The Province notes that as a result of IDOPs both the citizens’ trust and confidence in the local community were increased (Herpen, 2016).
In the current provincial policy there is no fixed programme, but only guidelines. These are gradually converted into an executive programme which has been based upon current issues (Herpen, 2016). That the government makes a selection out of social variation, taking into account the delicate balance between political issues and democratic values (Gunsteren, 2006). This approach needs trust and support of the citizens. Besides this the Province has organized instruction programmes about various approaches of initiatives. The
20
following points were highlighted: listening carefully to the essence of an initiative; which are the needs of the initiators and which are the specific aims. When this is clear it is time for the implementation. So the focus point is the beginning of the project.
A focus point of the current Province policy is cooperation and self-reliance. The Province supports local municipalities cooperating and sharing information about challenges, solutions and working methods. The Province is looking forward to a cross-over effect. For example the production of energy for the neighbourhood or local governments working with local products, companies and experts. Hence the municipality creates local interaction and self-reliance.
Another focus point in the current policy is social resilience. Social resilience is the ability of a society to respond to and cope with change (Herpen, 2016). Most individuals are able to cope and have a social network. However some individuals lack a social network or safety net and are not self-supporting. The Province will support the vulnerable groups in different ways, so that their people will become involved in the municipality. This will lead to increasing trust and empowerment. The Province has several policy instruments to intensify social resilience. First they will focus on areas and not particular initiatives. Secondly they want to support all-embracing projects and cooperation with other organisational experts and parties outside the Province (Brabant.nl, 2017). Later in this research I pointed out this policy.
4.1.3 Local Policy
A local authority faces many challenges. On one hand, the decentralization process causes the local authority to take more responsibility and more tasks and, on the other hand, the local authority has to realize things with less money. Local authorities are also expected to restore the trust of citizens in government, because the municipality are standing in the middle of society. To win their trust back and save money, the local authority must be committed to participation. Both citizens and communities will be expected to be committed to
participation. To actually win the trust back and run an appropriate policy, it is important that the local government keeps its citizens close to them and that citizens can influence their policy (Volkskrant, 2010). Hence, communities have an important role when it comes to citizen participation.
The participation policies of the Steenbergen and Valkenswaard communities will be discussed in this section and they will be placed on the participation ladder of the Institute for Publics and Politics. As we discussed before, the participation ladders are used to show the different levels of participation.
21
4.1.3.1 Steenbergen participation policy
The participation policy of the Municipality of Steenbergen is discussed in this
section. I interviewed alderman Zijlmans to delve more in-depth into this issue. The interview has shown that the municipality promotes different forms of citizen participation and creates shorter lines of communication between the citizen and local government. The municipality introduced community teams at the end of 2015. The community teams consist of employees and the sheltered employment service supplemented by people from the intermunicipal social service (Zijlmans, 2017). These teams have the task of keeping public areas in optimum condition and, where possible, to improve issues with the available resources (Gemeente Steenbergen, 2015). These teams are also the point of contact for residents when they have an issue or an idea to improve the quality of life in the surrounding area (Zijlmans, 2017).
From the side of the municipality, they try to actively involve citizens in improving the living environment. Before a change is implemented, consultation with residents first takes place about what ideas they have, the interests that they have and what they want in their environment. The municipality tries to create a plan together with residents based on this starting point. In the first instance, the municipality felt there was mistrust amongst citizens. This could be noticed because citizens assumed that the municipality had already brought out and made decisions about a plan. However, this was not the case. In addition, Zijlmans tries to have residents first come up with what they would do to achieve a goal when citizens have questions or want something to be done. This promotes taking responsibility and self-reliance. The municipality would like to take on a supportive and facilitating role in future. In addition, the municipality wants to start emphasising dealing with challenges and arriving at a solution as a team.
Zijlmans has noticed that trust in the municipality has also increased because of participation. He states within this context that listening carefully, starting the dialogue and making visible what the municipality does increases the trust that residents have. Zijlmans has also seen more citizen initiatives take place because of the new developments. This also means that people are more understanding with regard to the municipality when something is not possible (Zijlmans, 2017).
It can, therefore, be concluded that it emerges from the policy of the Municipality of Steenbergen that they focus on involving the citizen when taking decisions and in the municipality processes, but also with regard to enabling citizens to assume responsibilities and to participate. The Municipality of Steenbergen gives residents the space to put forward problems and solutions themselves. There is space within this context to have ideas and
22
interests play a role in policy, however, the municipality has the main responsibility with regard to policy and takes the final decision. It became apparent in this policy that residents, that is, the participants, have an advisory role (level 3) (WRR, 2015).
4.1.3.2 Valkenswaard participation policy
The participation policy of the Municipality of Valkenswaard is discussed in this section. I interviewed the mayor, Anton B.A.M. Ederveen, and three policy employees of the Municipality of Valkenswaard for this. The policy employees are referred to through their job titles in this thesis. It became immediately apparent from these interviews that the
municipality was involved in the transition from citizen participation to public-sector participation. It applies to the Municipality of Valkenswaard that they no longer talk about citizen participation, but about public-sector participation, therefore, a step along on the participation ladder. The traditional method of citizen participation in accordance to Ederveen is that the municipality comes up with something and then checks what residents think about it. It is argued that the municipality must find ways to connect with the initiatives of the citizen with regard to public-sector participation. The relevant parties are involved in the processes from the start. The goal is to find and implement a solution together, that is, by the involved parties. The municipality will assume a supportive role within this context. In some cases, citizens want to realise initiatives/ideas themselves. It is important that the municipality gives citizens the space with regard to this and that it consults citizens in relation to where it can offer support (Ederveen, 2017).
The community coordinator, however, states that both forms, that is, citizen and public-sector participation, apply in the municipality. Which participation method applies depends on the situation and the initiative type. The municipality will, therefore, always have to search for the role that it can fulfil in projects. In some cases, the role will be supportive and, in other cases, citizens will not require support, but just to be given space by the local government to implement the initiative while there will also be cases when citizens and the local government will have to act as partners. This constant change of the role demands a flexible attitude and creative insights where, in some cases, they will have to read between the lines. The municipality is involved in realising this transitions in projects both inside and outside the municipality (Strategic Policy Consultant, Communication and Community Coordinator, 2017).
They work while focusing on the community in Valkenswaard. This means that every community has a community coordinator. A community coordinator is the pivot between the
23
(local) government and (organised) society of Valkenswaard such as committees, community groups and other forms of administrations. Matching the questions and subjects that are current in society with official expertise and administrative priorities is the task of a
community coordinator. The Municipality of Valkenswaard is covered by three community coordinators. In addition to the community coordinator, there are community representative bodies in the communities such as the seven community committees that consist of residents. They represent the relevant community and organise and/or support initiatives in the
community. In addition, they have direct contact with the community coordinator (Strategic Policy Consultant, Communication and Community Coordinator, 2017).
It has emerged from both the interview with Ederveen and the policy employees that the citizens of Valkenswaard are active in organising initiatives and the municipality actively cooperates to support these initiatives (2017). The initiatives arrive through the community committees and community coordinators, but social media also plays an important role. These are places where people express their opinions and where you can play a role as a
municipality in some cases so that the issue is, for example, resolved or discussable. The strategic policy consultant indicated that you must ensure you do not take over the initiative from citizens, but that you leave the initiative and responsibility with citizens (Strategic Policy Consultant, Communication and Community Coordinator, 2017).
The policy of the municipality of Valkenswaard has shown that it focuses on the self-reliance of citizens. Both citizens and local government can determine the agenda and together they will search for a solution. In some cases, local government will take over the solutions from citizens/retailers/hotel and catering establishments. This description fits in with the participant as a cooperation partner (level4) or when the decision taking is left to citizens as co-deciders (level5) (WRR, 2015).
4.2 Citizen trust
Meurs (2008) and Fukuyama (Dijk, 2010) claim that the Netherlands has changed in a short period from a high trust society to a low trust society. Trust has been declining in different areas, for example, in democratic institutions such as the police, army, legal system and justice system. Similarly, citizens have the least trust in national government, the political parties and parliament. The Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR) survey (2005) claims that citizens have, for example, more faith in non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the media than in politics or institutions. It did, however, emerge from the interviews with the Municipality of Valkenswaard that they had noticed that
24
residents had much faith in the different offices such as that of the mayor. This trust is not linked to the trust in the local administration or institutions (Ederveen, 2016). The decreasing level of trust in politics and institutions is deemed to be due to the fact that institutions
"suffer" from the decreasing political trust of citizens. Individuals make institutions part of the political system and, therefore, the drop in one would influence the other according to Korsten and Goede (2006). In addition to the decreasing trust in institutions and politics, a decreasing trend in social trust is discernible (WRR, 2005). Statistics Netherlands stated that the social trust level, however, has remained the same since 2012 in accordance with the results of the survey carried out in 2015 (2015).
Therefore, today citizens’ trust has been a major issue in local governments’ policy. The decrease of trust in the three different forms of citizen trust is generally experienced as a problem for the operation of society. Dohmen, Verbake and Kraaykamp argue that trust that people have in each other, political institutions and society is of essential importance for the operation of society (2010). Citizens will, for example, be less cooperative towards local government and each other when the trust in the different areas is low. In addition, Putnam argues that social capital will also decrease as trust decreases. Strong social capital will lead to a healthier, safer environment where the quality of life is higher and residents will
generally feel happier in accordance with Putnam. Strong social capital will lead to citizen participation in different forms such as social and political within this context (Korsten and Goede, 2006). The increase of citizen trust in the different areas is essential for improving society.
4.2.1 Citizen trust relations with citizen participation.
Citizen participation and political trust are concepts that are closely linked in literature. For example, Edelenbos claims that the WWR shows that political trust will increase if individuals are tempted to participate in self-governance and solving social issues (Edelenbos, 2006). However, this interaction also applies the other way around. The research of Statistics Netherlands reveals that participating individuals usually have more trust in politics, institutions and the social sphere. On the other hand, non-participating individuals have substantially less trust in politics, institutions and the social sphere (Arends and Smeets, 2015).
Participation contributes to the occurrence of social networks where standards and values are shared and where you can become familiar with each other's standards norms and values. This will lead to more understanding and cohesion between different communities
25
(CBS, 2015). The other way around, you can also say that trust causes individuals to enter into a relationship quicker than distrustful individuals where trusting individuals will be be prepared more rapidly to participate. Besides the fact that with the occurrence of social networks, individuals get access to other networks and sources that they probably never would normally reach. These factors ensure the that politics, institutional and social trust will increase (Blanken et al., 2016). Participation will indirectly lead to less resistance against newcomers from other communities because of this connection.
The WWR report `Vertrouwen in de buurt’ shows that political trust can be restored by letting citizens participate in the form of self-government and in solving social issues. However, Edelenbos says that when citizens have to participate and give trust to government, they expect the same from government. To stimulate the participation of citizens, government will have to trust and give space to its citizens so they can participate. An important aspect is making citizens more responsible for the quality of life in their own city. The local authority must assume a supportive role and dare to allow citizens to give their opinion and make their contributions, that is, it must trust them because only will citizens be given the space to participate. Edelenbos says in his article that “Politiek vertrouwen hersteld kan worden via kortlopende projecten, vertrouwen creëren kost tijd, is van de lange adem.” (2006, p.4).
Participation and trust have been discussed in this paragraph. It is striking that, by increasing participation, it will automatically lead to trust being increased and vice versa. How the causality works is difficult to establish (Newton, 2001). The policy that stimulates both citizen participation and trust will be considered most active within this context. When interviewing alderman Zijlmans, he stated that this interaction is clearly visible in the local authority of Steenbergen (Zijlmans, 2017). Ederveen acknowledged that this interaction is barely visible in the local authority of Valkenswaard. He indicates that trust does not depend on the way that citizens participates, but he believes that they will be influenced by more factors (Ederveen, 2017).
4.3 Social self-reliance.
During my interview with Van Herpen, he said that the Brabant local Brabant is currently improving self-reliance. The definition of social self-reliances that the province’s use “het vermogen van mensen en gemeenschappen die zij hebben om met veranderingen om te gaan en de toegang die zij hebben tot externe hulpbronnen” (Blanken et al., 2016, p.4). The goal of this policy is to increase their ability. This would ensure that citizens and communities could respond in a more resilient way (flexible) to the change so that they can move forward
26
if a sudden unexpected event occurs. Social resilience is formed by three pillars; the resource environment, social resources and personal resources. It is important that there is a diversity of resources available to the people of Brabant and that resources can be replaceable. When an individual is short of a certain resource, it is necessary that a different resource can compensate for this shortage. A study of the social self-reliance was carried out in 2016 regarding the people of Brabant. Within the context of this study, it is important to elaborate on social resilience because of the link with the support and response the citizens have in the decisions of government.
The research group Pon has investigated the differences in social self-reliance within the province of Brabant. It became clear that the differences in the degree of social self-reliance is visible between the areas. In the study, the province of Brabant is divided into four areas; West, Central, Northeast and Southeast. The focus is on the two areas that belong to the municipalities that are important for this study in the referred to research. The municipality of Steenbergen falls under the west area and the Valkenswaard town under the Southeast area (Blanken et al., 2016).
The first pillar is resource area. The researchers examined the facility level within this context. According to the WRR study 'Confidence in the citizens’, citizens need to have their meeting places and social spaces such as schools and shopping centres. In these places, links between residents are being made, but individuals will also recognize other individuals that they do not really know. This allows individuals to be able to interpret and organize their social environment so that they will feel safe, says Blokland (2008). Besides that, the level of supply will give information about the proximity of essential services. The research revealed that the difference in this area between the towns of Valkenswaard and Steenbergen is that big. Steenbergen normally falls in the average category and Valkenswaard one category above the average (the level consists of five categories). In addition, mobility is measured in the areas (travel behaviour of individuals). This shows that the individuals in the Southeast are moving the least, around 29 km per day. However, the residents of the western province cover the most distance per day: around 33 km. Finally, we looked at wealth and, with regard to this, the municipalities Steenbergen and Valkenswaard are very similar. Interesting to note is that the level of prosperity in West Brabant is relatively high in comparison with Southeast Brabant (Blanken et al., 2016).
The second pillar focuses on social resources. In social capital theory, as already mentioned in this thesis, individuals develop themselves by participating in social networks. The study distinguishes between three types of participation: social (family, friends,
27
neighbours and unpaid care), social (paid volunteer work and an active social life) and
political (voting and politically active). The research showed that the investment in Southeast Brabant is the lowest in West Brabant and the participation rate is as high as the average of Brabant. This difference lies for the most part in political participation. This form of participation in West Brabant is higher than in Southeast Brabant (Blanken et al., 2016).
The third pillar is personal resources. People's trust was studied. The study
distinguishes between political, social and societal expectations; the difference between the three has been previously described in this thesis. It is remarkable that in Western Brabant the trust with respect to the other areas is low. This difference is mainly due to the difference in social and political trust. Southeast Brabant also scores just below average with regard to overall trust. The difference is reflected in the social and political trust that are below average. Besides confidence, they researched the average trip a person makes per day. The following is assumed in the study: "wie mobiel is, heeft meer mogelijkheden om werk te vinden, een opleiding te volgen en sociale contacten te onderhouden" (Blanken et al., 2016, p.15.). The municipalities Steenbergen and Valkenswaard both scored above average and, thus, fall into category 4 (category 1 to 5 where 1 is the worst and 5 the best).
The conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that West Brabant remains behind in the area of social self-reliance compared to the other areas. Remarkable in this study is that West Brabant is on a higher prosperous level and people have a higher level of participation than in Southeast Brabant while the confidence level is much lower in West Brabant (Blanken et al., 2016). This does not correlate entirely with the expectations and assumptions made earlier in this research. It is also interesting to include an earlier finding in this study. During the interview with Van Herpen, he showed that the western towns generally involved later in the Provincial participation policy than towns in East Brabant (Herpen, 2016). In addition, trust based on the average is lower in the western municipalities as in the eastern
municipalities. Participation has increased to the same level as the rest of Brabant, but confidence is still something that stays behind.
4.4 Difference between Southeast and Western Brabant.
In the research regarding social self-reliance and in the interview with policymaker Van Herpen, you clearly can see the difference between the West and the Southeast of Brabant. De Groot Zevert told me during my interview with this policymaker that the eastern communities of Brabant normally are more open to taking in refugees than the Western communities of Brabant with regard to the refugee case. So the interaction between
28
participation and trust does not always apply. Social self-reliance in Western Brabant scores lower with regard to the resource pillar in relation to the resources available in their region than the Southeast of Brabant (Blanken et al., 2016). Therefore, the question should be asked whether this factor will have such an impact on the interaction between participation and trust that it will disappear.
During my interviews with Van Herpen and De Groot Zevert I asked them if they had an explanation why there is a difference in trust between communities. Neither could answer this question. They said that a reason for the differences in the cultural aspects could be the influence of the distance (based on feelings) between West-Brabant and both the local authority (province) and the distance to a large and economic key point’ (Herpen, 2016) (Groot Zevert, 2016). Another option that has been put forward in literature was the historical reason of low trust in government (Russel Hochschild, 2016).
The cultural differences between the West and Southeast of Brabant will be briefly discussed in this section. Research by Bommel and Vinckx revealed that there are clear cultural differences between Western and Southeast Brabant. Western Brabant feels that their residents are the least connected to Brabant and, therefore, their level of feeling that they are genuine people from Brabant is lower. While in Eastern Brabant this feeling is strong. The study investigated with what values different regions feel most connected. Western Brabant scored high on family values and dialect (to feel connected to their region) and low on open values: innovation, hardworking and socially involved. Southeast Brabant scores high on being open and broad-minded and innovation and they score low on sociability, and being proud and faithful. People from Western Brabant are more focused on social/family ties and feel very connected to their environment while in Southeast Brabant they focus on self-development. The last point that has been noticed is that the West of Brabant is the happiest of all (Bommel and Vinckx, 2015). The values of being open and innovative and self-development are values that contribute to the willingness to participate in new initiatives and/or developments. This may explain why Southeast Brabant from the outset actively participated in the new participation policy developed by the Province of North-Brabant (the IDOPs as discussed earlier in this thesis).
As a second option they studied the actual or relative distance to government and/or the economic crunch. It was shown earlier in this thesis that people usually have more confidence in local government. Because of the short distance between the town and the residents of the municipality, the municipality would be better informed about the citizens’ needs. It may be the case that the greater the distance between the citizen and the state, the
